... so in other words you know nothing about the law and have never worked in a legal office.

I think this guy's probably a desk clerk at the firm and is trying to make up stupid things. this is not a silly case... Agree with the guy above me.

You could be right in which case the OP deserved it... problem is that if she was not advised that they would be "testing" the restraints then it becomes a case of assault especially when the teacher let the whole class take part in the tickling and let it go on until OP was actually crying. Teacher should have been very clear as to what was going to happen after the restraints were applied because not everyone is OK with things like this. People have sued, winning large amounts of money and costing their bosses/teachers their jobs, over far less.

If she explicitly asked them to stop & they didn't she may have a case, but look at the wording "tickled me UNTIL I screamed', not continued after I screamed, it suggests she allowed the experiment to go on without resisting. I somewhat disagree as to teacher making everything very clear, in a healthcare setting one is expected to understand some training exercises may be physically or psychologically unpleasant like having to handle needles, body fluids, excrements, practice inasive procedures on fellow students etc....& she volunteered which is key here. Most likley, she & her friends had a laugh over it afterwards & suing or even alleging assault never even came into the picture. As to suing, given there was no damage, no obvious sex/race discrimination & was in a medical training situation, I doubt she'll find a lawyer to take the case, this is after all not a teacher grabbing a student in a bar, & oh yes it'll ruin her chances of getting a job in the field...

Flipflops: I read your comments here and at 94 above, but like 98 said, they're irrelevant. I was already aware of the points you've raised when I commented earlier (#31), and I stand behind it.   First, I doubt the teacher explained the exercise. Read these comments; few people would submit to being tickled voluntarily, even for the sake of education. Second, would a nurse really tell a prospective employer, "I have experience with restraints; I've tickled someone who was in them"? No, because it's not a realistic simulation. Nurses would be trying to calm or treat the patient, not purposely trying to put him in further distress.  Lastly, and most importantly, you could justify almost anything with the excuse of "practicing". Why not break a student's leg, or dose her coffee with heroin to simulate an OD? There has to be a line somewhere. It's logical to draw the line at a) consent, b) the minimum necessary for simulation, and c) not causing permanent harm to the "practicee". (And yes, this could cause harm to OP's reputation and respect in the eyes of her colleagues.)     The teacher should've picked the strongest person in the class and told him to struggle as hard as he could. Tickling isn't necessary for something that's easily faked. This was over the line. I do agree a lawsuit and/or legal charges shouldn't be pursued. Not because this was harmless, but because it didn't cause *enough* harm to merit the stigma OP would carry by doing so. Still, she needs to make the institution aware of what happened to prevent it in the future.              

agreed with JaneDoe, and the op wouldn't be able to scream... they're being tickled. sometimes people who are being tickled can let out a yelp or two, but to be able to scream "stop!" while being tickled by 10 or more people is unthinkable in the situation. They clearly were not able to.