Question

Charlotte Newsom worked as a cashier at a store. One day she was told to report to the manager's office, where she was accused by two security staff members of stealing $500. She denied stealing the money. The meeting lasted two hours. The security staff asserted to have evidence of theft, although Newsom constantly denied the claim. Whenever Newsom said she wanted to leave, the staff told her she would be arrested for theft if she left. Finally, Newsom wrote a statement denying the charge. She was fired on the spot and left the store. Did she have a case for false imprisonment

Answer 1

Answer:No, because the staff members only threatened to arrest her if she left, and that she was free to leave at any time.

Explanation: False imprisonment is an intentional tort, defined under tort law as an act of restraining someone in a bounded area without any authority.

Bounded Area

- It can be a physical barrier such as locking someone where they can't get out,it involves using physical force to keep that person in that area. The bounded are is characterized by limited room for movement in any direction. If one can easily find means to escape from that area , without getting hurt this means the area is not bound but if there is a chance of getting physically harmed when one tries to escape then the area is bounded. Charlotte was in manager's office ,which has no limited movement.

A threat to harm this person or their family would also be counted as a bounded area.

A mere threat to imprison doesn't count as false imprisonment like in Charlotte was only threatened that if she leaves she will be arrested but we don't sense any sign that she will be injured if she left . The court always consider if the person had any fear that they will be injured if they left the place.