King v. Montgomery

         There is no allegation of want of probable cause in any part of the complaint. (Levy v. Brannan , 39 Cal. 488; Grant v. Moore , 29 Cal. 647; Ellis v. Thilman, 3 Call, 3; Young v. Gregorie, 3 Call, 446; Davis v. Clough , 8 N.H. 157; Maddox v. McGinnis, 7 Mon. 371; Smith v. Story, 4 Humph. 169; Lindsay v. Larned , 17 Mass. 193.)

         JUDGES: Niles, J.

         OPINION

          NILES, Judge

         The complaint contained no averment that the action against Dobbs and King was commenced, or the writ of attachment sued out and prosecuted, without probable cause. In this the complaint was clearly insufficient, and the plaintiff declining to amend, the motion to dismiss was properly granted.

         Judgment affirmed.