TERRY SPONDER, APPELLANT,
v.
FRANK BRICKMAN, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Terry Sponder appealed a summary judgment dismissing his malicious prosecution action against Frank Brickman. The court affirmed, holding that an acquittal does not establish the absence of probable cause necessary to succeed on a malicious prosecution claim, and that the evidence demonstrated Brickman had probable cause to believe Sponder violated an ordinance.
An acquittal is not sufficient to establish the absence of probable cause for instituting criminal proceedings. The court held that probable cause exists if there is a reasonable ground of suspicion supported by circumstances sufficiently strong to warrant a cautious man in the belief that the accused is guilty. Here, the evidence established Brickman had probable cause, so summary judgment was properly entered.
“Acquittal of a person tried for violating the law is not sufficient to establish the absence of probable cause for instituting criminal proceedings.”
Core holding regarding the legal standard for malicious prosecution claims
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSponder brought a malicious prosecution action against Brickman, who had initiated criminal proceedings against Sponder for an ordinance violation. Sp…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Malicious Prosecution cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant, who was plaintiff in an action for malicious prosecution, appeals from a summary final judgment for the appellee.
An absence of probable cause for the original criminal proceeding is an essential element of the appellant’s cause of action. Duval Jewelry Co. v. Smith, 102 Fla. 717, 136 So. 878 (1931). Acquittal of a person tried for violating the law is not sufficient to establish the absence of probable cause for instituting criminal proceedings. If the converse were the rule, then a public officer who instituted criminal proceedings would be liable in damages for malicious prosecution if the person against whom the proceedings were brought were acquitted. Such a state of affairs would be detrimental to the public interest, since public officers would be discouraged from performing their duties conscientiously. See Ward v. Allen, 152 Fla. 82, 11. So.2d 193 (1943).
In Clements v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., Fla.App.1966, 183 So.2d 264, we pointed out:
“In determining the existence of probable cause, the question is not the guilt or innocence of the accused but whether there is a reasonable ground of suspicion supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant a cautious man in the belief that the person accused is guilty.” (Footnote omitted.) 183 So.2d at 266.
The trial judge in the instant case properly applied this test. The pleadings, depositions, and affidavits filed in this cause show there is no genuine issue as to the fact that the appellee had probable cause to believe the appellant was guilty of the ordinance violation for which he was arrested. We therefore conclude that the trial judge correctly entered the summary final judgment.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Applestein v. Preston, 335 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)…acquittal, as establishing want of probable cause. Acquittal of a person tried for violating law is not sufficient to establish absence of probable cause for instituting criminal proceedings. Ward v. Allen, supra; Sponder v. Brickman, Fla.App.1960, 214 So. 2d 631. Additionally the evidence that the defendant proceeded on advice of counsel constituted a defense to the action. Here there was a showing of the requisite disclosure by the defendant to his attorney, upon whose advice the defendant acted. Duval Je…
-
In re Forfeiture OF 1976 Kenworth Tractor Trailer Truck, 576 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 1990)…ainst whom the proceedings were brought were acquitted. Such a state of affairs would be detrimental to the public interest, since public officers would be discouraged from performing their duties conscientiously.” Id. (quoting Sponder v. Brickman, 214 So. 2d 631, 632 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)). Thus, Justice Ehrlich concluded that: Loss of use of property is the natural and necessary consequence of its seizure by the government. If a governmental agency acts upon probable cause and in good faith in seizing proper…
-
Gailyn W. Wheeler v. Finlay Corbin, 546 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 1989)…the person against whom the proceedings were brought were acquitted. Such a state of affairs would be detrimental to the public interest, since public officers would be discouraged from performing their duties conscientiously.” Sponder v. Brickman, 214 So. 2d 631, 632 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968). As the Third District Court noted in Morton v. Gardner, 513 So. 2d 725, 728 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), review denied, 525 So. 2d 879 (Fla.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 109 S.Ct. 305, 102 L.Ed.2d 324 (1988), the forfeiture process als…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Duval Jewelry Co. v. Smith, 102 Fla. 717 (Fla. 1931)
- L. Maxcy, Inc. v. MRS. Annie LEE Morris, 152 Fla. 82 (Fla. 1942)
- Clements v. E. AIR Lines, Inc., 183 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)