suing over phone recordings

[dad989]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? MD

This is a duplicate post but only because I didn't receive an answer in the last forum I was in and thought maybe I put it in the wrong spot. I'm sorry for the repeats.

According to Statute 10-402, my ex wife broke the law by recording phone conversations and posting them and text messages on youtube and myspace. She did this in October last year.
According to Statute 10-410, I have the right to sue her for $100/ day and lawyers fees.

Am I reading this correctly? And if so, what type of lawsuit is it? Civil?

I apologize if this doesn't go here. If not, will someone please point me in the right direction?

 

[dolebot]

A Summary of Maryland's Interception Laws

Are the conversations with your ex-wife?

Read the entire statute - there are LOTS of exceptions.

Section 10-402 - Maryland Courts and Judicial Proceedings - Maryland Code :: Justia



Looks to be true - as long as the interception was not with her and was not with the noted exceptions: You not only get $100/day, but your actual damages, and also the ability to get punitive damages.

§ 10-410.

(a) Any person whose wire, oral, or electronic communication is intercepted, disclosed, or used in violation of this subtitle shall have a civil cause of action against any person who intercepts, discloses, or uses, or procures any other person to intercept, disclose, or use the communications, and be entitled to recover from any person:

(1) Actual damages but not less than liquidated damages computed at the rate of $100 a day for each day of violation or $1,000, whichever is higher;

(2) Punitive damages; and

(3) A reasonable attorney's fee and other litigation costs reasonably incurred.

(b) A good faith reliance on a court order or legislative authorization shall constitute a complete defense to any civil or criminal action brought under this subtitle or under any other law.

 

[dad989]

The conversations are me and my ex but Maryland law says both parties need to know about the recording. I never knew. Also the text messages. I was told they were illegal for her to post. Is this true?

 

[dad989]

A Summary of Maryland's Interception Laws

Ok, I just looked at this. If I can't prove the recordings were illegal, can I at least prove that putting them online was illegal?

 

[dolebot]

If you read the first URL about lewinsky - you'll notice that the courts found that in order to run afoul of this statute, the communications must be "intercepted". That doesn't include being received by the intended recipient.

I can't find an actual case law to cite this that is published, but read the statute - your ex wife wasn't tapping your phone, she was talking to you, thats not covered by the statutes. Posting phone calls is not illegal under that statute unless intercepted.

Again - I am not a lawyer - just my take.

 

[johnacastro]

No Legal Basis

You're misinterpreting the statute. In order for the recording to be legal and admissable in Court, both parties have to had known the call was being recorded. That does not mean that by one party not knowing, it was illegal. The confusion seems to rest in your belief that if something is not legal, it is illegal. I'll give you an example: Filing a Motion to Compel Production of Evidence BEFORE requesting it through Discovery is not legal, but it is not illegal. It simply means I did not follow the legal process. It's tough to understand at first, by try.

In Layman's terms, 1 point for the pink team, 0 for you. She got you, that's all there is to it.