The claim in respect of false imprisonment is tenuous and questionable at best. No intentional total confinement is alleged. However, that can await the trial and the exact evidence adduced, without prejudice or expense. If it exists, it exists on the basis of paragraphs 6 and 7, being the same paragraphs as pleaded in support of assault and battery and negligence. I have, in effect, decided to use the approach in Grose v. Grose, supra. I am not striking paragraphs 6 and 7 in any event, and there is no harm in dealing with the reference to false imprisonment in the claim for relief, if, indeed, it is proper to strike it.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.