Hood v. Naeter Brothers Publishing Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
562 S.W.2d 770 (1978)
- Written by Brian Meadors, JD
Facts
Hood (plaintiff) worked in a liquor store. The store was robbed, and one of Hood’s coworkers was killed. Hood was a witness. The robbers were not caught. The next day, the police department released a press report identifying Hood as a witness and disclosing Hood’s address. The newspaper run by Naeter Brothers Publishing Co. (Naeter) (defendant), ran a front-page article identifying Hood as a witness and printed Hood’s address. Hood’s address and number were unlisted in the local telephone directory. Hood became fearful that Naeter’s disclosure of Hood’s unlisted address and the fact that Hood was a witness would expose Hood to danger from the robbers. Hood suffered constant fear and had to change his residence. Hood sued Naeter, alleging that Naeter had committed the tort of outrage. The trial court ruled against Hood on summary judgment. Hood appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Clemens, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
