Printable Format22-2518. Same; civil action for damages; defense available in civil and criminal actions. (1) Any person whose wire, oral or electronic communication is intercepted, disclosed or used in violation of this act shall have a civil cause of action against any person who intercepts, discloses or uses, or procures any other person to intercept, disclose or use, such communications, and shall be entitled to recover from any such person:
(a) Actual damages, but not less than liquidated damages computed at the rate of $100 a day for each day of violation or $1,000, whichever is greater;
(b) punitive damages; and
(c) reasonable attorneys' fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred.
(2) A good faith reliance by any person on a court order authorizing the interception of any wire, oral or electronic communication shall constitute a complete defense in any civil or criminal action brought against such person based upon such interception.
History: L. 1974, ch. 150, § 5; L. 1988, ch. 117, § 4; July 1.
Cross References to Related Sections:
Unlawful disclosure of authorized interception of wire, oral or electronic communications, see 21-3838.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
"Recovery of Attorney Fees in Kansas," Mark A. Furney, 18 W.L.J. 535, 558 (1979).
"Evidence—Distinguishing Between Radio-Telephone and Wire Communications: The Kansas Approach to Cordless Telephone Conversations," Terri L. Savely, 24 W.L.J. 175 (1984).
"Evidence for the family lawyer: Intrafamily wiretapping, the Fifth Amendment and other selected topics," Steve Leben, 68 J.K.B.A. No. 3, 24 (1999).
"The Right to Be Let Alone: The Kansas Right of Privacy," J. Lyn Entrikin, 53 W.L.J. 207 (2014).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Cited; whether court had jurisdiction to order pen register and wiretap when component located in adjacent county examined. State v. Gibson, 255 Kan. 474, 480, 874 P.2d 1122 (1994).