QUILLIAN, Justice.
Where, as in the case sub judice, the petition alleges that the defendant caused a distress warrant to issue against the plaintiff maliciously and without probable cause, but fails to allege that the distress-warrant proceedings terminated favorably to the plaintiff, the petition set forth no cause of action in trespass ( Sledge v. McLaren, 29 Ga. 74; Parter v. Johnson, 96 Ga. 148, 23 S.E. 123; Fulton Grocery Co. v. Maddox, 111 Ga. 260, 36 S.E. 647), or for malicious use of process. Sparrow v. Weld, 177 Ga. 134 ( 169 S.E. 487). There is a clear distinction between the seizure of property under a valid process, as in this case, and the seizure of property of a person under process which is invalid or void upon its face, or where no process has ever issued against him.
Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.
ARGUED MAY 8, 1961 — DECIDED JUNE 8, 1961.