right of privacy

The right to be let alone; the right of a person to be free from unwarranted publicity; and right to live without unwarranted interference by the public in matters with which the public is not necessarily concerned.

Term "right of privacy" is generic term encompassing various rights recognized to be inherent in concept of ordered liberty, and such right prevents governmental interference in intimate personal relationships or activities, freedoms of individual to make fundamental choices involving himself, his family, and his relationship with others. Industrial Foundation of the South v. Texas Indus. Ace. Bd., Tex., 540 S.W.2d 668, 679.

The right of an individual (or corporation) to withhold himself and his property from public scrutiny, if he so chooses. It is said to exist only so far as its assertion is consistent with law or public policy, and in a proper case equity will interfere, if there is no remedy at law, to prevent an injury threatened by the invasion of, or infringement upon, this right from motives of curiosity, gain or malice. Federal Trade Commission v. American Tobacco Co., 264 U.S. 298, 44 S.Ct. 336, 68 L.Ed. 696.

While there is no right of privacy found in any specific guarantees of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has recognized that zones of privacy may be created by more specific constitutional guarantees and thereby impose limits upon governmental power. Paul v. Davis, 424 U.S. 693, 712, 96 S.Ct. 1155, 1166, 47 L.Ed.2d 405; Whalen v. Roe, 429 U.S. 589, 97 S.Ct. 869, 51 L.Ed.2d 64.

See also Warren and Brandeis, The Right to Privacy, 4 Harv.L.Rev. 193.

Tort actions for invasion of privacy fall into four general classes:

- Appropriation, consisting of appropriation, for the defendant's benefit or advantage, of the plaintiffs name or likeness, Carlisle v. Fawcett Publications, 201 Cal.App.2d 733, 20 Cal.Rptr. 405;

- Intrusion, consisting of intrusion upon the plaintiffs solitude or seclusion, as by invading his home (Ford Motor Co. v. Williams, 108 Ga.App. 21, 132 S.E.2d 206),

- Eavesdropping (LaCrone v. Ohio Bell Tel. Co., 114 Ohio App. 299, 182 N.E.2d 15, 19 O.O.2d 236); as well as persistent and unwanted telephone calls (Housh v. Peth, 165 Ohio St. 35, 133 N.E.2d 340, 59 O.O. 60);

- Public disclosure of private facts, consisting of a cause of action in publicity, of a highly objectionable kind, given to private information about the plaintiff, even though it is true and no action would lie for defamation, Melvin v. Reid, 112 Cal.App. 285, 297 P. 91;

- False light in the public eye, consisting of publicity which places the plaintiff in a false light in the public eye, Norman v. City of Las Vegas, 64 Nev. 38, 177 P.2d 442.

See also false light privacy

- invasion of privacy