Dana Renton sued Monica Watson for malicious prosecution, defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and related relief after Watson applied for an arrest warrant accusing Renton of forgery. Watson withdrew the application before any warrant issued or arrest occurred, and the trial court dismissed the amended complaint and awarded attorney fees. The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal of the malicious-prosecution claim because the required criminal process—a valid warrant, accusation, or qualifying summons—never issued. It also affirmed dismissal of defamation allegations based on statements made in the warrant application and hearing because those statements were absolutely privileged. But the complaint also alleged that Watson repeated defamatory statements to unprivileged third parties; construed in Renton’s favor at the motion-to-dismiss stage, that allegation was sufficient to require further proceedings. The court upheld dismissal of the emotional-distress claim on the separate ground that the alleged conduct was not sufficiently outrageous, while rejecting the attorney-fee award. Renton’s legal theory about summons was novel but had arguable support in another superior-court ruling, so it was not frivolous. The judgment was affirmed in part and reversed in part.