Va. Model Jury Instr. Civ. No. 41.070

A [merchant; agent or employee of a merchant] who causes the arrest or detention of any person

for [larceny; shoplifting] is not liable to the plaintiff for malicious prosecution if he proves by the

greater weight of the evidence that at the time of such person’s arrest or detention, the [merchant;

agent or employee of the merchant] had probable cause to believe that the person had committed

[willful concealment of goods or merchandise; shoplifting].

[The activation of an electronic article surveillance device as a result of a person exiting the

premises or an area within the premises of a merchant where an electronic article surveillance device is

located shall constitute probable cause for the detention of such person by such merchant, his agent, or

employee, provided such person is detained only in a reasonable manner and only for such time as is

necessary for an inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the activation of the device, and provided

that clear and visible notice is posted at each exit and location within the premises where such a device

is located indicating the presence of an anti-shoplifting or inventory control device.]

[An “electronic article surveillance device” means an electronic device, designed and operated for

the purpose of detecting the removal from the premises, or a protected area within such premises, of

specially marked or tagged merchandise.]