Favorite Links

MICHIGAN CASE LAW:
In Bailey v. Bailey (2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8565):

The husband used key logger software in two home computers to monitor his wife's Yahoo account.

Through this software, the husband learned his wife's e-mail password and accessed it.
He then he discovered adult content in his wife's e-mails. The husband left home with his children and initiated divorce proceedings. The husband provided copies of his wife's e-mails to his family attorney to be used in the divorce case. The husband was granted full custody of the children (additional wife's behavioral issues triggered this decision) to which wife alleged it had not happened but for the e-mails husband illegally obtained.

Wife filed a lawsuit alleging her husband violated 18 U.S.C. §§ 2511, 2512; Michigan Criminal Code- MCL §§ 750.539a and 750.540; and violated invasion of privacy rules; and intentional infliction of emotional distress, among others.

Definition of the term "interception" becomes a major issue in cases under U.S.C. title 18. In Bailey's case, the court held that interception within the meaning of the statute "encompasses only acquisitions contemporaneous with transmission." The husband obtained the e-mail password through the software program; his eavesdropping was not "contemporaneous with the transmission." Therefore, there title 18 of the U.S.C. (Wiretap Act) does not apply.

Husband was granted summary judgement as to the 18 U.S.C. § 2511 charge. Regarding violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2512, the court held this statute does not apply to husband's conduct because this section of the statute does not apply to the use of the wife's electronic communications.

The husband was also granted summary judgment on wife's claims that husband's conduct violated Michigan Criminal Code.