#### Mary Giroux, Appellee, v. Ben Goldman, Appellant.

Gen. No. 23,151.

(Not to he reported in full.)

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. David F. Matchbtt, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1917.

Affirmed on remittitur; otherwise reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed November 30, 1917.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Mary Giroux, plaintiff, against Ben Goldman, defendant, to recover damages for malicious prosecution. FYom a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $300, defendant appeals.

Kelley & Griffin, for appellant; Edward J. Kelley, of counsel.

Daniel L. Madden and R. C. Merrick, for appellee.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.

*262Abstract of the Decision.

1. Malicious prosecution, § 76 * —when malice not shown. In an action for malicious prosecution, evidence held insufficient to show malice on the part of defendant.

2. Malicious prosecution, § 20*—when good faith is sufficient defense. Good faith in swearing out the warrant for plaintiff’s arrest is a sufficient defense to an action for malicious prosecution.

3. Malicious prosecution, § 74*—when evidence is insufficient to show caution in swearing out warrant. In an action to recover for malicious prosecution, evidence held to show that, in swearing out a warrant for plaintiff’s arrest, defendant did not act as a reasonably cautious person would have acted in the circumstances.

4. Malicious prosecution, jj 98*—when verdict is excessive. In an action to recover for malicious prosecution, a verdict for plaintiff for $300 held excessive and remittitur of $150 required as condition of affirmance.