Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5741 (2026)

  Unlawful access to stored communications.

✓ current as of May 2026
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

 

 

SUBCHAPTER C

STORED WIRE AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS

AND TRANSACTIONAL RECORDS ACCESS

 

Sec.

5741.  Unlawful access to stored communications.

5742.  Disclosure of contents and records.

5743.  Requirements for governmental access.

5743.1. Administrative subpoena.

5744.  Backup preservation.

5745.  Delayed notice.

5746.  Cost reimbursement.

5747.  Civil action.

5748.  Exclusivity of remedies.

5749.  Retention of certain records.

5750.  Department of Corrections retention policy.

 

Enactment.  Subchapter C was added October 21, 1988, P.L.1000, No.115, effective immediately.

§ 5741.  Unlawful access to stored communications.

(a)  Offense.--Except as provided in subsection (c), it is an offense to obtain, alter or prevent authorized access to a wire or electronic communication while it is in electronic storage by intentionally:

(1)  accessing without authorization a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided; or

(2)  exceeding the scope of one's authorization to access the facility.

(b)  Penalty.--

(1)  If the offense is committed for the purpose of commercial advantage, malicious destruction or damage, or private commercial gain, the offender shall be subject to:

(i)  a fine of not more than $250,000 or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in the case of a first offense; or

(ii)  a fine of not more than $250,000 or imprisonment for not more than two years, or both, for any subsequent offense.

(2)  In any other case, the offender shall be subject to a fine of not more than $5,000 or imprisonment for not more than six months, or both.

(c)  Exceptions.--Subsection (a) of this section does not apply with respect to conduct authorized:

(1)  by the person or entity providing a wire or electronic communication service;

(2)  by a user of that service with respect to a communication of or intended for that user; or

(3)  in section 5743 (relating to requirements for governmental access) or 5744 (relating to backup preservation).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2001–2022 · leading case: Canada v. Samuel Grossi & Sons Inc, 49 F.4th 340 (3rd Cir. 2022).
Canada v. Samuel Grossi & Sons Inc, 49 F.4th 340 (3rd Cir. 2022). “(Count IV); unlawful access to stored communications under Pennsylvania’s Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act, 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5741 et seq. (Count V); and invasion of privacy under state common law (Count VI).”
Frankentek Residential Sys., LLC v. Buerger, 15 F. Supp. 3d 574 (E.D. Pa. 2014). · cites it 2× “Violation of 18 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. § 5741 (“Unlawful Access to Stored Communications”) (with respect to the Pennsylvania Property only); IV.”
Brooks v. AM Resorts, LLC, 954 F. Supp. 2d 331 (E.D. Pa. 2013). · cites it 2× “, and the Pennsylvania counterpart to the SCA, 18 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. § 5741, et seq. I *333 exercise jurisdiction over Brooks’ federal claims pursuant to 28 U.”
Fraser v. Nationwide Mut. Ins., 135 F. Supp. 2d 623 (E.D. Pa. 2001). “, and 18 Pa.C.S. § 5741. 10 Defendants argue that summary judgment should be granted on Counts I-IV.”
McCulligan v. Pennsylvania State Police, 123 A.3d 1136 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2015). “3d 1185 (2012) (single-judge opinion reiterating the distinction made in Boettger and noting: “[I]n the absence of specific language stating otherwise, this Court is arguably not vested with jurisdiction to hear claims made under either Sections 5741 or 5747 [of the Wiretap Act,…”
Lane v. CBS Broad. Inc., 612 F. Supp. 2d 623 (E.D. Pa. 2009). · cites it 2× “1 Plaintiff’s Complaint contains eighteen state-law claims including: defamation; false light; invasion of privacy; tortious interference with prospective contractual relations; unlawful interception and disclosure of electronic communications under 18 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. §§…”
Welch v. Palka, 983 A.2d 209 (Pa. 2009). · cites it 4× “§ 5703 and 18 Pa.C.S. § 5741, and, absent full and sufficient legal analysis of these and related provisions by the Commonwealth Court establishing otherwise, it appearing that Appellant has alleged sufficient facts that may meet the criteria for establishing violations of these…”
Canada v. Samuel Grossi & Sons, Inc. (E.D. Pa. 2020). · cites it 5× “(Count IV); unlawful access to stored communications pursuant to Subchapter C of Pennsylvania’s Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act (“Pennsylvania SCA”) 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5741 et seq. (Count V); and invasion of privacy (Count VI).”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5741(a) — 1 case
Canada v. Samuel Grossi & Sons, Inc. (E.D. Pa. 2020). “(Count IV); unlawful access to stored communications pursuant to Subchapter C of Pennsylvania’s Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act (“Pennsylvania SCA”) 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5741 et seq. (Count V); and invasion of privacy (Count VI).”
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.