Perspective
Feb. 1, 2013
Plaintiffs must show more under state call-recording law
A new decision addresses the factual circumstances plaintiffs must plead to allege that a communication was confidential. By James G. Snell and Heather Shook
On Jan. 17, in Faulkner v. ADT Security Services, Inc., 2013 DJDAR 817 (9th Cir. 2013), the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals weighed in on the pleading requirements under California's Invasion of Privacy Act, California Penal Code Section 632 regarding recording of telephone calls. As the Faulkner court noted, Section 632 makes it illegal to "intentionally and without the consent of all par...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In