## Facts

- On March 8, 1995, Sarah Edmondson and Benjamin Darrus committed an armed robbery at a convenience store in Ponchatoula, Louisiana.
- During the robbery, Edmondson shot Patsy Ann Byers, causing permanent injuries that left her paraplegic.
- Byers and her husband sued Edmondson and Darrus for damages, and later added additional defendants, including film companies and a director involved with the movie *Natural Born Killers*.
- The amended pleadings alleged the perpetrators were inspired by the film and that the film’s production and distribution created an unreasonable risk that viewers would imitate the violence.
- The film-company defendants filed a peremptory exception of no cause of action, arguing they owed no duty to protect Byers from viewers’ criminal acts and that imposing liability would violate the First Amendment.

## Issues

1. Whether the pleadings stated a legally cognizable negligence or intentional-tort claim against film producers and distributors for injuries caused by third-party criminals allegedly inspired by a movie.
2. Whether the First Amendment bars imposing tort liability on filmmakers for the content of a non-obscene film based on its alleged inspirational effect on viewers’ later crimes.

## Decision

- The court affirmed the judgment sustaining the peremptory exception of no cause of action and dismissed the claims against the film-company defendants.
- Even accepting the pleaded facts as true, Louisiana tort law did not impose a duty on the film-company defendants to protect victims from independent criminal acts of viewers.
- The perpetrators’ intentional criminal conduct was an intervening cause outside the scope of any duty asserted against the film-company defendants.
- Imposing liability for a generally distributed, non-obscene expressive work—absent direct incitement to imminent lawless action—would conflict with First Amendment protections.

## Legal Principles

- On an exception of no cause of action, courts accept well-pleaded facts as true and determine only whether the law affords a remedy on those facts.
- Under Louisiana duty–risk analysis, foreseeability alone does not create a duty to protect the public from the intentional criminal acts of third parties absent a recognized basis for such a duty.
- A creator or distributor of protected expressive content generally has no tort duty to prevent audience members from committing crimes allegedly influenced by that content.
- The First Amendment protects non-obscene films and bars civil liability premised on content unless the expression falls within an unprotected category (such as incitement directed to producing imminent lawless action).

## Conclusion

The court held that Louisiana law and the First Amendment foreclosed tort claims against film producers and distributors for injuries caused by criminals who allegedly imitated a movie’s violence, and it affirmed dismissal for no cause of action.


Byers v. Edmondson, 712 So. 2d 681 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998)