Wednesday, June 6. 2007A new right for the Falsely Accused in Ohio - False Light Invasion of PrivacyThe Ohio Supreme Court today recognized a claim for "false light" invasion of privacy. This claim arises where one party knowingly or recklessly publicizes false information about a person that is highly offensive. The case, Welling v. Weinfeld, involved the Weinfeld's party center in Stark County and its neighbor, the Wellings. The two did not get along. The Wellings did not like the parties and traffic at the party center and the party center did not appreciate that a rock was thrown through its window. Suspecting that one of the Welling kids launched the offending rock, Weinfeld distributed a flyer that said: $500.00 Call the Perry Township Police Department’s Detective Bureau at 478-5121. Reward will be paid in cash. Although the flier did not name any names, the Weinfelds distributed the flyer at the factory where a Welling kid worked and at the high school that he attended. He sued, claiming that the flyer placed him in a false light. When the case reached the Ohio Supreme Court, the court did not decide whether the Welling boy threw the rock or whether the suggestion that he had would offend a reasonable person. Instead, the Court decided whether, assuming that those facts were true, Ohio would allow him to pursue a previously unrecognized "false light" claim. The Ohio Supreme Court said yes, he could. False light invasion of privacy is now a viable cause of action in Ohio. The elements of a false light invasion of privacy claim are:
"Publicity" means that the matter is made public by communicating it to the public at large, or to so many persons that the matter must be regarded as substantially certain to become one of public knowledge. Thus, publicity includes any means of communication, whether oral, written or by any other means that reaches the public, or is sure to reach the public. This case may provide a remedy for employees who are falsely accused of sexual harassment where the accusation reaches, or is communicated in a way that is sure to reach, the public. In that context, the public could possibly mean the workplace community. This case does not address the main problem of the falsely accused, which is the lack of an adequate means to challenge the falsity of the accusation and lack of a remedy if they lose their job because of it. However, where the complainant takes the complaint to the public, the falsely accused now has the right to prove that it is false in a court of law and recover damages from the accuser if the accusation is offensive to a reasonable person. This is a step in the right direction.
(Page 1 of 1, totaling 1 entries)
|
QuicksearchCategoriesSyndicate This BlogBlog Administration |
