E-Z Rid disposes of toxic wastes. Elmo worked for E-Z. He contacted clients, negotiated contracts, and oversaw the daily operations at E-Z. The company is so busy its safety procedures are overlooked to get all the work done. Elmo knew safety lapses at E-Z (including improperly burying toxic waste) were common, but he overlooked this because he wanted the company to succeed. Elmo happy until one day he and Jo Wong, president of the E-Z, had an argument. Elmo quit and began to look for another job. Extracto, a rival of E-Z, needed someone like Elmo. He interviewed and thought he would get the job. But when Extracto got a letter describing Elmo's work, they told him they could not hire him. Jo had written a negative and partly untrue account of his work record. Elmo started his own business and contacted many of E-Z's clients. He told them that E-Z was having safety problems, that they could be financially liable for E-Z's negligence, and that Jo was unstable. Many of E-Z's customers switch to do business with Elmo. When Jo discovered what Elmo had done she was furious. She bought a one-page ad in the local paper which stated that Elmo was a careless businessman whose business was bound to be awful, and who embezzled funds from clients in the past (not true). Elmo then stormed onto E-Z's property and went into Jo's office. After calling her a no-good liar, Elmo slapped her. Jo's letter to Extracto concerning Elmo's work record was partly true and partly untrue. If Elmo sued Jo and E-Z based on the untruths, on what theory would he base his claim:
a. appropriation of likeness b. disparagement
c. defamation d. negligence
e. invasion of privacy
Quick Reply
