Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Posted: 10/27/2010 7:07:14 PM EST
I put this in the Legal section, but no response, so I'll try here.

To my understanding, MN is a one party consent, meaning that in order to voice record a consversation, one person must consent to the recording. That can be the one doing the recording, without disclosing it to the other. Recording is not legal if the purpose is criminal or used for tortious intent. Or if there is an expectation of privacy issue, which I think applies to stuff like planted devices, video camera pointed at a hotel room window,etc.

The Criminal part I get(bribery, etc). Tortious Intent has me confused. Can I get some examples of a Tortious Intent scenario?

My landlord sometimes voice records conversations in his office with tenant(mostly the problem ones) to cover his ass if anything is said against him.

Can the Landlord use the recording if the tenant admits doing something against policy or lying about something(claiming income.etc) and use that to infraction them?

There was a situation where one tenant found out about the recorder and her lawyer said that he wanted the recorder and it was illegal to record without consent. Landlord ended up smashing the tape thinking he was in the wrong.

When he told me this, I thought B.S. Being in his office I didn't see an expectation of privacy and the Landlord was a party to the conversation, and nothing criminal that I see.

Any thoughts?
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 8:18:33 PM EST
[#1]
My law degree is safely stored next to my unicorn and a democrat with fiscal responsibility so I am confident giving you legal advice.  In his office, it is his call assuming he is party to all the conversations recorded.  Anytime a salesman in a car dealership walks away from their desk and leaves you alone with your wife, physically pick up the phone and hang it back up.  Those speakerphones combined with a mute button in another room can be detrimental to your negotiating skills.  That could be an example of  "not ok to listen, even in your own office."
Link Posted: 10/28/2010 3:09:36 AM EST
[#2]
my Juris Doctorate was stolen by the gremlin who lives in the hole in my bedroom wall, but the way I would see it is it could be argued that he only recorded the bad people for the possibility of it being used in a tort, making it tortious intent.



it doesn't matter if its his office or not.




now, if he had a security system running that had voice recording 24/7 he could argue that the evidence was collected with security as his intent.
Link Posted: 10/28/2010 5:14:26 AM EST
[#3]
I have a criminal justice degree, tho I'm not a lawyer.
but the "tortious intent" is referring to the intent to COMMIT a tort, not protect yourself from one.  its basically another version of the first part saying its illegal if your planning on using it to commit a crime. MN is a one party consent state, so as long as the person recording is in the conversation it is legal.
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top