英美侵权法笔记及案例分析

路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度一、Introductiona)Tortsv.Contractlawtorts:legislationcontractlaw:agreement\consenttorts:restorationtooriginalpositionandrequirementsofpunitivedamagesinsomecases.contractlaw:Protecting3kindsofinterests:restitution,reliance,andexpectationinterests(shouldthecontractperformed)iii.formofremedy:torts:monetarycontractlaw:monetary,injunctiverelief,rescindthecontract,equitablereliefofspecialperformanceb)Tortsv.Constitutionoverlappingissuesbutconsideredindifferentangleseg.(defamation):freedomofspeechv.rightofreputationtorts:privatelawtorts:Injuredpartyseekingpersonalreliefcriminallaws:protectthepublicandsatisfyitssenseofjusticebypunishingthewrongdoersiii.formofremedytorts:monetarycriminallaws:fines,imprisonment,deathpenalty 路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度iv.standardofprooftorts:preponderanceoftheevidencecriminallaws:beyondallreasonabledoubt2.3typesoftortlawa)intentionala)intentionaltortstheharmisdesiredortheresultsofharmarewithinknowledge(thesubstantialcertaintyoftheharm).b)negligence/tortsofnegligence:legaldutyisowned;breakofthatduty;anddamageiscausedtoplaintiff.Theforeseeabilityiscrucial.c)strictliabilitytorts:Aliabilityassignedregardlessoffaultasamatterofsocialpolicy.(noforeseeabilityofinjuryorblameworthyconductisrequired)3.remediesPunitivedamages(requiremalicious,fraudulent,orevilmotives)1.generalelementsofintentionaltortsa)elements(3)(primafaciecase)avolitionalact:amovementdictatedbyaperson’smind(wrongfulact)intent:generalintent(substantialcertaintyoftheconsequences)&specificintent(wanttobringabouttheresults)causation:(causalrelationship)theresultmustbelegallycausedbytheact 路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度b)transferredintentdoctrine(intentissue)i.Definition:whileAintendstocommitatortagainstonepersonbutinsteadcommitsadifferenttortagainstthatperson,orcommitsthesametortbutagainstadifferentperson,orcommitadifferentintentagainstadifferentperson,theintentistransferredtotheothertortortheinjuredperson.ii.Application:assault,battery,falseimprisonment,trespasstoland,trespasstochattels.chattels.anintentionaltortfeasorisordinaryliableforallconsequences,whetherforeseeableornot,whichareactualcauseofhisconduct.Proceduralhistory:VosburgsuedPutneyforassaultandbattery.ThejuryrenderedaverdictforPlaintiffintheamountof$2,800.Thedefendantappealed,thecasewasagaintriedinthecircuitcourt,andthejudgmentwasreversedforerrorandthenewtrialresultedinaverdictforPlaintiffintheamountof$2,500.Facts:Putney(Defendant,11-yearsold)slightly,butunlawfully,kickedVosburg(Plaintiff,14-yearsold)onthelegduringschoolintendingnoharm.Althoughthekickwasslight,PlaintifflosttheuseofhislimbbecauseDefendant'skickrevivifiedapreviousinjury.Issue:1.Whiletheintenttodoharmisoftheessenceofanassault,whetherthedefendanthadtheintent?(intent)2.Whilethedefendantjustkickedslightlyonthelegoftheplaintiff,whetherhewasliableforallinjuriesresultingdirectlyfromthewrongfulactevenitcouldnothavebeenforeseen?(damage)1.Inactionsforassaultandbattery,Plaintiffmustshoweitherthattheintentionwasunlawful,orthatDefendantisatfault.Iftheintendedactisunlawful,theintentiontocommititmust 路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度necessarybeunlawful.Inthiscase,theactwasunlawfulsinceittookplaceduringclass,ratherthanontheplayground.ThecourthelditwasunlawfulandthatunlawfulnesswasenoughtoimposeliabilityonDefendant.2.Thewrongdoerisliableforallinjuriesresultingdirectlyfromthewrongfulactwhethertheycouldorcouldnothavebeenforeseenbyhim,whichistheso-called“eggshellskullrule”.Judgment:JudgmentJudgmentreversedandcaseremandedforanewtrial.2.Intentionaltortstotheperson(4types)a)BatteryDefinition:theintentional,unprivileged,andeitherharmfuloroffensivecontractwiththepersonofanother.Elements:(3)Act:bringsaboutharmfuloroffensivecontactstoplaintiff'spersonoreffects(rule:plaintiff'spersonincludesanythingdirectlyconnectedtotheperson,suchasapenorabookheldbytheplaintiffperson.)Intent:tomakeacontact(physicaltouch)Causation:betweentheactandharmfuloroffensivetouchingPs:defendant'slikeordisliketowardstheplaintiffisexplainablebutnotnecessarytoestablishtheprimafaciecase.i.Definition:anactcreatingareasonableapprehensionintheplaintiffofimmediateharmfuloroffensivecontacttotheplaintiff’spersonAct:creatingareasonableapprehensionintheplaintiffofimmediateharmfuloroffensivecontacttotheplaintiff’spersonIntent:tocauseapprehensionCausation:betweentheactandapprehensionii.Apprehension:meanstheplaintiff'sexpectationofthebatteryAdisplayofforcewhichdirectedspecificallytowardstheplaintiff(e.g.athreateninggesturesuggestingimminent,unconsentedcontact)Thevictimbeawareofthethreateningconductandactuallyfeelthreatened(notrequireactuallybefrightened,test:areasonableperson)e.g1:ae.g1:a13yearoldboyinmilitaryuniformcarriedaplasticgunandthreatenedan 路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度adult------apprehensiveofadult------apprehensiveofimminentharm?-------reasonablepersonstandard.e.g2:BstandbehindA；BwanttostabA；Afinditlater；AwanttosueB；isthereanassault？Answer：thereisnoassault——thereisNOapprehensiveofimminentharmwithinA'sknowledgeiii.Differencesbetweenassaultandbattery(act)1.Act:withoutphysicaltouch-->Assault;withphysicaltouch--->Battery.2.Time:beforephysicaltouchh-->Assault;afterphysicaltouch--->Battery.CaseCase15Fisherv.CarrouselMotorHotel,Inc.Proceduralhistory:FishersuedCarrouselMotorHotel,Inc.,theBrassRingClubandtheemployeeRobertW.Flynnforactualandexemplarydamagesgrowingoutofanallegedassaultandbattery.Thejuryreturnedaverdictof$400foractualdamagesand$500inpunitivedamages.Thetrialcourtrenderedjudgmentforthedefendantnotwithstandingtheverdict.(JNOV)TheplaintiffappealedandtheCourtofCivilAppealsaffirmed.Facts:AtaprofessionalconferenceheldinDefendant'shotel,oneofDefendant'semployeesforciblyremovedaplatefromthePlaintiff'shand,shoutingthata"Negrocouldnotbeservedintheclub".Defendant'semployeedidnotmakephysicalcontactwithPlaintiff,buttheeventwaswitnessedbymanyofPlaintiff'scolleagues.Issue:1.Whilethedefendantdidn’tdoanyphysicalharmtotheplaintiff’sbodybutsnatchedanobjectfromhishands,whetheranactionablebatterywascommitted?2.WhetherthedefendantsmustrespondinexemplaryaswellasactualdamagesforthemaliciousconductofFlynn?1.Thedispossessionofanobjectfromone’shandinanoffensivemannerisactuallyunwantedandintentionalinvasionofone'sperson(anoffensetohisdignity),thusconstitutesabattery.2.Aprincipalormasterisliableforexemplaryorpunitivedamagesbecauseofhisagentiftheagentwasemployedinamanagerialcapacityandwasactinginthescopeofemployment.Inthiscase,FlynnwasthemanageroftheBrassRingClubandwasactingwithinthecourseandscopeof 路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度hisemployment.Judgment:Thetrialcourterredinoverrulingthatmotionandinenteringjudgmentforthedefendantsnotwithstandingtheverdict;andtheCourtofCivilAppealserredinaffirmingthejudgment.Thejudgmentsbelowarereversedandjudgmentishererenderedfortheplaintifffor$900withinterestfromthedateofthetrialcourt’sjudgmentandforcostsofthissuit.i.Definition:anactoromissiontoactofthedefendantthatconfinesorrestrainstheplaintifftoaboundedarea.ii.Elements(3)Act:unlawfulandunconsenteddetentionoftheplaintiffwithinboundariesIntent:toconfinetheplaintiff,omissionorarbitrarilyCausation:betweentheactandapprehensionConfine:useofunreasonableforce,threatofforceorassertionoflegalauthorityofthedefendant,andharmtotheplaintifforknowledgebytheplaintiffoftheconfinement,bothphysicallyandmentallyAboundedarea:apparentlackofareasonableexite.g.theshopownermistakenlyshutsomebodydownintheshopwhenhethoughtthereisnobodythere→falseimprisonmenta)Definition:Shopkeepershaveaprivilegetodetainsuspectedthiefforinvestigation,whichmaynegateoneoftheelementsoffalseimprisonment.reasonablebelief:believetheplaintiffwasasuspectedthiefreasonableperiod:thedetentionisonlyforareasonabletimereasonablemanner:onlyreasonableforcewasused()reasonablepurpose:forreasonableinvestigationProceduralhistory:Facts:aftershoppinginDefendant’sstore,Plaintiff,a70-year-oldman,wasleavingwhenDefendantstoppedhim.DefendantthoughtPlaintiffwasattemptingtostealanascot.Asaresult,PlaintiffwashospitalizedandsuedDefendantforfalseimprisonment.. 路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度Issue:3.Doesrestraintofpersonalliberty,byfearofapersonaldifficulty,amounttoafalseimprisonment?4.IfPlaintiffwasfalselyimprisoned,wastheimprisonmentprivileged?4.No1.Anygeneralrestraintissufficienttoconstituteanimprisonment.Anydemonstrationofphysicalpower,which,toallappearances,canbeavoidedonlybysubmission,operatesaseffectuallytoconstituteanimprisonment.Inthiscase,GossfirmlygraspedPlaintiff’sarmandtoldhimthathehadbettergobacktoseethemanager.TherewasanotheremployeestandingnexttoGoss.ConsideringPlaintiff’sageandheartcondition,itishardlyexpectedthatPlaintiffcoulddoanythingbutcomplywithGoss’s“request”thathegobackandseethemanager.Ifamanisrestrainedofhispersonallibertybyfearofapersonaldifficulty,thatmeansifPlaintiffleftbeforeexoneratinghimself,theonlookersmighthaveinterpretedhisdepartureasanadmissionofguilt,sothatamountstoafalseimprisonment.2.Defendant,ashopkeeper,hasaprivilegetodetainPlaintiffifdetainedinareasonablemanner,forareasonablelengthoftime,andifDefendanthadreasonablegroundsforbelievingthatPlaintiffwasattemptingtocommitlarcenyofgoodsheldforsale.Inthiscase,itisconcededthatPlaintiffwasheldforareasonablelengthoftime.However,Defendant’sdetentionofPlaintiffwasnotperformedinareasonablemanner.TherewerenoreasonablegroundsforbelievingthatPlaintiffwascommittinglarcenyand,therefore,heshouldnothavebeendetainedatall.Furthermore,Goss’sfailuretoidentifyhimselfasanemployeeofDefendant,coupledwiththephysicalrestraintinapublicplaceimposeduponPlaintiff,anelderlyman,whohadexhibitednoaggressiveintentiontodepart,couldbesaidtoconstituteanunreasonablemethodbywhichtoeffectdetention.Judgment:Plaintiffwasimprisonedbyademonstrationofphysicalpowerthatcouldonlybeavoidedbysubmission.PlaintiffwasfalselyimprisonedandDefendantwasnotprivilegedtodetainPlaintiff.Defendantdidnothaveanyobjective,reasonablegroundsforbelievingthatPlaintiffcommittedlarceny.ThecourtaddedthateveniftherewerereasonablegroundstodetainPlaintiff,thedetainmentwasnotexecutedinareasonablemanner.Initsanalysis,thecourtpaysspecialattention 路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度toPlaintiff’sageandphysicalcondition.So,thereisafalseimprisond)Intentionalinflictionofemotionaldistress(thetortofoutrage)i.Definition:serious,intentionalandunprivilegedinvasionsofmentalandemotionaltranquility.iiii.Elements:(4)Act:amountingtoextremeandoutrageousconductIntent:tocausetheplaintifftosufferorrecklessnessastotheeffectofthedefendant’sconductCausation:betweentheactanddamage,causationbetweentheintentandact(2causations)Damage:severeemotionaldistressasaresultSevereemotionaldistress:includingfright,grief,shame,humiliation,embarrassmentandanger,mustbesubstantialorpersistentthatnoreasonablepersoninacivilizedsocietyshouldbeexpectedtoendureit.whydamagesarerequired？thesufferingmustbetangible——thereforeitrequiresiii.DifferencesbetweenIIEDandother3tortsa)Act:amountingtoextremeandoutrageousconductProceduralhistory:Facts:Defendant’semployeecalledplaintiffathisplaceofbusinesstoseeifhehadmadethemonthlypaymentonD’sstorecreditcard.PheardtheSearsemployeestate:“Thisguyisaqueerasathree-dollarbill.Heownsabeautysalon,andhejusttoldmethatifyou’llholdthelineIwillcheckmycheckbook.”NooneonP’sendoftheconversationbutPheardtheemployee’sremarks.PisahomosexualandsuedDforIIED.Issue:Whetherthetrailcourterredingrantingsummaryjudgment?No 路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度Theword“queer”,eventhoughisanintrusionuponP’ssolitudeorseclusion,wedonotbelievethatitissoextremeoroutrageousastooffendthesensibilitiesofanordinarypersonsimilarlysituated.Inordertocreateacauseofaction,theconductmustbesuchthatwouldcausementalsuffering,shame,orhumiliationtoapersonofordinarysensibilities,notconductwhichwouldbeconsideredunacceptablemerelybyhomosexuals.What’smore,theemployeedidn’tknowthatPisahomosexualandandissupersensitiveaboutbeingcalled“queer”.SothereisnotexistanIIEDJudgment:Thetrailcourtdidnoterringrantingsummaryjudgment.3.Intentionaltortstopropertyi.Infringe:apossessor’sinterestinexclusivepossessionoflandAct:physicalinvasionoftheplaintiff’srealpropertyIntent:tobringabouttheinvasionCausation:betweentheactandintentPhysicalinvasion:enter(actuallypresenton,underorabovetheland);intentionallycastsanobjectuponthelandorcausesanothertoenter(theanotheroneisnotliableifheleavewithreasonabledispatch)Intent:merelytobepresentattheplace,notintenttogouponthelandofanothernortoviolateanother’srights(thatis,noneedtoknowwhoselanditis)unlessit’sinducedbytheplaintiffb)Trespasstochattelsi.Infringe:apossessor’sinterestinfreedomfromminorintentionalinterferencewithpersonalpropertyAct:interfereswiththeplaintiff’srightofpossessioninthechattel,bydispossession,use,orintermeddlingIntent:toaffectthechattelCausation:betweentheactanddamage,betweentheactandintentDamage:dispossessionitselfisdamage,ifnodispossession,mustprovedamageinthe 路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度formofsubstantiallossofuse,orimpairmentofcondition,quality,orvalueiii.DifferencesbetweentrespasstolandandtrespasstochattelsTrespasstoland:nodamage,immoveablepropertyTrespasstochattels:damage,moveablepropertyiv.DifferencebetweentortoftrespassandtortofnuisanceTrespass:actualinvasionNuisance:projectionoflight,noise,vibrationsi.Definition:apersonintentionallyexercisesexclusivecontroloverthepersonalpropertyofanotherwithoutpermissionsothattheactorjustlyberequiredtopaytheotherthefullvalueofthechattel.conversionvs.larceny::tortlawvs.criminallawAct:interfereswiththeplaintiff’srightofpossessioninthechattelthatisseriousenoughinnatureorconsequencetowarrantthedefendantpaythefullvalueIntent:tointerferewiththeplaintiff’srightofpossessioninthechattelCausation:betweentheactandresultiii.Differencesbetweenthetrespasstochattelsandconversiona)DegreeTresspasstochattels:low-----plantopaybackConversion:high-----keepitforeverTresspasstochattels:paythedamageConversion:paythefullvalue(fairmarketvalue)orreplevin(returnoftheproperty),attheplaintiff’selectione.g.1:stealthebook；wanttoborrowthebookforawhilewithoutpermission（lostthetemporaryownershipofthebook）e.g2:takethebikeforawhile----trespass;acaraccidentdestroythebike-------conversionstuffthathasbeendestroyedtotallyortakenforever:conversionstuffthathasbeenborrowedforawhiletobeused:trespasstochattelsiv.Ways(types)AcquisitionofpropertywithoutjustificationWrongfultransferofthechattelSubstantiallychangingofthechattelSeverelydamagingordestroyingthechattel 路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度Misusingthechattelv.SubjectmatterBothtangibleandintangiblethatisreducedtophysicalform,suchasapromissorynote,anddocumentsinwhichtitletochattelismerged,likeabilloflading.4.Intentionaltortstoeconomicanddignityinterestsa)a)Defamationi.Definition:defamationisthefalsecommunicationsmadewiththeintentionofharmingthereputationofanindividualoracorporation.(dignitaryinterests)ii.Forms:slander(oral)andlibel(written)1.SlanderConsistsofspokenwords,transitorygestures,andotherless-permanentandless-harmfulformsofcommunications.2.Libelconsistsofthepublicationofdefamatorymatterbyrecordinginwritingorotherpermanentformorbyanyotherformofcommunicationwhichhasthesimilarpotentiallyharmfulqualitiesandcharacteristics.3.Slanderperse1.Acrimeinvolvingmoralturpitude2.Havingaloathsomedisease3.Beingincompetenttopracticeabusiness,trade,orprofession4.Beinganunchastewomanorserioussexualmisconductiii.Elements:1.adefamatorystatement(bothoralandwritten)onthedefendant2.thelanguagemustbeoforconcerningtheplaintiff3.apublicationtoathirdpersonwhounderstandsit4.plaintiff’sreputationbeharmedbythedefamatorystatement5.specificdamage:pecuniaryloss,includealossofajob,aprospectivegiftorinheritance,anadvantageousbusinessrelationship,orcustomers,slander-12345slanderperse-1234libel-1234ps:statementmustbefalseinordertosuedefamation(butitisnottheburdenoftheplaintiff,butthesufficientdefense)iv.Differencesbetweenslanderandlibel-proofofdamage1.Libel-actionableperse,withoutproofofinjury,generaldamageispresumed2.Slander-mustprovespecificdamage,unlesstheslanderisslanderperse.2elements:falsity:thedefamatorylanguagemustbefault（normallyitistheburden 路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度ofthedefendant）Malice:Faultonthedefendantastothefalsity（mistakenlymaketheaccusationwillnotconstitutethedefamationofthepublicfigure）vi.Whoistheplaintiff?Whyitisimportant?1.Who:Mustbelivingpersonaswellasonbehalfofcorporations,partnerships,unincorporatedassociations,andnon-profitinstitutions.(adeceasedperson’sreputationcan’tbevindicated,butifthedefamationofthedeadmayreflecttheliving,it’sokay.)2.Reason:todeterminethefeatureofthecase,commonpersonorpublicfigure;Itrequires“oforconcerningplaintiff”------standingtosue.vii.Defensesa)Consent---completedefenseb)Truth---bestdefensei.Absoluteprivilege(5types)Appliedincasesinvolvingjudicialproceedings,legislativeproceedings,actionsoftheexecutivebranch,communicationsbetweenspouses,compelledbroadcastsorpublicationsrequiredbylaw.ii.Qualifiedprivilege-shouldnotbeabusedAppliedwhencircumstanceswarrantFactorsconsidered:therelationshipbetweenthepublisherandtherecipient;theriskposedtotheinterestsofthepublisher,therecipientorothers;whethertheinformationwassolicitedorvolunteered;thelikelihoodthattheinformationwillenabletherecipienttotakeeffectiveactiontoavoidtheriskofharmfromcomingtofruition;whethertheplaintiffpreviouslyengagedinconductwrongfultothepublisher,therecipientorthepublicingeneral.E.g.theauthorofthereportsofpublicproceedings;adebtorexplainingtoacollectionagencyhisreasonfornotpayingviii.mitigatingfactorsreducetheseverityoraggravationofthedefamation:1)nomalice（intent）;2)retractionofstatement3)provokedanger——presupposethestatementistrue 路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度firsttriedinSuperiorCourt,GranvilleCounty,motionallowedastotheallegedslanderandblackmail,anddeniedastotheallegedlibel.DefendantexceptedandappealedtoSupremeCourtofNorthFacts:Facts:Coleman(D),amerchant,gothisstorehouseandsafestolen.Soonafterthatcrime,Hedgpeth(P),ateenageboy,receivedanoteofunavowedauthorship,whichaskedhimtoturninthestolenstuffotherwiseadisclosureofthecrimewouldbebroughtagainsthim.Hedgpethturnedtohelp,whichinevitablydivulgedthenote’scontenttoothers.Andthenanexperttestifiedthatthenotewaswrittenonacertaintypewriter,whichwouldwarrantafactthatthedefendantwasresponsibleforthistypewrittennoteofunavowedauthorship.Thentheplaintiffbroughtasuitagainstdefendant.Issue:1.Didthejudgeproperlyinstructedthejurywiththeexpert’stestimonyasevidenceinthetrial?2.Doescommunicatingofthedefamatorycontent,whichisdirectlytotheplaintiffhimselfconstituteapublication?1.Asthetestimonyofanexpertoughtneithertobeblindlyacceptednorarbitrarilyrejected,sothequestionwhetheritistobeconsideredlikeotherevidenceorreceivedwithcautionmaydependuponthecircumstancesdevelopedinthetrial.Andsurelythejudgecaninstructthejurytofind2.Theissuesofthiscasemainlyconcernthepublicationelementofdefamation.Wecancrackthepublicationintotwopartstoanalyze:creationandcommunication.Inthiscase,thejuryagreedthatthedefendantwasliableforthecreationoftheletter.Astothepublication,it’salittlecomplicatedhere.Toestablishaprimafaciecaseofdefamation,publicationofthedefamatorylanguagemustbecommunicatedtoathirdpersonwhounderstandsit.Buthereinthiscase,theletterwasdeliveredtotheplaintiffwhowasactuallydefamed.Andit’stheplaintiffhimselfwhodivulgedthedefamatorylanguagetoothers.Socanthisestablishaprimafaciecase?Ageneralruleisthatthecommunicationoflibelousmattertothepersondefameddoesnotofitselfconstituteapublication. 路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度Buttheultimateconcernistherelationbetweenthewritingofthepaperandthedisclosureofitscontentsbytheplaintiff.Exceptionsarebasedupontheprinciplethattheactofdisclosurearisesfromnecessity.Andthatnecessitycanbesuperinducedbyafear.Consideringtheplaintiff’simmaturityandthecharacteroftheaccusationandmenacecontainedintheletter,it’squitenaturalthattheplaintiffwouldturntosomeoneforhelpandadvice,whichwilldefinitelyleadtothedisclosureoftheletter.Withknowledgeofsituationabove,thedefendantmusthaveforeseentheplaintiff'snecessaryexposureoftheletterasthenaturalandprobableresultofthedefamation.Obviously,theactofthedefendantwastheproximatecauseofthepublication.Andaprimafaciecaseiswellestablished.Judgment:privacy:1)notabouttrueorfalseasdefamation2)everyonehastherightofhisorherownprivacy：likeness，stayingalone（zoneofsafety）3)hardtounderstand4)rightofsolitudebeinginfringed5)irrelevantpersonalstufftothecase1.Definition:aperson’sprivacyisphysicallyinvadedphysicalintrusionsintosuchplacesasplaintiff’shomeorhotelroomorpryingtheintrusionmustbeoffensiveorobjectionabletoareasonablepersonthethingintowhichthereispryingorintrusionisprivateii.publicdisclosureofprivatematte1.definition:information,privateincharacter,isexposedtothepublicgaze.discloseaprivatemattertopublic,whichisnotoflegitimateconcernhighlyoffensivetoareasonableperson3.Differencesofthe”publication”elementDafamation-anythirdpersonwhounderstandsitpublicdisclosureofprivatematters-thepublicatlarge,ortosomanypersonsthatitmayberegardedaspublicknowledge.iii.falselight1.Definition:onepublishesfalsematerialdesignedtomakeapersonlookbad.{ 路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度{2.RelationshipwithdefamationNotnecessarybeadefamatoryone,althoughitveryoftenis.3.Differencebetweenitanddisclosureofprivatematters1.Disclosure-truthfalselight-lie2.Disclosure-involvesone’sprivateorsecretmattersfalselight-inventthematterdisclosed4.Elements:(4)publicitytofalsepublicitytofalseinformationwithactualmalicehighlyoffensivetoareasonableperson1.Definition:aperson’sname,picture,orotherlikenessisusedforcommercialadvantagewithouttheperson’sconsent.2.Elements:(2) Unauthorizeduseofname,picture,orotherlikenesswithoutconsentorpermission,notincidentallynotaccidentallymentionedthenameinthenewspaperoradvertisementoraccidentallyshowupinaphotoornews2.Privileges:absoluteandqualifiedprivilegesTruth,inadvertence,goodfaith,andlackofmalicearenotgooddefenses.Case23CarlH.Hambergerv.CliffordC.EastmanCarlH.HambergerbroughtcompanionsuitsforinvasionoftheirprivacyagainstCliffordC.Eastman.Thedefendantmovedtodismissthecases,thetrialcourtreversedandtransferredthecasestotheSupremeCourtwithoutruling.forthedefendant’sbenefit,notsomuchasaproprietaryoneFacts:Appellantsrentedadwellinghousetotheappellee.However,theappellee,whollywithouttheknowledgeandmaliciouslyinstalledandconcealedalisteningandrecordingdeviceintheirdwellinghouse.What’smore,thedevicewasconcealedinanareaadjacenttothebedoccupiedbytheappellant.Issue: 路漫漫其修远兮，吾将上下而求索-百度WhethertheactionbyCliffordC.Eastmanconstitutesaninvasiontoprivacy?ThetortofintrusionuponP’ssolitudeorseclusionisnotlimitedtoaphysicalinvasionofhishomeorhomeorhisroomorhisquarters,theprinciplehasbeenextendedtoeavesdroppinguponprivateconversationsbymeansofwiretappingandmicrophines.Liabilityexistsonlyifthedefendant’sconductwassuchthatheshouldhaverealizedthatitwouldbeoffensivetopersonsofordinarysensibilities.Itisonlywheretheint