Doe v. Hagar, No. 13-2156 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff filed suit against Sammy Hagar after he published an autobiography in which he alleged that plaintiff had extorted him by claiming she was pregnant with his child. The district court granted summary judgment for Hagar on all of plaintiff's claims. Applying Iowa law, the court concluded that the district court erred by granting summary judgment on the libel per se claim where Hagar's statements are defamatory as a matter of law, plaintiff has shown the existence of a fact issue regarding whether the challenged statements were "of and concerning" her, and the evidence was sufficient to submit the question of substantial truth to the jury. The court also concluded that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on the false light invasion of privacy claim where questions of fact exist as to whether the challenged statements were sufficiently publicized. The court agreed with the district court's ruling that, with respect to evidence of emotional distress, plaintiff put forth conclusory statements; the court reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment on the breach-of-contract claim where a jury must decide the ultimate issue of breach; and the district court did not err in granting summary judgment on plaintiff's claim for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing because Hagar's statement's did not deprive plaintiff of the benefits under a negotiated agreement between the parties.
Sign up for free summaries delivered directly to your inbox. Learn More › You already receive new opinion summaries from Eighth Circuit US Court of Appeals. Did you know we offer summary newsletters for even more practice areas and jurisdictions? Explore them here.
Court Description: Civil case. In action alleging Sammy Hagar libeled plaintiff in his autobiograhpy Red: My Uncensored Life in Rock, the district court erred in granting Hagar's motion for summary judgment as Hagar's statements were defamatory as a matter of law, and there were jury issues concerning whether plaintiff had satisfied the publication element of her libel per se claim and whether the challenged statements were "of and concerning her;" further, with respect to Hagar's defense that the statements were substantially true, plaintiff had produced sufficient evidence to raise a jury question on the issue; the district court also erred in granting summary judgment on plaintiff's false light invasion of privacy claim as she satisfied the "publicity" element of a false light claim and raised a jury issue as to whether the challenged statements were sufficiently publicized; district court did not err in granting Hagar summary judgment on plaintiff's intentional infliction of emotional distress claim; plaintiff raised a jury issue as to whether Hagar's comments breached the parties' confidentiality agreement, and the court erred in granting Hagar summary judgment on her breach-of-contract claim; no error in granting Hagar summary judgment on plaintiff's breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing claims.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.