Jack and His Friends Were Dining at Daniel's Kentucky Home

Jack and his friends were dining at Daniel's Kentucky Home restaurant. Along with the meal, Jack had ordered several bottles of alcohol for his friends and him to share. When the clock struck midnight, Louella, the waitress who had served Jack's table, correctly informed Jack that she was required by law to remove a bottle of whisky that had been opened, but not consumed. Jack initially protested, but eventually was persuaded by his friends to give up possession of the bottle. He became very angry, however, when Louella returned a few minutes later with the bottle (which she had re- capped) and a bill that included a charge for the whisky in question. Jack angrily refused to pay for the disputed bottle. He stuck his business card onto the bottle with a piece of tape, paid for the rest of the meal, and began to leave. Before he could get out of the restaurant, however, Louella directed several other employees to lock the door. Jack and his friends were able to leave only after the police arrived about an hour later. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) Louella almost certainly is liable for malicious prosecution.
B) Louella is liable for the tort of assault.
C) Louella is liable for the tort of false imprisonment.
D) Jack is guilty of the tort of conversion as a result of his actions with the bottle.
E) Louella was entitled to detain Jack until he paid the entire bill.