## Facts

- Nellie Mitchell, a 96–97-year-old longtime newspaper vendor and carrier in Mountain Home, Arkansas, was a well-known local figure featured in prior human-interest media stories.
- Globe International Publishing, Inc., publisher of the supermarket tabloid *the Sun*, previously printed a largely accurate story about Mitchell using a photograph obtained from a local newspaper.
- On October 2, 1990, *the Sun* ran a cover and interior story about a 101-year-old newspaper carrier who became pregnant after an extramarital affair and quit work; the story was fictional.
- *The Sun* used Mitchell’s real photograph on the cover and again inside the issue, without checking whether she was alive or considering the impact of associating her with the story.
- Evidence showed *the Sun* presented itself as reporting real news, mingled true and fabricated stories without clear distinction, and used limited disclaimers that did not indicate news stories were fictional.
- The issue was sold in the Mountain Home area and sold out locally; people in the community recognized Mitchell in the photograph and connected her to the salacious narrative.
- Mitchell testified that the publication caused humiliation, embarrassment, and emotional distress.
- A jury rejected defamation but found for Mitchell on false-light invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED), awarding $650,000 compensatory damages and $850,000 punitive damages.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence supported false-light invasion of privacy, including identifiability, highly offensive portrayal, and knowledge or reckless disregard of falsity.
2. Whether Globe’s conduct could be found extreme and outrageous, and intentional or reckless, sufficient to support IIED.
3. Whether the compensatory and punitive awards were supported by the evidence, and whether compensatory damages required remittitur as excessive.

## Decision

- The court affirmed liability on false-light invasion of privacy and IIED.
- The court affirmed the punitive damages award.
- The court held the compensatory damages award was excessive relative to the proof of actual injury and remanded for a substantial remittitur of compensatory damages.

## Legal Principles

- False-light invasion of privacy requires publicity placing a person in a false light that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, with knowledge or reckless disregard as to falsity.
- Use of a real person’s identifiable image in connection with a fabricated, humiliating narrative can satisfy the “false light” and “highly offensive” elements, particularly where readers may reasonably believe the depiction is factual.
- A publisher’s presentation of content as factual, while mixing true and fabricated stories without clear signals, can support a finding of reckless disregard that readers will take a false portrayal as true.
- IIED may be established where conduct is extreme and outrageous and is undertaken intentionally or with reckless disregard of the likelihood of causing severe emotional distress.
- Punitive damages may be upheld where the defendant’s conduct shows reckless disregard for the plaintiff’s rights and supports punishment and deterrence.
- Even when liability is supported, compensatory damages for emotional harm may be reduced by remittitur when the award is out of proportion to the injuries proven.

## Conclusion

The Eighth Circuit held that a tabloid’s use of an identifiable elderly woman’s photograph to illustrate a wholly fictional, degrading story could support false-light and IIED liability and justify punitive damages, but required reduction of an excessive compensatory award to match the evidence of actual harm.


Peoples Bank & Tr. Co. of Mountain Home v. Globe Int’l Publ’g, Inc., 978 F.2d 1065 (8th Cir. 1992)