Opinion ID: 150721
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Appropriation of Likeness

Text: We now turn to Plaintiff's second issue on appeal: that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on his appropriation-of-likeness tort claim. To prove an appropriation of likeness under Georgia law, a plaintiff must establish that the defendant invaded his privacy by appropriating, for the defendant's benefit, use or advantage, the plaintiff's name or likeness. Cabaniss v. Hipsley, 114 Ga. App. 367, 151 S.E.2d 496, 500 (1966). Plaintiff asserts on appeal that an appropriation of likeness need not be intentional to be an actionable invasion of privacy. This position is wholly without merit. An appropriation of likeness without an intent to use the likeness for one's benefit fails to meet the very definition of the tort itself. Furthermore, Georgia case law plainly establishes that summary judgment is proper where a plaintiff fails to show an intentional or knowing appropriation of likeness. Blakey v. Victory Equip. Sales, Inc., 259 Ga.App. 34, 576 S.E.2d 288, 292 (2002) (holding that the district court properly awarded summary judgment to defendant on plaintiff's appropriation-of-likeness claim for the sole reason that [t]here [was] no evidence ... that defendants ever knowingly took Blakely's identity for their purposes). As discussed in Part II.A., Plaintiff also fails to present any material evidence that calls into question the truthfulness of Clapp's claim of origin for his restaurant's name aside from the general assertion that Clapp's experience working in Los Angeles may have resulted in his knowledge of the Dan Tana's restaurant. Without any evidence to contradict Clapp's account that his restaurant is named after his own two children, as opposed to Plaintiff's restaurant in Hollywood, and without any evidence of a motive for Defendants to trade on the name of Plaintiff's restaurant, there can be no intentional appropriation of Plaintiff's name or likeness. In sum, the district court did not err in granting summary judgment to Defendants on Plaintiff's appropriation-of-likeness claim.