Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite McClinton v. Rice, 265 P.2d 425.

65 citing documents.

Tate v. Connel 416 P.2d 213 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Tate v. Connel 416 P.2d 213 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Visco v. First National Bank of Arizona 415 P.2d 902 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Visco v. First National Bank of Arizona 415 P.2d 902 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
674; Ackerman v. Kaufman, supra; , , 58 A.L.R.2d 1422 ; 86 A.L.R.2d 1090 ; 34 Am.Jur., Malicious Prosecution, Sec.
Lantay v. McLean 406 P.2d 224 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Lantay v. McLean 406 P.2d 224 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Taylor v. American National Insurance Company 405 P.2d 826 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Taylor v. American National Insurance Company 405 P.2d 826 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Bergman v. Bergman 401 P.2d 163 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Sarwark Motor Sales, Inc. v. Woolridge 354 P.2d 34 Ariz. 1960
Sarwark Motor Sales, Inc. v. Woolridge 354 P.2d 34 Ariz. 1960
the question is, did the plaintiff “show want of probable cause, one of the essentials of malicious prosecution?” Probable cause was there defined as “a reasonable ground of suspicion, supported by circumstances sufficient to warrant an ordinarily prudent man in believing the accused is guil
Overson v. Lynch 317 P.2d 948 Ariz. 1957
Overson v. Lynch 317 P.2d 948 Ariz. 1957
we held that probable cause is a complete and absolute defense to a suit for malicious prosecution, and we also defined probable cause: “ * * * What facts are sufficient to constitute probable cause is a question of law.
Picow v. Baldwin 272 P.2d 613 Ariz. 1954
Picow v. Baldwin 272 P.2d 613 Ariz. 1954