JAMES N. HENRY vs. CHERRY & WEBB., 30 R.I. 13

Summary

The company demurred to the citizen's cause of action for trespass vi et armis, defined as trespass with force and arms, for advertising a product using his likeness without permission. The citizen alleged that his right to privacy was invaded and that he suffered mental anguish. The lower court found that the action presented questions of law that were of such doubt and importance that they should be determined by the court before further proceedings under § 478 of Court and Practice Act. The first certified question was whether a person at common law had a right designated as a right of privacy for the invasion of which an action for damages would lie. The second certified question was whether the unwarranted publication of a person's photograph for advertising purposes was actionable at common law where the only injury alleged was that of mental suffering. The court answered both questions in the negative and found that the invasion of a person's right of privacy was not actionable.