upheld Tuesday by the Connecticut Supreme Court, in Bhatia v. Debek. An interesting discussion of how the malicious prosecution tort formally operates when the defendant is accused of having lied to the police in a way that led to an actual criminal prosecution -- usually the tort, despite its name, applies to unfounded civil claims.

Naturally, it's fairly unlikely that the plaintiff would actually be able to collect the sum, though it depends on the defendant's particular circumstances. (My very tentative understanding is that this sort of behavior generally isn't covered by typical personal liability insurance policies, which are chiefly homeowner's insurance policies.)