UPDATE: 11th Cir. Sides with Hustler in Benoit Privacy Suit

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit last week in LFP Publishing Group d/b/a Hustler Magazine v. Maureen Toffoloni, Admin. of the Estate of Nancy E. Benoit (Docket No. 11-cv-12922) refused to reinstate a  near $20 million 2011 jury award against the adult magazine for publishing nude photos of the spouse of professional wrestler Chris Benoit, who strangled her and the couple's son in a murder-suicide in 2007 (see "TUOL" post 1/27/12).

The appellate court ruled that although Hustler wrongly published the then-24-year-old photos of former model and wrestler Nancy Benoit, its actions did not warrant the $19.6 million punitive damages (later reduced by a District Court judge to $250,000) assessed by the jury. Georgia recognizes a right of publicity/invasion of privacy action that allows a plaintiff to recover for the commercial use of his or her image without permission. Though Hustler was misguided in its belief, the appellate court found the magazine had a good-faith belief that the photos satisfied the "newsworthiness" defense to a right of publicity claim because of Nancy Benoit's violent death.

UPDATE: Nancy Benoit Heirs Ask 11th Circ. to Reinstate $20m Judgment Against Hustler Magazine

Image via WikipediaA three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit this week heard arguments from the family of the late model/pro wrestler Nancy (Toffolini) Benoit to reinstate a $20 million judgment in their invasion of privacy suit against Hustler Magazine's parent company, Larry Flynt Publishing Group LLC, which published nude photos of Benoit a year after she and her seven-year-old son were strangled by her pro wrestler husband, Chris Benoit, in a murder/suicide in June 2007.

Last June, a jury awarded Nancy Benoit's family $19.6 million in punitive damages, along with $125,000 in compensatory damages, but U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Judge Thomas Thrash, Jr. reduced the $19.6 million to $250,000, citing Georgia's statutory cap on punitive damages. (See "TUOL" post 6/20/11.) As reported by the Daily Mail online edition (www.dailymail.co.uk), Associated Press and the ABA Journal Law News Now blog, counsel for Nancy Benoit's Estate argued the adult magazine "acted...with intent to harm" the plaintiff, an exception to the statutory cap, so the $19.6 million puntive damages award should be reinstated. Counsel for the defendant argued on First Amendment grounds that the matter was wrongly tried in the first instance because the photos of Nancy Benoit were newsworthy, involving a matter of public concern, a recognized defense to invasion of privacy claims.