The Invasion Of Privacy Torts Essay

1620 Words7 Pages
For the reasons stated in Part I, supra, when the invasion of privacy torts were created, its promulgators went to great lengths to distinguish the interest protected by those causes of action as opposed to traditional causes of action for defamation and the like. Nevertheless, those distinctions have faded throughout the years, and in Maryland, “[a]n allegation of false light must meet the same legal standards as an allegation of defamation.” Piscatelli v. Van Smith, 424 Md. 294, 306 (2012). Accordingly, for the reasons stated in my prior memoranda, if it is determined that the plaintiff does not state a cause of action for defamation, so too must the false light claim fail. Stated differently, defamation is a necessary condition in order to achieve false light. See Id. (“We shall address in greatest detail [the plaintiff] 's defamation claim, but need not address the false light claim separately.”). Accordingly, all that follows assumes first that the plaintiff has made a claim for defamation. The tort of publicly placing a person in a false light is recoverable if: One who gives publicity to a matter concerning another that places the other before the public in a false light is subject to liability to the other for invasion of his privacy, if (a) the false light in which the other person was placed would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, and (b) the actor had knowledge or acted in reckless disregard as to the falsity of the publicized matter and the false

More about The Invasion Of Privacy Torts Essay

Open Document