CA · jury_instructions
CACI No. 1807
Affirmative Defense—Invasion of Privacy Justified
[Name of defendant] claims that even if [name of plaintiff] has proven all
of the above, [his/her/ nonbinary pronoun/its] conduct was justified. [Name
of defendant] must prove that the circumstances justified the invasion of
privacy because the invasion of privacy substantially furthered [insert
relevant legitimate or compelling competing interest].
If [name of defendant] proves that [his/her/ nonbinary pronoun/its] conduct
was justified, then you must find for [name of defendant] unless [name of
plaintiff] proves that there was a practical, effective, and less invasive
method of achieving [name of defendant]’s purpose.
New September 2003; Revised October 2008, June 2010
Provenance
- Source
- courts.ca.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-20
- Edition
- caci-2025
- Content hash
d9630082d7405a562bea3c16a9e6115e4f736f66712879c2c68a15f5659e5093
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.