Lal, Amrit v. Cbs, Inc
726 F.2d 97 (1984)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An out-of-possession landlord cannot maintain an action for trespass against a third party who enters the leased property with the consent of the tenant in possession. Additionally, the fair report privilege protects news reports of judicial proceedings that include illustrative videotape footage, unless the plaintiff can prove the footage deliberately distorts or sensationalizes the account.
Facts:
- Amrit Lai, a professor, owned several rental houses, including one at 217 East Nield Street which he leased to five college students in March 1980.
- A student newspaper, the Quad, was preparing to publish an article about the poor conditions of Lai's rental properties.
- Lai filed a suit in state court seeking to enjoin the publication of the article.
- Roseanne Cerra, a reporter for WCAU-TV (owned by CBS), attended a brief court hearing related to Lai's suit.
- After the hearing, Cerra and her news crew went to the Nield Street house.
- A tenant in possession, Amy Wertz, gave Cerra and her crew permission to enter the house and film the interior.
- The crew filmed areas of the house, including a water-stained ceiling, an unshaded light bulb, and exposed insulation on a porch.
- WCAU-TV later aired a news report about Lai's lawsuit which included the filmed footage and a statement that tenants' complaints about 'leaking roofs, faulty wiring and other eyesores were never answered.'
Procedural Posture:
- Amrit Lai sued CBS, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleging defamation and trespass.
- The district court denied Lai's motion to compel production of the reporter's notes, finding them privileged under Pennsylvania's shield statute.
- CBS filed a motion for summary judgment on the trespass count.
- The district court granted CBS's motion for summary judgment on the trespass count.
- The defamation count proceeded to trial.
- At the close of all evidence, the district court directed a verdict in favor of CBS on the defamation count.
- Lai, the plaintiff-appellant, appealed all three of the district court's adverse orders to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
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 news crew commit trespass against an out-of-possession landlord by entering a leased property with the express consent of the tenant in possession?
Opinions:
Majority - Sloviter, Circuit Judge.
No. A news crew does not commit trespass against a landlord when their entry onto the property is authorized by the tenant in possession. Under Pennsylvania law, an out-of-possession lessor cannot maintain a trespass action unless there is an injury to the lessor's reversionary interest. The consent of the person in possession of the property is a complete defense to a trespass action. In this case, it is undisputed that the tenant gave permission for the CBS crew to enter and that no damage to the property occurred. Therefore, Lai's trespass claim fails. The court also affirmed the dismissal of the defamation claim, holding that the news broadcast was protected by the 'fair report' privilege. The inclusion of videotape footage to illustrate the subject of the judicial proceeding does not constitute an abuse of the privilege, as there was no evidence that the footage so 'exaggerated and sensationalized' the account as to render it unfair or inaccurate.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies two important legal principles for landlords and journalists. First, it affirms the legal authority of a tenant in possession to grant consent for entry, effectively barring trespass claims from out-of-possession landlords against those invitees, provided no damage occurs. This reinforces that the right of possession, including the right to admit visitors, transfers from landlord to tenant for the term of the lease. Second, the ruling extends the common law 'fair report' privilege to the modern context of television news, clarifying that visual media may accompany reports of judicial proceedings so long as the images are illustrative and not deliberately distorting, thereby protecting journalistic methods in a visual medium.
