Sangster

Sangster v. Paetkau

Good Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 998·68 Cal. App. 4th 151·80 Cal. Rptr. 2d 66·98 Daily Journal DAR 12193·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8764
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 30, 1998A081624California7,656 words

Opinion

Opinion

McGUINESS, J.

Diane L. Sangster appeals from summary judgment entered against her on her complaint for malicious prosecution against Phoebe Hearst Cooke (Cooke), the San Francisco Equestrian Festival (the Festival), Tyler M. Paetkau, Philip M. Battaglia, and the law firm of Donovan, Leisure, Newton & Irvine (Donovan Leisure) (collectively, respondents), arising from an underlying cross-complaint for fraud and breach of fiduciary duty filed against Sangster by Cooke and the Festival We conclude that respondents established the existence of probable cause to bring the underlying cross-complaint and, therefore, affirm the summary judgment on Sangster’s complaint for malicious prosecution.

I. Factual and Procedural Background

Sangster was employed as Cooke’s secretary beginning in 1989. Sangster’s employment duties included assisting Cooke in creating and preparing printed programs for a horse show at the San Francisco Cow Palace sponsored by the Festival, Cooke and the Hearst Corporation. For several years, Sangster utilized the design services of Dennis Wozniak in designing and producing the programs. As part of his services, Wozniak acted as a broker, directly soliciting and receiving…

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.