TITLE XI. FALSE ARREST AND IMPRISONMENT. CHAPTER LII. FALSE ARREST AND IMPRISONMENT. § 1064. False imprisonment What is. § 1065. Restraint without process - When permitted. § 1066. § 1067. Imprisonment of insane persons. § 1064. False Imprisonment - What is. - False imprisonment consists in unlawfully restraining a person's freedom without legal authority. If his freedom of locomotion is interfered with, it matters not whether he is confined in a room, or a building, or on the streets, or in the open air. Nor is it essential that the person shall be actually taken hold of or assaulted. "It is the fact 1 Crowell v. Gleason, 10 Me. 325; Bird v. Jones, 7 Q. B. 742; Colter v. Lower, 35 Ind. 285; 9 Am. Rep. 735; Allen v. R. R. Co., L. R. 6 Q. B. 65. See note to Mitchell v. State, 54 Am. Dec. 258-271. 2 Floyd v. State, 12 Ark. 43; 54 Am. Dec. 250. 3 Grainger v. Hill, 4 Bing. N. C. 212; Mowry v. Chase, 100 Mass. 79; Ahern Collins, 39 Mo. 145; Hawk Ridgway, 33 Ill. 473; Bissell v. v. v. of compulsory submission which brings a person into imprisonment; and impending and threatened physical violence, which, to all appearance, can only be avoided by submission, operates as effectually, if submitted to, as if the arrest had been forcibly accomplished without such submission. There are cases in which a party who does not submit cannot be regarded as arrested until his person is touched, but when he does submit, no such necessity exists." It is an imprisonment to notify a person that he is arrested, he submitting and accompanying the officer; to stop and prevent one from passing along a highway; to tell one on a ferry that he cannot leave it until a certain demand is settled; or to prevent one from leaving a house or a room without being accompanied by an officer; or to call a person out to the gate of his house, and by threats make him confess that he is guilty of falsehood, and compel him to drink,with his assailants; or to lay the hand on a person to arrest him, even though he is not stopped or held an instant; or to lock the door of the room, telling him he is arrested." 3 5 But there must be a restriction of the right of locomotion; the party's liberty must be restrained," and the party must be aware of it.10 It is not an imprisonment to prevent a person from leaving a place by one door, there Gold, 1 Wend. 210; 19 Am. Dec. 480; Whithead v. Keyes, 3 Allen, 495; 81 Am. Dec. 672; Warner v, Riddiford, 4 Com. B., N. S., 205; Murphy v. Counters, 1 Harr. (Del.) 143; Johnson v. Tompkins, 1 Bald. 571; Emery v. Chesley, 18 N. H. 198; Pike v. Hanson, 9 N. H. 491; Field v. Ireland, 21 Ala. 240; Courtoy v. Dozier, 20 Ga. 369; Searls v. Viets, 2 Thomp. & C. 224; Haskins v. Young, 2 Dev. & B. 527; 31 Am. Dec. 426. 1 Brushaber v. Stegemann, 22 Mich. 266; Genner v. Sparks, 1 Salk. 79. And see Arrowsmith v. Le Mesurier, 2 Bos. & P. 211; Lawson v. Bergines, 3 Harr. (Del.) 416. 2 Brushaber v. Stegemann, 22 Mich. 266; Wood v. Lane, 6 Car. & P. N. 3 Bloomer v. State, 3 Sneed, 66. 5 Warner v. Riddiford, 4 Com. B., 6 Herring v. State, 3 Tex. App. 108. 7 Whithead v. Keyes, 3 Allen, 495; 81 Am. Dec. 672. 8 Williams v. Jones, Cas. t. Hardw. 298. "Hart v. Flynn, 8 Dana, 190; French v. Bancroft, 1 Met. 502; Russen v. Lucas, 1 Car. & P. 153; Berry v. Adamson, 6 Barn. & C. 528; Hill v. Taylor, 50 Mich. 549. 10 Jones v. Jones, 13 Ired. 448; Herring v. Boyle, 1 Cromp. M. &. R. 377. 1 2 being another which he may use. A mere delivery of a summons or citation without detention of the person is not an arrest. The distinction between the civil action for malicious prosecution and the civil action for false imprisonment is this: in the former the arrest or imprisonment is under legal process, but the action has been commenced or carried on maliciously and without probable cause; in the latter, the arrest or imprisonment is unlawful and without legal authority, and the question of malice or probable cause is not in issue.3 An action for false imprisonment is transitory, and the courts of a state have jurisdiction of such an action brought to recover damages for an arrest under a warrant issued to enforce the collection of an illegal tax of another state.* ILLUSTRATIONS.—A person went into a bank on business, and having remained after the usual hours for business, the teller closed the doors and refused to let him depart. Held, an imprisonment, notwithstanding the person knew the usual hours of closing the bank: Woodward v. Washburn, 3 Denio, 369. R., a constable, having a warrant for plaintiff and his sons, issued by a justice, met the plaintiff and one of his sons in a wagon. R. said: “I have a warrant for you and your two sons." Plaintiff asked for what. R. replied, "for stealing pumpkins." Plaintiff started to get out of the wagon, and R. said: "You can go home and get your horses put up and take your tea and come down." Plaintiff went home, took his tea, employed a lawyer, and with him and his two sons went to R.'s, and calling out R., said, "Here's your prisoners." R. said: "You move on and I will overtake you." They went on, and R. overtook them as they got to the house of the justice. The matter was then, after discussion, adjourned to another day, without bail, and on the adjourned day the plaintiff appeared, an examination was had, Wright v. Wilson, 1 Ld. Raym. 739; Bird v. Jones, 7 Q. B. 742. Huntington v. Shultz, Harp. 452; 18 Am. Dec. 660; Hart v. Flynn, 8 Dana, 190. Gelzenleuchter v. Niemeyer, 64 Wis. 316; 54 Am. Rep. 616; Wentz v. Bernhardt, 37 La. Ann. 636. Although one's object in procuring an arrest was to enforce payment of a debt, an action for false imprisonment will not le if the warrant was a lawful one. An action for a malicious prosecution affords the remedy: Mullen v. Brown, 138 Mass. 114. See Fellows v. Goodman, 49 Mo. 62. But false imprisonment, it has been held in Massachusetts, will lie for the abuse or misuse of valid legal process: Wood v. Graves, 144 Mass. 365; 59 Am. Rep. 95. See Hackett v. King, 6 Allen, 58. Henry v. Sargeant, 13 N. H. 321; 40 Am. Dec. 146. |