Q1.The
opinion in this case tells us that one thing a plaintiff has to prove in
cases of false imprisonment is "direct restraint." Why did the
court agree with the jury that Mr. Newman was restrained? (Choose the
best answer)
The
court found that the nursing home had restrained Mr. Newman because the
nursing home had no written authorization to keep him against his will.
The
court found that the nursing home had restrained Mr. Newman because Mr.
Newman's nephew
had failed to pay his uncle's bill.
The
court found that the nursing home had restrained Mr. Newman because the
plaintiff introduced evidence that he had been prohibited from using the
phone to call a taxi, was brought back on those occasions when he tried
to leave, was locked in, did not have access to his clothing, and was
held in a restraint chair.
Maybe
the court found that the nursing home had restrained Mr. Newman
because the judge had personal knowledge of another resident of
defendant's nursing home that had suffered a similar experience. I
assume the case was brought in a local court which had experience with
this nursing home and knew them to be overbearing in their use of
force.
Question 1
