Brown v. Selfridge,
224 U.S. 189 (1912)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Brown v. Selfridge, 224 U.S. 189 (1912)

Brown v. Selfridge

No. 214

Argued March 14, 1912

Decided April 1, 1912

224 U.S. 189


While, in an action for malicious prosecution, the burden of proving malice and want of probable cause is on the plaintiff, Wheeler v. Nesbitt, 24 How. 544, as the motive and circumstances are best known to the defendant, plaintiff is only required to adduce such proof as is affirmatively under his control, and which he can fairly be expected to be able to produce.

In this case, held that plaintiff did not produce all the testimony within her control and did not sustain the burden even to that extent.

In a suit for malicious prosecution, in the absence of plaintiff's adducing facts properly expected to be under her control, the question of probable cause in a clear case is one for the court and, in this case, was properly taken from the jury.

34 App.D.C. 242 affirmed.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.