1989),[1] the Second Circuit considered whether, under New York law, a plaintiff could satisfy the element of "favorable termination" requisite to a malicious prosecution claim when he had been acquitted on a misdemeanor charge (resisting arrest) but convicted of a less serious charge (disorderly conduct, a violation).

Janetka was found guilty of a lesser charge, disorderly conduct, and Dabe was reprimanded for how he documented the incident.

Janetka later filed suit against the county under the concept of respondeat superior.

The holding of Janetka is overcome by arguing that all the charges for which plaintiff was prosecuted stem from the same criminal activity and substantially overlap.

1989) is available from: Google Scholar Justia Leagle OpenJurist