New Case on Malicious Prosecution: Plaintiffs' Malicious Prosecution Claim Did Not Accrue Until Defendant's Time to File a Brief on Appeal Expired

The Tennessee Court of Appeals has issued its decision in Cordova v. Martin, No. M2021-01412-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. May 24, 2023). The syllabus from the slip opinion reads:

This is an action for malicious prosecution of an attorney’s fee claim. The plaintiffs contend that the trial court improperly granted summary judgment to the defendant under the oneyear statute of limitations in Tennessee Code Annotated § 28-3-104(a)(1). The court held that the plaintiffs’ cause of action accrued when the allegedly-malicious prosecution terminated, and it held that the prosecution terminated when the first court denied the defendant’s motion to alter or amend the judgment under Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 59.04. The plaintiffs contend that this is wrong because the defendant was a party to and participated in the appeal of those proceedings. They assert that the defendant’s action did not terminate until he exhausted his appellate remedies. We agree and hold that the defendant’s cause of action did not terminate until his time for filing an appellate brief expired. Thus, we reverse the decision of the trial court and remand with instructions to reinstate the complaint and for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Here is a link to the slip opinion: Majority Opinion M2021-01412-COA-R3-CV.pdf (tncourts.gov).

NOTE: This opinion does a good job of explaining the accrual of these types of claims; it is a good read.