Reinhardt v. Reitz

LAWLOR, J.

From a judgment rendered in an action brought for malicious prosecution defendant presents this appeal. The plaintiff was arrested and lodged in jail upon the filing of a complaint by defendant in a justice’s court charging him with the crime of burglary. When the preliminary examination was had, the plaintiff was discharged, whereupon he brought this action to recover damages for injury to his reputation and good name and for money expended for counsel fees in defending himself against the charge. The action was tried before a jury, and a verdict rendered for $575 and costs.

It appears from the evidence that the defendant is a German, who was at the time of the arrest of the plaintiff not familiar with the law or with the practice of the courts touching matters involved. For several years prior to and at the time of the alleged burglary in the commission of which it was claimed certain money belonging to defendant was taken, he was conducting a saloon in the town of Willows. His money was always kept hidden in various places in the saloon. Besides some change kept in a cash register, it was his prac

[210]

tice to place about $30 in gold under a bottle" on what was called the back bar. His bartenders used this money when necessary for the making of extra change. The balance of the gold the defendant concealed among the barrels, boxes, and other articles stored in the cellar of his saloon, the sole entrance to which was through a trap-door in the floor of the main barroom. At the time of the burglary he had thus secreted in the cellar about eight hundred dollars in gold. He usually attended to his business alone, and did his own janitor work, but occasionally employed others to assist in tending bar. These bartenders did not have occasion to go into the cellar, for the defendant always brought up the liquors himself and personally replenished the bottles on the bar for the daily consumption. For nearly five weeks the plaintiff had been thus employed to tend bar. He was a fellow countryman, was married, had several children, and, according to the defendant’s testimony, had told"him that his trade in Germany was that of a locksmith. The plaintiff denies having made any such statement. Although the defendant testified that he often sent the plaintiff into the cellar in the course of his employment, the latter declared that the only time he went there was with a customer who was looking for a barrel, and that he did not then see any money. The evidence does not - show that the plaintiff ever had knowledge of any money being kept in the cellar. Part of his duties consisted in opening the saloon in the morning. For this purpose he had been supplied with keys to the front and rear doors, which remained in his possession during the period of his employment.