Picture This: O.J. in Tale of Trick or Treat

Seagal droppings . . . Wilt’s IOU . . . When ‘as if’ means ‘I do.’

Talk about trick or treat. Three people who appeared in pictures published in the Globe of a Halloween party attended by O.J. Simpson have filed an invasion-of-privacy suit against the supermarket tabloid and a man they say stole their party snapshots and sold them for profit.

The suit includes a nifty cause of action we’re not familiar with. But we like the way it sounds: “Public disclosure of true but embarrassing private facts.”

Michael Mata, Carlye Streco and Richard Paolini, all of Los Angeles, charge in the Superior Court suit that they attended the party at a private home last year. When they took pictures of each other, The Juice was on the loose and in the background.

A man named Clark Swanson, who also is named as a defendant, noticed the pictures during a Nov. 25 visit to Mata and Streco’s home. Three days later, he returned with another man, “created a distraction” and swiped the snapshots, according to the suit.

The pictures, accompanied by an allegedly “fabricated” story, appeared in the Dec. 14, 1999, issue of the Globe. The plaintiffs took special exception to this passage: “While some party-goers posed for pics, most avoided the fallen football star like a bad joke. They were not amused by the realization that O.J., 52 . . . was thumbing his nose at officers and flaunting his freedom. ‘He should have come dressed as a Pokemon creature,’ quipped one guest, ‘at least he could have been what he is: a cartoon monster!’ ”

“No legitimate public concern is served by revealing these facts and by identifying plaintiffs,” the suit says, or by “publishing plaintiffs’ images in the offending magazine.” No immediate comment from tabloidland.

NO ACTION: Three men who say they were partners in a deal to produce a Steven Seagal album and documentary to sell in Japan sued the film action hero in Los Angeles Superior Court, claiming he backed out of the deal and left them holding the bag.

Michael Vanderhoof, Michael Khaled and Donald Danks charge in court papers that they’re out $600,000 and have nothing to show for it. The partners say Seagal never intended to hold up his end of the deal.

Seagal said through his publicist that the charges in the complaint are “false and malicious” and “have no merit.” He added that he’d love to finish the album, but the plaintiffs won’t give him the master recordings.

The suit charges that Seagal told the plaintiffs he could finish the album in 30 to 45 days if they’d invest. At a later meeting, he asked for another $150,000 and promised that the album would make millions.

“In every such meeting, Seagal sought to instill confidence in plaintiffs by referring to them as his ‘brothers,’ ” the lawsuit states. Seagal also allegedly vowed that “he was a person of great integrity and that they could all take his word.”

PROMISES, PROMISES: A man named Leonard Bloom sued the estate of the late great hoops star Wilt Chamberlain, claiming he’s owed about $812,000 (plus interest) from a promissory note he says Chamberlain signed in 1973.

Bloom’s Los Angeles Superior Court suit doesn’t say why Chamberlain signed the note so many years ago. A creditor’s claim was rejected in August, court papers say, but Bloom did receive a partial payment of $170,000.

Chamberlain’s executor, Seymour S. Goldberg, also was named as a defendant. He could not be reached. Chamberlain, the only man to score 100 points in an NBA game, died at home in his sleep a year ago this week at age 63.

REBUTTALS: Only in Hollywood can “as if” mean “I do.”

Charles Wake is the attorney who filed Holly Holmberg Brooks’ complaint for $100 million against producer James L. Brooks for breach of contract and other claims based on the couple’s cohabitation, “as if they were husband and wife.”

He now advises The Times that Holly married James in 1978 and that they have been married continuously since that time. We stand as if corrected.