Siegmund E. Halberstadt, Appellant v. New York Life Insurance Company, Respondent

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division's order, holding that the plaintiff's complaint does state a cause of action for malicious prosecution but that the defenses pleaded—asserting that the criminal proceeding was terminated by the plaintiff's flight from Mexico—are sufficient to defeat the claim. The court ruled that issuance of a warrant alone constitutes the institution of a prosecution, yet a termination caused by the accused's absence does not satisfy the requirement that the proceeding be ended by judicial action on the merits. A concurrence argued that no prosecution ever began because the defendant was never served, but this did not alter the majority's holding.