Liability & LegalQuestion 100 of 200

A guard, in front of other shoppers, loudly accuses a customer of theft. Investigation reveals the customer was innocent. Civil Code §§44-46 most directly support which claim?

a.Breach of contract, since the store's posted terms of sale promise every customer courteous treatment while they are inside on the premises
b.Strict products liability, because the accusation arose out of the store's own merchandise-tagging system misfiring at the exit gate as the customer left
c.Defamation (slander) — a false, unprivileged oral statement causing reputational injury; here the accusation of crime is slander per se
d.An antitrust violation, on the theory that publicly branding a paying customer a thief drives that shopper straight to a competing retailer down the street

Explanation

Civil Code §44 defines defamation as either libel (written) or slander (oral). §46 lists slander per se categories — including false statements charging a person with crime — which require no proof of special damages. Loudly accusing a shopper of theft in front of others, when false, is the textbook slander per se case. Defenses include truth (absolute) and qualified privilege under §47(c) protecting communications made without malice to interested parties. But public, loud accusations to bystanders exceed any qualified-privilege scope and may also support intentional infliction of emotional distress claims. Best practice: keep accusations private and factually grounded.

Law Reference: Cal. Civil Code §§44-46

This topic, taught in full in the California Guard Card (BSIS Security Guard) guide. California Guard Card — Complete Study Guide (2026) — PDF + EPUB, $9.99 · 14-day refund →

Practice all 200 questions free — no signup required.

Own the complete California Guard Card (BSIS Security Guard) guide — PDF + EPUB, $9.99 →

Related questions on this topic

Last reviewed: · editorial process

PrepPass team · Verified against California BSIS Guard Card Exam · How we review
Report