Florida Pub. Co. v. Fletcher
2 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1088, 340 So. 2d 914 (1976)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
News media entering private property at the invitation of law enforcement officials during an emergency of public interest, without objection and in accordance with common custom and usage, does not constitute actionable trespass.
Facts:
- On September 15, 1972, Klenna Ann Fletcher was visiting a friend in New York, leaving her three young daughters, including seventeen-year-old Cindy, at her Jacksonville home.
- On the same afternoon, while Cindy was alone in the house, a fire of undetermined origin caused significant damage to the home, and Cindy died.
- Fire and police departments, along with news media representatives and onlookers, gathered at Mrs. Fletcher's property after a neighbor discovered the fire.
- The Fire Marshal and Police Sergeant Short entered the house for their official investigation and invited news media to accompany them, a standard practice, and news representatives entered peacefully through an open door without objection.
- At the Fire Marshal's request, news photographer Cranford took a picture of a 'silhouette' left on the floor after Cindy's body was removed, which was included in the official investigation file.
- This photograph, along with others by Cranford, was turned over to and published by The Florida Times-Union (Florida Publishing Company) on September 16, 1972.
- Mrs. Fletcher first learned of the facts surrounding her daughter's death by reading the newspaper story and viewing the published photographs.
Procedural Posture:
- Klenna Ann Fletcher filed an amended complaint against Florida Publishing Company in a state trial court, alleging (1) trespass and invasion of privacy, (2) invasion of privacy, and (3) intentional infliction of emotional distress.
- The trial court dismissed Count II and granted final summary judgment for Florida Publishing Company on Counts I and III, finding no genuine issue of material fact regarding implied consent for entry.
- Klenna Ann Fletcher (appellant) appealed the trial court's decision to the District Court of Appeal, First District (intermediate appellate court), and Florida Publishing Company was the appellee.
- The District Court of Appeal reversed the summary judgment as to Count I (trespass and invasion of privacy), concluding the proofs were insufficient for summary judgment, but affirmed the dismissal of Count II and summary judgment on Count III.
- Florida Publishing Company (petitioner) sought review in the Supreme Court of Florida, arguing a direct conflict with a prior decision.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a newspaper's entry onto private property at the invitation of law enforcement, following a major public interest event like a fire and death, constitute trespass when such entry is consistent with common custom and usage?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Roberts
No, the newspaper's entry did not constitute trespass. The Supreme Court of Florida held that the entry into Mrs. Fletcher's home by the newspaper's employees became lawful and non-actionable pursuant to the doctrine of common custom, usage, and practice. The trial court correctly determined that there was no genuine issue of material fact on this point, as affidavits from numerous news editors and law enforcement officials throughout Florida and the nation attested to a long-standing custom and practice for news media to enter private premises in a peaceful manner, without causing physical damage, at the invitation of officers investigating a calamity of great public interest. The court adopted the reasoning of Judge McCord's dissenting opinion from the appellate court, emphasizing that consent may be implied from custom, usage, or conduct, especially when law enforcement invites the media, and there is no objection from the owner or possessor at the time of entry. Since the photographs and news story were accurate and truthful, there could be no recovery under the 'false-light' doctrine of invasion of privacy, meaning any recovery would have to be based on trespass, which the court found did not occur.
Dissenting - Justice Sundberg
Justice Sundberg dissented on jurisdictional grounds, arguing that the Florida Supreme Court should not have heard the case because there was no direct conflict with Jacova v. Southern Radio and Television Co., as claimed by the majority. He asserted that Jacova dealt with the qualified privilege to publish names or photos of persons involved in newsworthy events and did not involve the issue of trespass. Justice Sundberg noted that the District Court of Appeal recognized this distinction and that the question of implied consent for news media personnel to enter premises under such circumstances was one of first impression, which, under Florida's constitutional scheme, should be brought to the Supreme Court via certification from the District Court of Appeal for questions of great public interest, rather than through an alleged conflict. He felt that absent a clear conflict or certification, the Court lacked jurisdiction to review the case.
Analysis:
This case establishes a significant defense for news organizations against trespass claims when reporting on events of public interest. It provides legal precedent for the concept of 'implied consent' through common custom and usage, particularly when law enforcement invites media onto private property during emergencies. The ruling balances property rights with First Amendment considerations, potentially encouraging broader news coverage of public calamities. Future cases will likely scrutinize the extent of 'common custom and usage' and the specific nature of 'invitation' by authorities to apply this doctrine.
