California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print

Ignat v. Yum! Brands, Inc., G046343

Summary judgment for defendant on plaintiff's claim alleging invasion of privacy by public disclosure of private facts when her supervisor disclosed to plaintiff's coworkers her bipolar condition, is reversed and remanded, where: 1) disclosure in a writing is not required to maintain a cause of action for public disclosure of private facts; however, 2) alleging a violation of a person's common-law right to privacy is not the equivalent of alleging a violation of the constitutional right to privacy, and because plaintiff failed to allege a constitutional right, the trial court properly refused to consider her arguments on this theory of liability.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 03/18/2013
  • Published 03/18/2013

Judges

  • BEDSWORTH

Court

  • California Court of Appeal

Counsel

Copied to clipboard