False Imprisonment
A willful and wrongful interference with the freedom of movement of another against his will.

False Imprisonment

False imprisonment is sometimes called false arrest. It protects the personal interest in freedom from restraint of movement. Imprisonment does not necessarily mean incarceration (although it may include it);  one can be imprisoned when restrained in the open street, or in a traveling automobile. 

The successful plaintiff may be entitled to compensation for loss of time, for physical discomfort or inconvenience, and for any resulting physical illness or injury to health. The plaintiff may also be entitled to damages for mental suffering, humiliation, etc. When done intentionally, it is usually a proper case for the award of punitive damages.

The restraint may be by means of physical barriers, or by threats of force which intimidate the person into compliance with orders. The restraint may also be imposed by the assertion of legal authority.

California Penal Code section 236 provides: “False imprisonment is the unlawful violation of the personal liberty of another.” Courts have held that this statutory definition applies whether the offense is treated as a tort (a civil wrong) or a crime. (See Fermino v. Fedco, Inc. (1994) 7 Cal.4th 701, 715 [30 Cal.Rptr.2d 18, 872 P.2d 559]; 42 Cal.App.4th 1124, 1135 [50 Cal.Rptr.2d 169] [the tort of false imprisonment is “a willful and wrongful interference with the freedom of movement of another against his will”].)

If no arrest is actually made, a claim for false imprisonment may still be made if plaintiff claims that [he/she] was wrongfully [restrained / confined / detained] by defendant. To establish the claim, plaintiff must prove all of the following:

1. That defendant intentionally deprived plaintiff of [his/her] freedom of movement by use of
[physical barriers / force / threats of force / menace / fraud / deceit / unreasonable duress];[and]
2. That plaintiff did not consent;
3. That plaintiff was [actually] harmed; and
4. That defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing plaintiff’s harm.

"actually" in required in the third element only if nominal damages are also being sought.

E-Mail us

Your Name (required)

Your Email (required)

Subject

Your Message

Code: captcha
Type above code:

Client Testimonial

I would like to thank Brian for a job well done. He walked me through the whole process first, and it unfolded just as he had predicted. I would highly recommend him to family, friends and anyone interested in his services. — M.V.

Disclaimer

These testimonials or endorsements do not constitute a guarantee, warranty or prediction regarding the outcome of your legal matter.