Ferreira

Ferreira v. GRAY, CARY, WARE & FREIENDRICH

Good Law
104 Cal. Rptr. 2d 683·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 137·2001 Daily Journal DAR 2163·87 Cal. App. 4th 409·2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1722
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 28, 2001D034678California1,495 words

Opinion

Opinion

McINTYRE, J.

In this appeal, we decide that where a case is concluded by a settlement after trial, there is no favorable termination for purposes of pursuing a malicious prosecution action.

Frank E. Ferreira sued the law firm of Gray, Cary, Ware & Freidenrich, and two of its attorneys, Duane S. Horning and L.B. Chip Edleson (together Gray, Cary) for malicious prosecution, based on their representation of Debra, Maryanne and Christine Rushing in an earlier action which was settled after trial. The trial court entered summary judgment dismissing Ferreira’s malicious prosecution suit, holding there was no favorable termination of the underlying action, and in the alternative, that the underlying action was brought with probable cause. Ferreira appeals, contending the court erred in both respects.

As we explain below, although the underlying litigation was tried on the merits, it concluded with a settlement, and thus there was not a favorable termination for Ferreira. Accordingly, Ferreira’s malicious prosecution action failed as a matter of law, and we affirm the judgment below. Given this holding, we need not reach the trial court’s alternative basis for granting summary…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.