Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Davis v. Trusthouse Forte Hotels Worldwide, Inc.
Citations: 395 S.E.2d 235; 195 Ga. App. 768; 1990 Ga. App. LEXIS 713Docket: A90A0487
Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia; May 14, 1990; Georgia; State Appellate Court
Michael G. Davis filed a malicious prosecution suit against Trusthouse Forte Hotels Worldwide, Inc. and three employees, following his arrest for armed robbery, which resulted from an incident at the Viscount Inn. The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendants, leading to Davis's appeal. The court's decision was based on the established existence of probable cause, as the judge in the criminal trial denied Davis's motions for directed verdict of acquittal. Citing Monroe v. Sigler, the court ruled that such a denial constitutes a binding determination of probable cause, negating an essential element of Davis's malicious prosecution claim. Although Davis alleged that hotel employees provided perjured testimony, he failed to present any supporting evidence. The court noted that Davis had not appealed his criminal conviction, and given his acquittal of armed robbery, an appeal regarding the directed verdict on that charge was unlikely. Therefore, summary judgment was affirmed. Appellant's assertion that there are unresolved material facts regarding other causes of action in his complaint lacks merit. Although the complaint could suggest a slander claim, statements made in good faith during police investigations are privileged under OCGA 51-5-7 (1). The appellees were entitled to summary judgment due to the absence of evidence countering their good faith assertions. The other claims identified by the appellant are merely related to damages stemming from alleged malicious prosecution and slander, not additional causes of action. Appellant's constitutional claims were not addressed by the trial court, rendering them non-reviewable on appeal. Furthermore, these claims challenge established precedent, making them without merit. The court found no conflict with South Ga. Grocery Co. v. Banks, determining that the trial testimony was credible enough to support a finding of probable cause. It was noted that when material facts are undisputed, the question shifts from fact to law. Given the precedent established in Monroe, which required a specific inference in this case, the trial court's summary judgment ruling in favor of the appellees is affirmed.