Smith v. Doss
Decision Date | 07 October 1948 |
Docket Number | 6 Div. 685. |
Citation | 37 So.2d 118,251 Ala. 250 |
Parties | SMITH et al. v. DOSS. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Jack H. McGuire, of Tuscaloosa, for appellants.
Frank Bruce, of Tuscaloosa, for appellee.
This is a suit brought by Roberta Lindgren Smith and Katrina Lindgren Mathews against James R. Doss, doing business as Radio Station WJRD. The suit seeks to recover damages for the alleged invasion of the plaintiffs' right of privacy. The complaint consists of one count to which demurrers were sustained. On account of this adverse ruling the plaintiffs took a nonsuit. Hence this appeal.
Two questions are presented for decision. (1) May an action be maintained in the State of Alabama for a violation of what has been termed the right of privacy? (2) If so, can the suit be maintained under the facts alleged in this case?
The allegations of the complaint may be summarized in substance as follows. In 1946 James R. Doss, doing business as Radio Station WJRD at Tuscaloosa, Alabama, broadcast a commercial program designated as 'Tuscaloosa Town Talks'. This program was broadcast weekly over a period of several months. There was much public interest in the program. It had a large listening audience in the City and County of Tuscaloosa as well as on the part of others who could tune in on the broadcast. In May 1946 on several broadcasts of this program there was what purported to be a 'sketch, description and practical history of the private and family life of plaintiffs, plaintiffs' father and plaintiffs' family, in which the name, actions and intimate details of the past and forgotten life of plaintiffs' father and of plaintiffs' family are reproduced, resurrected and detailed by graphic descriptions, creating a pen portrait of plaintiffs' father, his past and forgotten life, all recognizable to plaintiffs and to friends and acquaintances of plaintiffs and which clearly identified plaintiffs in the public mind', with the result that 'plaintiffs have been subjected to contempt, ridicule and inquisitive notice of the general public to the injury of their name, personality pride and honor and to the outrage of the finer sentiments of their nature and to the humiliation of their self-respect * * *, their privacy has been invaded and their right to privacy violated * * * and plaintiffs each have been caused and have suffered great mental pain and personal injury and degradation,' the broadcast referred to being substantially as follows.
'Tuscaloosa Town Talks
Upon careful consideration we are satisfied that the right of privacy is supported by logic and the weight of authority. The decisions of the various court...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Drake v. Covington County Board of Education
...duty was, therefore, impermissible. Speaking of the right of privacy in this State, the Supreme Court of Alabama in Smith, et al v. Doss, 251 Ala. 250, 37 So.2d 118, stated the "1 The general nature of the right of privacy is described in 41 Am.Jur. p. 925. It has been defined `as the right......
-
Briscoe v. Reader's Digest Association, Inc.
...189 A.2d 773, which explicitly rejects our landmark decision of Melvin v. Reid, Supra, 112 Cal.App. 285, 297 P. 91, and Smith v. Doss (1948) 251 Ala. 250, 37 So.2d 118, is the recall of past events involving nonpublic figures at issue. In the latter case the spectacular disappearance of pla......
-
Butler v. Town of Argo
...privacy. See I.C.U. Investigations, Inc. v. Jones, 780 So.2d at 688; Johnston v. Fuller, 706 So.2d 700, 701 (Ala.1997); Smith v. Doss, 251 Ala. 250, 37 So.2d 118 (1948). "`This Court defines the tort of invasion of privacy as the intentional wrongful intrusion into one's private activities ......
-
Cordell v. Detective Publications, Inc., 18918.
...Nw.U.L.Rev. 553, 594-615 (1960). See Rest. Torts, § 867 (1939). Cf. Ravellette v. Smith, 300 F.2d 854 (7th Cir. 1962); Smith v. Doss, 251 Ala. 250, 37 So.2d 118 (1945) (issue not decided); Fretz v. Anderson, 5 Utah 2d 290, 300 P.2d 642 (1956). But see Annerino v. Dell Pub. Co., 17 Ill.App. ......