If A is a much smaller man who attempts to detain B, is this considered false imprisonment?

The correct answer is that A’s action can be considered false imprisonment because the key element of false imprisonment is the restriction of a person's freedom of movement without their consent, rather than the physical size or strength of the person attempting the detention. Even though A is much smaller than B, if A attempts to detain B and successfully prevents him from leaving, A’s action constitutes an unlawful confinement.

It is important to remember that false imprisonment does not require the use of physical force or intimidation; it simply requires an act that restricts another person's freedom of movement. Therefore, if A's actions lead to B feeling that he cannot leave, even if B could technically escape with ease, the essential element of false imprisonment could still be met since the act of detention occurred.

In this scenario, the fact that B could easily escape does not negate the possibility of false imprisonment, as the perception of being confined is essential. Furthermore, the presence of a weapon is not a necessary condition for false imprisonment. The essence of the wrong is the unlawful restraint on personal liberty, not the means by which it is enforced. Thus, while physical force may support a claim of false imprisonment, it is not a prerequisite for establishing such a tort.