In Pote v. Jarrell, 186 W. Va. 369, 412 S.E.2d 770 (1991), Mr. Pote's company had contracted with the Jarrell bothers to provide a bulldozer and a driver for use in a well project. An emergency occurred on the job after the bulldozer operator had left for the day, so Mr. Pote authorized the use of the bulldozer without obtaining permission from the Jarrells. The Jarrells alleged that the bulldozer was damaged as a result, and when a dispute arose over payment for the damages, the Jarrells succeeded in having Mr. Pote indicted for stealing and damaging the bulldozer. Mr. Pote was acquitted and then sued the Jarrells for malicious prosecution, abuse of process, and other torts. A jury awarded damages to Mr. Pote and the Jarrells appealed. The Court upheld the jury's verdict, stating that "Pote presented sufficient evidence from which a jury could find that he established all of the elements of his causes of action." Id. 186 W. Va. at 374, 412 S.E.2d at 775.