Portrait Painter and Ass's Ears

Clara pegg

unread,

Mar 5, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/5/98

to

The customer of a portrait painter hires him to do his likeness in oil.
It is done and the customer comes to inspect it. He is disappointed in the
work and refuses to pay and take delivery.
The painter puts ass's ears on the likeness and sets it out in front of
his shop for passersby to see.
Can this be called defamation or libel and why? >Clara Peggotty<

Daniel R. Reitman

unread,

Mar 6, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/6/98

to

It implies that the customer is an ass. It may also be a reference to
the King Midas legend. Even if not sufficiently defamatory to allow
for relief, I can also see a privacy claim for appropriation and
possibly false light.

Daniel Reitman

Hilary B. Miller, Esq.

unread,

Mar 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/10/98

to

On 5 Mar 1998 13:07:23 -0500, clar...@aol.com (Clara pegg) wrote:

> The customer of a portrait painter hires him to do his likeness in oil.
>It is done and the customer comes to inspect it. He is disappointed in the
>work and refuses to pay and take delivery.
> The painter puts ass's ears on the likeness and sets it out in front of
>his shop for passersby to see.

Clara, in addition to the possibility of defamation (claims about
which I am not particularly sanguine), these acts may constitute a
so-called "prima facie tort." Essentially, the painter is holding the
customer up to scorn or ridicule -- which he may or may not deserve --
for the sole purpose of attempting to extort the price of the painting
from the customer.
** Hilary **

* le...@compuserve.com *
* Law offices of Hilary B. Miller, Esq. *
* 112 Parsonage Road *
* Greenwich, Connecticut 06830-3942 *
* (203) 861-6262 Voice *
* (203) 622-6264 Fax *

evans-the-swim

unread,

Mar 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/12/98

to

On 10 Mar 1998 10:29:38 -0500, le...@compuserve.com (Hilary B. Miller,

Esq.) wrote:
>On 5 Mar 1998 13:07:23 -0500, clar...@aol.com (Clara pegg) wrote:
>
>> The customer of a portrait painter hires him to do his likeness in oil.
>>It is done and the customer comes to inspect it. He is disappointed in the
>>work and refuses to pay and take delivery.
>> The painter puts ass's ears on the likeness and sets it out in front of
>>his shop for passersby to see.
>
>Clara, in addition to the possibility of defamation (claims about
>which I am not particularly sanguine), these acts may constitute a
>so-called "prima facie tort." Essentially, the painter is holding the
>customer up to scorn or ridicule -- which he may or may not deserve --
>for the sole purpose of attempting to extort the price of the painting
>from the customer.

I love hypotheticals.

What if the painter also owns a gallery with exhibition space; and a
third party buys the painting, which he (new owner) displays in the
painter/gallery-owner's front window on main street?

Daniel R. Reitman

unread,

Mar 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/12/98

to

On 10 Mar 1998 10:29:38 -0500, le...@compuserve.com (Hilary B. Miller,
Esq.) wrote:

>Clara, in addition to the possibility of defamation (claims about
>which I am not particularly sanguine), these acts may constitute a
>so-called "prima facie tort." Essentially, the painter is holding the
>customer up to scorn or ridicule -- which he may or may not deserve --
>for the sole purpose of attempting to extort the price of the painting
>from the customer.

Of course, not all states recognize prima facie tort. Oregon, for
example, has expressly rejected it.

Daniel Reitman