Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Derek Haskell v. Stauffer Communications, Inc.
Date: 10-08-1999
Case Number: 80,079
Judge: Van Hampton
Court: District Court, Ford County, Kansas
Plaintiff's Attorney: Scott G. Hattrup, Overland Park, Kansas
Defendant's Attorney: Michael W. Merriam of Gehrt & Roberts, Chartered, Topeka, Kansas
the headline, "WANTED - Recent poster evokes memories of town's
Wild West era." The article reported the appearance within Dodge
City of posters resembling old-fashioned "Wanted" notices, which
bore a photograph of Haskell. The text of the poster revealed his
penchant for carrying unconcealed weapons in public, suggested he
should be incarcerated or committed, listed various news articles
and law enforcement agencies to which one could refer for more
information, and suggested a reward.
The news article included a picture of the poster. The news
article clarified that Haskell was not wanted by law enforcement
and that carrying unconcealed weapons is legal. It included
statements from the Dodge City police chief discussing Haskell's
legal but frightening behavior and mentioning the context of the
Dodge City wild west image.
On August 31, 1995, Haskell sued Ted Harbin, the reporter;
Stauffer Communications, Inc., owner of the Dodge City Daily
Globe; and John Doe and Richard Roe for defamation, outrage, and
infringement of his constitutional right to bear arms. John Doe
and Richard Roe are defendants whose names are unknown by Haskell.
They are charged with printing, publishing, and displaying the
posters. Later, Haskell amended the petition to include an
invasion of privacy claim.
awarded Haskell $2,500 on a misappropriation of name or likeness
claim, one of the four bases for invasion of privacy recovery
enumerated in PIK Civ. 2d 14.61.
About This Case
What was the outcome of Derek Haskell v. Stauffer Communications, Inc.?
The outcome was: Following a May 1997 trial, a jury awarded Haskell $2,500 on a misappropriation of name or likeness claim, one of the four bases for invasion of privacy recovery enumerated in PIK Civ. 2d 14.61.
Which court heard Derek Haskell v. Stauffer Communications, Inc.?
This case was heard in District Court, Ford County, Kansas, KS. The presiding judge was Van Hampton.
Who were the attorneys in Derek Haskell v. Stauffer Communications, Inc.?
Plaintiff's attorney: Scott G. Hattrup, Overland Park, Kansas. Defendant's attorney: Michael W. Merriam of Gehrt & Roberts, Chartered, Topeka, Kansas.
When was Derek Haskell v. Stauffer Communications, Inc. decided?
This case was decided on October 8, 1999.