A Register Guard photographer photographed a visitor at the opening of an alcohol treatment facility. In the photo it appeared as if the plaintiff, who was visiting the facility and was not a patient, was in the aversion therapy treatment room. The plaintiff was known to have an alcohol problem, but was not in treatment or recovery. He claimed false light, arguing that the photo left the impression that he was in treatment for alcoholism.

1. The court adopted the Restatement False light analysis.

2. The trial court had issues a directed verdict for the newspaper saying that as matter of law the photo could not be highly offensive to a reasonable person. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the case saying the the false impression question and the public perception of alcoholism (i.e., the highly offensive standard) were questions for the jury to determine.

3. The court noted but did not address the uncertain state of the public/private status of the plaintiff question in false light cases.

THE CASE WAS SETTLED IN 1988.