Anthony LAW, Vondeste G. Mole, Mark Holmes, Arthur A. Vaughan, Harry Jenkins, and Kenneth Green, Appellants, v…

Summary

The court affirmed summary judgment on the malicious-prosecution claims because the criminal proceedings were not shown to have terminated favorably, probable cause existed, and malice was not established. It affirmed the directed verdict on the wrongful-termination claims because four appellants resigned and the two terminated appellants failed to exhaust available administrative remedies. It also affirmed JNOV on the false-imprisonment claims because sworn oral testimony supplemented the arrest affidavits and established probable cause as a matter of law. Justice PLEICONES, concurring in part and dissenting in part, would have reversed the JNOV because the evidence permitted a reasonable inference that the affidavits were not properly supplemented.