A more thorough explanation:

False imprisonment is a legal term that refers to the act of restraining someone against their will, which confines them to a restricted area. This act is punishable under both criminal and tort law, and is classified as an intentional tort.

In order to prove false imprisonment, the following elements must be present:

• The defendant willfully acted with the intention of confining the plaintiff without their consent and without legal authority
• The defendant's actions caused the plaintiff's confinement
• The plaintiff was aware of their confinement

An area is considered bounded if freedom of movement is limited in all directions. This can be achieved through physical barriers, physical force, failure to release, or an invalid use of legal authority. If there is a reasonable means of escape from the area, it is not considered bounded. However, if the means of escape would result in physical harm to the detainee, or if the detainee's family is threatened if they leave, then the area is considered bounded.

Threats of immediate physical force can also be considered acts of restraint. However, a mere threat to imprison someone is not enough to qualify as false imprisonment. The court will consider whether the plaintiff had a justifiable fear of injury when determining if a threat counts as false imprisonment.

An example of an invalid use of legal authority is when a person is detained or arrested without a warrant, with an illegal warrant, or with a warrant that was illegally executed. The amount of time the person is detained is inconsequential as long as they are deprived of their personal liberty.

The shopkeeper's privilege is an affirmative defense to the false imprisonment tort. It allows a shopkeeper who reasonably believes that someone has stolen or is attempting to steal something from their store to detain them in a reasonable manner for a reasonable amount of time to investigate.

There are two other torts that fall under false imprisonment: malicious prosecution and abuse of process. Malicious prosecution requires the plaintiff to prove that the defendant acted without probable cause and with malice toward the plaintiff, that the prosecution would not have proceeded without the defendant's actions, and that the plaintiff did not engage in the alleged misconduct. Abuse of process requires the plaintiff to prove that the defendant invoked the legal system in order to extort, threaten, or harass them.

An example of false imprisonment would be if a security guard at a store detains a customer without their consent or without legal authority, and confines them to a room in the back of the store. Another example would be if a police officer arrests someone without a warrant or with an invalid warrant, and holds them in custody for an extended period of time.

An example of a threat of false imprisonment would be if someone threatens to lock another person in a room if they do not comply with their demands. This would only qualify as false imprisonment if the person had a justifiable fear of being locked in the room.

An example of an invalid use of legal authority would be if a police officer arrests someone without a warrant or with an invalid warrant, and holds them in custody for an extended period of time. Even if the person is released after a short period of time, they were still deprived of their personal liberty.

An example of shopkeeper's privilege would be if a store owner detains someone who they reasonably believe has stolen something from their store, and holds them for a short period of time to investigate. As long as the detention is reasonable and the investigation is conducted in good faith, this would not be considered false imprisonment.

An example of malicious prosecution would be if a prosecutor brings charges against someone without probable cause and with malice toward the defendant, and the case proceeds to trial. If the defendant is found not guilty, they may have a claim for malicious prosecution.

An example of abuse of process would be if a person files a lawsuit against someone with the intention of harassing or extorting them, rather than with a legitimate legal claim. This would be considered an abuse of the legal process.