Legal Opinion

Bertha Huff v. Carol Spaw

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided July 21, 2015No. 14-5123PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BOGGS, Circuit Judge.

This case requires us to consider whether a person who listens to and subsequently electronically records a conversation from an inadvertent “pocket-dial” call 1 violates Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Street Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. § 2510 et seq. (Title III). James Huff inadvertently placed a pocket-dial call to Carol Spaw while he was on a business trip in Italy. Spaw stayed on the line for 91 minutes and listened to face-to-face conversations that James Huff had with Larry Savage, James’s colleague, and with Bertha Huff, James’s wife. Spaw…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Kyllo v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  5. Minnesota v. OlsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1990

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. In the Matter of the Application of the State of NewNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2017
  2. Brodrick Michael James v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2016
  3. In re Search Warrant Issued to Google, Inc.District Court, N.D. Alabama · 2017
  4. State v. NettlesOhio Court of Appeals · 2018
  5. Brodrick Michael James v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2015

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API