Connection lost
Server error
ARRINGTON v. NY TIMES CO. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A man’s photo was used without consent on a magazine cover for an article on the “black middle class.” The court dismissed the privacy claim against the publisher due to newsworthiness but allowed it against the photographer who sold the image for commercial gain.
Legal Significance: This case reinforces that New York’s statutory right to privacy does not apply to newsworthy publications but holds that photographers and agencies can be liable for the separate commercial act of selling a person’s likeness without consent, even if the ultimate use is newsworthy.
ARRINGTON v. NY TIMES CO. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiff Clarence Arrington, a financial analyst, was photographed on a New York City street without his knowledge or consent. The photographer, Gianfranco Gorgoni, sold the photograph through his agency, Contact Press Images, Inc., to The New York Times Company. The Times published the photo prominently on the cover of its Sunday Magazine to illustrate a feature article entitled “The Black Middle Class: Making It.” The article discussed the social and economic status of this demographic, presenting views that Arrington did not share and found disparaging. Arrington was not named in the article, but his image was used as its primary visual representation. He sued the Times, the photographer, and the agency, alleging a violation of his statutory right of privacy under New York Civil Rights Law §§ 50 and 51, which prohibits the nonconsensual use of a person’s likeness for “advertising purposes, or for the purposes of trade.”
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the nonconsensual use of a person’s photograph by a news publisher to illustrate a newsworthy article, or the prior sale of that photograph by a photographer, constitute a violation of the statutory right of privacy for “purposes of trade” under New York Civil Rights Law §§ 50 and 51?
No as to the publisher, but potentially yes as to the photographer Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat c
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does the nonconsensual use of a person’s photograph by a news publisher to illustrate a newsworthy article, or the prior sale of that photograph by a photographer, constitute a violation of the statutory right of privacy for “purposes of trade” under New York Civil Rights Law §§ 50 and 51?
Conclusion
This case solidifies the broad scope of the newsworthiness exception for publishers Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris n
Legal Rule
Under New York Civil Rights Law §§ 50 and 51, a picture Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do
Legal Analysis
The court began its analysis by confirming that New York does not Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequa
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- NY does not recognize a common-law right to privacy; the only