
    PRICE v. STANLEY.
    (Filed March 12, 1901.)
    MALICIOUS PROSECUTION — Probable Cause.
    
    An. action for malicious prosecution cannot be sustained where , a verdict and judgment of conviction have been had in a court of competent jurisdiction.
    ActioN by W. G. Price against J. H. Stanley, beard by Judge ~W. 8. O’B. Robinson, at November Term, 1900, of JohNstoN County Superior Court. From a judgment for tbe defendant, tire plaintiff appealed.
    
      Jas. H. Pou, for tbe plaintiff.
    
      E. 8. Abell, and Wellons & Morgan, for tbe defendant.
   MONTGOMERY, J.

Tbis action was brought by tbe plaintiff to recover damages from tbe defendant for alleged malicious prosecution. A Justice of tbe Peace of Jobnston County, upon tbe complaint of tbe defendant in tbis action (Stanley), issued a warrant against tbe plaintiff in tbis action (Price), in which Price was charged with wilfully and unlawfully trespassing upon tbe lands of Stanley “by raking up and hauling off manure.” After bearing tbe evidence in the criminal proceedings, the Justice of tibe Peace adjudged that Price was guilty. He, however, bound him over to the nest term of tbe Superior Court of Jobnston County. At that term of the Superior Court a nol pros, was entered by tbe Solicitor in tbe action.

On tbe trial of tbe present action tbe plaintiff testified that tbe defendant bad told him not to go on tbe land again; that tbe fences were all on bis, defendant’s, land, and that be, the plaintiff, must not rake up manure or any more dirt from tbe fence jambs, as all tbe jambs and tbe fence were on defendant’s land. Tbe defendant demurred to tbe plaintiff’s evidence. His Honor sustained tbe demurrer and dismissed the action, and tbe plaintiff appealed.

We think that bis Honor committed no error in tbe matter. Tbe offence charged in tbe warrant was not as clearly set out as it might have been, but on tbe bearing and tbe trial before tbe Justice of tbe Peace tbe evidence made clear any seeming uncertainty of tbe offence charged, and that it was for a misdemeanor of which tbe Justice of tbe Peace bad jurisdiction.

■ After the judgment of guilty bad been rendered against the plaintiff, the Justice of the Peace bound the plaintiff over to the Superior Court instead of having disposed of the matter by a final judgment. But for this error on the part of the Magistrate the defendant is not responsible. The Justice of the Peace had jurisdiction of the offence which he investigated and tried, and there was a judgment of guilty. If by any means a trial had been afterwards had in the Superior Court, and the same had resulted in an acquittal of the plaintiff Price, nevertheless the conviction in the Justice’s court— a court of competent jurisdiction — established probable cause for the prosecution. Griffis v. Sellars, 19 N. C., 493.

No error.  