We live in an interstate world where the law is not always consistent. We just wrote about how an Arizona senator texting her security guard in North Carolina may make the senator liable for damages to the security guard’s wife.
Now…a new angle involving Miami wide receiver Tyreek Hill. Tyreek’s problem could become yours which is why we write about it. In 2023 Mr. Hill married Keeta Vaccaro. After 16 months and one child, she filed for divorce. Hill owns several homes but is a resident of Florida.
We don’t really pay much attention today when someone calls us where we are or where the caller is when the call is placed. It’s all the more confusing because people retain their phone numbers so that the caller “appears” to be Indiana, even though he/she no longer lives there. No one really cares.
But perhaps we should. Our topic du jour, Mr. Hill took a call from his mother-in-law while he was in Florida. She was calling from Texas. During the call it seems Mr. Hill said some things to his mother-in-law which his wife wants to introduce in the Florida divorce. Florida, like Pennsylvania, is a state which forbids people from recording a call unless the parties to the call consent. If you record without consent, it’s actually a crime. 18 Pa.C.S.A. 5701 et seq. Meanwhile, Texas is a place which allows unconsented recording. So, a crime in Florida but not in Texas where (we assume) the recording was made. As I write this, it occurs to me the recording device could be in another state.
Now, Ms. Vaccaro/Hill wants to use that call in a Florida divorce. Mr. Hill is moving to bar that evidence because he never consented to the recording. That’s probably true although we all routinely consent to recording for “quality assurance” (a strange pre-text).
Question 1. What law applies? Was Hill’s mother-in-law supposed to research Florida law before “rolling tape” while calling her son-in-law? Did she commit a Florida crime by recording without Hill’s consent?
But, it’s more complicated. Mother-in-law is not a party to her daughter’s divorce. She would have to be subpoenaed as a witness to the phone call to authenticate the recording as one she had with Mr. Hill. Florida could charge her with a crime but that does not bar her daughter from trying to force her to testify. She has evidence (the recording) that is presumably authentic and relevant to the divorce. She may have committed a crime, but her daughter didn’t. If I want a witness to provide evidence in court, the witness can’t refuse because the way the evidence was collected involved a crime. That’s not a reliable answer. A Florida judge could suppress the evidence because it was against state law to collect it without consent. But, courts can also rule that “how” the evidence was collected is not material in a civil case, even though introduction of the evidence may yield a criminal wiretapping case.
It can get weird because of technology. I get a call from my accountants. The number is an Indiana area code. Because I am obsessive, I research Indiana wiretap law before picking up and find both my state and Indiana require both parties to consent before recording. I later learn the accountant is calling me from Texas where he’s attending a conference. The call is recorded by a device physically located in North Dakota. During the call, I inquire about hiding assets in my pending divorce. My spouse sees my accounting bill and notices “Call from client re use of crypto in divorce.” She subpoenas the accountant to come with any documents, electronic or otherwise made in connection with this call.”
Imagine being the judge in that setting. Two parties. Three state laws. Possible criminal implications that could cause the accountant to lose his license to practice. Meanwhile, the accountant invoice suggests smoke that will lead to fire. Two things are assured. The issue of what evidence will be admitted is likely to consume at least a day and the ruling will prompt an appeal to the Superior Court.
The story: Tyreek Hill says mother-in-law’s secret recordings should be excluded from court
Addendum: October 7. Ms. Vaccaro’s lawyer is reportedly leaking to the press a conversation between Mr. Hill and Ms. Vaccaro’s mother in which it is alleged that Hill said “Tell her to get out… . I’m not going to hurt but… I got friends that will hurt her.”
That may be the recorded fight we have discussed above. If true it may be a tortious threat but it’s not clear how it plays into property and alimony claims in a divorce. Judges ordinarily loathe parties and lawyers trying their cases in the press box and not the courtroom. But there are bigger fish watching as NFL teams weigh Hill’s skill on the field against his history of conduct off the field. The marriage lasted about 16 months. Before the Dolphins released him, Hill’s base salary was reported to be $29 million.