Cited by

the facts of a case are undisputed, probable cause is a question of law to be reviewed de novo.”); (noting that “we review the district court’s findings of historical fact relating to the probable cause determination for clear error under the clearly erroneous standard but we independently review de novo the issue of probable cause”); Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256, 260 , 68 N.W.

796, 798 (1904) (“It is not the policy of the law to discourage investigation into the sources of crime, or to impose such difficulties in the way of judicial proceedings therefor as to constitute barriers to the administration of justice and discourage the institution of necessary criminal prosecutions”); Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256, 259-260 , 68 N.W.

796, 798 (1904); Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256, 259-260 , 68 N.W.

The term is employed with this meaning in the statute requiring a committing magistrate to hold the accused to answer if probable cause be shown that the accused committed the offense charged, In re Snell, 31 Minn. 110 , ; and in determining the existence of probable cause for the institution of a prosecution in an action for malicious prosecution, Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , ; and of an arrest in an action for false imprisonment, Nelson v. Halvorson, 117 Minn. 255 , , Ann. Cas.

Defendants cite Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , ; but the court held the facts there did not warrant punitive damages.

Woodward v. Glidden, 33 Minn. 108 , ; Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , ; Rauma v. Lamont, 82 Minn. 477 , ; Roemer v. Jacob Schmidt Brg.

Co. 122 Minn. 241 , ; Lammers v. Mason, 123 Minn. 204 , ; Cox v. Lauritsen, 126 Minn. 128 , ; Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , ; Dun.

Potter v. Gjertsen, 37 Minn. 386 , ; Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256, 259 , ; 26 Cyc.

ing the facts, if such doubt induces in the mind an honest belief that there are legal grounds for the prosecution.” Probable cause has been defined "as the existence of such facts and circumstances as would excite belief in a reasonable mind, acting on the facts within the knowledge of the prosecutor, that the person charged was guilty of the offense for which he was prosecuted.” Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , ; Stacey v. Emery, 97 U. S. 642 , 24 L. ed. 1035.

See Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , .

Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , ; Slater v. Advance Thresher Co. 97 Minn. 305 , , 5 L.R.A.(N.S.)

Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , Lesch v. Great Northern Ry.

Co. 31 Minn. 147, ; Gilbertson v. Fuller, 40 Minn. 413 , ; Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , ; Baldwin v. Capitol Steam Laundry Co. 109 Minn. 38 , ; Mundal v. Minneapolis & St.

What will constitute probable cause has been defined as “the existence of such facts and circumstances as would excite the belief in a reasonable mind, acting on the facts within the knowledge of the prosecutor, that the person charged was guilty of the offense for which he was prosecuted.” Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , ; Hanowitz v. Great Northern Ry.

Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , ; Barrett v. Minneapolis, St.

Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256, 260 , ; Larson v. Fidelity Mut.

Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , ; Sina v. Carlson, 120 Minn. 283 , .

He may act upon communications made to him by others if be has reasonable ground for believing, and does believe, that tbe communications are true.” Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256, 259 , .

Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , ; Crandall v. Boutell, 95 Minn. 114 , , 5 An.

Co. 31 Minn. 351 , ; Mulvehill v. Bates, 31 Minn. 364 , ; Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , ; Slater v. Advance Thresher Co. 97 Minn. 305 , ; Barrett v. Minneapolis, St.

Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , ; Larson v. Fidelity Mut.

Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , ; Larson v. Fidelity Mut.

Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , ; Mulvehill v. Bates, 31 Minn. 364 , ; Walters v. Pioneer Fuel Co., 52 Minn. 474 , ; Schubert v. J. R. Clark Co., 49 Minn. 331 , ; Philadelphia & R. R. Co. v. Derby, 14 How.

Mulvehill v. Bates, 31 Minn. 364 , ; Ellegard v. Ackland, 43 Minn. 352 , ; Brazil v. Peterson, 44 Minn. 212 , ; Smith v. Munch, 65 Minn. 256 , .