Pachowitz v. Ledoux: A Case on Invasion of Privacy and Attorney Fees

This article discusses the case of Pachowitz v. Ledoux, where the court had to decide on invasion of privacy and attorney fees. The court found that Ledoux had invaded Pachowitz's right to privacy and awarded attorney fees. The article also explains the court's rationale and the concept of reasonableness and fairness.

Running Head: Pachowitz v. Ledoux
Healthcare Law
Student’s Name
Name of Institution

Pachowitz v. Ledoux 2
I have selected the decision in Pachowitz v. Ledoux for this task. The full citation of the case is
(Pachowitz v. Ledoux, 2003 WL 21221823 (Wis.App. May 28, 2003)
Questions:
1. Information on the identity of the opinion court can be obtained from the citation of the
case. From the citation, the court is indicated as Court of Appeal of Wisconsin.
2. The issues to be decided by the opinion court include:
a) Whether there was invasion of privacy according to Wis. Stat. § 895.50 when
LeDoux disclosed Pachowit’z private information;
b) Whether there was reckless or unreasonable conduct on the part of LeDoux when
he disclosed Pachowit’z private information; and
c) Whether Pachowit’z was entitled to attorney fees.
3. Decision of the Court below
The trial court had denied the appellant’s action to change the jury’s answer and
proceeded to set Pachowit’z reasonable attorney fees at 30,460. The trial court further
rejected LeDoux’s offer for judgment but held that Pachowit’s offer of settlement was
valid (Crawford & Schultz, 2014, p. 32). Consequently, the trial court awarded Pachowit
compensatory damages for breach of privacy amounting to 3000 and $ 30,460 as attorney
fees.
4. Decision of the Opinion Court
The opinion court held that LeDoux had invaded Pachowitz’s right to privacy under Wis.
Stat. § 895.50, held that Pachowitz attorney fees of $30,460 was reasonable. That
LeDoux offer of judgment was invalid. The court also found and held that Pachowitz
offer for settlement was invalid. The court remanded the case with directions that the
court below enters judgment that is consistent with the observations and opinion of the
Appellate court (Solove & Schwartz, 2014, p. 12).

Pachowitz v. Ledoux 3
5. Rationale behind the Opinion Court’s Decision
a) The opinion court found that there was invasion on the right of privacy because
Pachowitz had a special and close relationship with he co-workers and as a result,
such disclosure could lead to embarrassment as it was made recklessly.
b) The attorney fees were reasonable because the issue in this case was fairly novel
and therefore required time and labor to prepare it for trial.
c) LeDoux’s offer for judgment did not factor in an allowance for Pachowitz’s
attorney fees and therefore invalid.
d) Pachowitz’s offer for settlement was invalid since it was made to numerous
defendants who had diverse interests.
6. Concept of reasonableness and fairness
The concept of reasonableness is used to determine and weigh whether a decision taken
on a particular matter is appropriate in the circumstances. Fairness relates to the manner in which
the decision was taken, it is procedural and considers whether all the parties positions were
considered and weighed against the law before arriving at a decision. In this case therefore, the
principle of reasonableness and fairness apply; both parties were given opportunity to be heard,
they made proposals that have been considered and weighed against the existing and applicable
law (Weisfeld, 2011, p. 22). Therefore, the decision of the opinion court satisfies the principle of
reasonableness and fairness in the circumstances.
7. From the summaries read this week, I have obtained better information and
understanding. The summaries contained all the facts and reasoning of the courts as well
as the history of the matter before the court for determination. All the required
information was available and presented in a manner that is easier to understand and
follow.

Pachowitz v. Ledoux 4
References
Crawford, K., & Schultz, J. (2014) Big data and due process: Toward a framework to redress
predictive privacy harms. BCL Rev., 55, 93
Solove, D. J., & Schwartz, P. (2014). Information privacy law Wolters Kluwer Law & Business
Weisfeld, V. D. (2011) Jonas and kovner's health care delivery in the United States. Springer
Publishing Company
Case
Pachowitz v. Ledoux, 2003 WL 21221823 (Wis. App. May 28, 2003)