Flanagan v. Flanagan
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KENNARD, J.
California prohibits the recording of a telephone call without consent from all parties, but only if the call includes a “confidential communication.” (Pen. Code, § 632, subd. (a).) Violation of the law is a misdemeanor (ibid.) and may entail a civil penalty of $5,000 or three times the actual damages, whichever is greater (§ 637.2). Our Courts of Appeal have disagreed over the meaning of the critical term “confidential communication.” We granted review to resolve that disagreement.
One line of authority holds that a conversation is confidential if a party to that…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hale v. MorganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- People v. Western Air Lines, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1954
- Ribas v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- Shulman v. Group W Productions, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1998
- Quintal v. Laurel Grove HospitalCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by95 opinions
- John Faulkner v. Adt Security Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Hassan v. Mercy American River HospitalCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2006
- City of San Jose v. Superior Court of Santa Clara Cnty.California Supreme Court · 2017
- Fassberg Construction Co. v. Housing AuthorityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
90 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.