Court Opinion

ID: 9738828
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:03:51.692387+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:08.699904
License: Public Domain

*114HOMEYER, J.
(concurring specially) I agree with the opinion that the invasion of the right of privacy as a cause of action should be recognized in South Dakota, and also concur in the reversal of the judgment. The majority opinion calls attention to plaintiff's employment in the postal department and that the photograph was taken at the post office after arrangements had been made with the postmaster under whose supervision the plaintiff worked. I consider this as the determinative factor on reversal. For many years plaintiff had been a public employee, and although his duties were such as to subject him to little public attention, still the retirement of postal employees, and public employees in general, is a matter of legitimate news comment and public interest, and plaintiff should have recognized this fact as an incident of his employment. If the article and photograph had been published in the same manner of a person not in public employment, I feel that there would have been a fact issue presented for determination.