Legal Opinion
Perfit v. Perfit
District Court, C.D. California
Decided August 25, 1988No. CV 83-7916 AHSPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION ON ORDER GRANTING DIRECTED VERDICT IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT
STOTLER, District Judge.
Plaintiff June E. Perfit brought this action seeking damages under Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968,18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2520, on the basis of defendant Martin J. Perfit’s installation of a recording device on a telephone in the marital home. A jury trial commenced on May 24, 1988. At the conclusion of plaintiff’s case completed by an offer of proof, the Court granted a directed verdict in favor of defendant for the reasons set forth below.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Plain…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Solomon Lew v. Stanton Moss and Harlean MossCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Best v. District of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- United States v. William Allan JonesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1976
- Beverly Camp Simpson v. John G. Simpson, IIICourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1974
- Anonymous v. AnonymousCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1977
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Catherine A. Heggy v. T.L. HeggyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- People v. OttoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- Commonwealth v. VieuxMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1996
- Abbott v. Village of Winthrop HarborDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1996
- M.G. v. J.C.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1991
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.