In 2006, two women who worked for an Ohio insurance salesman found an unpleasant surprise in their company’s bathroom – a hidden video camera. The women, Sara Koeppel and Deanna Miller, filed a lawsuit against their boss, Robert Speirs, for invading their privacy. Last month, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that the case could go forward, even though the camera didn’t work properly.
According to Speirs, Koeppel’s job performance had deteriorated over time and he suspected her of abusing drugs on the job. He claims he installed the camera originally in the reception area to monitor her performance. After two weeks, he moved the camera to the bathroom, after he claimed he found a used needle in the parking lot under Koeppel’s car.
Koeppel and Miller found the hidden camera before Speirs could remove it and informed the authorities. While Speirs was acquitted on any criminal charges, the women went ahead with a civil lawsuit, seeking to hold Speirs liable for invading their right to privacy at work. In its written opinion, the Iowa Supreme Court explained that a victim doesn’t have to be physically harmed in order have a case for damages. The court stated “Harm from intrusion occurs when a plaintiff reasonably believes an intrusion has occurred.”
While the outcome of the case remains to be seen, the state Supreme Court’s ruling goes a long way to establishing the rights of private individuals. According to the opinion, once an individual’s right to privacy is violated, even if there is no lasting harm, he or she may have a case.
Image c/o: dmuth
