Sussman
Sussman v. American Broadcasting Companies, Inc.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Kozinski, J.
We decide whether ABC’s surreptitious videotapings during an investigation of the Psychic Marketing Group could have violated 18 U.S.C. § 2511 (1994), the federal wiretapping statute.
I
ABC hired Stacy Lescht to pose as a psychic telephone advisor in order to gain access to the offices of the Psychic Marketing Group (PMG). While working in the Los Angeles office of the PMG, Lescht used various surveillance devices to record the activities around her. Some of these recordings were aired in a segment of the ABC News program Prime Time Live.
Soon thereafter, two PMG employees who had been taped filed suit in state court alleging various causes of action, including invasion of privacy by photography. 1 The jury found for plaintiffs on this claim but the California Court of Appeal reversed. See Sanders v. American Broad. Cos., 60 Cal.Rptr.2d 595 , 599 (Cal.Ct.App.1997). 2 The California Supreme Court, in turn, reversed the Court of Appeal, holding that the covert taping of office conversations by a television reporter could be actionable as an invasion of privacy. See Sanders v. American Broad. Cos., 20 Cal.4th 907 , 85 Cal.Rptr.2d 909 , 978 P.2d 67 (1999).