WPC8 B!RTC2$ͷ0M@Z/:d>لzР=ů5W(y>$J;&(Vb15*'UAd{+\E x GK3w1Sbf;BQSdz]cЪt'D3_]u믿=4&1H FK蜶1b[)9N)+0(q{%x+Q mᗌXٰY8[jrI(Xd enRȹTuI!u|vTWFPhjX_-z48WCTӏ:Fp XXofTs>{%8Vrkrô|o Zq"8ES'fX|Rb#\ % U># 0a UN ^ 7 wC zG  4   m   [ !N 0DUNE++++++++++++++++++++++++b------------------------------------ 05555 B   0= D3 D- 0KAA AS 0 0DI AHP LaserJet 8000 Series PS0\  `&Times New Roman(`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular{)  C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptUUb)0ӡ3|xULevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5  R$      1     _ThedateofbirthinformationwascriticalinthedecisionoftheKingsportpolicetocometothemotel.This  isbecauseoftheabsolutelyimprobablecoincidencethatthe DavidRobertswantedinFloridahasthesamedateof t birthastheplaintiff.(#$  0  (I Z6Times New Roman Regular- -(|G2$ !.8Nd d 8         0  6  d(|3 $ !.8Nd d 8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3 $ !.8Nd d 8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8Utd d8     _  A8;XXdd 8  @ AINTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE#A #Ԉ &   October5,2000Session L XUXA #AXXU#DAVIDROBERTSv.ESSEX_MICROTEL_ԀASSOCIATES,II,L.P.d/b/a J _MICROTEL_ԄKINGSPORT,etal.XUXA   ^ @@ AppealfromtheCircuitCourtforSullivanCounty  ^ @@No.C32311RichardE.Ladd,Chancellor  J FILEDNOVEMBER27,2000 "  @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E2000_COA_ԄR3CV   AV) ` dE<` A          #AXU#XUX.ACharlesD.Susano,Jr.,J.,concurringinpartanddissentinginpart. x   Iagreewiththemajoritythatthefactsbeforeusevenwhenviewedmostfavorablytothe (x plaintiffdonotmakeoutacauseofactionforthetortoffalseimprisonment.Icannotagree, d however,withthemajoritysconclusionthatthefactsfavorabletotheplaintiffdonotmakeouta P caseofinvasionofprivacy. <   Ibelievethedeskclerkscommunicationtothepoliceofdatafromtheplaintiffsdrivers  license,particularlyasitturnedout #  1      ׀hisdateofbirth,constitutedanunlawfulinvasionofhis  privacyinviolationofRestatement(Second)ofTorts652B(1977).Judge_Swiney_Ԁreliesupon  commentcto652B#AXXUx#XUXAԀwhichstatesthat thereisno#AXXU #XUXAliabilityfortheexaminationofapublicrecord  concerningtheplaintiff,orofdocumentsthattheplaintiffisrequiredtokeepandmakeavailablefor t  publicinspection. Id .WhileIrecognizethatacitizenisrequiredunderappropriatecircumstances `!  toexhibithisdriverslicensetocertainpublicofficersorofficials,thisdoesnotmeanthatheis L"!  requiredtokeepandmake[it]availabletoaprivateindividual.Ialsorecognizethatindividuals 8#" oftenmaketheirdriverslicensesavailabletoprivateindividualsforidentificationpurposes,such $$t# aswhencashingacheck;butthisdoesnotmeanthattheyare requiredtodoso.Ifindnosupport %` $ forthemajoritysopinionincommentcto#AXXU) #XUXAԀ652B. %L!%   Themajorityalsoreliesuponthefactthattheplaintiff willinglyprovidedhisdrivers '$#' licensetothedeskclerk.Thebetterreasonedcasesaddressingthisaspectofa#AXXU #XUXAԀ652Bclaimindicate ($( thatthefacttheplaintiffgavethedeskclerkhisdriverslicenseisnotadefensetotheplaintiffs )$) _causeofaction.XUXXXU Therightofprivacymaybewaived8foronepurposeandstillbeassertedfor  another.62AAm.Jur.2dPrivacy,183(citing Donahuev.WarnerBros.Pictures,Inc., 194F.2d  6,13(10thCir.1952)( Therightmaybewaivedcompletelyoronlyinpart.Itmaybewaivedfor  onepurpose,andstillbeassertedforanother.Buttheexistenceofthewaivercarrieswithittheright t toinvadetherightofprivacyoftheindividualonlytotheextentlegitimatelynecessaryandproper ` indealingwiththematterwhichgaverisetothewaiver.); Pavesichv.NewEnglandLifeIns.Co ., L  50S.E.68,72(Ga.1905)( [T]heexistenceofthewaivercarrieswithittherighttoaninvasionof 8  privacyonlytosuchanextentasmaybelegitimatelynecessaryandproperindealingwiththematter $ t whichhasbroughtaboutthewaiver.Itmaybewaivedforonepurpose,andstillassertedforanother;  ` itmaybewaivedinbehalfofoneclass,andretainedasagainstanotherclass;itmaybewaivedas  L  tooneindividual,andretainedasagainstallotherpersons.); Smithv.WGN,Inc .197N.E.2d482  8  (Ill.App.Ct.1964)(quoting Pavesich andthenholdingthat [t]hescopeoftheconsent,thenisafact $  determinationwhichhasnotbeenmadeinthiscase.)). Consentmaybeassertedasadefenseonly   whereithasnotbeenexceeded;consentwhichhasbeenexceededisnotadefense.62AAm.Jur.   Privacy,219(citing ContinentalOpticalCo.v.Reed ,86N.E.2d306,309(Ind.Ct.App.1949)( In   anyeventawaiveroftherightjustifiesaninvasionofprivacyonlytotheextentwarrantedbythe   circumstanceswhichbroughtaboutthewaiver.); Faberv.Condecor,Inc .,477A.2d1289,1294 p (N.J.Super.Ct.App.Div.1984)( Iftheactualinvasiongoesbeyondthecontract,8thereis \ liability.); Dzurenkov.Jordache,Inc .,451N.E.2d477,478(N.Y.1983)( [A]defendants H immunityfromaclaimforinvasionofprivacyisnobroaderthantheconsentexecutedtohim.)). 4   Asfurthersupportforitsdecision,themajorityopinionreliesupontheunreportedopinion  \ ofthisCourtinthecaseof Maysv.Freds,Inc. ,C/ANo.W199902189COAR3CV,2000WL H 53082(Tenn.Ct.App.W.S.,filedJanuary10,2000).Idonotfindthe Mays decisioncontrolling. 4 Whileboth Mays andtheinstantcaseinvolveacommunicationofinformationtothepolice,those   decisionsareverydifferentwhenviewedinthecontextofthesourceoftheinformation   communicated.Intheinstantcase,thedeskclerkcommunicatedinformationfromadocumentthat  wasgiventotheclerkbytheplaintiffforalimitedpurpose.In Mays ,thestoremanagercontacted  thepolicebecauseofobservationsmadebyanemployeeofthedefendantstore.Thecruxofthe  unlawfulconductintheinstantcasetheinvasionofprivacyisnotthecommunicationtothe l policeperse;rather,itistheinformationthatwassubmittedtothepoliceand,moreimportantly,the X  mannerinwhichandthecircumstancesunderwhichthatinformationwasobtainedbythedeskclerk. D!   Intheinstantcase,thedeskclerkcommunicatedtheplaintiffsdateofbirthtothepolice,a #l! communicationthatultimatelyandinexorablyledtoaseriesofeventsthatculminatedintheplaintiff $X" beingtakenintocustody.Theclerkgotthisinformationfromtheplaintiffsdriverslicense,a $D # documentthatwashandedtoherforalimitedpurpose.Hegavehislicensetotheclerkas %0!$ identificationtoherandonlyinconnectionwithhisstayatthemotel.Bydoingso,hedidnot &"% authorizeher,expresslyorbyimplication,tocommunicateanyinformationonthatlicense,including '#& hisdateofbirth,toanyoneoutsidethemanagementofthemotel.Whenshedidso,Ibelievesheran (#' afouloftheprescriptionof652B. )$(   |*%)   Finally,Ibelieveitgoeswithoutsayingthatareasonablepersonwouldbeoffendedifahotel   clerk,totallywithoutcauseorjustification,phonedthepoliceandgavetheminformationaboutthat  person,informationthathadbeencopiedfromadriverslicensegiventotheclerkforalimited  purpose. t   Atravelerseekslodgingwithaneyetowardsagoodnightsrest.Toaccomplishthis,heor L  shesecuresamotelroom,hopingtosleepinacomfortablebedwithcleansheets.Ataminimum, 8  thetravelerseeksasafe,clean,bugfreeenvironment.Onedoesnotpayforamotelroomsoat $ t thebehestofthemotelsclerkthetravelercanbevisitedbymembersofthelocalconstabulary,  ` handcuffed,paradeddownthehallandoutthelobbyofthisplaceofsupposedpeaceandrest,and  L  driventothelocalpolicestationforquestioning.Iftheplaintiffistobebelievedandhemustbe  8  believedatthisjunctureoftheproceedingsthedefendantsclerkhadabsolutelynobasisfor $  placingacalltothe911operator,acallthatsetinmotionaseriesofeventsthatturnedtheplaintiffs   quieteveningintoanightmarishexperience.IampersonallyoutragedbywhatIfindtobean   invasionoftheplaintiffscommonlawrightofprivacy.     Accordingly,Iconcurinpartanddissentinpart.Iwouldremandforatrialontheissueof p theallegedviolationoftheplaintiffsrightofprivacy. \ #XUXXXU##AXXU#XUXA   `     h     ____________________________________ H    `     h     CHARLESD.SUSANO,JR.,JUDGE 4 I#AXXUd*#