jon motion to dismiss 9 18 13.pdf


Preview of PDF document jon-motion-to-dismiss-9-18-13.pdf

Page 1...23 24 2526

Text preview


Case 5:13-cv-04989-JLS Document 3-2 Filed 09/18/13 Page 25 of 26

published in several publications, Compl. ¶ 28, that Defendants Hoffman and Gosselin were paid
for this information by various publications, Compl. ¶ 32, which payments escalated, Compl. ¶
33, and finally the information was used by Defendant Hoffman to publish a book, Compl. ¶ 34,
and finally and most importantly, alleges that the Defendants did these things “for the purpose of
profiting from the book and the tabloid publications, Compl. ¶ 37. Plaintiff’s own pleading
affirmatively negates her conspiracy claim.
H.

The Complaint Fails To Adequately Plead Several Requirements Of The Invasion Of
Privacy Claim (Count VIII).
The Complaint is deficient in that it fails to even allege the particular basis of the

Invasion of Privacy claim in Count VIII. “Under Pennsylvania law, invasion of privacy
encompasses four separate torts: (1) unreasonable intrusion upon the seclusion of another; (2)
appropriation of another's name or likeness; (3) publicity given to another's private life; and (4)
publicity that unreasonably places another in a false light before the public.” Rodriguez v.
Widener Univ., 2013 WL 3009736, at *9 (E.D. Pa. June 17, 2013). Plaintiff’s failure to plead the
basis for her Invasion of Privacy claim is inadequate, requiring dismissal.
The Complaint does not allege that the information claimed disclosed was not true. In the
event Plaintiff’s conclusory claim for Invasion of Privacy purports to assert a claim under the
separate torts identified as (1), (3), or (4) above, “there can be no liability when the statement is
true.” Rodriguez v. Widener Univ., 2013 WL 3009736, at *10 (E.D. Pa. June 17, 2013); See
Chan v. County of Lancaster, 2013 WL 2412168, at *28 (E.D. Pa. June 4, 2013). The only
categories of information Plaintiff mentions are "family photos, personal documents, tax and
business records plus contracts," Compl. ¶ 26, most of which are items that Plaintiff should hope
are not false. Any Invasion of Privacy claim premised on the above torts should be dismissed.

DEFENDANT JONATHAN K. GOSSELIN’S BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS

PAGE 25