ight of the individual to be left alone" which Brandeis extolled in his dissent in Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1928) as "the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized man." Warren and Brandeis said that "the press is overstepping in every direction the obvious bounds of propriety and of decency." In fact, the tort of invasion of privacy so highly valued by Brandeis, and other attempts protect it through regulation have, according to Cate, been "significantly influenced by the importance placed by society on . . . free expression and an investigative press."
In 1964 William Prosser said that courts in the overwhelming majority of states recognized civil (tort) actions for invasion of privacy. According to Carter et al, the District of Columbia and all states but Minnesota recognize a right of privacy in some form. In the 1960s and 1970s a number of states, including Alaska, California, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Montana and South Carolina, added protection of privacy provisions to their constitutions. For example, Art. I, Sec. 23 of the Florida Constitution provides: "Every natural person has the right to be let alone and free from governmental intrusion into his private life except as otherwise provided herein."
Causes of action for invasion of privacy break down into four types: (i) unreasonable intrusion upon the seclusion of another; (ii) appropriation of the other's name or likeness; (iii) unreasonable publicity given to the other's private life (private facts); and (iv) publicity that unreasonably places the other in a false light before the public, which are described, respectively, in Secs. 652B through 652E of the Restatement (Second) of Torts (1977).
Intrusion. The key elements of this tort are illegal entry or prying into someone's property or space, such as their home, bank account, private affairs or concerns. According to Prosser and Keeton, to be act...