{"title":"US call recording laws by state","publisher":"Redialler","source":"https://redialler.com/recording-laws-by-state","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","attribution":"Recording-law reference data by Redialler (https://redialler.com/recording-laws-by-state), reviewed October 8, 2026."},"disclaimer":"This reference is not legal advice. The labels describe conservative recording practices. They do not determine which law applies to your call. Confirm the current law with qualified counsel, including each participant's actual location and any industry-specific rules. A phone number's area code does not establish a person's location.","classification":"Conservative consent practice; read each state's scope and verification notes.","federalRule":{"statuteName":"Federal Wiretap Act","statuteCitation":"18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d)","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2024-title18/html/USCODE-2024-title18-partI-chap119-sec2511.htm","summary":"For a person not acting under color of law, the federal statute permits interception when that person is a party to the communication or one party has given prior consent. This exception does not apply when the purpose is to commit a criminal or tortious act in violation of federal or state law. It does not settle stricter state requirements.","editionNote":"This reference was checked against the official 2024 U.S. Code edition. Later amendments have not been confirmed. Confirm them before relying on this reference.","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08"},"states":[{"code":"AL","name":"Alabama","slug":"alabama","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Criminal Eavesdropping","statuteCitation":"Ala. Code §§ 13A-11-30(1), 13A-11-31, 13A-11-35, 13A-11-36","officialSourceUrl":"https://alison.legislature.state.al.us/code-of-alabama?section=13A-11-30","summary":"Alabama permits recording a private communication with consent from at least one participant.","exceptions":"The article exempts good-faith reliance on a lawful court order or legislative authorization.","penalties":"Criminal eavesdropping is a Class A misdemeanor; unlawful use or disclosure is a Class B misdemeanor.","phoneNuance":"The device ban applies whether or not the recorder is present.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Alabama, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the current Alabama Legislature text for §§ 13A-11-30, 13A-11-31, 13A-11-35, and 13A-11-36.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Ala. Code §§ 13A-11-30(1), 13A-11-31, 13A-11-35, 13A-11-36","url":"https://alison.legislature.state.al.us/code-of-alabama?section=13A-11-30"},{"label":"Official supporting text","url":"https://alison.legislature.state.al.us/graphql?query=query+%7B+codesOfAlabama%28where%3A+%7B+type%3A+%7B+eq%3A+Section+%7D%2C+displayId%3A+%7B+in%3A+%5B%2213A-11-30%22%2C+%2213A-11-31%22%2C+%2213A-11-35%22%2C+%2213A-11-36%22%5D+%7D+%7D%2C+versions%3A+true%29+%7B+data+%7B+displayId+title+content+%7D+%7D+%7D"}]},{"code":"AK","name":"Alaska","slug":"alaska","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Eavesdropping","statuteCitation":"Alaska Stat. §§ 42.20.310, 42.20.320(a)(5), 42.20.330","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.akleg.gov/basis/statutes.asp?media=print&secStart=42.20.300&secEnd=42.20.390","summary":"Alaska allows recording an oral conversation with consent from one participant.","exceptions":"Inadvertent interception of telephone conversations over party lines is exempt.","penalties":"Violating the eavesdropping or unauthorized-publication provisions is a class A misdemeanor.","phoneNuance":"The eavesdropping-device definition expressly covers telephone conversations.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Alaska, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official Alaska Legislature text, including the consent rule, exemptions, penalties, and definitions.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Alaska Stat. §§ 42.20.310, 42.20.320(a)(5), 42.20.330","url":"https://www.akleg.gov/basis/statutes.asp?media=print&secStart=42.20.300&secEnd=42.20.390"}]},{"code":"AZ","name":"Arizona","slug":"arizona","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Interception of wire, electronic and oral communications","statuteCitation":"Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 13-3005(A)(1), 13-3012(7)","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.azleg.gov/ars/13/03005.htm","summary":"Arizona permits a call participant to record; others need consent from a sender or receiver.","exceptions":"A limited exception allows interception needed to identify harmful interference with a lawful station or consumer equipment.","penalties":"Unlawful intentional interception is a class 5 felony.","phoneNuance":"The consent rule covers both wire and electronic communications.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Arizona, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed §§ 13-3005 and 13-3012 on the official Arizona Legislature website.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 13-3005(A)(1), 13-3012(7)","url":"https://www.azleg.gov/ars/13/03005.htm"},{"label":"Official supporting text","url":"https://www.azleg.gov/ars/13/03012.htm"}]},{"code":"AR","name":"Arkansas","slug":"arkansas","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Arkansas Code recording provisions","statuteCitation":"Ark. Code Ann. § 5-60-120","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/ArkansasLaw","summary":"The current official statute text could not be verified in this review.","exceptions":"Review the current official text for exceptions.","penalties":"Review the current official text for penalties.","phoneNuance":"Check the current official telephone recording provisions before recording.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Arkansas, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The Reporters Committee (RCFP) guide identifies § 5-60-120. The current statute text, exceptions, and penalties still need confirmation from the official Arkansas Code source.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Ark. Code Ann. § 5-60-120","url":"https://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/ArkansasLaw"}]},{"code":"CA","name":"California","slug":"california","consentType":"all-party","statuteName":"California Invasion of Privacy Act","statuteCitation":"Cal. Penal Code §§ 632(a), 632.7(a), 637.2; Smith v. LoanMe, Inc., 11 Cal. 5th 183 (2021)","officialSourceUrl":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=632.","summary":"Obtain consent from every participant before recording a confidential telephone conversation under § 632. Section 632.7 separately requires all parties’ consent for covered calls involving a cellular or cordless telephone, without a confidentiality requirement.","exceptions":"The confidentiality limit belongs to § 632. It does not remove the separate § 632.7 protection for covered cellular and cordless calls. Current statutory exceptions require follow-up review.","penalties":"Unlawful recording can carry criminal liability and civil damages. Smith confirms both forms of liability under § 632.7 and references § 637.2. Current numeric penalties were not verified.","phoneNuance":"Smith v. LoanMe holds that § 632.7 applies to participants as well as third parties. Merely being a participant does not remove the consent requirement. Its confidentiality discussion confirms that the § 632 and § 632.7 rules differ.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving California, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: Reviewed the official California Supreme Court opinion in Smith v. LoanMe. It supports the stated telephone distinctions and the participant holding. Current statute text, penalties, and amendments still need confirmation from the official California Legislature source.","additionalSources":[{"label":"Cellular and cordless calls: Penal Code § 632.7","url":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=632.7."},{"label":"Official Supreme Court opinion: Smith v. LoanMe","url":"https://www4.courts.ca.gov/opinions/archive/S260391.PDF"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/california/"}],"sources":[{"label":"Cal. Penal Code §§ 632(a), 632.7(a), 637.2; Smith v. LoanMe, Inc., 11 Cal. 5th 183 (2021)","url":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=632."},{"label":"Cellular and cordless calls: Penal Code § 632.7","url":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=632.7."},{"label":"Official Supreme Court opinion: Smith v. LoanMe","url":"https://www4.courts.ca.gov/opinions/archive/S260391.PDF"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/california/"}]},{"code":"CO","name":"Colorado","slug":"colorado","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Wiretapping prohibited — penalty","statuteCitation":"Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 18-9-303, 18-9-305(1)","officialSourceUrl":"https://olls.info/crs/crs2026-title-18.pdf","summary":"Colorado permits a call sender or intended receiver to record; others need consent from a sender or receiver.","exceptions":"Security or business recording on one’s own premises is exempt when reasonable notice is given to the public.","penalties":"The current wiretapping provision classifies the offense as a class 2 misdemeanor.","phoneNuance":"The telephone provision also covers recording electronic communications and knowing use or disclosure of unlawfully obtained contents.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Colorado, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed pages 1598–1603 of the official 2026 Colorado Revised Statutes Title 18 text from the Office of Legislative Legal Services. Section 18-9-303(2) changed in 2023, so the older RCFP description of the offense as a felony is out of date.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 18-9-303, 18-9-305(1)","url":"https://olls.info/crs/crs2026-title-18.pdf"},{"label":"Official supporting text","url":"https://olls.info/crs/crs2026-title-18.pdf#page=1598"},{"label":"Official supporting text","url":"https://olls.info/crs/crs2026-title-18.pdf#page=1602"},{"label":"Official supporting text","url":"https://olls.info/crs/crs2026-title-18.pdf#page=1599"}]},{"code":"CT","name":"Connecticut","slug":"connecticut","consentType":"all-party","statuteName":"Recording private telephonic communications; eavesdropping","statuteCitation":"Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 52-570d, 53a-187, 53a-189","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_925.htm#sec_52-570d","summary":"For private telephone calls, § 52-570d sets civil requirements: all parties’ prior consent, a recorded verbal notification at the start, or the specified automatic warning tone. The separate criminal eavesdropping law permits participant recording and one-party consent.","exceptions":"Section 52-570d(a) permits recorded verbal notice at the beginning or a distinct warning tone repeated at approximately 15-second intervals, as alternatives to prior all-party consent. Section 52-570d(b) includes specified lawful law-enforcement, emergency, threatening-call, repeated-call, carrier, and broadcast exceptions.","penalties":"Section 52-570d(c) permits damages, costs, and reasonable attorney fees. Eavesdropping outside the criminal participant or consent rule is a class D felony under § 53a-189. Numeric criminal sentencing limits were not checked.","phoneNuance":"The all-party category is a conservative private-call practice. It does not mean that every participant recording is a criminal offense. The civil and criminal rules differ, and the civil statute expressly offers notice or tone alternatives.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Connecticut, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the named sections in both current official Connecticut General Statutes chapters.","additionalSources":[{"label":"Criminal definitions and eavesdropping","url":"https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_952.htm#sec_53a-187"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/connecticut/"}],"sources":[{"label":"Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 52-570d, 53a-187, 53a-189","url":"https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_925.htm#sec_52-570d"},{"label":"Criminal definitions and eavesdropping","url":"https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_952.htm#sec_53a-187"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/connecticut/"}]},{"code":"DE","name":"Delaware","slug":"delaware","consentType":"all-party","statuteName":"Violation of privacy; interception of communications","statuteCitation":"11 Del. C. §§ 1335(a)(4), 2402(c)(4), 2409","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.delcode.delaware.gov/title11/c005/sc07/#1335","summary":"Use all-party consent for private telephone calls. Section 1335(a)(4) requires consent from all parties. Section 2402(c)(4) separately permits participant or one-party interception. This entry uses the stricter practice because these provisions overlap.","exceptions":"Section 2402(c)(4) permits a participant or a person with one party’s prior consent to intercept a communication, unless the purpose is a criminal or tortious act. Section 1335 contains separate exceptions for specified telephone operations and other authorized acts. Do not assume that the one-party provision removes the privacy-law issue.","penalties":"A telephone privacy violation under § 1335(a)(4) is a class A misdemeanor. A violation of § 2402(a) is a class E felony and carries a fine of up to $10,000. Section 2409 permits civil recovery of actual damages with statutory minimum damages, punitive damages, and reasonable attorney fees and litigation costs.","phoneNuance":"Delaware has overlapping all-party privacy language and one-party wiretap language. The all-party category is a conservative calling practice, not a claim that § 2402 has no participant exception.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Delaware, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the text of both official Delaware Code provisions on 2026-10-08. No case interpretation is asserted.","additionalSources":[{"label":"Official one-party provision and civil remedies","url":"https://www.delcode.delaware.gov/title11/c024/sc01/index.html#2402"}],"sources":[{"label":"11 Del. C. §§ 1335(a)(4), 2402(c)(4), 2409","url":"https://www.delcode.delaware.gov/title11/c005/sc07/#1335"},{"label":"Official one-party provision and civil remedies","url":"https://www.delcode.delaware.gov/title11/c024/sc01/index.html#2402"}]},{"code":"DC","name":"District of Columbia","slug":"district-of-columbia","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Interception, disclosure, and use of wire or oral communications prohibited","statuteCitation":"D.C. Code § 23-542","officialSourceUrl":"https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/23-542","summary":"D.C. permits call recording by a participant or with one participant’s prior consent.","exceptions":"The private-person consent exception excludes recording for a criminal, tortious or other injurious act.","penalties":"A violation can result in a fine, imprisonment for up to five years, or both.","phoneNuance":"Knowing use or disclosure of illegally intercepted contents is prohibited; this does not apply after the contents become public information or common knowledge.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving District of Columbia, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the current official D.C. Council law library text, including the prior-consent exception and criminal penalties.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"D.C. Code § 23-542","url":"https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/23-542"}]},{"code":"FL","name":"Florida","slug":"florida","consentType":"all-party","statuteName":"Security of Communications Act","statuteCitation":"Fla. Stat. §§ 934.02, 934.03(2)(d), 934.03(4), 934.10","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0900-0999/0934/Sections/0934.03.html","summary":"For ordinary telephone calls, obtain prior consent from all parties. Section 934.03(2)(d) permits interception when every party has given prior consent.","exceptions":"The statute has specific service-provider and law-enforcement exceptions. Sections 934.03(2)(k)–(m) also contain limited recording exceptions for specified threats, violence, or sexual abuse, with conditions. Do not apply these as a general sales-call exception.","penalties":"Section 934.03(4)(a) generally classifies unlawful interception as a third-degree felony, with narrower statutory exceptions. Section 934.10 permits civil relief, damages, punitive damages, and attorney fees. Criminal sentence and fine ranges are not asserted here.","phoneNuance":"The expectation-of-privacy wording in § 934.02(2) defines oral communications. It should not be treated as a blanket public-place exception for wire telephone calls. For ordinary calls, use the all-party prior-consent rule.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Florida, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the current official Florida Legislature text for §§ 934.02, 934.03, and 934.10. No judicial interpretation is asserted.","additionalSources":[{"label":"Definitions: § 934.02","url":"https://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0900-0999/0934/Sections/0934.02.html"},{"label":"Civil remedies: § 934.10","url":"https://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0900-0999/0934/Sections/0934.10.html"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/florida/"}],"sources":[{"label":"Fla. Stat. §§ 934.02, 934.03(2)(d), 934.03(4), 934.10","url":"https://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0900-0999/0934/Sections/0934.03.html"},{"label":"Definitions: § 934.02","url":"https://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0900-0999/0934/Sections/0934.02.html"},{"label":"Civil remedies: § 934.10","url":"https://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0900-0999/0934/Sections/0934.10.html"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/florida/"}]},{"code":"GA","name":"Georgia","slug":"georgia","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Georgia Code recording provisions","statuteCitation":"Ga. Code Ann. §§ 16-11-62, 16-11-66, 16-11-69","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.legis.ga.gov/georgia-code","summary":"The current official statute text could not be verified in this review.","exceptions":"Review the current official text for exceptions.","penalties":"Review the current official text for penalties.","phoneNuance":"Check the current official telephone recording provisions before recording.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Georgia, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The Reporters Committee (RCFP) guide identifies §§ 16-11-62 and 16-11-66. The current statute text, exceptions, and penalties still need confirmation from the official Georgia Code source.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Ga. Code Ann. §§ 16-11-62, 16-11-66, 16-11-69","url":"https://www.legis.ga.gov/georgia-code"}]},{"code":"HI","name":"Hawaii","slug":"hawaii","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Interception, access, and disclosure of communications","statuteCitation":"Haw. Rev. Stat. § 803-42(b)(3)(A)","officialSourceUrl":"https://data.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol14_Ch0701-0853/HRS0803/HRS_0803-0042.htm","summary":"Official-source verification is pending for telephone recording requirements.","exceptions":"State-specific exceptions remain unverified.","penalties":"State-specific penalties remain unverified.","phoneNuance":"Review the official statute before recording a telephone call.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Hawaii, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The Reporters Committee (RCFP) guide identifies § 803-42(b)(3)(A) as the telephone one-party-consent provision. The statute text, exceptions, and penalties still need confirmation from the official Hawaii source.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Haw. Rev. Stat. § 803-42(b)(3)(A)","url":"https://data.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol14_Ch0701-0853/HRS0803/HRS_0803-0042.htm"}]},{"code":"ID","name":"Idaho","slug":"idaho","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Interception and disclosure of wire, electronic or oral communications prohibited","statuteCitation":"Idaho Code § 18-6702(2)(d)","officialSourceUrl":"https://legislature.idaho.gov/statutesrules/idstat/title18/t18ch67/sect18-6702/","summary":"Official-source verification is pending for telephone recording requirements.","exceptions":"State-specific exceptions remain unverified.","penalties":"State-specific penalties remain unverified.","phoneNuance":"Review the official statute before recording a telephone call.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Idaho, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The Reporters Committee (RCFP) guide identifies § 18-6702(2)(d) as the one-party-consent provision. The statute text, exceptions, and penalties still need confirmation from the official Idaho source.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Idaho Code § 18-6702(2)(d)","url":"https://legislature.idaho.gov/statutesrules/idstat/title18/t18ch67/sect18-6702/"}]},{"code":"IL","name":"Illinois","slug":"illinois","consentType":"all-party","statuteName":"Eavesdropping","statuteCitation":"720 ILCS 5/14-1, 14-2, 14-3, 14-4, 14-6","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/fulltext?DocName=072000050K14-2","summary":"Use consent from every participant before recording a private telephone conversation. Official indexed statute text describes a ban on surreptitious participant recording without the other parties’ consent. Current full-text verification remains incomplete.","exceptions":"The statutory framework includes specific law-enforcement and other exceptions in § 14-3. Their current conditions were not verified. Do not assume a blanket exception for ordinary business calls.","penalties":"Current penalties and civil remedies under §§ 14-4 and 14-6 were not verified. No numeric penalty amounts are supplied.","phoneNuance":"The conservative all-party label concerns private telephone conversations. The official indexed text uses both privacy and surreptitious-recording limits. Do not transfer this call rule directly to email or text without checking the separate electronic-communication provisions.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Illinois, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The Reporters Committee (RCFP) guide was used only to locate the sources. Excerpts from the official Illinois General Assembly index support the participant-consent language. The full current statute text, exceptions, and penalties still need confirmation from the official source.","additionalSources":[{"label":"Official Article 14 index","url":"https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ILCS/details?ActID=1876&ActName=Criminal+Code+of+2012.&ChapAct=720+ILCS+5%2F&Chapter=&ChapterID=53&MajorTopic=&SeqEnd=35399999&SeqStart=34200000"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/illinois/"}],"sources":[{"label":"720 ILCS 5/14-1, 14-2, 14-3, 14-4, 14-6","url":"https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/fulltext?DocName=072000050K14-2"},{"label":"Official Article 14 index","url":"https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ILCS/details?ActID=1876&ActName=Criminal+Code+of+2012.&ChapAct=720+ILCS+5%2F&Chapter=&ChapterID=53&MajorTopic=&SeqEnd=35399999&SeqStart=34200000"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/illinois/"}]},{"code":"IN","name":"Indiana","slug":"indiana","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Indiana telephone interception statutes","statuteCitation":"Ind. Code §§ 35-31.5-2-176; 35-33.5-5-5(b)","officialSourceUrl":"https://iga.in.gov/laws/2026/ic/titles/35","summary":"The cited Indiana telephone interception rules need a current official-source check.","exceptions":"Check the official statute for the consent rule and any exclusions before recording.","penalties":"Confirm current criminal and civil penalties in the official code.","phoneNuance":"Confirm how the cited law applies to the planned telephone call.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Indiana, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The consent classification and citations still need confirmation against the current official Indiana Code text.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Ind. Code §§ 35-31.5-2-176; 35-33.5-5-5(b)","url":"https://iga.in.gov/laws/2026/ic/titles/35"},{"label":"Official supporting text","url":"https://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title35/ar33.5/ch5.html"}]},{"code":"IA","name":"Iowa","slug":"iowa","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Interception of Communications; Electronic and Mechanical Eavesdropping","statuteCitation":"Iowa Code §§ 808B.2(1), (2)(c); 727.8(2), (3)(a)","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/2026/808B.2.pdf","summary":"A call participant may record. Another person needs one participant’s prior consent.","exceptions":"Consent does not excuse interception to commit a criminal, tortious, or other injurious act.","penalties":"Unlawful interception is a class D felony. The separate eavesdropping offense is a serious misdemeanor.","phoneNuance":"The separate eavesdropping law exempts recording by a message’s sender or recipient.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Iowa, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official Iowa Code 2026 text for both the interception and eavesdropping statutes.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Iowa Code §§ 808B.2(1), (2)(c); 727.8(2), (3)(a)","url":"https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/2026/808B.2.pdf"},{"label":"Official supporting text","url":"https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/2026/727.8.pdf"}]},{"code":"KS","name":"Kansas","slug":"kansas","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Breach of privacy","statuteCitation":"Kan. Stat. § 21-6101(a)(1), (a)(5), (b)(1), (d)","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.sos.ks.gov/publications/sessionlaws/2026/Chapter-114-HB-2479.html","summary":"A sender or receiver can consent to interception of a private telephone message.","exceptions":"The telephone-message prohibition excludes messages overheard through a regular telephone party line or extension.","penalties":"Telephone interception offenses under subsections (a)(1) through (a)(5) are class A nonperson misdemeanors.","phoneNuance":"The law separately restricts wire or wireless interception equipment used without consent from the person who controls the communications facilities.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Kansas, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Official 2026 session law Chapter 114, § 8, amends § 21-6101. The official session-law index lists an effective date of July 1, 2026 (https://www.sos.ks.gov/publications/session-laws.html). Chapter 155 of the 2026 session laws does not amend § 21-6101 (https://www.sos.ks.gov/publications/sessionlaws/2026/Chapter-155-HB-2029.html).","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Kan. Stat. § 21-6101(a)(1), (a)(5), (b)(1), (d)","url":"https://www.sos.ks.gov/publications/sessionlaws/2026/Chapter-114-HB-2479.html"}]},{"code":"KY","name":"Kentucky","slug":"kentucky","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Eavesdropping and related offenses","statuteCitation":"Ky. Rev. Stat. §§ 526.010, 526.020, 526.070","officialSourceUrl":"https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=19948","summary":"One party can consent to device recording of a wire or oral communication.","exceptions":"Inadvertent hearing through a regular telephone party line or extension is exempt if the listener does not divulge the communication.","penalties":"Intentional device eavesdropping is a Class D felony.","phoneNuance":"The definition covers any part of a wire communication recorded through an electronic, mechanical, or other device.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Kentucky, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official Kentucky Revised Statutes text for §§ 526.010, 526.020, and 526.070. The official chapter page states that it includes enactments through the 2026 Regular Session (https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/chapter.aspx?id=39393).","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Ky. Rev. Stat. §§ 526.010, 526.020, 526.070","url":"https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=19948"},{"label":"Official supporting text","url":"https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=19949"},{"label":"Official supporting text","url":"https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=19954"}]},{"code":"LA","name":"Louisiana","slug":"louisiana","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Interception and disclosure of wire, electronic, or oral communications","statuteCitation":"La. Rev. Stat. §§ 15:1303(C)(4), (B); 15:1302(9)(b)","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.legis.la.gov/Legis/Law.aspx?d=78938","summary":"Louisiana permits call recording by a participant or with one participant’s prior consent.","exceptions":"The consent exception does not cover interception for a criminal, tortious, or other injurious act.","penalties":"A violation can carry a fine of up to $10,000 and two to ten years at hard labor.","phoneNuance":"The law expressly includes the radio portion of cordless, portable, and cellular telephone calls.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Louisiana, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official Louisiana Legislature text for §§ 15:1303 and 15:1302. The telephone definition is now § 15:1302(9)(b). The older RCFP citation to subsection (8) is out of date after the 2025 definition amendments.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"La. Rev. Stat. §§ 15:1303(C)(4), (B); 15:1302(9)(b)","url":"https://www.legis.la.gov/Legis/Law.aspx?d=78938"},{"label":"Official supporting text","url":"https://www.legis.la.gov/Legis/Law.aspx?d=78937"}]},{"code":"ME","name":"Maine","slug":"maine","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Interception of wire and oral communications","statuteCitation":"Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 15, §§ 709–711; tit. 17-A, § 511","officialSourceUrl":"https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/15/title15sec709.html","summary":"Under Maine’s interception chapter, the sender or receiver may record. A nonparticipant may record with prior authority from the sender or receiver.","exceptions":"The separate privacy statute requires consent from the persons entitled to privacy for a device used in a private place, such as a bathroom or dressing room.","penalties":"Prohibited interception, disclosure, or use is a Class C crime. Section 711 also provides a civil claim for damages, attorney fees, and litigation expenses.","phoneNuance":"The telephone rule comes from the definition of interception. For a nonparticipant, authority from the sender or receiver must be prior.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Maine, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official Maine Legislature text for 15 M.R.S. §§ 709, 710, and 711 and 17-A M.R.S. § 511. The official pages are dated January 2026.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 15, §§ 709–711; tit. 17-A, § 511","url":"https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/15/title15sec709.html"},{"label":"15 M.R.S. § 710(1)","url":"https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/15/title15sec710.html"},{"label":"17-A M.R.S. § 511(1)(B)","url":"https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/17-A/title17-Asec511.html"},{"label":"15 M.R.S. § 711","url":"https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/15/title15sec711.html"}]},{"code":"MD","name":"Maryland","slug":"maryland","consentType":"all-party","statuteName":"Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance","statuteCitation":"Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. §§ 10-402(a), (b), (c)(3), 10-410","officialSourceUrl":"https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gcj&section=10-402&enactments=false","summary":"For ordinary telephone recordings, the person recording must be a participant and must obtain every party’s prior consent. Section 10-402(c)(3) permits this interception unless it has a criminal or tortious purpose.","exceptions":"Section 10-402(c) sets limited exceptions for service operations, authorized criminal investigations, emergency communications, and other specified activities. All-party consent does not excuse recording for a criminal or tortious purpose.","penalties":"A violation of § 10-402(a) is a felony punishable by up to five years of imprisonment, a fine of up to $10,000, or both. Section 10-410 permits actual or statutory-minimum damages, punitive damages, attorney fees, and litigation costs.","phoneNuance":"The ordinary participant exception requires prior consent from all parties. Being a participant alone is insufficient under § 10-402(c)(3). A general notice-only alternative is not stated in this provision.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Maryland, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official Maryland General Assembly text for §§ 10-402 and 10-410, including the ordinary consent rule, enumerated exceptions, criminal penalties, and civil remedies.","additionalSources":[{"label":"Civil remedies: § 10-410","url":"https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gcj&section=10-410&enactments=false"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/maryland/"}],"sources":[{"label":"Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. §§ 10-402(a), (b), (c)(3), 10-410","url":"https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gcj&section=10-402&enactments=false"},{"label":"Civil remedies: § 10-410","url":"https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gcj&section=10-410&enactments=false"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/maryland/"}]},{"code":"MA","name":"Massachusetts","slug":"massachusetts","consentType":"all-party","statuteName":"Interception of wire and oral communications","statuteCitation":"Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, § 99(B)(4), (C)(1), (D)","officialSourceUrl":"https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Chapter272/Section99","summary":"Section 99 prohibits secret recording of a telephone conversation without prior authority from all parties. The statute defines interception in terms of secretly hearing or recording a wire or oral communication.","exceptions":"The statutory rule targets secret recording. Section 99(D) sets specific carrier, warrant, law-enforcement, and financial-trading exceptions. A public location alone is not an exception stated in the ordinary definition.","penalties":"Section 99(C)(1) permits a fine of up to $10,000, state-prison imprisonment of up to five years, jail or house-of-correction imprisonment of up to two and one-half years, or the fine with one of those prison terms. Other offense provisions have different penalties.","phoneNuance":"The all-party label is a conservative practice. The actual statute regulates secret interception and authority from all parties. This entry does not claim a separate judicial rule about notice because no official notice case was reviewed.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Massachusetts, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the current official Massachusetts Legislature text of § 99, including the definition, criminal offense, and exception provisions. No current case holding or civil-damages amount is asserted.","additionalSources":[{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/massachusetts/"}],"sources":[{"label":"Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, § 99(B)(4), (C)(1), (D)","url":"https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Chapter272/Section99"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/massachusetts/"}]},{"code":"MI","name":"Michigan","slug":"michigan","consentType":"all-party","statuteName":"Eavesdropping upon private conversation","statuteCitation":"Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 750.539a, 750.539c, 750.539h","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=mcl-750-539c","summary":"Michigan’s statute uses all-party consent language for private conversations. The Michigan Court of Appeals excludes recording by a participant from its definition of eavesdropping. The all-party label is a conservative calling policy and does not describe an absolute ban on participant recording.","exceptions":"Sullivan v. Gray, 117 Mich. App. 476, 481–482 (1982), permits a participant to record their own conversation under the eavesdropping statute. Sullivan also explains that a participant’s consent alone does not authorize a third party to eavesdrop.","penalties":"Unlawful eavesdropping can lead to felony charges and civil remedies. Current penalty amounts were not verified from the official statute.","phoneNuance":"Sullivan concerned a recorded telephone conversation and held that participant recording falls outside “private discourse of others.” Lewis v. LeGrow, 258 Mich. App. 175, 185 (2003), repeats that interpretation. Keep the participant exception visible when using an all-party classification.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Michigan, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: Reviewed the official Michigan Court of Appeals reports for Sullivan v. Gray and Lewis v. LeGrow. They support the participant-recording point. Current statutory penalty amounts still need confirmation from the official Michigan Legislature source.","additionalSources":[{"label":"Michigan Court of Appeals — Sullivan v. Gray (official bound volume)","url":"https://www.courts.michigan.gov/siteassets/publications/coa-bound-volumes/101-200/bv_miapp117_final.pdf"},{"label":"Michigan Court of Appeals — Lewis v. LeGrow (official bound volume)","url":"https://www.courts.michigan.gov/siteassets/publications/coa-bound-volumes/201-300/bv_miapp258_final.pdf"},{"label":"Michigan statutory definitions","url":"https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=mcl-750-539a"},{"label":"Michigan civil remedies","url":"https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=mcl-750-539h"},{"label":"RCFP Michigan recording guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/michigan/"}],"sources":[{"label":"Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 750.539a, 750.539c, 750.539h","url":"https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=mcl-750-539c"},{"label":"Michigan Court of Appeals — Sullivan v. Gray (official bound volume)","url":"https://www.courts.michigan.gov/siteassets/publications/coa-bound-volumes/101-200/bv_miapp117_final.pdf"},{"label":"Michigan Court of Appeals — Lewis v. LeGrow (official bound volume)","url":"https://www.courts.michigan.gov/siteassets/publications/coa-bound-volumes/201-300/bv_miapp258_final.pdf"},{"label":"Michigan statutory definitions","url":"https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=mcl-750-539a"},{"label":"Michigan civil remedies","url":"https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=mcl-750-539h"},{"label":"RCFP Michigan recording guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/michigan/"}]},{"code":"MN","name":"Minnesota","slug":"minnesota","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Interception and disclosure of wire, electronic, or oral communications prohibited","statuteCitation":"Minn. Stat. § 626A.02","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/626A.02","summary":"A private person may record a wire, electronic, or oral communication if they are a party or one party gave prior consent, subject to the purpose restriction.","exceptions":"The private-party exception does not cover interception for a criminal or tortious act. Service-provider monitoring is separately limited to service or property protection, with restrictions on random monitoring.","penalties":"Ordinary violations can bring imprisonment and a fine. Section 626A.13 also permits civil damages and other relief. The statute has separate penalty rules for specified radio communications.","phoneNuance":"Section 626A.02(2)(g) has a narrow exception for a cordless handset-to-base radio communication whose initial interception was inadvertent. This does not replace the consent rule for ordinary call recording.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Minnesota, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official Minnesota Revisor 2025 Statutes text for §§ 626A.02 and 626A.13. It includes the consent, purpose, cordless-radio, penalty, and civil-remedy provisions.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Minn. Stat. § 626A.02","url":"https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/626A.02"},{"label":"Minn. Stat. § 626A.13(1)","url":"https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/626A.13"}]},{"code":"MS","name":"Mississippi","slug":"mississippi","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Interception of communications","statuteCitation":"Miss. Code §§ 41-29-531, 41-29-533","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.legislature.ms.gov/","summary":"The one-party classification is provisional. Current official statute text requires review.","exceptions":"Review required. Exceptions were not verified against current official statute text.","penalties":"Review required. Penalties were not verified against current official statute text.","phoneNuance":"Review required. Telephone-specific scope was not verified against current official statute text.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Mississippi, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The Reporters Committee (RCFP) guide was used only to find the citations. The consent rule, exceptions, penalties, and telephone scope still need confirmation from the official Mississippi Code source.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Miss. Code §§ 41-29-531, 41-29-533","url":"https://www.legislature.ms.gov/"}]},{"code":"MO","name":"Missouri","slug":"missouri","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Penalty for illegal wiretapping, permitted activities","statuteCitation":"Mo. Rev. Stat. § 542.402","officialSourceUrl":"https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=542.402","summary":"A private person may intercept a wire communication if they are a party or one party gave prior consent, unless the interception is for a criminal or tortious act.","exceptions":"The private-person consent exception is limited to wire communications. Section 542.402 separately prohibits specified device-based interception of oral communications.","penalties":"Prohibited conduct under § 542.402 is a class E felony. Section 542.418 also provides a civil claim for unlawful interception, disclosure, or use of wire communications.","phoneNuance":"The official statute page includes a case annotation stating that a call between a cellular phone and a regular wire phone is a wire communication. The private-party consent exception should not be generalized to all in-person recordings.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Missouri, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Checked each substantive statement against the official Missouri statute text.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Mo. Rev. Stat. § 542.402","url":"https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=542.402"},{"label":"Mo. Rev. Stat. § 542.418(2)","url":"https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=542.418"}]},{"code":"MT","name":"Montana","slug":"montana","consentType":"all-party","statuteName":"Privacy in communications","statuteCitation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 45-8-213(1)(c), (2)(a), (3), (4)(a)","officialSourceUrl":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0450/chapter_0080/part_0020/section_0130/0450-0080-0020-0130.html","summary":"The conversation rule prohibits use of a hidden recording device without all parties’ knowledge. Prior warning is an express exception. Use clear notice to every participant before recording a telephone conversation.","exceptions":"Section 45-8-213(2)(a) exempts specified official-duty recordings, public-meeting speakers, warned persons, and certain health-care emergency telephone communications. When one person provides the warning, either party may record. Section (3) separately restricts purposeful electronic interception and provides notice and official-duty exceptions.","penalties":"The recording offense under § 45-8-213(1)(c) is subject to the baseline penalty in (4)(a): a fine of up to $500, county-jail imprisonment of up to six months, or both. Enhanced provisions for other listed conduct should not be treated as recording-specific penalties.","phoneNuance":"This is a knowledge and warning rule for conversations, not an absolute requirement to collect affirmative consent from everyone. The all-party category is a conservative calling practice. The official 2025 statute makes the prior-warning exception explicit.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Montana, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official Montana Code Annotated 2025 text. It includes the 2025 amendment history and the precise hidden-device, knowledge, warning, and penalty provisions.","additionalSources":[{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/montana/"}],"sources":[{"label":"Mont. Code Ann. § 45-8-213(1)(c), (2)(a), (3), (4)(a)","url":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0450/chapter_0080/part_0020/section_0130/0450-0080-0020-0130.html"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/montana/"}]},{"code":"NE","name":"Nebraska","slug":"nebraska","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Nebraska interception law","statuteCitation":"Neb. Rev. Stat. § 86-290","officialSourceUrl":"https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=86-290","summary":"The candidate one-party classification remains pending official-source verification.","exceptions":"Not verified against official statute text.","penalties":"Not verified against official statute text.","phoneNuance":"Telephone-specific provisions need official-source verification.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Nebraska, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The Reporters Committee (RCFP) guide identifies § 86-290 and describes a one-party rule. The consent rule and penalties still need confirmation from the official Nebraska source. No substantive rule or penalty is treated as verified.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Neb. Rev. Stat. § 86-290","url":"https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=86-290"}]},{"code":"NV","name":"Nevada","slug":"nevada","consentType":"all-party","statuteName":"Interception and attempted interception of wire communication prohibited; exceptions","statuteCitation":"Nev. Rev. Stat. §§ 200.620, 200.650, 200.690","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-200.html#NRS200Sec620","summary":"Nevada generally requires all participants to consent before a telephone call is recorded. Its rule for private in-person conversations permits authorization from one participant. These two rules differ.","exceptions":"The one-party consent wording in § 200.620 is subject to emergency and court-order conditions; it is not a general permission to record telephone calls with one person’s consent. Ditech Financial LLC v. Buckles, 133 Nev. 493 (2017), holds that § 200.620 does not apply when the act of recording takes place outside Nevada. The applicable law can depend on where recording occurs.","penalties":"Illegal recording can lead to felony charges and civil liability. Current penalty amounts were not verified from the official statute.","phoneNuance":"Ditech states that § 200.620 requires both parties participating in a telephone call to consent, and cites Lane v. Allstate Insurance Co., 114 Nev. 1176, 1179 (1998). Sharpe v. State, 131 Nev. 269, 274–275 (2015), treats cellphone calls and text messages as wire communications under Nevada’s wiretap statutes.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Nevada, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: Reviewed the official Nevada Supreme Court reports for Ditech and Sharpe. Ditech supports the all-party interpretation for telephone calls and cites Lane. Lane itself was not reviewed from an official court source. Current statute text and penalties still need confirmation from the official Nevada source. No numeric penalties are supplied.","additionalSources":[{"label":"Nevada Supreme Court — Ditech Financial LLC v. Buckles (official report)","url":"https://nvcourts.gov/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/11467/133_nevada_reports_pages_438-500.pdf"},{"label":"Nevada Supreme Court — Sharpe v. State (official report)","url":"https://nvcourts.gov/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/11550/131_nevada_reports_pages_260-307.pdf"},{"label":"Nevada private-conversation recording statute","url":"https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-200.html#NRS200Sec650"},{"label":"Nevada recording penalties and civil remedies","url":"https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-200.html#NRS200Sec690"},{"label":"RCFP Nevada recording guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/nevada/"}],"sources":[{"label":"Nev. Rev. Stat. §§ 200.620, 200.650, 200.690","url":"https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-200.html#NRS200Sec620"},{"label":"Nevada Supreme Court — Ditech Financial LLC v. Buckles (official report)","url":"https://nvcourts.gov/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/11467/133_nevada_reports_pages_438-500.pdf"},{"label":"Nevada Supreme Court — Sharpe v. State (official report)","url":"https://nvcourts.gov/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/11550/131_nevada_reports_pages_260-307.pdf"},{"label":"Nevada private-conversation recording statute","url":"https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-200.html#NRS200Sec650"},{"label":"Nevada recording penalties and civil remedies","url":"https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-200.html#NRS200Sec690"},{"label":"RCFP Nevada recording guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/nevada/"}]},{"code":"NH","name":"New Hampshire","slug":"new-hampshire","consentType":"all-party","statuteName":"Wiretapping and eavesdropping","statuteCitation":"N.H. Rev. Stat. §§ 570-A:1, 570-A:2(I), (I-a), (II), 570-A:11","officialSourceUrl":"https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/LVIII/570-A/570-A-mrg.htm","summary":"Obtain consent from all parties before recording an ordinary telephone communication. Section 570-A:2(I-a) still makes participant or one-party-consented recording a misdemeanor when all-party consent and an applicable authorization are absent.","exceptions":"Section 570-A:2(II) includes service-provider, authorized law-enforcement, emergency-service, utility and other specified exceptions. These have conditions and do not create a general participant permission for sales calls.","penalties":"Section 570-A:2(I) sets a class B felony baseline. Section (I-a) sets misdemeanor treatment for a participant or a person with one party’s prior consent. Section 570-A:11 provides actual or statutory-minimum damages, punitive damages, attorney fees and litigation costs. Numeric criminal sentencing ranges were not checked.","phoneNuance":"Telecommunications and private in-person oral communications have separate definitions in § 570-A:1. The all-party telephone requirement is not removed merely because the recorder takes part in the call.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving New Hampshire, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official New Hampshire text of the full chapter and § 570-A:11. No judicial implied-consent rule is asserted.","additionalSources":[{"label":"Civil remedies: § 570-A:11","url":"https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/LVIII/570-A/570-A-11.htm"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/new-hampshire/"}],"sources":[{"label":"N.H. Rev. Stat. §§ 570-A:1, 570-A:2(I), (I-a), (II), 570-A:11","url":"https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/LVIII/570-A/570-A-mrg.htm"},{"label":"Civil remedies: § 570-A:11","url":"https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/LVIII/570-A/570-A-11.htm"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/new-hampshire/"}]},{"code":"NJ","name":"New Jersey","slug":"new-jersey","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"New Jersey Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act","statuteCitation":"N.J. Stat. Ann. §§ 2A:156A-3, 2A:156A-4 and 2A:156A-24","officialSourceUrl":"https://lis.njleg.state.nj.us/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templates&fn=default.htm&vid=Publish:10.1048/Enu","summary":"Needs verification: RCFP describes New Jersey's telephone-recording baseline as consent from one party. The current statutory text has not been independently confirmed from the official source.","exceptions":"Needs verification: check the current § 2A:156A-4 consent exception and its criminal-or-tortious-purpose limitation before relying on the one-party label.","penalties":"Needs verification: review the current offense provisions in § 2A:156A-3 and civil remedies in § 2A:156A-24. No penalty amount or sentence is stated here.","phoneNuance":"The practice label follows the RCFP telephone-communications summary. It is not a verified legal approval for a landline, mobile, electronic or interstate recording.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving New Jersey, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The Reporters Committee (RCFP) guide was used only to locate the sources. The current statute text, exceptions, and penalties still need confirmation from the official New Jersey source.","additionalSources":[{"label":"RCFP New Jersey recording guide (secondary; discovery only)","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/new-jersey/"}],"sources":[{"label":"N.J. Stat. Ann. §§ 2A:156A-3, 2A:156A-4 and 2A:156A-24","url":"https://lis.njleg.state.nj.us/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templates&fn=default.htm&vid=Publish:10.1048/Enu"},{"label":"RCFP New Jersey recording guide (secondary; discovery only)","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/new-jersey/"}]},{"code":"NM","name":"New Mexico","slug":"new-mexico","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Unlawful interference with communications","statuteCitation":"N.M. Stat. § 30-12-1","officialSourceUrl":"https://nmonesource.com/","summary":"The one-party classification is provisional. Current official statute text could not be verified.","exceptions":"Exceptions could not be verified against current official statute text.","penalties":"Penalties could not be verified against current official statute text.","phoneNuance":"Telephone, wireless, and browser-call coverage require verification before relying on this classification.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving New Mexico, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The Reporters Committee (RCFP) guide was used only to find the citation. The current consent rule, exceptions, penalties, and telephone scope still need confirmation from the official New Mexico source.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"N.M. Stat. § 30-12-1","url":"https://nmonesource.com/"}]},{"code":"NY","name":"New York","slug":"new-york","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Eavesdropping","statuteCitation":"N.Y. Penal Law §§ 250.00, 250.05","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/250.00","summary":"The one-party classification is provisional. Current official statute text could not be verified.","exceptions":"Exceptions could not be verified against current official statute text.","penalties":"Penalties could not be verified against current official statute text.","phoneNuance":"Telephone and electronic-communication definitions require verification before relying on this classification.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving New York, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The Reporters Committee (RCFP) guide was used only to find the citations. The current text of Penal Law §§ 250.00 and 250.05, including exceptions and penalties, still needs confirmation from the official New York source.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"N.Y. Penal Law §§ 250.00, 250.05","url":"https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/250.00"}]},{"code":"NC","name":"North Carolina","slug":"north-carolina","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited","statuteCitation":"N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 15A-286, 15A-287, 15A-296","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.ncleg.gov/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_15A/GS_15A-287.html","summary":"The one-party classification is provisional. Current official statute text could not be verified.","exceptions":"Exceptions could not be verified against current official statute text.","penalties":"Criminal penalties and civil remedies could not be verified against current official statute text.","phoneNuance":"Wire, oral, and electronic-communication scope requires verification before relying on this classification.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving North Carolina, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The Reporters Committee (RCFP) guide was used only to find the citations. The current consent rule, exceptions, penalties, and communication definitions still need confirmation from the official North Carolina source.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 15A-286, 15A-287, 15A-296","url":"https://www.ncleg.gov/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_15A/GS_15A-287.html"}]},{"code":"ND","name":"North Dakota","slug":"north-dakota","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Interception of wire or oral communications — Eavesdropping","statuteCitation":"N.D. Cent. Code §§ 12.1-15-02, 12.1-15-04","officialSourceUrl":"https://ndlegis.gov/cencode/t12-1c15.pdf","summary":"Being a party to the communication, or having one party’s prior consent, is a defense to interception when the communication is not intercepted to commit a crime or other unlawful harm.","exceptions":"The private-party defense excludes interception to commit a crime or other unlawful harm. The statute separately provides defenses for lawful authorization and qualifying action under color of law.","penalties":"Section 12.1-15-02 classifies intentional prohibited interception, disclosure, or use as a class C felony.","phoneNuance":"The law uses a wire-or-oral framework. Its wire definition includes a carrier wire, cable, or similar connection used in whole or in part; the definition does not expressly name cellphone calls.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving North Dakota, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official North Dakota Legislative Branch chapter text for §§ 12.1-15-02 and 12.1-15-04. The phone note describes the statutory text and does not assert a wireless exemption.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"N.D. Cent. Code §§ 12.1-15-02, 12.1-15-04","url":"https://ndlegis.gov/cencode/t12-1c15.pdf"}]},{"code":"OH","name":"Ohio","slug":"ohio","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Ohio interception law","statuteCitation":"Ohio Rev. Code § 2933.52","officialSourceUrl":"https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-2933.52","summary":"The candidate one-party classification remains pending official-source verification.","exceptions":"Not verified against official statute text.","penalties":"Not verified against official statute text.","phoneNuance":"Telephone-specific provisions need official-source verification.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Ohio, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The Reporters Committee (RCFP) guide identifies § 2933.52 and describes a one-party rule. The consent rule and penalties still need confirmation from the official Ohio Revised Code. No substantive rule or penalty is treated as verified.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Ohio Rev. Code § 2933.52","url":"https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-2933.52"}]},{"code":"OK","name":"Oklahoma","slug":"oklahoma","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Security of Communications Act","statuteCitation":"Okla. Stat. tit. 13, §§ 176.2–176.4","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.oklegislature.gov/OK_Statutes/CompleteTitles/os13.pdf","summary":"A private person may record a wire, oral, or electronic communication if the recorder is a participant or one participant gives prior consent.","exceptions":"The private-person consent exception does not apply when the recording is made to commit a criminal act. Separate provisions permit specified carrier activity and law-enforcement assistance.","penalties":"Section 176.3 makes unlawful interception, and knowing unlawful disclosure or use, a Class D1 felony. It provides for a fine, imprisonment, or both.","phoneNuance":"The consent exception expressly covers wire and electronic communications. The statutory definition of wire communication includes aural transfers through transmission facilities and switching connections.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Oklahoma, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed §§ 176.2–176.4 in the official Oklahoma Legislature Title 13 compilation. The official index says the statutes were updated November 18, 2025. Section 176.3 includes a penalty amendment effective January 1, 2026. Section 176.4(5) says criminal act; it does not add a tortious-purpose condition.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Okla. Stat. tit. 13, §§ 176.2–176.4","url":"https://www.oklegislature.gov/OK_Statutes/CompleteTitles/os13.pdf"}]},{"code":"OR","name":"Oregon","slug":"oregon","consentType":"all-party","statuteName":"Obtaining contents of communications","statuteCitation":"ORS 165.535; ORS 165.540(1)(a), (1)(c), (2)–(9); ORS 165.543","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors165.html","summary":"Telephone and radio communications generally use a one-party rule. Other conversations generally require all participants to be specifically informed before recording. The statutory conversation definition includes video conferences. Use prior notice to all participants as the conservative practice.","exceptions":"Section 165.540 includes limited exceptions for specified home subscribers or family members, a felony that endangers human life, certain open recordings of on-duty law enforcement, listed meetings or classes, and specified video-conference recordings to capture alleged unlawful activity. Each exception has conditions.","penalties":"A violation of ORS 165.540(1) or (2)(b) is a Class A misdemeanor. ORS 165.543 also makes unauthorized nonparticipant interception without any party’s prior consent a Class A misdemeanor. Numeric sentence or fine limits are not asserted here.","phoneNuance":"ORS 165.540(1)(a) allows participant recording and third-party recording with at least one participant’s consent for telecommunications or radio communications. The separate conversation rule requires prior information to all participants, rather than their express agreement, and has exceptions. The Ninth Circuit’s January 7, 2025 en banc decision upheld the challenged conversation rule; the older 2023 RCFP guide reflects a superseded panel decision.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Oregon, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official Oregon statute text, the official January 7, 2025 Ninth Circuit en banc opinion, and the official Supreme Court docket. The statute text, the 2025 court holding, and the October 6, 2025 petition denial are verified.","additionalSources":[{"label":"Official 2025 en banc opinion","url":"https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2025/01/07/22-35271.pdf"},{"label":"Official Supreme Court docket: petition denied October 6, 2025","url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24-1061.html"}],"sources":[{"label":"ORS 165.535; ORS 165.540(1)(a), (1)(c), (2)–(9); ORS 165.543","url":"https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors165.html"},{"label":"Official 2025 en banc opinion","url":"https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2025/01/07/22-35271.pdf"},{"label":"Official Supreme Court docket: petition denied October 6, 2025","url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24-1061.html"}]},{"code":"PA","name":"Pennsylvania","slug":"pennsylvania","consentType":"all-party","statuteName":"Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act","statuteCitation":"18 Pa. Cons. Stat. §§ 5703, 5704(4), 5704(15), 5725","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/HTM/18/00.057.004.000..HTM","summary":"Obtain every party’s prior consent before recording an ordinary telephone call under the general § 5704(4) exception. Pennsylvania also has narrow statutory exceptions. Do not treat the all-party category as a complete description of every business-call rule.","exceptions":"Section 5704(15) permits personnel of a telephone-marketing or customer-service business to record with one party’s consent solely for training, quality control or monitoring. Those recordings may be used only for training or quality control and must be destroyed within one year unless other law requires otherwise. Other enumerated exceptions include specified service, emergency and authorized investigation recordings.","penalties":"Section 5703 generally makes prohibited interception, use or disclosure a third-degree felony. Section 5725 permits actual or statutory-minimum damages, punitive damages, attorney fees and litigation costs. Numeric criminal sentence and fine ranges are not asserted.","phoneNuance":"The all-party category is a conservative ordinary-call practice. Section 5704(15) is a limited purpose and retention exception, not general permission to record, publish or reuse sales calls. No judicial implied-consent rule is asserted because the official case was not reviewed.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Pennsylvania, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official text of §§ 5703, 5704, and 5725. The Byrd opinion was not reviewed from an official source, so it is not used as authority for a court holding.","additionalSources":[{"label":"Prohibitions and criminal classification: § 5703","url":"https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/HTM/18/00.057.003.000..HTM"},{"label":"Civil action: § 5725","url":"https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/HTM/18/00.057.025.000..HTM"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/pennsylvania/"}],"sources":[{"label":"18 Pa. Cons. Stat. §§ 5703, 5704(4), 5704(15), 5725","url":"https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/HTM/18/00.057.004.000..HTM"},{"label":"Prohibitions and criminal classification: § 5703","url":"https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/HTM/18/00.057.003.000..HTM"},{"label":"Civil action: § 5725","url":"https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/HTM/18/00.057.025.000..HTM"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/pennsylvania/"}]},{"code":"RI","name":"Rhode Island","slug":"rhode-island","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Rhode Island interception statute (official review required)","statuteCitation":"R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-35-21; § 12-5.1-13 (research leads)","officialSourceUrl":"https://webserver.rilegislature.gov/Statutes/TITLE11/11-35/11-35-21.htm","summary":"Official statute review is required before using this entry to decide whether to record a call.","exceptions":"Current exceptions were not verified against official statute text.","penalties":"Current criminal penalties and civil remedies were not verified against official statute text.","phoneNuance":"The telephone-recording rule still needs review against the official code text.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Rhode Island, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The Reporters Committee (RCFP) guide identifies these sections and a one-party classification. It was used only to locate the statutes. The current statute text still needs confirmation from the official Rhode Island source.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-35-21; § 12-5.1-13 (research leads)","url":"https://webserver.rilegislature.gov/Statutes/TITLE11/11-35/11-35-21.htm"}]},{"code":"SC","name":"South Carolina","slug":"south-carolina","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Interception of Wire, Electronic, or Oral Communications","statuteCitation":"S.C. Code §§ 17-30-15, 17-30-20, 17-30-30, 17-30-50, 17-30-135","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t17c030.php","summary":"A private person may record a wire, oral, or electronic communication if the recorder participates or one participant gives prior consent.","exceptions":"Section 17-30-30(C) states the private-person consent exception. Section 17-30-25 separately permits specified provider activity and court-authorized assistance.","penalties":"Unlawful interception and knowing unlawful disclosure or use are felonies. The general penalty is up to five years in prison, a fine up to $5,000, or both. Section 17-30-135 permits civil relief, damages, and litigation costs.","phoneNuance":"The wire-communication definition covers voice transfers through transmission and switching connections. It also includes electronic storage of the communication.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving South Carolina, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official South Carolina Legislature chapter, including the private-person consent rule, definitions, criminal prohibitions, general penalty, and civil remedies.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"S.C. Code §§ 17-30-15, 17-30-20, 17-30-30, 17-30-50, 17-30-135","url":"https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t17c030.php"}]},{"code":"SD","name":"South Dakota","slug":"south-dakota","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Overhearing or recording communications, conversations, or jury deliberations by means of eavesdropping device as felony","statuteCitation":"S.D. Codified Laws §§ 23A-35A-1, 23A-35A-20, 23A-35A-21","officialSourceUrl":"https://sdlegislature.gov/api/Statutes/23A-35A-20.html?all=true","summary":"A sender or receiver may record a communication. A nonparticipant needs the consent of either the sender or receiver to record with an eavesdropping device.","exceptions":"Section 23A-35A-21 exempts court-ordered wiretapping and eavesdropping, normal carrier and switchboard functions, and specified assistance to authorized investigators.","penalties":"Recording covered communications without the required participant status or consent is a Class 5 felony under §23A-35A-20.","phoneNuance":"Wire communication includes transmission by wire, cable, radio, or another connection. The rule for communications uses the consent of either the sender or receiver.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving South Dakota, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official South Dakota Legislature text for §§ 23A-35A-1, -20, and -21. The official site lists September 3, 2026 as the effective date of the latest statutes.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"S.D. Codified Laws §§ 23A-35A-1, 23A-35A-20, 23A-35A-21","url":"https://sdlegislature.gov/api/Statutes/23A-35A-20.html?all=true"},{"label":"§23A-35A-1(15)","url":"https://sdlegislature.gov/api/Statutes/23A-35A-1.html?all=true"},{"label":"§23A-35A-21","url":"https://sdlegislature.gov/api/Statutes/23A-35A-21.html?all=true"}]},{"code":"TN","name":"Tennessee","slug":"tennessee","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Tennessee recording statutes (text pending)","statuteCitation":"Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-13-601–603","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/tncode/","summary":"Official statutory text has not been reviewed. Treat the one-party classification as pending verification.","exceptions":"Consent conditions and exceptions need official-source verification.","penalties":"Criminal and civil penalties need official-source verification.","phoneNuance":"The rules for telephone communications need official-source verification.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Tennessee, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The Reporters Committee (RCFP) guide identifies §§ 39-13-601–603. The consent rule, exceptions, and penalties still need confirmation from the official Tennessee Code source. No legal conclusion has been verified against the current official statute.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-13-601–603","url":"https://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/tncode/"}]},{"code":"TX","name":"Texas","slug":"texas","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Unlawful interception, use, or disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications","statuteCitation":"Tex. Penal Code § 16.02(c)(4), (f); Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 123.004","officialSourceUrl":"https://tcss.legis.texas.gov/resources/PE/htm/PE.16.htm#16.02","summary":"A private person has an affirmative defense when they record a call they take part in. A nonparticipant can use the defense with one party’s prior consent, subject to the unlawful-act exception.","exceptions":"The prior-consent defense in § 16.02(c)(4)(B) excludes interception for the purpose of committing an unlawful act. Section 16.02(b) also prohibits intentional disclosure or use of illegally intercepted communications under its knowledge requirements.","penalties":"Unlawful interception under § 16.02(b) is a second-degree felony. The civil statute provides an injunction, $10,000 per occurrence, actual damages above $10,000, punitive damages, and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs.","phoneNuance":"The recording provision covers wire, oral and electronic communications. Article 18A.001 defines wire communication as a voice transfer made wholly or partly through wire, cable or similar facilities, including a switching station.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Texas, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official Texas Legislature statute text for the cited sections.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Tex. Penal Code § 16.02(c)(4), (f); Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 123.004","url":"https://tcss.legis.texas.gov/resources/PE/htm/PE.16.htm#16.02"},{"label":"§ 123.004","url":"https://tcss.legis.texas.gov/resources/CP/htm/CP.123.htm#123.004"},{"label":"Art. 18A.001(3), (24)","url":"https://tcss.legis.texas.gov/resources/CR/htm/CR.18A.htm#18A.001"}]},{"code":"UT","name":"Utah","slug":"utah","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Interception of Communications Act — Offenses; lawful interception","statuteCitation":"Utah Code §§ 77-23a-4(7)(b), (10); 77-23a-11","officialSourceUrl":"https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title77/Chapter23a/77-23a-S4.html","summary":"A private person may record a call if they are a participant or one participant gives prior consent. This permission excludes recording to commit a criminal or tortious act.","exceptions":"The private-party consent provision does not cover interception for the purpose of committing a criminal or tortious act that violates state or federal law.","penalties":"A violation is generally a third-degree felony. A limited first-offense exception covers an unencrypted cellular radio communication recorded without a tortious, illegal or commercial purpose; that offense is a class B misdemeanor. Civil relief can include an injunction, damages, punitive damages, attorney’s fees and litigation costs.","phoneNuance":"The definitions exclude the radio link between a cordless telephone handset and its base unit from both wire communication and electronic communication.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Utah, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the Utah Legislature’s current official text for §§ 77-23a-3, -4, and -11. The definitions section identifies its current version as effective May 7, 2025.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Utah Code §§ 77-23a-4(7)(b), (10); 77-23a-11","url":"https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title77/Chapter23a/77-23a-S4.html"},{"label":"§ 77-23a-4(7)(b)","url":"https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title77/Chapter23a/C77-23a-S4_1800010118000101.html"},{"label":"§ 77-23a-11(2)","url":"https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title77/Chapter23a/C77-23a-S11_1800010118000101.html"},{"label":"§ 77-23a-3(5)(a), (19)(b)","url":"https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title77/Chapter23a/C77-23a-S3_2025050720250507.html"}]},{"code":"VT","name":"Vermont","slug":"vermont","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Federal wiretap law baseline; no general Vermont telephone consent statute identified","statuteCitation":"18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d), (4)(a); 18 U.S.C. § 2520","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2024-title18/html/USCODE-2024-title18-partI-chap119-sec2511.htm","summary":"This Vermont entry uses the federal one-party baseline. Federal law generally allows a participant, or a person with one participant’s prior consent, to record a telephone call. No separate general Vermont telephone-recording consent statute was identified.","exceptions":"The federal participant or one-party permission does not apply when interception is for a criminal or tortious purpose. Specific types of calls can have separate rules. For example, 18 V.S.A. § 9362(d) bars providers and patients from recording a provider’s telephone consultation with a patient.","penalties":"Federal § 2511(4)(a) provides a fine, imprisonment of up to five years, or both for covered violations, subject to the statute’s exceptions. Federal § 2520 permits civil relief, damages, punitive damages in appropriate cases, and reasonable attorney fees and litigation costs. These are federal penalties; no general Vermont recording penalty is invented.","phoneNuance":"The one-party category is the federal baseline for this entry. It does not establish that every type of call can be recorded in Vermont. Sector-specific rules and other applicable law can still restrict recording.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Vermont, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The federal rule and civil remedies were verified in the official 2024 U.S. Code edition. Later federal amendments still need confirmation. A general Vermont telephone consent statute was not identified. The official Vermont health-care telephone recording restriction was reviewed.","additionalSources":[{"label":"Federal civil remedies (2024 edition)","url":"https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2024-title18/html/USCODE-2024-title18-partI-chap119-sec2520.htm"},{"label":"Official Vermont health-care call recording restriction","url":"https://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/section/18/219/09362"}],"sources":[{"label":"18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d), (4)(a); 18 U.S.C. § 2520","url":"https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2024-title18/html/USCODE-2024-title18-partI-chap119-sec2511.htm"},{"label":"Federal civil remedies (2024 edition)","url":"https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2024-title18/html/USCODE-2024-title18-partI-chap119-sec2520.htm"},{"label":"Official Vermont health-care call recording restriction","url":"https://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/section/18/219/09362"}]},{"code":"VA","name":"Virginia","slug":"virginia","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Interception, disclosure, etc., of wire, electronic or oral communications unlawful; penalties; exceptions","statuteCitation":"Va. Code § 19.2-62","officialSourceUrl":"https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/19.2-62/","summary":"A person may record a wire, electronic, or oral communication if they are a party or one party gave prior consent under § 19.2-62(B)(2).","exceptions":"The service-provider exception is limited to normal employment activities needed to provide service or protect the provider. Random monitoring is restricted to mechanical or service-quality checks.","penalties":"Prohibited interception, disclosure, or use under subsection A is a Class 6 felony. Section 19.2-69 provides civil damages, punitive damages, attorney fees, and litigation costs.","phoneNuance":"The same party-consent exception expressly covers wire, electronic, and oral communications. A nonparticipant needs one party’s prior consent.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Virginia, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Checked each substantive statement against the official Virginia statute text.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Va. Code § 19.2-62","url":"https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/19.2-62/"},{"label":"Va. Code § 19.2-69","url":"https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/19.2-69/"}]},{"code":"WA","name":"Washington","slug":"washington","consentType":"all-party","statuteName":"Privacy: intercepting and recording private communications","statuteCitation":"RCW 9.73.030(1)–(4), 9.73.060, 9.73.080","officialSourceUrl":"https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.73.030","summary":"Private telephone communications generally require consent from every participant. Section 9.73.030(3) deems consent obtained when one party makes a reasonably effective recording announcement to all others; the announcement must also be recorded.","exceptions":"Section 9.73.030(2) permits one-party recording for specified emergency, threatening, anonymous, repeated, inconvenient-hour, hostage or barricade communications. Section (4) has a specific news-gathering rule. These are limited statutory exceptions.","penalties":"A violation of RCW 9.73.030 is generally a gross misdemeanor under RCW 9.73.080. RCW 9.73.060 permits actual damages or the specified liquidated damages, attorney fees and litigation costs. Numeric criminal sentence and fine ranges are not asserted.","phoneNuance":"The statute covers private communications, including telephone calls within or outside the state. Recorded effective notice is an express route to statutory consent. This differs from rules that require a separate affirmative agreement in every case.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Washington, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official Washington Legislature text for all three sections. No judicial consent or privacy interpretation is asserted.","additionalSources":[{"label":"Civil action: RCW 9.73.060","url":"https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.73.060"},{"label":"Penalties: RCW 9.73.080","url":"https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.73.080"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/washington/"}],"sources":[{"label":"RCW 9.73.030(1)–(4), 9.73.060, 9.73.080","url":"https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.73.030"},{"label":"Civil action: RCW 9.73.060","url":"https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.73.060"},{"label":"Penalties: RCW 9.73.080","url":"https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.73.080"},{"label":"Reporters Committee discovery guide","url":"https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/washington/"}]},{"code":"WV","name":"West Virginia","slug":"west-virginia","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Act: interception of communications generally","statuteCitation":"W. Va. Code § 62-1D-3","officialSourceUrl":"https://code.wvlegislature.gov/62-1D-3/","summary":"A person may record a wire, oral, or electronic communication if they are a party or one party gave prior consent, subject to the criminal-or-tortious-purpose restriction.","exceptions":"The party-consent exception excludes interception for a criminal or tortious act. Providers have a separate normal-employment exception, with restrictions on random monitoring.","penalties":"Violations of subsection (a), including prohibited interception and knowing disclosure or use, are felonies. Section 62-1D-12 also provides civil damages and litigation costs.","phoneNuance":"The consent rule expressly includes wire and electronic communications. Consent must be prior when the recorder is not a party.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving West Virginia, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Checked each substantive statement against the official West Virginia statute text.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"W. Va. Code § 62-1D-3","url":"https://code.wvlegislature.gov/62-1D-3/"},{"label":"W. Va. Code § 62-1D-12(a)","url":"https://code.wvlegislature.gov/62-1D-12/"}]},{"code":"WI","name":"Wisconsin","slug":"wisconsin","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Interception of communications","statuteCitation":"Wis. Stat. § 968.31","officialSourceUrl":"https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/968/31","summary":"The one-party classification is provisional. Current official statute text requires review.","exceptions":"Review required. Exceptions were not verified against current official statute text.","penalties":"Review required. Penalties were not verified against current official statute text.","phoneNuance":"Review required. Telephone-specific scope was not verified against current official statute text.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Wisconsin, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"needs-verification","verificationNote":"Needs verification: The Reporters Committee (RCFP) guide was used only to find § 968.31. The consent rule, exceptions, penalties, and telephone scope still need confirmation from the official Wisconsin Legislature source.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Wis. Stat. § 968.31","url":"https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/968/31"}]},{"code":"WY","name":"Wyoming","slug":"wyoming","consentType":"one-party","statuteName":"Prohibition against interception or disclosure of wire, oral or electronic communications; exceptions; penalties","statuteCitation":"Wyo. Stat. § 7-3-702","officialSourceUrl":"https://wyoleg.gov/statutes/compress/title07.pdf","summary":"A person may record an oral, wire, or electronic communication if they are a party or one party gave prior consent, unless the interception is for a criminal or tortious act.","exceptions":"The party-consent exception excludes interception for a criminal or tortious act. Other exceptions include qualifying service-provider activity and authorized law-enforcement interception.","penalties":"Violations are generally felonies. Section 7-3-702(f) treats interception of specified telephone or paging radio portions as misdemeanors. Section 7-3-710 provides civil damages, punitive damages, and litigation costs.","phoneNuance":"The misdemeanor provision specifically names cellular and cordless telephone radio portions. The consent exception still expressly covers wire, oral, and electronic communications.","interstateNote":"For an interstate call involving Wyoming, this reference uses the more protective practice label for the selected jurisdictions. That practice does not decide which law governs the call. Check each participant's actual location and the other state's notes before recording.","disclosure":"With your permission, I would like to record this call to keep an accurate record of our conversation. Is that okay with everyone on the call?","lastReviewed":"2026-10-08","verificationStatus":"verified","verificationNote":"Reviewed the official Wyoming Legislature Title 7 text for §§ 7-3-701, 7-3-702, and 7-3-710.","additionalSources":[],"sources":[{"label":"Wyo. Stat. § 7-3-702","url":"https://wyoleg.gov/statutes/compress/title07.pdf"}]}]}