False Imprisonment Viral Video: Is Walmart Liable for Damages?

If you have ever worked at a store, you know how frustrating it can be when last-minute customers come in and refuse to leave- even after closing. But does that give you a right to false imprisonment?

The circumstances leading up to this video are unclear. However, we can see an employee locking the door of this Walmart store, leaving customers trapped inside. His actions constitute false imprisonment, and Walmart can be liable for damages.

What is False Imprisonment?

False imprisonment occurs when a person confines another in a restricted area. It is punishable under criminal law and tort law as an intentional act. The following circumstances must apply for an act to be considered false imprisonment;

• The defendant acts willfully.
• The defendant confines a person without their consent and legal authority.
• The defendant causes the plaintiff’s confinement.
• The plaintiff is aware of the confinement.

Other Guidelines for False Imprisonment

Bounded Area

False imprisonment must occur in a bounded area. An area is bounded if escape is limited in all directions. The area is not bounded if there is a reasonable means of escape. However, the area is bound if escaping could result in injury or if the detainee is physically threatened for attempting to flee.

Threats of False Imprisonment

Authorities can charge a person with threatening false imprisonment if it instills a fear of injury.

Invalid Use of Authority

Invalid use of authority occurs when someone falsely imprisons a person without a warrant or with an illegal warrant.

Shopkeeper’s Privilege

Shopkeepers may have a right to detain a customer if they believe the customer has stolen something or is about to steal something.

Could Trespassing Apply?

As mentioned earlier, what happened before the store locked the customers inside is unclear. They might have been trespassing. In some states, a shopkeeper can charge a customer with trespassing if they refuse to leave after being asked.

However, you can only address trespassing using reasonable force. False imprisonment does not fall under the guidelines for reasonable force; it constitutes excessive action and is a criminally punishable offense.

Is Walmart Responsible for False Imprisonment?

There is no question that the viral video shows an action of false imprisonment. But who would be liable for damages? The employee or Walmart?

A legal doctrine called “respondeat superior” (let the superior answer) states that an employer is legally responsible for their employees’ actions. However, the employee will only be responsible if the employee is acting within their scope of employment. Additionally, if the employee acts out of personal motives, the employer may not be liable.

In this case, Walmart would be liable if the worker’s superior directly ordered the employee to lock the door. A less direct chain of action would also make Walmart responsible. For example, if they informed the worker that the doors had to be locked at a certain time or there would be consequences, they could be liable for damages.

Walmart could also get in trouble if their employee had a past of criminal or violent behavior. They would be liable because they failed to run a background check or otherwise poorly judged his character.

What is the Punishment for False Imprisonment?

Authorities can charge false imprisonment as a misdemeanor, which carries a penalty of up to one year in county jail and a fine of up to $1,000, or as a felony, with a potential sentence of up to three years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000. The sentence depends on the level of danger involved. For example, if the victim is elderly or dependent, if a weapon is used, or if street gangs are involved, the sentence could be more severe.