Hustler magazine owes the family of a professional wrestler’s deceased wife damages for publishing nude photographs of her, a federal judge in Atlanta ruled Wednesday.
The magazine had claimed that the photographs of Nancy Benoit, who was killed by her husband, WWE wrestler Chris Benoit, were newsworthy.
But U.S. District Judge Thomas W. Thrash Jr. rejected that claim saying there is “no question” that the woman’s family suffered damages and the photographs were purely for the magazine’s profit, according to an order obtained by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
“No reasonable juror could conclude that [Larry Flynt Publishing] did not publish the photographs and the article for financial gain,” Thrash wrote. “The evidence shows that LFP made significant profits off the March 2008 issue and that the reaction to the Benoit photographs was ‘huge and overwhelmingly positive.’ ”
The family of Nancy Benoit, who lived in Fayette County, filed a federal suit against Larry Flynt Publishing Group in 2008 after Hustler published the photographs.
“The family is ecstatic about the ruling,” the family’s attorney, Richard Decker, told the AJC on Wednesday. “It’s what we thought should be the case. Hustler said it was a jury case, but the judge said no. Now, the only issue is how much the damages will be.”
A jury trial will be held to determine the damages, but no date has been set.
Hustler spokeswoman Julie Messing declined to comment.
Chris Benoit killed his wife and the couple’s 7-year-old son, Daniel, at the family’s Fayette home in June 2007 before committing suicide. An autopsy showed she died of asphyxiation.
In March 2008, Hustler published photographs of Nancy Benoit showing frontal nudity and other suggestive poses, Decker said.
Nancy Benoit, who was known by her wrestling names of “Woman” and “Fallen Angel,” had posed for the photographs in 1983, before she married the wrestler. At the time, she was an aspiring model, according to the lawsuit.
Nancy Benoit's mother and the administrator of her estate, Maureen Toffoloni, said that shortly after the photo shoot, the photographer promised to destroy the photos.
In October 2008, a judge threw out the family’s suit and sided with Hustler, arguing that the photographs were newsworthy. The family appealed, and the decision was reversed.
The court ruled that the magazine violated the woman’s privacy by not seeking permission from her estate.
On Wednesday, the judge also rejected testimony from financial experts as to the extent of the damages and the value of the photographs, saying that is a question for the jury.
