Alexander v. Verizon Wireless Servs. LLC.

• Author: Nowell, Laura

875 F.3D 243 (5TH CIR. 2017)

In Alexander v. Verizon Wireless Servs. LLC, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's judgement dismissing the plaintiff's complaint for failing to state a claim against the defendant, Verizon Wireless, under the Stored Communications Act (SCA), 18 U.S.C. [section][section] 2701 --2712. (28) The Fifth Circuit applied an objective standard to the good faith requirements found in the SCA, sections 2702(c)(4) and 2707(e)(1). The Court held that Verizon acted in an objectively reasonable manner after construing the facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. (29)

1. BACKGROUND

   In 1986, Congress passed the Stored Communications Act, a part of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, to regulate the privacy of stored communications within the United States and to control the disclosure of stored electronic communications by service providers. (30) The general purposes of the SCA include: 1) prohibiting unauthorized access to certain electronic communications, 2) restricting service providers from voluntarily disclosing the contents of customer records to certain entities and individuals, and 3) permitting a governmental entity to compel a service provider to disclose customer communications or records in certain circumstances. (31) Section 2707(c)(4) of the SCA, referred to as the "emergency exception" states, "a service provider may divulge a record or other information pertaining to a subscriber to or customer of such service...to a governmental entity, if the provider, in good faith, believes that an emergency involving danger of death or serious physical injury to any person requires disclosure without delay of information relating to the emergency..." (32)

   In 2014, Verizon released subscriber records to a detective pursuant to the "emergency exception" of the SCA, which in part provided the basis for the plaintiff's arrest and the charge of aggravated arson and two counts of attempted second degree murder. (33) The detective provided Verizon with a form indicating that the information requested pertained to an arson, where a house was set on fire with two individuals inside, and the detective certified that the request potentially involved "the danger of death or serious physical injury to a person, necessitating the immediate release of information relating to the emergency." (34) Verizon subsequently provided the detective with the requested information, which included the...