Larry, who is deaf, purchased several items at a large chain discount store. One of the items was a large inflated doll for his daughter. Larry went to a cash register near a store entrance to pay for his goods. The doll was so large that the sales clerk could not find a bag to hold it. With the doll under his arm and his other purchases in bags held in both hands, Larry left the store. As he did so, a store employee stationed at the door to welcome people in and conduct security screens of those leaving, noticed the unbagged doll. The employee was instructed to stop and check the receipt of any party leaving the store with an unbagged item. As a consequence, she asked Larry to stop. When he did not, she shouted at him to stop. Finally, she yelled, “Stop thief,” and gave chase. Other store personnel joined in and threw Larry down onto the asphalt in the parking lot. Larry finally was able to make the store personnel understand he was deaf and that he had the receipt in his pocket. Upon seeing the receipt they let him go with apologies. Although he was embarrassed, his clothes torn, and his skin scraped, Larry accepted the apologies and left. Now he is reconsidering. Would it be ethical for Larry to bring suit against the discount store? Does Larry owe a duty to bring suit? If so, to whom and for what?

Answer from Chapter 5 Civil Law and Procedure

liability for statements made during the actual trial or hearing. Similarly, liability for defamatory statements about public officials or prominent personalities does not exist unless the statements were made with malice. That means the statement when issued was known to be false or was made with a reckless disregard for its probable falsehood. Invasion of Privacy People are entitled to keep personal matters private. This is the right to privacy. Congress has stated that the right of privacy is a personal and fundamental right protected by the Constitution of the United States. Invasion of privacy is a tort defined as the uninvited intrusion into an individual s personal relationships and activities in a way likely to cause shame or mental suffering in an ordinary person. An invasion of privacy also can result from unnecessary publicity regarding personal matters. So, unlike the law regarding the tort of defamation, publication of even a true statement about someone may be an invasion of privacy. This is because, as the U.S. Supreme Court put it, you should be protected when you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Thus, two-way mirrors result of the slanderous remark. Exceptions to this occur in cases where the oral statements are to the effect that the plaintiff committed a serious crime, has a loathsome disease, or injures someone in his or her profession or business. In libel cases, you are presumed to have suffered a loss, and so these damages do not have to be shown to the court. Exceptions are made to the law of defamation in order to encourage open discussion of issues of public concern. For example, legislators statements, even those made with malice, are immune from liability if made during legislative meetings. Judges, lawyers, jurors, witnesses, and other parties in judicial proceedings are also immune from What are some situations related to the right to privacy that affect your life? BLEND IMAGES 5-2 Intentional Torts, Negligence, and Strict Liability 87