HALL V. POST
372 S.E.2d 711 (1988)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Hall (P), adoptive mother and daughter, filed an action against Post
(D), journalist and newspaper, alleging the tortious invasion of their privacy by truthful
public disclosure of private facts. The North Carolina Court of Appeals reversed the trial
court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Ds, who appealed.
FACTS: Ps brought separate civil actions against Ds for invasion of privacy. The basis of
the suits were two articles in the Salisbury Post and written by its special assignment
reporter. The Salisbury Post published an article which bore the headline 'Ex-Carny Seeks
Baby Abandoned 17 Years Ago.' The article concerned the search by Lee and Aledith Gottschalk
for Aledith's daughter by a previous marriage, whom she and her former husband had abandoned
in Rowan County in September of 1967. The article told of Aledith's former marriage to a
carnival barker named Clarence Maxson, the birth of their daughter in 1967, their
abandonment of the child at the age of four months, events in Aledith's life thereafter, and
her return to Rowan County after seventeen years to look for the child. The article
indicated that Clarence Maxson had made arrangements in 1967 for a babysitter named P to
keep the child for a few weeks. Clarence and Aledith then moved on with the carnival, and
Clarence later told Aledith that he had signed papers authorizing the baby's adoption.
Aledith was married to Lee Gottschalk in 1984, and they decided to travel to Rowan County to
look for Aledith's child. The newspaper article of 18 July 1984 related the details of their
unsuccessful search and then stated: If anyone, they say, knows anything about a little
blonde baby left here when the county fair closed and the carnies moved on in September
1967, Lee and Aledith Gottschalk can be reached in Room 173 at the Econo Motel. Shortly
after the article was published, the Gottschalks were called at the motel and informed of
the child's identity and whereabouts. D published a second article on 20 July 1984 reporting
that the Gottschalks had located the child with the aid of responses to the earlier article.
The second article identified the child and her adoptive mother as Ps. The article related
the details of a telephone encounter between the Gottschalks and Mrs. Hall and described the
emotions of both families. Ps alleged that they fled their home in order to avoid public
attention resulting from the articles and sought and received psychiatric care for the
emotional and mental distress caused by the incident. Ds contend that the imposition of
civil liability for their truthful public disclosure of facts about the plaintiffs would
violate the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The trial court
granted summary judgment to Ds and the appeals court overturned. Ds appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment