Help me answer provides an example of a quality answer to the exam. Not only does it show the strongest answer based on the facts and law, it utilizes the IRAC format of analysis. Reviewing the model answer is an essential part of the process.

We include the self-reflection as part of your learning process and the review of the model answer because research and our own experience shows students who engage in structured self-reflection will outperform those who do not. Frankly, professionals who engage in self-reflection will outperform and outlast those who do not, so this is a lifelong success skill.

Using the hypothetical question and essay answers below, grade the essay answers, and explain your reasoning behind the grade. Apply the mini-essay assignment and grading rubric, available here.

Essay Question:

Paulina went to the local mall in search of a pair of Biesel jeans which had become all the rage

after a slick advertising campaign. After entering a department store and browsing for a few

minutes, she found the perfect pair and tried them on in one of the dressing room stalls at the back of the store. Deciding to purchase them, Paulina left her stall with the jeans and tried to exit the dressing room. "Hey! I'm buying those!" hollered Dominica, standing with her arms stretched wide, blocking Paulina from exiting the dressing room. "Hand 'em over or else!" Dominica threatened. There were no other exits and no store employee to help Paulina get around Dominica.

Finally, after yelling back and forth at each other for several minutes, Paulina threw Dominica the jeans and Dominica dropped her arms to catch them, letting Paulina exit the dressing room.

Address Dominica's liability to Paulina for any intentional torts.

Exam Answer #1

Paulina v. Dominica

Paulina will be successful with her assault claim if the required elements are present:

that the defendant acted voluntarily which caused the plaintiff to fear harmful contact.

It must be established that the defendant acted voluntarily, with the intent to cause such contact or cause the fear of such contact. Intent is acting with a desire to produce a consequence. In this case, Dominica's actions were an angry response to Paulina finding the 'perfect pair' of jeans at a department store, when Dominica wanted them for herself. This is evident as she yelled at Paulina, "Hey, I'm buying those," and then stopped Paulina when she tried to leave the dressing room, in order to take the jeans from Paulina. Dominica deliberately approached Paulina and stopped her in order to get the jeans. She also threatened Paulina "or else" if she didn't hand over the jeans. Her conduct demonstrates intent to put Paulina in fear that Dominica would make direct, harmful, contact with Paulina's person. Her conduct was voluntary and intentional.

In addition, Paulina must apprehend imminent contact that is harmful or offensive.

Harmful contact is contact that causes physical impairment, pain, or change. Dominica hollering and angry at Paulina, blocking her path, making threats if she didn't hand over the jeans, all in a span of a few minutes, would put a reasonable person in fear she was about to harm Paulina, which constitutes imminent harmful contact.

Since Dominica likely created an apprehension of harmful contact in Paulina, she is liable for assault.

Is Dominica liable to Paulina for false imprisonment?

False imprisonment is when someone recklessly restrains or confines another person in a room.

Dominica acts to get the jeans from Paulina without caring about anyone else's wellbeing in the store. She blocks off the dressing room with her body, so no one can leave. Her behavior shows she doesn't care about anyone around her like the other shoppers, or Paulina herself, who, as discussed above, is probably frightened or apprehensive at Dominica's conduct. She doesn't check if there are other shoppers in the dressing room or anything. She puts other people in the store in danger. Therefore, her actions are reckless.

Dominica blocks off the dressing room so Paulina and any other shoppers in the room can't leave. She uses her body to get in the way of Paulina when she tries to exit. Therefore, she confines Paulina to the dressing room.

Therefore, Dominica is liable to Paulina for false imprisonment.

Essay Answer #2

Is Dominica liable to Paulina for false imprisonment?

False imprisonment is when someone acts intentionally to unlawfully restrain or confine another person.

Did Dominica act intentionally?

Yes, because she yelled and threatened Paulina to hand over the jeans "or else." Therefore, there was intent.

Did Dominica unlawfully restrain Paulina?

In this case, there is nothing in the facts to indicate Dominica has any legal right to block Paulina from leaving the dressing room. She does not claim to be an employee of the store or anything like that. She is just another shopper, there to buy jeans.

Dominica also restrains or confines Paulina by trapping her in the dressing room. The facts state there are no other exits, which is probably a safety violation. Especially for a department store. It's dangerous to not have another exit, the store would be liable if there was a fire and Paulina couldn't get out. I think it's more likely there was an exit and Paulina just didn't look. It's not worth it for a big mall department store to tempt a lawsuit by not having another exit. Paulina should be able to leave even though the way she came in was blocked. Dominica used her body to close off the entry to the dressing room. Therefore, Paulina was confined to a bounded area, but only if there really was no other exit, which is doubtful.

Paulina was aware of the confinement because she had entered the dressing room and tried to leave it, and was yelling back and forth at Dominica until she handed over the jeans. Clearly, she felt trapped or she wouldn't have handed over the jeans in order to escape, which she eventually did. So, she was aware of the confinement or restraint.

Since there was most likely another exit all that time, for store safety reasons, Dominica is probably not liable to Paulina for false imprisonment, since Paulina had another exit but just didn't look for it.

Is Dominica liable to Paulina for assault?

An assault is a voluntary act by the defendant which intentionally causes the plaintiff to suffer an apprehension of an immediate harmful or offensive contact.

Did Dominica intend to cause apprehension of an immediate harmful or offensive contact?

Yes, because Dominica shouted at Paulina to hand over the jeans. She wanted the jeans specifically from Paulina. She harassed her until Paulina handed over the jeans.

Essay Answer #3

What intentional torts is Dominica liable to Paulina for?

Assault

Is Dominica liable to Paulina for assault?

An assault is a voluntary act by the defendant which intentionally causes the plaintiff to suffer an apprehension of an immediate harmful or offensive contact.

Was Dominica's conduct intentional?

The intent required for assault is satisfied if the defendant either desires the consequences of her act or knows to a substantial certainty those consequences will occur.

In this case, Dominica blocked Paulina's exit to compel her to hand over the jeans. She does not threaten to hit Paulina or move to push her. Despite making a demand that Paulina might find outrageoPaulina ord over the jeans that Paulina was planning to buy Dominica's use of her body to block Paulina's path is no more than necessary to get Paulina to stop and interact with her. During their encounter, Dominica has ample opportunity to raise her hand to Paulina, but does not. Even when Dominica makes her demand for the jeans, she does so verbally. She does not move to threaten physical violence during the multiple minutes of their encounter. Her 'or else', is thus merely hyperbole. This indicates her intent is not to cause apprehension of imminent harm at Dominica's hands, but to get Paulina to stop and hear her demands. Therefore, there is likely no intent to cause Paulina to suffer an apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive contact.

Did Dominica Create an Apprehension of Immediate Harmful or Offensive Contact?

The apprehension element is satisfied if a reasonable person in plaintiff's position would have suffered an apprehension of an immediate harmful (or offensive) contact.

Harmful or offensive contact: Contact is harmful if it causes pain, impairment, or change. Contact is offensive if it offends a reasonable (ordinary person's) sense of personal dignity.

In this case, Dominica followed Paulina to the dressing room and accosted her there, saying she was going to buy those jeans. Dominica blocked Paulina's exit from the dressing room with her body to accomplish her goal of getting the jeans from Paulina. They yelled back and forth for minutes. It is reasonable that someone who is followed by another shopper in a store, physically blocked by that shopper from leaving a dressing room, and subject to demands to hand over the clothing she had tried on "or else", might feel apprehension of either a immediate harmful or offensive contact, such as getting shoved or struck to get the jeans. Therefore, Dominica may have created an apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive contact in a reasonable person in Paulina's position, but it is equally likely that a reasonable person would not apprehend such contact, as the longer the encounter, the more obvious it became that Dominica was not going to touch anyone to get the jeans. Therefore, it is not clear that Dominica created an apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive contact.

Dominica is not liable for assault.

False Imprisonment

Is Dominica liable to Paulina for false imprisonment?

False Imprisonment occurs when a person (who doesn't have legal authority or justification) intentionally restrains another person's ability to move freely. The elements for false imprisonment are an actor's intent to confine another or a third person, the confinement was directly or indirectly caused by the actor, and the other person is aware of the confinement or is harmed by it.

Intent

The intent required for false imprisonment is satisfied if the defendant either desires the consequences of her act or knows to a substantial certainty that her action will confine another or a third person.

In this case, Dominica stretched her arms across the path out of the dressing room, blocking it with her body. Her action was deliberate because she chose to block the path out of the room with her body, in order to demand Paulina hand over the jeans. She stated she wanted to buy them, and ultimately threatened Paulina that she would face some kind of violent consequence if she did not hand them over, by ordering her to give up the jeans to Dominica, "or else." Her blocking Paulina's exit from the dressing room was deliberately chosen as part of achieving her goal of getting the jeans, satisfying the intent requirement for false imprisonment.

Causation of Confinement

The causation requirement is satisfied when the actor, through physical force, barriers, threats, failing to release, or assertions of authority, confines another person.Nevertheless, if the confined person knows of a reasonable means of escape, no confinement exists.

In this case, Dominica used both physical barriers and threats to confine Paulina. Dominica stretched her arms across the path out of the dressing room, blocking it with her body. She chose to block the path out of the room with her body, in order to demand Paulina hand over the jeans. She indirectly threatened physical force, by demanding the jeans be handed over "or else," while blocking the exit to the dressing room with her body. Dominica used her body and threats to create a confined space made up of the dressing room and its stalls. The facts state there was no other exit. With no other way out, Paulina was trapped in the room. Therefore, she was confined by the barrier of Dominica's body, the walls of the dressing room, and Dominica's threats, and Dominica directly caused her confinement.

Awareness of Confinement

Finally, the victim must be aware of the confinement or be harmed by it.

In this case, Paulina was aware of the confinement because she had entered the dressing room to try on the jeans, and then tried to leave it. She also yelled back and forth at Dominica about the jeans, and she finally handed over the jeans in order to get out of the confinement. Paulina wouldn't have handed over the jeans in order to escape the confinement if she didn't know about the confinement. Eventually, after yelling back and forth with Dominica as Dominica blocked the exit to the dressing room, Paulina did hand over the jeans. Therefore, she was aware of the confinement.

Therefore, Dominica is liable to Paulina for false imprisonment.