## Facts

- A newspaper published a sexually explicit classified advertisement using the mother’s first name and the family’s home address.
- The family alleged the advertisement was published without the mother’s consent.
- After publication, the family allegedly received sexually solicitous correspondence and experienced repeated harassment at their residence.
- Plaintiffs alleged more than 100 strangers entered the property demanding to see the mother and used lewd, abusive, and threatening language.
- Plaintiffs alleged more than 150 vehicles stopped in front of or cruised by the home, frightening and humiliating the family.
- The family’s 14-year-old daughter alleged the intrusions and resulting ridicule caused her fear, humiliation, and emotional harm requiring medical attention.
- The trial court overruled demurrers to the mother’s libel and privacy claims and the father’s privacy claim, but sustained without leave to amend demurrers to the daughter’s privacy and emotional distress claims and the parents’ derivative medical-expense claims, and entered dismissal as to those causes.

## Issues

1. Whether a minor household member may state a direct claim for invasion of privacy by intrusion upon seclusion when a publication about another resident foreseeably triggers repeated physical and verbal intrusions at the home.
2. Whether the minor may state claims for intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress based on the foreseeable harassment caused by publishing a sexually explicit advertisement with a residential address.
3. Whether parents may pursue derivative claims for medical expenses incurred for their minor child when the child’s underlying tort claims are sufficiently pleaded.

## Decision

- The court reversed the judgment of dismissal as to the fifth through tenth causes of action.
- The court held the daughter adequately pleaded a direct claim for intrusion upon seclusion based on invasions of the peace and security of the home affecting her personally.
- The court held the daughter adequately pleaded intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress; dismissal at the demurrer stage was improper given the pleaded foreseeability and alleged severity of harassment.
- Because the daughter’s claims were viable, the parents’ derivative claims for the child’s medical expenses were also sufficiently stated.
- The matter was remanded for further proceedings on those causes of action.

## Legal Principles

- A plaintiff need not be the direct subject of a publication to plead intrusion upon seclusion if the defendant’s conduct foreseeably results in a substantial invasion of the plaintiff’s private affairs, including the quiet enjoyment and security of the home.
- California does not recognize a purely “relational” privacy claim based solely on injury from another person’s privacy invasion; however, a household member may recover for a direct intrusion into that household member’s own seclusion and emotional security.
- On demurrer, courts accept well-pleaded facts as true and construe allegations liberally in favor of stating a cause of action; close questions about outrageousness, intent or recklessness, and foreseeability are generally not resolved at the pleading stage.
- A minor may plead intentional infliction of emotional distress where conduct is alleged to be extreme and likely to cause severe emotional harm, and may plead negligent infliction of emotional distress where the minor is a foreseeable victim of the defendant’s conduct.
- Parents may recover medical expenses incurred for treatment of a minor child when the child has a viable underlying cause of action for the injuries alleged.

## Conclusion

The court reinstated a minor’s claims for intrusion upon seclusion and emotional distress arising from repeated harassment at the family home allegedly caused by publication of a sexually explicit advertisement containing the family address, and it reinstated the parents’ derivative claims for the child’s medical expenses.


Vescovo v. New Way Enters., Ltd., 60 Cal. App. 3d 582 (Ct. App. 1976)