Read the "You Be the Judge" on p. 164 of the text. It is the case of Huff v. Spaw.

Review the facts, and the arguments of each party in the case. 

The issue is: did the Huffs have a reasonable expectation of privacy and did Spaw violate the Wiretap Act?

First:

1. What are the requirements for a reasonable expectation of privacy in section 9-2a and the requirements that apply from the Wiretap Act in section 9-2c.

2. Were the requirements met? Consider Jim and Bertha Huff separately.

As the judge, decide for one party or the other. Consider each issue.

Note that the call was from Italy to Kentucky (which is a one-party consent state). Remember that the call was technically placed by Huff to Spaw.

Second:

Consider what would you do ethically if you were Spaw in this situation?

State your reasoning. Go beyond reiterating the arguments given in the text. Also, don’t rely on your instinct. Apply the law. 

This assignment is in a discussion forum so feel free to comment on your classmates’ responses.

Note: This case has local origins. It involved board members for the Greater Cincinnati-Northern Kentucky International Airport.