## Facts

- Toni Ann Diaz, a transgender woman, underwent gender-affirming surgery in 1975 after clinical evaluation and treatment.
- Diaz lived publicly as a woman and took extensive steps to keep her transgender history confidential, limiting disclosure to immediate family and close friends and updating identifying records (e.g., name and identity-related documents).
- Diaz became student body president at the College of Alameda; her tenure coincided with controversy concerning alleged misuse of student-government funds.
- An Oakland Tribune columnist, Sidney Jones, investigated the student-government matter and published a column disclosing that Diaz had been born male and had undergone sex-reassignment surgery.
- Jones obtained the information from a confidential informant and confirmed it through police arrest records.
- Diaz alleged severe emotional distress and psychological harm from the public disclosure.

## Issues

1. What are the elements of California’s tort for public disclosure of private facts, including whether the plaintiff must prove the disclosed matter was not of legitimate public concern.
2. Whether the disclosed information about Diaz’s transgender history was constitutionally protected as newsworthy in connection with her public role and the student-government controversy.
3. Whether the trial court’s jury instructions misstated the law and misallocated the burden of proof on newsworthiness, requiring reversal.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal reversed the judgment for Diaz and remanded for a new trial.
- The court held the jury instructions contained prejudicial legal error regarding the elements of public disclosure of private facts and the allocation of the burden of proof on newsworthiness.
- The court stated the plaintiff bears the burden to prove: (1) public disclosure, (2) of a private fact, (3) highly offensive to a reasonable person, and (4) not of legitimate public concern.
- The court indicated newsworthiness ordinarily presents a jury question informed by community standards, subject to judicial control in extreme cases.
- Issues concerning punitive damages and the size of the awards were not finally resolved because a new trial was required.

## Legal Principles

- In California, public disclosure of private facts requires proof of: public disclosure; a private fact; offensiveness to a reasonable person; and lack of legitimate public concern.
- Newsworthiness is a limiting doctrine that reflects the need to reconcile privacy protections with constitutional protections for speech and press.
- The plaintiff, not the publisher, bears the burden of proving the published matter was not of legitimate public concern; instructions shifting that burden are erroneous.
- Whether a disclosure is newsworthy is generally for the jury to decide, because it commonly turns on community norms and the relationship between the disclosure and a matter of public interest.

## Conclusion

The appellate court set aside the plaintiff’s jury verdict because the trial court’s instructions misstated the public-disclosure tort and improperly shifted the burden on newsworthiness, requiring a new trial under correct standards balancing privacy against protected reporting on matters of legitimate public concern.


Diaz v. Oakland Tribune, Inc., 139 Cal. App. 3d 118, 188 Cal. Rptr. 762 (Ct. App. 1983)