All of the following common law torts are relevant to employee privacy under US law EXCEPT?
All of the following common law torts are relevant to employee privacy under US law EXCEPT?
The question asks for the common law tort that is least relevant to employee privacy under US law. Infliction of emotional distress, intrusion upon seclusion, and defamation are all closely related to personal privacy and the harm one can experience from its violation. Infliction of emotional distress can occur from severe invasion of privacy, intrusion upon seclusion directly addresses privacy invasion, and defamation deals with false statements harming someone's reputation. Conversion, on the other hand, involves the wrongful possession or disposition of another’s property and is more related to property law than privacy law, making it the least relevant to employee privacy.
The answer is D. Intrusion upon seclusion and defamation are discussed in the book under workplace privacy. Infliction of emotional distress is available as an added-on civil tort with other forms of privacy torts, such as intrusion upon seclusion. The only one that makes sense in this scenario is conversion because it involves property.
Great explanation by [Removed]
Plaintiffs can sue under the privacy torts, which traditionally have been categorized as intrusion upon seclusion, appropriation of name or likeness, publicity given to private life, and publicity placing a person in false light. Plaintiffs may also sue under a contract theory in certain situations, such when a physician, financial institution, or other entity holding sensitive information breaches a promise of confidentiality and causes harm.