In James v.Bob Ross Buick,where James had been fired from a car dealership that then sent letters to customers under his name,James sued for invasion of privacy and the appeals court held that:
A)he had no case because no harm was done to his reputation
B)he had no case because he was already a "public figure" to the customers
C)he had no case because he could show no damages
D)he had no case because the dealership did not intend to harm his privacy
E)none of the other choices

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The appeals court held that James had a case because using his name without permission could be considered an invasion of privacy, regardless of the intent or harm to reputation.

In James V