False Arrest Claims in Personal Injury Law

False arrest is a type of civil wrong, known as an intentional tort, which can give rise to a personal injury claim. It involves the unlawful restraint or detention of an individual without proper legal authority and without the individual’s consent. A false arrest can lead to physical harm, emotional distress, loss of income, and reputational damage. Although police officers frequently perform arrests, private individuals such as store managers or security guards can also commit false arrest when they limit another person’s freedom of movement without a valid legal basis.

False Arrest vs. False Imprisonment

False arrest and false imprisonment often overlap, since both involve the intentional and unlawful confinement of a person against their will. In some jurisdictions, false arrest is treated simply as a specific type of false imprisonment that arises under color of an asserted legal authority. In others, the two are considered separate claims, but both protect the right to freedom of movement. The defining feature in false arrest is generally the assertion or appearance of legal authority that does not, in fact, exist.

Elements of a False Arrest Claim

A typical false arrest claim requires showing that the defendant intentionally confined the plaintiff by arrest or restraint, the plaintiff did not consent to the confinement, the confinement was not supported by lawful authority, and the plaintiff was aware of the confinement. The defendant need not have intended harm, only to perform the act that caused the unlawful detention. An arrest or detention is deemed lawful if it is based on a valid warrant or court order, or probable cause that a crime has been committed. An individual who is unconscious or unaware of the confinement at the time may not be able to bring a false arrest claim. However, it is unnecessary for a person to know the detention was illegal.

Legal Justifications for Detention

An arrest or detention may avoid being classified as false arrest if it is based on an appropriate legal justification. Law enforcement officers rely on warrants or probable cause to believe a crime has been committed. Probable cause is evaluated under an objective standard, considering whether a reasonable person with the same facts and circumstances would conclude that the individual being detained was involved in criminal activity. Private citizens usually have narrower authority to detain someone, although many jurisdictions recognize a shopkeeper’s privilege permitting merchants and their employees to detain a suspected shoplifter briefly and in a reasonable manner when there is a reasonable basis for suspecting theft.

Distinguishing a Stop From an Arrest

Law enforcement officers may stop someone briefly for questioning if they have a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. This detention, often known as a Terry stop, does not require the level of probable cause needed for a formal arrest. During a stop, the individual may not feel free to leave, but this temporary measure is permissible if it is limited in duration and scope. If it extends for too long, involves excessive force, or goes beyond what was initially justified by reasonable suspicion, it can become a de facto arrest requiring probable cause. A stop that evolves into an unlawful arrest may result in a claim for false arrest.

Who Can Be Held Liable

Liability for false arrest may extend to any individual or entity responsible for the unlawful confinement. The person directly performing the arrest, such as a police officer or security guard, can be liable if the detention lacks legal justification. Employers may bear responsibility for acts committed by their employees within the scope of employment, meaning a store owner can be liable for a false arrest committed by a manager or guard. Similarly, municipalities or police departments may be liable under certain state or federal laws, particularly when a constitutional violation has occurred in the course of the arrest.

Damages in a False Arrest Claim

A plaintiff in a personal injury case based on false arrest may seek compensation for medical bills and lost wages. Damages may also be claimed for intangible harm like pain and suffering and emotional distress, including the humiliation and trauma associated with being wrongfully detained. In situations when the defendant acted with malice or in particularly egregious ways, punitive damages may be awarded to punish the wrongdoer and deter similar misconduct.

Statutes of Limitations

False arrest claims, like other personal injury actions, are subject to statutes of limitations that impose strict deadlines for filing suit. Time limits vary based on the state in which the false arrest took place and sometimes on the identity of the defendant. Failing to commence a legal action before the deadline typically leads to dismissal, barring any recovery. Some governmental entities may impose agency-specific procedural requirements or shorter timelines.

Additional Defenses and Immunities

Certain legal doctrines may shield some defendants from false arrest liability. Law enforcement officers may be protected by qualified immunity if their actions did not violate a clearly established constitutional right or if a reasonable officer in the same position would have believed the arrest to be lawful. Governmental immunity or sovereign immunity can limit or prohibit suit against certain public entities, depending on the jurisdiction. Officers or officials who acted in good faith, believing they had legal grounds for arrest, may also attempt to raise a defense that they reasonably relied on existing information.

Last reviewed May 2025