Infographic Template Galleries

Created with Fabric.js 1.4.5 Should All Parties Consent to Conversation Recording in Ohio? Court Decision Regarding the Issue Vera v. OKeefe III, 791 F.Supp.2d 959 (S.D. Cal 2011)James O'Keefe ordered by California's U.S. District Court to pay $100,000 to Juan Carlos Vera, of ACORN, for secretly recording video and audio of Vera in an ACORN office without Vera's knowledge or consent.This shows, for example, that the courts believe knowledge/consent is required by all parties in the State of California when it comes to recording audio/video. However, not all U.S. states have this rule.The State of Ohio is an example of a state that does not agree with"full party" consent when it comes to recording. So, should this change? Per Ohio Revised Code, Section 2933.52: "An individual who is a party to either an in-person conversation or electronic communication, or who has the consent of one of the parties to the communication, can lawfully record it or disclose its contents, unless the person is doing so for the purpose of committing a criminal or tortious act." Source: Where Does Ohio Currently Stand? When Recording Becomes Illegal... ? What Does the Future Hold? Not Unethical, But... Banner ID: 810539107 The Ohio Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Disciplineis a body of the Supreme Court of Ohio that develops ethical andconduct codes for those working in the Ohio judicial system. It believes "as a basic rule, Ohio lawyers should not recordconversations with clients without their consent.... and Ohio lawyers should also refrain form non-consensual recordings of conversations with persons who are prospective clients ...The Board goes on to further explain that " an attorney in the course of legal representation should not make surreptitious recordings of his or her conversations with clients, witnesses, opposing parties, opposing counsel, or others without their notification or consent."So even though Ohio Revised Code, Section 2933.52 clearlystates that only one person needs to consent to the recordingof a conversation, the Ohio Board of Commissioners on Grievancesand Discipline still believes it's important to have those working inthe Ohio judicial system refrain from recording conversationswithout "full party" consent based on ethical reasoning.Source: International Journal of Ethics, Volume 8, Number 1/2 As it stands now, Ohio's laws on recording conversations do not appear to be changing anytime soon. However, as technology changes so may the rules on consent when it comes to recording. Attorney Michael Flynn states exactly this in a response to the legality of recording phone conversationson website Quick and Dirty, "This area of the law is not completely settled, and changes as our technology and notions of privacy change."So as of now Ohio still remains a "single party" consent state. But, as technology changes and the way society communicates changes there may be changes to the law later on down the road. Until then legalexperts suggest, from legal and ethical standpoints, to inform all parties in a conversation that it is being recorded as recording laws vary from state to state. Source: Ohio is a "single party" consent state when it comes to recoding conversations, but people can run in to other legal problems when they record illegally. So when does recording a conversation in a "single party" state become illegal?People who record conversations via "wiretapping" are legally in the wrong inthe State of Ohio. This occurs when someone who isn't a part of a conversationrecords a conversation.This is also defined in Ohio Revised Code, Section 2933.52: "No person purposely shall do any of the following: (1) Intercept, attempt to intercept, or procure another person to intercept or attempt to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication;"Additionally, recording in Ohio becomes illegal when the person doing the recordingdoes so "for the purpose of committing a criminal or tortious act."Source.
Create Your Free Infographic!