a. Facts-
D’s sent employees undercover with concealed cameras to pose as patients
seeking eye exams at P’s clinics. D then used the footage as part of a
television show. P is suing for trespass, because had P known D’s motive, P
wouldn’t have allowed entry.
b. Procedural
History- District court dismissed trespass counts in complaint, P appealed
c. Issue-
Whether entering the eye clinic on false pretenses constituted trespass.
d. Holding-
No, entering the eye clinic on false pretenses does not constitute trespass
e. Rule-
Entry upon another’s property under false pretenses does not constitute
trespass until the property is affected
f. Rationale-
Trespass is meant to protect a person’s property. In this case, the clinic’s
property was not adversely affected. Gaining entry through false pretenses might
still constitute consent. If the property was to be affected, then consent
would not be a defense to trespass.
g. Notes:
i.
ʃ
168. Conditional or Restricted Consent
1. A
conditional or restricted consent to enter land creates a privilege to do so
only in so far as the condition or restriction is complied with.
ii.
ʃ
158. Liability for Intentional Intrusions on Land
1. One
is subject to liability for trespass if he intentionally:
a. Enters
the land of another or causes something else to enter the land, or
b. Remains
on the land, or
c. Fails
to remove something from the land that shouldn’t be there
2. Comment i.-
Actor may be liable for trespass for throwing, propelling, or placing a thing
either on or beneath the surface of land or in the air space above it
No comments:
Post a Comment