Assault/Malicious Prosecution

Heard & Medack also has experience trying cases involving assault and malicious prosecution.  In both causes of action, our clients are usually facing an uphill battle, but we are there help even the odds. 

In cases of assault, a plaintiff has usually been injured or killed by the criminal conduct of a third party.  Our client is commonly the owner of the premises were the attack took place.  As such, our client is perceived to be the “deep pocket.”  If the plaintiff’s attorney has his way, he will try the case as if there was no criminal attacker. He will typically ignore the conduct of the attacker and focus on what our client “should have done” to prevent the attack.  He will then ask the jury to make our client financially responsible for the injuries the plaintiff sustained at the hands of the criminal.   It is our job to tell the other side of the story…the story the jury will not hear from the plaintiff’s lawyer.  We will demonstrate why the jury must consider the conduct of the responsible third party (the attacker) as well as the comparative negligence of the plaintiff.  Once we make it clear that the jury will get to hear all sides of the story, these cases frequently settle or get dismissed on summary judgment.

In cases involving malicious prosecution, the plaintiff has already won one battle.  They must have been acquitted for a crime our client said they committed.  Because they have satisfied this legal prerequisite, plaintiffs usually feel emboldened to sue for malicious prosecution.  Nevertheless, the remaining elements the plaintiff must satisfy to prevail on this cause of action are daunting.  Also, Texas law gives our clients an “extra arrow” for their trial quiver.  In Texas, we get to admit evidence at trial of all other occasions when the plaintiff was incarcerated.  This evidence is admissible to rebut the alleged mental anguish the plaintiff will claim as damages. Mental anguish for a plaintiff that has never been charged with a crime can arguably be intense.  However, their ability to credibly claim mental anguish decreases in cases where a plaintiff has a history of repeatedly being handled by the criminal justice system.  While the applicability of this rule of evidence may vary from case to case, it’s still pretty handy when dealing with recidivists.

Contact our Texas Malicious Prosecution Attorneys today!