4596 REVIEW DENIED A plaintiff’s deposition testimony indicating that she did not believe she suffered the injuries alleged in her complaint as a result of defendant’s alleged tortious conduct is sufficient evidence that her case was without merit to make her voluntary dismissal with prejudice in return for defendant’s waiver of costs a final termination on the merits; attorneys who continued prosecuting her case after she so testified did so without probable cause; combined with the other elements, the attorneys’ lack of probable cause was sufficient evidence of malice to establish a prima facie case of malicious prosecution against them; attorneys who substituted into the claim prior to plaintiff’s voluntary dismissal either knew or should have known that the case was without merit, and may also be subject to malicious prosecution liability.

SYCAMORE RIDGE APARTMENTS v NAUMANN (Moldy Apartments) 157 CA4 1385 [See: Crowley v Katleman 8 C4 666, T/AT 12/94; Zamos v Stroud 32 C4 958, T/AT 5/04; Ross v Kish 145 CA4 188, T/AT 2/07; Sangster v Paetkau 68 CA4 151, T/AT 1/99]