Mary Carroll v. Merrill Lynch
698 F.3d 561
| 7th Cir. | 2012Background
- Mary Carroll made a late-evening call to Jim Kelliher; Pat Kelliher overheard and recorded the call.
- Carroll’s conversation included profanity and anger; the Kellihers feared Carroll’s actions and recorded the call.
- Carroll was later fired by Merrill Lynch and sued for eavesdropping; the district court granted summary judgment for defendants citing fear of crime exemption.
- Illinois 720 ILCS 5/14-2 prohibits recording without consent and 5/14-2(a)(3) prohibits use of such information; 5/14-3(i) provides a fear of crime exemption.
- The exemption requires: (1) subjective suspicion of crime, (2) reasonable objective basis for that suspicion, (3) potential evidence of the crime.
- Carroll appeals only the fear of crime exemption applicability to Pat Kelliher’s recording and the use/dissemination issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether fear of crime exemption applies | Carroll argues no genuine fact issue on reasonableness. | Kelliher asserts Pat’s fear was reasonable and thus exempt. | Exemption applies; Pat’s fear was reasonable. |
| Whether there are genuine disputes of material fact precluding summary judgment | Carroll contends credibility issues and conflicting interpretations exist. | Defendants show uncontradicted evidence of fear of crime; disputes are not material. | No genuine disputes; summary judgment proper. |
| Whether use/dissemination of the recording falls within the fear of crime exemption | Exemption does not cover use/dissemination | Exemption applies to all parts of the act, including use/dissemination | Exemption covers use/dissemination; no violation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 F. Supp. 2d (Supreme Court (1986)) (summary judgment standard and material facts)
- Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (Supreme Court (1986)) (metaphysical doubt not enough for denial of summary judgment)
- Koclanakis v. Merrimack Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 899 F.2d 673 (7th Cir. 1990) (no genuine issue of material fact when evidence is speculative)
- Bd. of Trs. of Univ. of Ill. v. Ins. Corp. of Ir., Ltd., 969 F.2d 329 (7th Cir. 1992) (reasonableness determinations in employment/agency contexts)
- In re Nestrock, 735 N.E.2d 1101 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000) (fear of crime exemption context; criminal activity contemplated)