Originally Posted by
Loren Pechtel
False imprisonment??
If she has any way to prove what happened she'll collect on this but how did United imprison her in any way other than what she already consented to in taking the flight?
The claim will be that by not letting the plaintiff change seats away from the masturbater, she was tortiously confined to a restricted space against her will. The key word is "tortious", meaning "causing damages". This is a civil case, not a criminal one, and since the perp has been convicted, plaintiff will argue that (e.g.) she should have been switched with a male passenger, and in not doing so, she was damaged. They won't have to prove that the action she was made to witness was illegal. Don't get hung up on the actual name of the charge, in civil cases it is all about the damages, and whether the defendant (in this case United) had a responsibility that they (negligently) failed to uphold.
Another minor (no pun intended) wrinkle here is the plaintiff may not have had standing to sue until she turned 18. I'm not certain on that point of law, but it may have affected the question of whether or not a prior complaint was filed.
I am explaining above, not taking a position on the merits of the case.