Melvin v. Pence
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
76 U.S. App. D.C. 154, 130 F.2d 423 (1942)
- Written by Eric Miller, JD
Facts
A licensed private detective, Pence (plaintiff), accosted Melvin (defendant) and Elna Smith (defendant) as part of an investigation. Pence showed Smith a badge that said “Washington Detective Agency” but refused to state for whom he worked. Melvin and Smith each filed an affidavit with the police department stating that Pence had represented himself as being from the Washington Detective Bureau (as opposed to Agency), a branch of the police. The superintendent of police made a recommendation to the secretary of the commissioners that Pence’s license be denied renewal because Pence had impersonated a police officer. The recommendation was followed, but Pence successfully appealed to the License Denial and Revocation Board. Pence then brought an action for malicious prosecution against Melvin and Smith. The trial court found in favor of Pence. Melvin and Smith appealed, arguing that they did not initiate judicial proceedings. The United States Court of Appeals granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rutledge, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
