Carmie Watkins v. L.M. Berry & Company
704 F.2d 577, 1983 U.S. App. LEXIS 28362 (1983)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under the federal wiretapping statute, an employer may monitor an employee's personal phone call on a business extension only to the extent necessary to determine the call is personal, after which the employer must cease listening. Consent to the monitoring of business calls does not constitute consent for an employer to listen to the contents of personal calls.
Facts:
- Carmie Watkins was a sales representative for L.M. Berry & Company (Berry Co.).
- Berry Co. had a policy, known to employees, of monitoring sales calls for training purposes using an extension telephone.
- The company's policy stated that personal calls would not be monitored, except for the limited purpose of determining whether a call was business or personal.
- Employees, including Watkins, were permitted to make and receive personal calls on company telephones.
- During her lunch hour, Watkins received a call at her office from a personal friend.
- In the course of the conversation, Watkins told her friend about a recent job interview she had with another company, Lipton.
- Watkins's supervisor, Martha Little, was monitoring the call from her office and overheard the discussion about the Lipton interview.
Procedural Posture:
- Carmie Watkins filed a lawsuit in federal district court against her employer, L.M. Berry & Company, her supervisors, and South Central Bell.
- Watkins's complaint alleged violations of Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 and the Communications Act of 1934.
- The district court granted summary judgment for South Central Bell and dismissed the Communications Act claim.
- The district court then granted summary judgment against Watkins on her remaining Title III claim in favor of Berry Co. and its supervisors.
- Watkins, as the appellant, appealed the district court's grant of summary judgment on the Title III claim to the U.S. Court of Appeals.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does an employer's interception of an employee's personal telephone call, after the employer has determined the call is personal, violate the federal wiretapping statute when the employee has consented only to the monitoring of business calls?
Opinions:
Majority - Edward S. Smith, Circuit Judge
Yes, an employer's continued interception of a personal call after its nature has been determined violates the federal wiretapping statute. Neither the consent exception nor the business extension exception applies to the full interception of a personal call's contents. Watkins's consent to a policy of monitoring business calls was limited and did not extend to the contents of her personal calls; consent is not an 'all or nothing' proposition. The business extension exception, which permits interception 'in the ordinary course of business,' does not cover listening to the contents of a personal call. An employer's interest in the subject matter of a conversation does not transform a personal call into a business one. Therefore, an employer may listen only long enough to determine a call's nature and must cease interception immediately upon discovering it is personal.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies the scope of the consent and business extension exceptions to the federal wiretapping statute in the employment context. It establishes that an employee's knowledge of a general monitoring policy for business calls does not equate to blanket consent for the interception of personal calls. By holding that the 'ordinary course of business' exception does not permit listening to the contents of personal calls, the court imposes a de facto minimization requirement on private employers, obligating them to cease listening once a call is identified as personal. This ruling strengthens employee privacy rights and sets a clear boundary for corporate monitoring practices.
