From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Novel v. Beacon Operating Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 18, 1982
86 A.D.2d 602 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

Opinion

January 18, 1982


Appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Williams, J.), entered March 11, 1981, which is in favor of the defendant upon the trial court's dismissal of the complaint at the close of the plaintiff's case, at a nonjury trial. (The appeal was transferred to this court by order of the Appellate Division, First Department, dated Oct. 6, 1981.) Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Plaintiff seeks to recover damages from her landlord on the basis that the latter's unauthorized entry into her apartment and taking of pictures therein constituted an invasion of privacy. In New York, recovery for violation of one's right to privacy is provided for in the Civil Rights Law. No common-law right to privacy exists. (See Cohen v. Hallmark Cards, 45 N.Y.2d 493, 497, n 2; Wojtowicz v. Delacorte Press, 43 N.Y.2d 858.) "[T]he right protected [under the statute] is the right to be protected against commercial exploitation of one's personality without his written consent" ( Hill v. Hayes, 18 A.D.2d 485, 488). As no evidence of any "commercial exploitation" was adduced at trial, no cause of action has been stated. Mollen, P.J., Lazer, Cohalan and Thompson, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Novel v. Beacon Operating Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 18, 1982
86 A.D.2d 602 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)
Case details for

Novel v. Beacon Operating Corp.

Case Details

Full title:DOLORES NOVEL, Appellant, v. BEACON OPERATING CORP., Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 18, 1982

Citations

86 A.D.2d 602 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

Citing Cases

Ressis v. Herman

Any physician-patient confidentiality was waived in the stipulation to submit to a mental health evaluation…

Ogundiran v. Spira

Camera surveillance and the taking of photographs of a premises do not fall within the ambit of invasion of…