2014 IL App (1st) 132480
Ill. App. Ct.2014Background
- Plaintiff Amy Jacobson, a Chicago TV reporter, was videotaped with her two young children at Craig Stebic’s backyard pool during Lisa Stebic’s disappearance coverage.
- CBS-2 obtained the footage via a neighbor and aired an edited two-minute segment on July 10, 2007; NBC-5 terminated Jacobson in response to fallout.
- Jacobson sued CBS for intrusion on seclusion, false light, IIED, defamation (per se and per quod), and tortious interference with business relations/expectancy.
- The circuit court granted CBS summary judgment under 735 ILCS 5/2-1005 as to all seven counts; the appellate court reviews de novo.
- Illinois recognizes a right to privacy by intrusion upon seclusion; the court analyzes whether Jacobson was a public figure and whether CBS acted with actual malice; the court held Jacobson is a limited-purpose public figure and CBS did not act with actual malice, supporting summary judgment on defamation and related claims; intrusion claim rejected due to lack of reasonable privacy in the Stebic backyard.
- The remaining emotional distress and tortious interference claims were deemed derivative of the rejected defamation and intrusion claims and hence summarily rejected.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public-figure status under defamation law | Jacobson argues she is a general public figure due to notoriety | CBS contends she is a limited-purpose public figure | Jacobson is a limited-purpose public figure |
| Actual malice standard applies if public figure | Jacobson must prove CBS acted with actual malice | CBS did not act with actual malice | No triable issue of actual malice established |
| False light claim viability | Editing/publication created false light | No actual malice or improper portrayal proven | False light claim rejected on malice showing |
| Intrusion upon seclusion viability | CBS’s videotaping invaded privacy in a private backyard | No reasonable expectation of privacy; location publicly visible | Intrusion claim rejected; no highly offensive intrusion shown |
| Derivative nature of tort claims against CBS | Emotional distress and tortious interference independently arise from filming/editing | Claims are derivative of defamation/privacy | Claims independently rejected; affirmed summary judgment on remaining counts |
Key Cases Cited
- Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323 (U.S. 1974) (public figure standard for defamation; actual malice when public figure)
- Waldbaum v. Fairchild Publications, Inc., 627 F.2d 1287 (D.C. Cir. 1980) (limited/public figure analysis; essence of public controversy and prominence)
- Kessler v. Zekman, 250 Ill. App. 3d 172 (Ill. App. 1st Dist. 1993) (three-part Waldbaum test for limited-purpose public figures)
- Wayment v. Clear Channel Broadcasting, Inc., 2005 UT 25, 116 P.3d 271 (Utah 2005) (illustrates limited-purpose public figure concept)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (U.S. 1986) (summary judgment standard for proving actual malice)
- Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. Connaughton, 491 U.S. 657 (U.S. 1989) (publication with fault requires actual malice or reckless disregard)
- New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (U.S. 1964) (establishes actual malice standard for defamation of public figures)