Hall v. Post

372 S.E.2d 711 (1988)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Ps brought separate civil actions against Ds for invasion of privacy. The basis of the suits were two articles in the Salisbury Post and written by its special assignment reporter. The Salisbury Post published an article which bore the headline 'Ex-Carny Seeks Baby Abandoned 17 Years Ago.' The article concerned the search by Lee and Aledith Gottschalk for Aledith's daughter by a previous marriage, whom she and her former husband had abandoned in Rowan County in September of 1967. The article told of Aledith's former marriage to a carnival barker named Clarence Maxson, the birth of their daughter in 1967, their abandonment of the child at the age of four months, events in Aledith's life thereafter, and her return to Rowan County after seventeen years to look for the child. The article indicated that Clarence Maxson had made arrangements in 1967 for a babysitter named P to keep the child for a few weeks. Clarence and Aledith then moved on with the carnival, and Clarence later told Aledith that he had signed papers authorizing the baby's adoption. Aledith was married to Lee Gottschalk in 1984, and they decided to travel to Rowan County to look for Aledith's child. The newspaper article of 18 July 1984 related the details of their unsuccessful search and then stated: If anyone, they say, knows anything about a little blonde baby left here when the county fair closed and the carnies moved on in September 1967, Lee and Aledith Gottschalk can be reached in Room 173 at the Econo Motel. Shortly after the article was published, the Gottschalks were called at the motel and informed of the child's identity and whereabouts. D published a second article on 20 July 1984 reporting that the Gottschalks had located the child with the aid of responses to the earlier article. The second article identified the child and her adoptive mother as Ps. The article related the details of a telephone encounter between the Gottschalks and Mrs. Hall and described the emotions of both families. Ps alleged that they fled their home in order to avoid public attention resulting from the articles and sought and received psychiatric care for the emotional and mental distress caused by the incident. Ds contend that the imposition of civil liability for their truthful public disclosure of facts about the plaintiffs would violate the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The trial court granted summary judgment to Ds, and the appeals court overturned. Ds appealed.