False imprisonment

Lore & Background

False imprisonment requires an intentional act; accidental detention does not support a claim. The law may privilege a person to detain another against their will, such as a parent denying a child's request to leave the house, which does not ordinarily constitute false imprisonment. For detention by police, proof of false imprisonment provides a basis to obtain a writ of habeas corpus.

Reader's Guide

Under United States law, police officers may detain individuals based on probable cause or reasonable suspicion. To prevail in a false imprisonment claim, a plaintiff must prove willful detention in a bounded area, without consent, and without authority of lawful arrest. Many U.S. jurisdictions recognize the shopkeeper's privilege, allowing reasonable force to detain a suspected shoplifter for a reasonable period. The shopkeeper must conduct the investigation on or near the premises, have reasonable cause, use reasonable force, and not prolong detention unreasonably. In the United Kingdom, false imprisonment falls under trespass to the person and requires intentional or reckless, unlawful total restraint of the claimant's freedom of movement. Examples from U.S. case law include a woman winning a false imprisonment claim against a police officer who arrested her for not producing a driver's license without proper legal authority, and a pharmacist found liable for stalling a patient while calling police without the patient's knowledge.

Did You Know?

• Actual physical restraint is not necessary for false imprisonment to occur.
• Under common law, false imprisonment is both a crime and a tort.
• A shopkeeper's privilege allows reasonable force to detain a suspected shoplifter for a reasonable period.
• In the UK, false imprisonment does not require a literal prison; it can occur in an open field or a person's own house.