Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtSteen, J.
The complaint in this case claimed that “the defendant showed and commercialized the film of * * * [plaintiff’s] act without his consent and such conduct by the defendant was unlawful appropriation of plaintiff’s professional property.” Appropriation is a well-recognized branch of the more general tort of interference with the right of privacy. In Housh v. Peth (1956), 165 Ohio St. 35, *226133 N. E. 2d 340, this court affirmed the principle that each individual has a legally protected' right of privacy. In paragraph two of the syllabus of that case, the court held that:
“An actionable invasion…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Thornhill v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Winters v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Time, Inc. v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Bridges v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by96 opinions
- Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Joyce v. General Motors Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1990
- Etw Corporation v. Jireh Publishing, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
- Wiltberger v. DavisOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
- Sustin v. FeeOhio Supreme Court · 1982
91 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.