Hamberger v. Eastman

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the secret installation of a listening device in another's home is an invasion of privacy, without regard to whether it was actually utilized
• holding that placing a listening device in the plaintiffs’ marital bedroom violated their right to privacy
• declaring that “ ‘a person who unreasonably and seriously interferes with another’s interest in not having his affairs known to others ... is liable to the other’ ”
• rejecting contention that plaintiffs failed to state a claim for intrusion upon seclusion because “there are no allegations that anyone listened or overheard sounds or voices originating from plaintiffs’ bedroom”
• recognizing tort for invasion of plaintiff’s solitude or seclusion
• holding no proof of listening required

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).