Elliott Riches

Eimann v. Soldier of Fortune

Facts: Soldier of Fortune ran an ad that later led to a man being hired to commit murder. The family of
he victim sued the magazine saying that they breached a duty of care in publishing an ad that could
reasonable lead to criminal activity. The magazine had 7 ads out of 2000 shown to lead to criminal
activity at the time. Further the magazine was a mercenary and gun for hire magazine.
Issue: Did soldier of fortune owe a duty to investigate ads that may lead to criminal activity
Holding: No they did not
Reasoning: the court held that It would be an unreasonable burden for Solider of Fortune to investigate
every ad that was placed in it. The advertisement in question had language which the court said to be at
the most vague and ambiguous. The court further said that therefore soldier of fortune had no duty
towards the victim to investigate and thus could not breach any duty.