Alaska
Alaska Audio Recording Laws: One-Party Consent Rules and Penalties (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited November 1, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of November 1, 2026. · 8 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Alaska follows a one-party consent rule for audio recording under AS 42.20.310. Because the statute prohibits recording without the consent of a party to the conversation, a person who takes part in a conversation may record it without notifying others. Violations by non-participants carry up to one year in jail and fines up to $25,000.
Alaska allows individuals to record their own conversations without telling other participants. Under AS 42.20.310, the state follows a one-party consent framework for audio recording, meaning only one person involved in the conversation needs to agree to the recording. That person can be you.
This page covers the specific rules governing audio recording in Alaska, including what types of recordings are legal, the penalties for violations, key exceptions, and what the failed SB 85 would have changed.
Alaska's One-Party Consent Standard for Audio
Alaska's wiretapping and eavesdropping laws are found in Alaska Statutes Title 42, Chapter 20, Article 4. The primary statute governing audio recording is AS 42.20.310, which prohibits the use of an "eavesdropping device" to hear or record any part of an oral conversation without the consent of a party to the conversation.

The phrase "consent of a party" is the foundation of Alaska's one-party consent rule. Because the law requires consent from only one participant, any person who is part of the conversation satisfies this requirement simply by choosing to record. You do not need to announce that you are recording or obtain permission from anyone else.
What Counts as an "Eavesdropping Device"?
AS 42.20.310 defines an "eavesdropping device" broadly as any device capable of hearing or recording an oral conversation, whether conducted in person, by telephone, or by any other means. This includes:
- Smartphones and their built-in recording apps
- Digital voice recorders
- Laptop and desktop microphones
- AI wearable recorders (such as Plaud or similar devices)
- Smart speakers with recording features
- Any software that captures audio on a computer or phone
The statute specifically excludes hearing aids and devices used by people with hearing impairments to restore normal hearing.
The Palmer v. State Precedent
The Alaska Supreme Court addressed participant recording in Palmer v. State, 604 P.2d 1106, 1108 n.5 (Alaska 1979). In this footnote, the court held that AS 11.60.290, the eavesdropping statute Palmer invoked, was intended to prohibit third-party eavesdropping and did not apply where one of the participants recorded the conversation. Notably, AS 42.20.310 sits inside Title 42 (Public Utilities) rather than the criminal code.
The Palmer footnote addressed AS 11.60.290; the opinion does not discuss AS 42.20.310.
The Glass Warrant Overlay for Police Recording
A separate Alaska constitutional rule applies when law enforcement is the recording party. In State v. Glass, 583 P.2d 872 (Alaska 1978), the Alaska Supreme Court held that Article I, sections 14 and 22 of the Alaska Constitution require police to obtain a judicial warrant (the "Glass warrant") before consensually monitoring or recording a target's conversation, even though federal Title III would allow one-party consent. The Alaska Court of Appeals reaffirmed this rule in Cleveland v. State (Alaska Ct. App. 2020). The Glass-warrant rule is the strongest deviation from the federal one-party baseline in Alaska law, but it constrains the state, not private citizens.
When Audio Recording Is Legal in Alaska
Recording Your Own Conversations
You can legally record any conversation you actively participate in. This applies to:
- Face-to-face conversations
- Phone calls (landline, cell, VoIP)
- Video calls with audio (Zoom, Teams, Google Meet)
- Group conversations where you are a participant
- Voice messages and voicemail
There is no requirement to provide notice, obtain written consent, or use any particular recording method. The only requirement is that you are a party to the conversation.
Recording with Consent from One Party
If you are not a participant in the conversation, you can still legally record if you have the consent of at least one party. For example, if a friend asks you to record their phone call for them, and that friend is a participant in the call, the recording is legal because one party (your friend) has consented.
Recording in Public Places
Audio recording in public spaces where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy is generally permitted. Public places include:
- Streets, sidewalks, and parks
- Government buildings open to the public
- Public transportation
- Stores and restaurants (though the business owner may set their own rules)
- Public meetings and government proceedings
In these settings, conversations can be overheard by anyone nearby, so there is typically no reasonable expectation of privacy.
When Audio Recording Is Illegal in Alaska

Third-Party Eavesdropping
The primary prohibition under AS 42.20.310 targets third-party eavesdropping. It is illegal to use a recording device to capture a conversation between other people when none of the participants have consented. Examples of illegal recording include:
- Placing a hidden microphone in someone else's home to record their conversations
- Tapping a phone line to listen to calls between other people
- Using a directional microphone to record a private conversation from a distance
- Planting a recording device in a meeting room you will not be attending
Recording in Areas with a Reasonable Expectation of Privacy
Even if you could technically hear a conversation, recording in locations where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy may violate the law. Courts evaluate this on a case-by-case basis, but areas that typically carry a reasonable expectation of privacy include:
- Private homes (when you are not present)
- Hotel rooms
- Medical examination rooms (when you are not the patient)
- Attorney-client meeting spaces
- Restrooms and changing areas
Unauthorized Publication of Recorded Communications
AS 42.20.300 separately prohibits the unauthorized publication or use of communications obtained through illegal recording. Even if someone else made the illegal recording, knowingly using or distributing that recording can result in criminal liability.
Penalties for Illegal Audio Recording
Under AS 42.20.330, illegal eavesdropping is classified as a Class A misdemeanor in Alaska. AS 42.20.330 is the penalty provision only; it does not create a private civil cause of action. The maximum penalties come from the general sentencing provisions of AS 12.55.135(a) (jail) and AS 12.55.035(b)(5) (fine):
| Penalty | Maximum |
|---|---|
| Jail time | Up to 1 year |
| Fine | Up to $25,000 |
Each recording may be charged as a separate offense, depending on how prosecutors and courts count the violations.
Civil Liability
Alaska does not provide a state-law civil cause of action for eavesdropping (AS 42.20.330 is a penalty section, not a private right of action). Victims must instead rely on federal and common-law remedies, including:
- Common-law intrusion upon seclusion under Alaska tort law
- Intentional infliction of emotional distress if the recording caused severe emotional harm
- Federal Wiretap Act damages under 18 U.S.C. Section 2520, which provides for statutory damages, actual damages, punitive damages, and attorney's fees
- Injunctive relief to prevent further recording or distribution
Federal Law and Alaska Audio Recording

The federal Wiretap Act (18 U.S.C. Section 2511) also governs the interception of wire, oral, and electronic communications. Like Alaska law, the federal statute follows a one-party consent standard. Recording is permitted when one party to the communication consents, unless the recording is made for the purpose of committing a criminal or tortious act.
That purpose limit is the one place the two laws differ. Alaska's statute has no such limit, so a participant recording made to commit a crime or a tort, such as blackmail, can be lawful under AS 42.20.310 and still violate federal law. For ordinary recordings made for legitimate reasons, the two rules line up.
Interstate Recording Considerations
When you record a conversation that crosses state lines, the laws of both states may apply. If you are in Alaska recording a call with someone in a two-party consent state such as California, Florida, or Washington, that state's law may also apply. Courts disagree about which state's law governs a cross-border call. The states that require every party's consent for at least one major kind of conversation are:
- California
- Connecticut
- Delaware
- Florida
- Illinois
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Montana
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Washington
Some of these are partial. Connecticut (a civil rule) and Nevada require every party's consent only for phone calls, Oregon only for in-person conversations and video calls, and Delaware has two statutes that conflict.
The safest approach for interstate calls is to inform all parties that the call is being recorded or to consult with an attorney about which state's law applies. Before you call, our recording consent checker can show you which rule applies to the state on the other end.
Senate Bill 85: The Failed All-Party Consent Bill
Senate Bill 85, introduced in the 34th Alaska Legislature, would have converted Alaska from a one-party consent state to an all-party consent state. It did not pass.
What SB 85 Would Have Changed
SB 85 would have:
- Changed the consent standard from "a party" to "all parties to the communication"
- Made Alaska an all-party consent state for audio recording
- Required everyone in a conversation to agree before any recording can take place
Law Enforcement Exemption
SB 85 included an exemption for law enforcement officers. Police would be permitted to record interactions with the public, gather evidence, and investigate crimes without obtaining consent from all parties. However, this exemption would not extend to members of the public recording police officers.
This asymmetric exemption has drawn criticism from civil liberties organizations and journalists who argue it would create an uneven playing field between law enforcement and the public.
Current Status
SB 85 never moved past the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee after its February 5, 2025 referral, and the Legislature's 2026 regular session ended May 20, 2026 with no action on it. It was not enacted, and Alaska remains a one-party consent state. A similar bill could be filed in a future session; the Alaska Legislature website shows its record.
Recording in Specific Situations

Workplace Audio Recording
Alaska's one-party consent law applies in the workplace. You can record conversations with coworkers, supervisors, HR representatives, or anyone else at work, provided you are participating in the conversation. This can be useful for documenting harassment, preserving verbal instructions, or creating a record of disciplinary meetings.
However, your employer may have internal policies that prohibit recording. Violating a company policy is not a criminal offense, but it could lead to disciplinary action or termination. Review your employee handbook before recording at work.
Recording Medical Appointments
You can record your own medical appointments in Alaska without informing your healthcare provider. This can help you remember complex medical instructions, share information with family caregivers, or document informed consent discussions. Note that healthcare facilities may have their own recording policies on their private property.
Recording Landlord Interactions
Tenants in Alaska can record conversations with landlords to document verbal agreements about repairs, lease terms, security deposits, or instances of harassment. As a participant in the conversation, you satisfy the one-party consent requirement.
Using Audio Recordings as Evidence in Alaska
Recordings made in compliance with Alaska's one-party consent law are generally admissible as evidence in Alaska courts. However, courts evaluate several factors before admitting a recording:
- Authentication: You must demonstrate the recording is genuine and has not been altered or edited
- Relevance: The recording must relate to the issues in the case
- Hearsay considerations: Recorded statements may face hearsay objections depending on the purpose for which they are offered
- Prejudicial vs. probative value: The court weighs whether the evidentiary value outweighs any unfair prejudice
Illegally obtained recordings are generally inadmissible in criminal cases and may also be excluded in civil proceedings. Making an illegal recording can expose you to both criminal charges and civil liability, regardless of what the recording contains.
Best Practices for Legal Audio Recording in Alaska
While Alaska's one-party consent law is straightforward, following these practices can help protect your recordings' legal value:
-
Always be a participant. The safest way to ensure your recording is legal is to be an active participant in the conversation you are recording.
-
Use reliable equipment. Choose a recording device or app that captures clear audio. Poor quality recordings lose evidentiary value.
-
Preserve the original file. Keep the unedited original recording. Courts may question recordings that appear to have been altered.
-
Note the date, time, and participants. Create a log entry for each recording with basic metadata.
-
Store recordings securely. Protect your recordings from unauthorized access. Use encrypted storage when possible.
-
Consider informing the other party. Even though Alaska does not require it, voluntarily disclosing that you are recording can prevent disputes about the recording's legality and may encourage more honest communication.
-
Consult an attorney for sensitive situations. If you plan to use a recording in legal proceedings, discuss your recording strategy with a lawyer before you begin.
Wearable Audio Recording Devices
Modern wearable devices like AI voice recorders (Plaud, Otter, and similar products) and smart glasses with microphones are increasingly common in Alaska workplaces and daily life. Under AS 42.20.310, these devices are treated the same as any other recording device. You can use them to record conversations you participate in without notifying others.
The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) Section 7 provides additional federal protection for employees who use recording devices as part of concerted activity, such as documenting unsafe working conditions or gathering evidence of labor law violations.
Had SB 85 passed and made Alaska an all-party consent state, using wearable recorders without everyone's explicit permission would have become illegal for audio capture.
More Alaska Recording Topics
More Alaska Recording Laws
More Alaska Laws
- Alaska AI Meeting Recording Laws
- Alaska Dashcam Laws
- Alaska Data Privacy Laws
- Alaska Deepfake Laws
- Alaska Employee Monitoring Laws
- Alaska GPS Tracking Laws
- Alaska Police Bodycam Laws
- Alaska Smart Glasses Recording Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I record a conversation in Alaska without telling the other person?
Yes. Alaska is a one-party consent state under AS 42.20.310. As a participant in the conversation, you satisfy the consent requirement by choosing to record. You do not need to notify or obtain permission from any other participant.
What happens if I record someone else's conversation in Alaska?
Recording a conversation between other people without the consent of any participant is illegal under AS 42.20.310. This third-party eavesdropping is a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to 1 year in jail and fines up to $25,000. You may also face civil liability for invasion of privacy.
Is it legal to use a voice recorder app on my phone in Alaska?
Yes, as long as you are a participant in the conversation being recorded. The statute applies to any device capable of recording oral conversation, including smartphone apps. The type of device does not matter; what matters is that at least one party to the conversation has consented.
Will Alaska become an all-party consent state?
Governor Dunleavy introduced Senate Bill 85 in February 2025, which would require all parties to consent before recording. The bill never advanced beyond its initial committee referral, and the 2026 regular session ended May 20, 2026 with no action on it. Alaska remains a one-party consent state.
Can I record a phone call with someone in another state while I am in Alaska?
You can legally record the call under Alaska law, but the other state's law may also apply. If the other person is in an all-party consent state like California or Florida, that state's law may apply, and courts disagree about which state's law governs. For interstate calls, the safest approach is to inform all parties that the call is being recorded.
Updates
We corrected the list of all-party consent states, explained that federal law bars a participant recording made to commit a crime or tort even though Alaska law does not, updated the status of SB 85, and removed unsupported claims about the statute's origin and how violations are counted. Updated the description, headings and SB 85 passages to reflect that SB 85 died in committee without action and the 2026 regular session ended May 20, 2026, so it is no longer described as a pending proposal.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected the description of Palmer v. State to the statute the court actually addressed (AS 11.60.290) and removed an unsupported claim that courts had construed AS 42.20.310.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Alaska Statutes, Title 42. Public Utilities and Carriers and Energy Programs, Chapter 20. Telegraph and Telephone Systems and Cable Lines; Eavesdropping
§ 42.20.310EavesdroppingIn forcecited in 21 of our articles
(a) A person may not (1) use an eavesdropping device to hear or record all or any part of an oral conversation without the consent of a party to the conversation; (2) use or divulge any information which the person knows or reasonably should know was obtained through the illegal use of an eavesdropping device for personal benefit or another's benefit; (3) publish the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of any conversation the person has heard through the illegal use of an eavesdropping device; (4) divulge, or publish the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of any conversation the person has become acquainted with after the person knows or reasonably should know that the conversation and the information contained in the conversation was obtained through the illegal use of an eavesdropping device. (b) In this section eavesdropping device means any device capable of being used to hear or record oral conversation whether the conversation is conducted in person, by telephone, or by any other means; provided that this definition does not include devices used for the restoration of the deaf or hard-of-hearing to normal or partial hearing.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-23 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at akleg.gov
Also relied on in: Alaska Smart Glasses Recording Laws 2026, One-Party Consent States: Complete 2026 Guide, Alaska Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules
§ 42.20.300Unauthorized publication or use of communicationsIn forcecited in 7 of our articles
(a) Except for a party to a private conversation, a person who receives or assists in receiving, or who transmits or assists in transmitting, a private communication may not divulge or publish the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of the communication, except through authorized channels of transmission or reception (1) to the addressee or the agent or attorney of the addressee; (2) to a person employed or authorized to forward a communication to its destination; (3) to proper accounting or distributing officers of the various communicating centers over which the communication may be passed; (4) to the master of a ship under whom the person is serving; (5) to another on demand of lawful authority; or (6) in response to a subpoena issued or order entered by a court of competent jurisdiction. (b) Except as provided in AS 12.37, a person not authorized by a party to the communication may not intentionally intercept a private communication or divulge or publish the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of the intercepted communication to any person.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at akleg.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 1999
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Bachlet v. State (Court of Appeals of Alaska 1997, 941 P.2d 200)“…to the general statutory prohibition on eavesdropping under AS 42.20.300(b).[ 7 ] In this case, Phillip Carter…”
- Boehner, John A. v. McDermott, James A. (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 1999, 191 F.3d 463)“…C. § 2511 . See Ala. Code §§ 13A-ll-31,13A-ll-35 (1994); Alaska Stat. §§ 42.20.300 to 42.20.330 (Michie 1989 & Supp.1995)…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Alaska Dashcam Laws: Recording Rules, Windshield Mounting, and Legal Limits (2026), Alaska School Recording Laws: Student Privacy, FERPA, and Classroom Rules (2026), Alaska Data Privacy Laws: Constitutional Privacy & Breach Rules (2026)
§ 42.20.330PenaltyIn forcecited in 11 of our articles
A person who violates any of the provisions of AS 42.20.300 and 42.20.310 is guilty of a class A misdemeanor.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at akleg.gov
Also relied on in: Alaska Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws: Cameras, Privacy Rights, and Disputes (2026), Alaska Phone Call Recording Laws: Rules for Landline, Cell, and VoIP (2026), Alaska Employee Monitoring Laws (2026): Workplace Privacy Rules
Alaska Statutes, Title 12. Code of Criminal Procedure, Chapter 55. Sentencing and Probation
§ 12.55.035FinesIn forcecited in 13 of our articles
(a) Upon conviction of an offense, a defendant may be sentenced to pay a fine as authorized in this section or as otherwise authorized by law. (b) Upon conviction of an offense, a defendant who is not an organization may be sentenced to pay, unless otherwise specified in the provision of law defining the offense, a fine of not more than (1) $500,000 for murder in the first or second degree, attempted murder in the first degree, murder of an unborn child, sexual assault in the first degree under AS 11.41.410(a)(1)(A), (2), (3), or (4), sexual abuse of a minor in the first degree, kidnapping, sex trafficking in the first degree under AS 11.66.110(a)(2), or misconduct involving a controlled substance in the first degree; (2) $250,000 for a class A felony; (3) $100,000 for a class B felony; (4) $50,000 for a class C felony; (5) $25,000 for a class A misdemeanor; (6) $2,000 for a class B misdemeanor; (7) $500 for a violation.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at akleg.gov
Cited in 30 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Manderson v. State (Court of Appeals of Alaska 1983, 655 P.2d 1320)“…urden the payment of the fine will impose. See AS 12.55.035(a). 5 Clearly, the $1,…”
- Hillman v. Municipality of Anchorage (Court of Appeals of Alaska 1997, 941 P.2d 211)“…ture of an $8000 vehicle violates Alaska law because, under AS 12.55.035(b), the maximum fine for a class A misd…”
- Wilson v. State (Court of Appeals of Alaska 1988, 756 P.2d 307)“…ted on the basis of ability to pay. See, e.g., AS 12.55.035. A maximum fine does not necessarily in…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Alaska Medical Recording Laws: Patient Rights, HIPAA, and One-Party Consent (2026), Alaska Age of Consent Laws: Statutes, Penalties and Reporting, Alaska AI Meeting Recording Laws (2026)
§ 12.55.135Sentences of imprisonment for misdemeanorsIn forcecited in 10 of our articles
(a) A defendant convicted of a class A misdemeanor may be sentenced to a definite term of imprisonment of not more than one year. (b) A defendant convicted of a class B misdemeanor may be sentenced to a definite term of imprisonment of not more than 90 days unless otherwise specified in the provision of law defining the offense. (c) A defendant convicted of assault in the fourth degree that is a crime involving domestic violence committed in violation of the provisions of an order issued or filed under AS 12.30.027 or AS 18.66.100 18.66.180 and not subject to sentencing under (g) of this section shall be sentenced to a minimum term of imprisonment of 20 days.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at akleg.gov
Cited in 49 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Doe v. State, Department of Public Safety (Alaska Supreme Court 2004, 92 P.3d 398)“…y up to one year in jail and by a fine up to $10,000. See AS 12.55.135(a), .035(b)(5). [18] AS 18.65.087 au…”
- Dawson v. State (Court of Appeals of Alaska 2011, 264 P.3d 851)“…ode Revision, Tentative Draft, Part 5, p. 87. [16] See AS 12.55.135(b). [17] See R. Perkins & R. Boyce…”
- Miller v. State (Court of Appeals of Alaska 2013, 312 P.3d 1112)“…he faced a minimum sentence of 30 days' imprisonment under AS 12.55.135(g) 4 The defénse attorney never *1116…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Alaska Assault Laws: Degrees of Assault, Felonies and Penalties, Alaska Disorderly Conduct and Criminal Trespass Laws (2026), Alaska Felony Classes and Misdemeanor Penalties (2026)
United States Code Title 18
§ 2511Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibitedIn forcecited in 441 of our articles
Except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter any person who— intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication; intentionally uses, endeavors to use, or procures any other person to use or endeavor to use any electronic, mechanical, or other device to intercept any oral communication when— such device is affixed to, or otherwise transmits a signal through, a wire, cable, or other like connection used in wire communication; or such device transmits communications by radio, or interferes with the transmission of such communication; or such person knows, or has reason to know, that such device or any component thereof has been sent through the mail or transported in interstate or foreign commerce; or such use or endeavor to use (A) takes place on the premises of any business or other commercial establishment the operations of which affect interstate or foreign commerce; or (B) obtains or is for the purpose of obtaining information relating to the operations of any business or other commercial establishment the operations of which affect interstate or foreign…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-17 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 2,045 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Griggs-Ryan v. Smith (1990) applied the Section 2511(2)(d) prior-consent exception, treating a tenant repeatedly told that all incoming calls were taped as having impliedly consented. United States v. United States District Court (1972) read the then-current Section 2511(3) as conferring no presidential surveillance power.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Mitchell v. Forsyth (Supreme Court of the United States 1985, 472 U.S. 511)✓The Attorney General authorized a warrantless 1970 national security wiretap that caught the plaintiff's calls; the Court held the since-repealed Section 2511(3) disclaimer left the tap lawful under Title III, and that Mitchell had qualified immunity.
- United States v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Supreme Court of the United States 1972, 407 U.S. 297)✓The Attorney General approved warrantless wiretaps on members of a domestic group accused of bombing a CIA office; the Court read Section 2511(3) as a congressional disclaimer conferring no surveillance power, then held the Fourth Amendment required prior judicial approval.
- Forsyth v. Barr (Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 1994, 19 F.3d 1527)✓Dallas police used, in an internal affairs probe of an officer, calls private parties allegedly intercepted illegally; assuming that was unlawful, the Fifth Circuit held Section 2517(1) and (2) allowed the disclosure and use, defeating the Section 2511(1)(c) and (d) claims.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Can an Employer Record Conversations Without Consent? (2026), Can I Record My Boss Harassing Me? State-by-State Legal Guide (2026), Can I Sue Someone for Recording Me on Private or Public Property?
Sources and References
- Alaska Statutes Title 42, Chapter 20 - Eavesdropping and Wiretapping(akleg.gov).gov
- AS 42.20.310 - Eavesdropping (Full Statute Text)(akleg.gov).gov
- AS 42.20.330 - Penalty for Eavesdropping Violations(akleg.gov).gov
- Senate Bill 85 - 34th Alaska Legislature(akleg.gov).gov
- Alaska Court System - Criminal Case Background(courts.alaska.gov).gov
- 18 U.S.C. Section 2511 - Federal Wiretap Act(uscode.house.gov).gov
- Palmer v. State, 604 P.2d 1106, 1108 n.5 (Alaska 1979) (construing AS 42.20.310)(akleg.gov).gov
- NLRA Section 7 - Employee Rights(nlrb.gov).gov