(a)Every person who, without the consent of all of the parties to a communication, intercepts or receives and intentionally records, or assists in the interception or reception and intentional recordation of, a communication transmitted between two cellular radio telephones, a cellular radio telephone and a landline telephone, two cordless telephones, a cordless telephone and a landline telephone, or a cordless telephone and a cellular radio telephone, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment. If the person has been convicted previously of a
violation of this section or of Section 631, 632, 632.5, 632.6, or 636, the person shall be punished by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment.
(b)This section shall not apply to any of the following:
(1)Any public utility, or telephone company, engaged in the business of providing communications services and facilities, or to the officers, employees, or agents thereof, where the acts otherwise prohibited are for the purpose of construction, maintenance, conduct, or operation
of the services and facilities of the public
utility or telephone company.
(2)The use of any instrument, equipment, facility, or service furnished and used pursuant to the tariffs of the public utility.
(3)Any telephonic communication system used for communication exclusively within a state, county, city and county, or city correctional facility.
(c)For purposes of this section, “telephone company” is defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 638.
(d)As used in this section, each of the following terms have the following meaning:
(1)“Cellular radio telephone” means a wireless telephone authorized by the Federal Communications Commission to operate in the frequency bandwidth reserved for cellular radio telephones.
(2)“Cordless telephone” means a two-way, low power communication system consisting of two parts, a “base” unit which connects to the public switched telephone network and a handset or “remote” unit, that are connected by a radio link and authorized by the Federal Communications Commission to operate in the frequency bandwidths reserved for cordless telephones.
(3)“Communication” includes, but is not limited to, communications transmitted by voice, data, or image, including facsimile.
Notes of Decisions
Campbell v. Facebook Inc., 315 F.R.D. 250 (N.D. Cal. 2016).
“Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 . Plaintiffs do not appear to seek any sum for “actual damages” that they suffered, but instead, seek damages measured by profits made by Facebook (under ECPA) and/or statutory damages (under ECPA and CIPA).”
Torres v. Nutrisystem, Inc., 289 F.R.D. 587 (C.D. Cal. 2013).
“Similarly, California Penal Code § 632.7 prohibits recording communications involving a cellular phone without the consent of all parties.”
CS Wang & Assoc. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 305 F. Supp. 3d 864 (E.D. Ill. 2018).
“" Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 (a). The Amended Complaint alleges that three of the four named Plaintiffs received telemarketing calls from Defendants on a cellular or cordless telephone.”
People v. Chavez, 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2863 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996).
“2d 171, 178 ; Pen. Code, § 632.7, subd. (c)(2).) The CI sought authorization to continue the monitoring.”
Wang v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (N.D. Ill. 2020).
· cites it 6× “All Defendants move for partial judgment on the pleadings [433, 439, 441], arguing that a recent California decision bars Plaintiffs’ CAL. PENAL CODE § 632.7 claims as a matter of law.”
Maghen v. Quicken Loans Inc., 94 F. Supp. 3d 1141 (C.D. Cal. 2015).
“*1147 Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Quicken’s motion for summary judgment on Ma-ghen’s sole claim in the complaint under CaLPenal Code § 632.7 due to the existence of consent.”
Schick v. Compass Lending Corp. (D. Ariz. 2019).
· cites it 4× “CIPA Claim (Count Two) 13 Under California Penal Code § 632.7, an individual who “intercepts or receives and 14 intentionally records” a call made to a cellular phone without the other party’s consent 15 “shall be punished by a fine.”
Brinkley v. Monterey Fin. Servs., Inc. (S.D. Cal. 2020).
· cites it 4× “11 Cal. Pen. Code § 632.7 (a). Section 637.2 of the California Penal Code authorizes “any 12 person who has been injured by a violation of this chapter” to bring an action for the greater 13 of “[f]ive thousand dollars ($5,000) per violation” or “[t]hree times the amount of…”
Ewing v. DME Capital, LLC (S.D. Cal. 2024).
· cites it 4× “1 § 227(b)(1); (2) TCPA’s restrictions on calls to phone numbers on the National Do Not 2 Call Registry, id.”
Franklin v. OCWEN Loan Servicing, LLC (N.D. Cal. 2020).
· cites it 3× “Plaintiff brings one claim for relief, for illegal recording of cellular phone 4 conversations pursuant to California Penal Code section 632.7, which is part of the California 5 Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”).”
James v. Allstate Ins. Co. (N.D. Cal. 2023).
· cites it 3× “) The parties stipulated to Plaintiff 22 filing an amended complaint adding a claim under California Penal Code § 632.7. (Dkt. No. 32.”
— Cal. Penal Code § 632.7(a) — 7 cases
Wang v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (N.D. Ill. 2020).
“All Defendants move for partial judgment on the pleadings [433, 439, 441], arguing that a recent California decision bars Plaintiffs’ CAL. PENAL CODE § 632.7 claims as a matter of law.”
— Cal. Penal Code § 632.7(c)(l) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.