[PRIVACY]

FALSE LIGHT IN THE PUBLIC EYE Arguably not defamatory, but highly offensive to the reasonable person Requires widespread publicity, not just publication With actual malice, knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard as to truth (public or private P) Defenses Truth Consent Individual not identified Not offensive to reasonable person No actual malice Privileged source INTRUSION UPON SECLUSION/SOLITUDE Act is highly offensive to reasonable person Executed or controlled by D, not just beneficial to D No publication necessary Examples Trespassing and stealing files Peering into windows Cont. shouting of threats into Ps home Cont. mailing of threatening letters Eavesdropping when and where P has reasonable expectation of privacy Defenses D did not trespass Consent o Implicit o Explicit o Written PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Of private facts (NOT previously published) Highly offensive to the reasonable person NOT legitimate public concern Requires widespread publicity in community With actual malice, knowledge of or reckless disregard to whether it is of public interest Defenses Consent Qualified Privilege o Legal/moral/social duty o Common interest Not sufficiently offensive Public knowledge or occurrence Public record Newsworthiness APPROPRIATION OF NAME OR LIKENESS For Ds (commercial) benefit Without Ps consent Defenses Consent Newsworthiness o Cant draw P out as a performer P not identified Damages Fair market value

Punitive

[OUTRAGE]
OR INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS Intent (or reckless disregard) To cause distress, not just to do initial act o Would do so in reasonable person OR o D knew special circumstances Extreme and outrageous conduct Causation Can distress immediate family member OR Anyone else present for conduct if they suffer bodily harm Damages Severe emotional distress Physical manifestation, possible assoc. costs? o Bodily harm NOT nec. to cause of action o BUT courts want to weed spite suits

[INTERFERENCE W/ K OR PROSPECTIVE K]
ELEMENTS Intent To improperly interfere By action that would create probable cause for an independent tort OR by weighing: Nature of Ds conduct Ds motive (AND interest being advanced, if they are different) Ps interest Social interest re: freedom of K Proximity/remoteness of conduct Relations between parties W/ existing or prospective K (Two torts in most states) BURDEN OF PROOF Re: Prospective K P must prove D interfered & did so improperly Usually takes suit w/in suit Est. independent tort D must prove privilege Re: Existing K P must prove improper interference Lesser balancing test D must rebut with justification DEFENSE: PRIVILEGE OF COMPETITOR (RSTMT 768) Re: Prospective K IF: K relates to matter of competition b/w P & D D doesnt employ improper (tortious) means D doesnt restrain further competition illegally Ds purpose is at least in part to advance Ds interest in competition NO privilege re: existing Ks