The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Rannels (P) purchased a pair of blue jeans from Nichols (D) for $8. P wrote a check but discovered that the zipper on the jeans was defective. P went to the store the next day and demanded a replacement or a refund and the store refused either. P then stopped payment on the check, had the zipper fixed at a cost of $2, and returned to the store and offered to pay $6 for the jeans. Nichols (D) filed a criminal complaint under a Pennsylvania bad check statute. P returned to the store to inquire about the complaint. An employee of D stated in the presence of other customers that the store would have to make an example of P for taking merchandise and canceling the payment check. P brought an action for defamation and an action for malicious prosecution. The malicious prosecution complaint stated that D caused the criminal proceeding to begin, that it was terminated in her favor, and that D knew that P had not committed any crime. The district court dismissed the complaint because it did not allege that D acted without probable cause. P appealed.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.