Galella v. Onassis
353 F. Supp. 196 (1972)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The First Amendment does not grant newsgatherers a license to commit torts such as assault, battery, harassment, and invasion of privacy in the course of their activities, even when the subject is a public figure.
Facts:
- Ronald Galella, a professional free-lance photographer specializing in a style he called 'paparazzo', engaged in a years-long pattern of photographing Jacqueline Onassis and her children, Caroline and John Jr.
- In September 1969, Galella jumped from behind bushes directly into the path of John Kennedy Jr., who was riding his bicycle, forcing the child to swerve violently to avoid a collision.
- In December 1970, Galella hired a man in a Santa Claus costume to lunge at Onassis and her companion outside the '21' Club and later at a theatre, creating a commotion while Galella took photographs.
- In May 1971, after being ejected from a private school play in which John Kennedy Jr. was performing, Galella gave his camera to a student and instructed him to go inside and take photographs of the Onassis party.
- In October 1971, Galella's aggressive pursuit of Caroline Kennedy at a tennis court, where he yelled at her and took photos from a few feet away, caused her to cry.
- Galella's conduct also included high-speed car chases, hiding behind a coat rack in a restaurant to photograph a private dinner, bribing household staff for information, and constantly lurking outside the Onassis residence.
- Galella sent Onassis's husband, Aristotle Onassis, a Christmas card depicting Mr. Onassis as Santa Claus giving Galella money, with a caption reading 'THE PAYOFF', and later admitted to asking Mr. Onassis for a job with his airline.
Procedural Posture:
- Ronald Galella instituted an action in the U.S. District Court against Jacqueline Onassis and three U.S. Secret Service agents, seeking damages and an injunction.
- Onassis filed an answer with a counterclaim seeking damages and injunctive relief against Galella.
- The U.S. Government intervened in the action, seeking an injunction against Galella for interfering with the protective duties of the Secret Service.
- The court granted summary judgment for the defendant agents, dismissing them from the case on the ground of immunity.
- The court denied Onassis's motion for summary judgment on her counterclaim.
- The court granted Onassis's application for a temporary restraining order against Galella to prevent harassment, which was later extended by consent.
- Onassis filed motions to hold Galella in contempt for violating the court's restraining orders.
- The court consolidated the hearing for a preliminary injunction with the trial of the main action.
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 photographer's First Amendment right to gather news immunize him from liability for conduct that constitutes tortious harassment, assault, battery, and invasion of a public figure's privacy?
Opinions:
Majority - Cooper, District Judge
No, the First Amendment does not immunize a photographer from liability for tortious conduct committed while gathering news. While Jacqueline Onassis is a public figure, she does not forfeit her right to be free from assault, harassment, and an unreasonable invasion of privacy. The court rejected Galella's assertion of a complete First Amendment defense, holding that freedom of the press has never been construed as a license to commit torts. Citing Dietemann v. Time, Inc., the court affirmed that newsgatherers are not immune from crimes or torts committed during their work. The court employed a balancing test, weighing the minimal public interest in Galella's photographs of Onassis's daily life against the severe torment and emotional distress inflicted upon her and her children. It found the harm caused by Galella's intrusive and dangerous methods far outweighed any legitimate newsgathering interest. The court found that Galella's conduct constituted multiple torts under New York law, including assault, battery, harassment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and invasion of privacy. Furthermore, his actions were found to have interfered with the statutory duty of the Secret Service to protect the children of a former president.
Analysis:
This case is a foundational decision in establishing the limits of First Amendment protections for newsgathering activities, particularly in the context of public figures. It solidifies the principle that freedom of the press pertains to publication and dissemination of information, not to the physical conduct of gathering it. The court's application of a balancing test between the newsworthiness of the information and the intrusiveness of the methods used to obtain it created a significant precedent for future privacy and media-related cases. This ruling provides a legal framework for public figures to seek protection from relentless and dangerous journalistic pursuit, distinguishing legitimate newsgathering from tortious harassment and affirming that even the most famous individuals retain fundamental rights to personal safety and privacy.
Unlock the full brief for Galella v. Onassis