Question

Fred is awake in a small bedroom laying down in his bed. His roommate thinks it would be funny to lock Fred in the room, so he could not get out of the room. The roommate locks the door to Fred's bedroom. Fred is aware of what is happening and mutters under his breath, “What an idiot.” Having second thoughts, the roommate unlocks the door to the bedroom ten minutes later. While eating breakfast in the kitchen the next morning, the roommate tells Fred what he did. Fred mutters, “I know what you did. I’m not okay with that by the way. You are such a moron.” If Fred sues the roommate for false imprisonment, Fred’s lawsuit:

Group of answer choices

A. has legal merit because all elements of the prima facie case for false imprisonment are present in the fact pattern.

B. has legal merit because the roommate's actions were not privileged.

C. can be dismissed because the roommate's actions were privileged.

D. can be dismissed because Fred was not aware that he was locked in the room.

E. can be dismissed because Fred consented.

Answer 1

According to me the answer to the question is option B

It cannot be option A because not all the elements of the prima facie case for false imprisonment were present , as he removed him from the room within 10 mins , it was just for fun and did not have any soid valaid reason for doing it

Answer is option B because , Fred had legal merits because the roomates action were not privilage, he has not done a crime however whatever he did was completely wrong and acceptable

the requet of plea cannot be dismissed in any court

Thanking You , shall let you know