For Your Data Pearson V. Dodd Representative Brief Summary
February 24, 2019
Edit
- Pearson v. Dodd representative brief summary
F: Pearson (D/appellant) -> Newspaper columnist
Dodd (P/appellee) -> Senator
TC has granted partial SJ to Dodd finding liability on a theory of conversion.
But, TC denied partial SJ on the theory of invasion of privacy.
TC ruled that D’s receipt as well as subsequent usage of photocopies of documents which D knew had been removed from P’s filed w/o authorization established P’s liability for conversion.
Two quondam employees of Dodd entered P’s purpose w/o authorisation as well as unbeknownst to him amongst the assistance of P’s staff, as well as removed numerous documents from his files, made copies, replaced the originals, as well as turned over the copies to the D. D was aware of how the copies had been obtained. Later, D published articles containing data that has been extracted from these documents.
R: In circumstances where employees, without permission of employer, removed documents, made copies, as well as turned over to the paper columnists, 1) the data taken past times employees is non the type that constabulary of conversion protects. 2) accordingly, employee is non liable for conversion
A: Documents were removed from the files at night, photocopies, as well as returned to the files undamaged earlier purpose operations resumed inwards the morning. Insofar equally the documents value to appellee resided inwards their usefulness equally records of
the concern of his office, P was clearly non substantially deprived of his usage of them.
No conversion of the physical contents of P’s files took place, as well as because the data copies from the documents inwards those files has non been shown to hold upward belongings discipline to protection past times adjust for conversion, D is non liable for conversion.
C: affirm denial of SJ for invasion of privacy
Reverse its grant of SJ for conversion