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.
Jordan v. Deese
Citations: 452 S.E.2d 838; 317 S.C. 260; 1995 S.C. LEXIS 4Docket: 24176
Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina; January 9, 1995; South Carolina; State Supreme Court
Appellant Thomas F. Jordan challenged the grant of summary judgment in a malicious prosecution suit against respondents L. Frank Deese and Chemphar, Inc. The Supreme Court of South Carolina ruled in favor of the respondents. Jordan was initially charged with making harassing phone calls to Deese and entered a Pre-Trial Intervention (PTI) Program with the respondents' consent, fulfilling requirements that included fees, community service, and counseling. Upon successful completion, the charges were dismissed. In malicious prosecution claims, six elements must be established: 1) initiation or continuation of legal proceedings by the defendants, 2) favorable termination for the plaintiff, 3) malice in instituting the proceedings, 4) lack of probable cause, and 5) resulting injury. The respondents argued for summary judgment on the basis that the dismissal of charges after Jordan's voluntary participation in the PTI did not constitute a favorable termination of the proceedings. The court agreed, citing precedent that a voluntary settlement, such as completion of a PTI program, does not equate to a favorable termination needed to support a malicious prosecution claim. The circuit court's ruling was thus affirmed, with all justices concurring.