1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Cal.Rptr.3d
  4. 12 Cal.Rptr.3d
  5. 12 Cal.Rptr.3d 54 (2004)
 

ZAMOS v. STROUD

No. S118032.

12 Cal.Rptr.3d 54 (2004)

87 P.3d 802

32 Cal.4th 958

Jerome ZAMOS et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. James T. STROUD et al., Defendants and Respondents.

Supreme Court of California.

As Modified on Denial of Rehearing June 9, 2004.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Jerome Zamos, in pro. per., and for Plaintiffs and Appellants.

James T. Stroud, in pro per., and for Defendants and Respondents.

Milam & Larsen and Paul A. Larsen, Princeton, MN, for Association of California Insurance Companies as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Respondents.

BROWN, J.

The question presented by this case is whether, assuming the other elements of the tort are established, an attorney may be held liable for malicious prosecution when he commences a lawsuit properly but then continue's to prosecute it after learning it is not supported by probable cause.1 We conclude an attorney may be held liable for continuing to prosecute a lawsuit...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases