§ 6.5.4.6.1 PRIVATE SOLITUDE OR SECLUSION.

• Jurisdiction: Arizona

§ 6.5.4.6.1 Private Solitude or Seclusion. The tort of intrusion upon seclusion "consists solely of an intentional interference with his [or her] interest in solitude or seclusion, either as to his [or her] person or as to his [or her] private affairs or concerns.⁵⁴ In order to be liable for intrusion upon seclusion, the invasion must be into a person's private place or affairs; there is no tort liability for examining public records concerning the plaintiff or observing the plaintiff in public areas.⁵⁵ "Regardless of the method of intrusion used, a plaintiff can recover "only if he had an objectively reasonable expectation of seclusion or solitude in the place, conversation, or data source."⁵⁶

Courts have recognized a diminished expectation of privacy in the workplace.⁵⁷ For example, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has found there is no invasion of privacy where a supervisor followed an employee into a public bathroom and when she exited the stall, he allegedly "approached her, grabbed her arms and gave her an open mouth kiss and stuck his tongue in her mouth."⁵⁸ The employee had no reasonable expectation of privacy "in the common area of the restroom, where she would expect her conduct to be observed by other individuals in the restroom."⁵⁹ Likewise, where an employee has voluntarily disclosed private information or consented to the intrusion, there may be no reasonable expectation of privacy.⁶⁰ Employers may impose disciplinary action where the employee's off-duty drug use is directly related to his or her job performance.⁶¹

On the other hand, an employee may have a reasonable expectation of privacy as it relates to invasion of their personal matters, which are unrelated to the workplace.⁶² For example, inquiries into an employee's sexual relations may violate the employee's privacy.⁶³

--------

Notes:

^[54]Med. Lab. Mgmt. Consultants v. Am. Broad. Cos., 30 F. Supp. 2d 1182...