Koeppel v. Speirs

Summary

The Iowa Supreme Court considered whether secretly installing a camera in an office bathroom could constitute an intrusion upon seclusion when the equipment was not shown to have produced identifiable images. The court held that an electronic invasion occurs when the device could have invaded the plaintiff’s privacy in some way, even if it was not operational when discovered and no actual viewing or recording was proven. The court reversed summary judgment for the defendant and remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. Actual viewing or recording is not required. An electronic invasion occurs when the plaintiff proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the device or equipment used by the defendant could have invaded the plaintiff's privacy in some way.
2. The standard does not create a tort of attempted invasion of privacy. The intrusion is complete when the plaintiff discovers the device, and harm arises when the plaintiff reasonably believes an intrusion occurred, provided the device was capable of invading privacy.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an electronic device placed in a private area constitutes an intrusion upon seclusion when the plaintiff need not prove that the defendant actually viewed or recorded private activities.
2. Whether evidence that the device could have been configured or operated to transmit or record private activity is sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact and defeat summary judgment.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded