characterizing invasion of privacy as intentional tort
How later courts described this case
- characterizing invasion of privacy as intentional tort
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
I concur in the result to reverse the trial court's judgment because I perceive a distinction between a defamation claim (which was what the defendants contended that Minnifield had pleaded) and an invasion-of-privacy claim (which is what Minnifield actually pleaded) and because the release signed by Minnifield appears to be ambiguous as to whether it applies to actions or omissions of the defendants occurring after *Page 828
Minnifield's tattoo had been affixed. Cf. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Goodin , 535 So.2d 98 , 101-02 (Ala. 1988). Consideration of the precise type of invasion-of-privacy claim Minnifield has pleaded and of the applicability of the release to intentional torts is, in my view, unnecessary.
CRAWLEY, J., concurs.