Singh v. McLaughlin

A directed verdict by the trial court will be reversed and remanded by the Court of Appeals if the Court find that the plaintiff presented enough evidence for his claims to be evaluated by a jury.

Singh appealed the trial court's directed verdict in favor of McLaughlin on his tort claims of false imprisonment, malicious prosecution and abuse of process. Singh was accused and arrested of robbing the convenience store where he was employed, based on McLaughlin's review of the store's surveillance footage that showed an employee exiting the store with a cart full of bottles. McLaughlin, the store's attorney, had been asked to review the surveillance video after an investigator, hired by the store to research fraud and theft, had watched the surveillance video. Although the employee in the video did not look like Singh, it was determined that Singh was working at the time the video was taken. The trial court dismissed the tort claims against McLaughlin in a directed verdict, rather than let the jury evaluate the facts because the court found that all McLaughlin did was to tell the investigator what he saw in the video, and that the investigator called for the arrest. After reviewing the requirements and elements for Singh's tort claims, the Court of Appeals held that the trial court erred in entering a directed verdict for McLaughlin, because Singh presented enough evidence for his claims to be evaluated by a jury. Reversed and remanded.