The Law of Privacy . . .
            Warren Spahn, Pitcher, Milwaukee Braves

       In the case of Hall-of-Fame pitcher Warren Spahn, an author fabricated substantial segments of a book that he passed off as a biography of Spahn's life. The writer portrayed Spahn as the recipient of a Bronze Star for valor during his military service in World War II. In fact, Spahn, though injured during the war, was not awarded the Bronze Star. The biographer reported that Spahn "raced out into the teeth of the enemy barrage." By his own admission, Spahn did no such thing. The book reported that Spahn's father taught him to pitch and that his father provided advice to Spahn before he signed his first professional contract. Neither statement was true. Among other errors, the book inaccurately depicted Spahn's relationship with baseball figures Casey Stengel, Jackie Robinson and Lew Burdette. Spahn sued both the publisher and author for humiliation and mental anguish. He did not want friends and acquaintances to think that he had embellished his war record. Spahn also wanted to correct the notion that a close father-son relationship was a necessary ingredient for a successful career in baseball. As he did so often on the mound, Spahn prevailed in court. The judicial decision made it clear that if the biography had been accurate, there would have been no infringement of law. The court stated that if the affairs of an individual fall within the category of current news or information in which the community has a legitimate interest, the right of privacy must yield. Therefore, an individual's right to privacy does not apply to articles which, though not strictly news, are informative and educational and which make use of the names or pictures of living persons. When the information being reported falls outside the bounds of legitimate news or information, however, the privilege of reporting on a public figure ceases. The Spahn court found numerous "factual errors, distortions and fanciful passages" in the purported biography. The court concluded that both the writer and the publisher had shown a careless disregard for the responsibility of the press and ordered them to pay Spahn $10,000 in damages. Reference: Spahn v. Julian Messner, Inc., 250 N.Y.S.2d 529 (1964).