Wisconsin
Wisconsin Medical Recording Laws: Patient Rights, HIPAA, and Consent (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. · 10 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
Wisconsin is a one-party consent state under Wis. Stat. § 968.31(2)(c), so a patient may record their own medical appointment without notifying the provider. HIPAA restricts how healthcare providers handle protected health information; it does not prohibit patients from recording their own visits.
Wisconsin is a one-party consent state for recording conversations. Under Wis. Stat. § 968.31(2)(c), a person not acting under color of law may intercept a wire, electronic, or oral communication where the person is a party to the communication or where one of the parties has given prior consent. For patients, this means recording your own medical appointments, consultations, and healthcare conversations is legal under Wisconsin wiretapping law, provided the recording is not made for the purpose of committing a criminal or tortious act or any other injurious act.
This guide covers patient recording rights under Wisconsin law, HIPAA considerations, healthcare facility policies, telehealth recording, mental health confidentiality, and the use of medical recordings as evidence. This is general legal information, not legal advice. Consult an attorney for advice specific to your situation.
Patient Recording Rights in Wisconsin
Can You Record Your Doctor in Wisconsin?
Yes. Wisconsin's one-party consent law permits patients to record their own medical encounters. Because you are a party to the conversation with your doctor, nurse, specialist, or other healthcare provider, you satisfy the consent requirement under § 968.31(2)(c). You do not need to inform your provider that you are recording.
The statute includes one important caveat: the recording cannot be made "for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act" or "for the purpose of committing any other injurious act." That last clause is broader than federal law, which stops at criminal or tortious purposes, so a recording that is legal under federal law can still be a Wisconsin felony. Recording a medical visit for personal reference, to share with caregivers, or to preserve evidence of medical advice does not fall within this prohibition.
Video recording in medical settings raises separate considerations. Wisconsin's invasion of privacy statute (Wis. Stat. § 942.08) makes it a crime to install or use a surveillance device in a "private place" (a location where a person may reasonably expect to be safe from observation without knowledge and consent) with the intent to observe any nude or partially nude person without consent. Patient examination rooms qualify as private places, but the statute targets surveillance with intent to observe a nude or partially nude person, not a patient openly recording their own encounter.
Why Patients Record Medical Visits
Research consistently shows that patients forget 40 to 80 percent of medical information shortly after leaving an appointment. Recording serves practical purposes that benefit both patients and providers.
Common reasons patients record include reviewing complex diagnoses and treatment plans at home, sharing provider instructions with family members who could not attend, documenting informed consent discussions before procedures, and preserving a record of medication instructions and dosage changes. Patients managing chronic conditions, those receiving a new diagnosis, or individuals with limited English proficiency often find recordings especially valuable.
Types of Medical Encounters You Can Record
Under one-party consent, Wisconsin patients can record a wide range of medical interactions, including:
- Primary care visits and annual wellness exams
- Specialist consultations and second opinions
- Pre-surgical informed consent discussions
- Nursing instructions about medications and care plans
- Pharmacy consultations about prescriptions and drug interactions
- Hospital bedside conversations with attending physicians
- Discharge planning discussions and follow-up instructions
- Medical billing conversations about charges and insurance coverage
- Independent medical examinations ordered by insurers or employers
The key requirement is that you must be a participant in the conversation. You cannot leave a hidden recording device in an examination room to capture conversations happening without you present.
HIPAA and Patient Recording
What HIPAA Does and Does Not Do
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) is a federal law that governs how healthcare providers, health plans, and their business associates handle protected health information (PHI). Understanding what HIPAA actually covers is critical for patients who want to record.
HIPAA does not prohibit patients from recording their own medical appointments. The law applies to "covered entities" (healthcare providers, health plans, and clearinghouses) and their business associates. Patients are not covered entities. Your right to record your own conversations comes from Wisconsin state law, and HIPAA has no bearing on that right.
Some providers incorrectly cite HIPAA as grounds to prohibit patient recording. This reflects a misunderstanding of the law. HIPAA restricts what providers can do with your health information; it does not restrict what you can do during your own medical encounter.
HIPAA and Provider Recording
When a healthcare provider records a patient encounter, HIPAA applies to that recording because it contains PHI created by a covered entity. The provider must store, handle, and disclose the recording in compliance with HIPAA's Privacy and Security Rules. HIPAA does not generally require patient authorization for a provider to use or disclose PHI for its own treatment, payment, or health care operations under 45 CFR § 164.506, although many other uses require written authorization, and facility policies or other laws may add their own consent requirements. If the recording is part of the patient's designated record set (for example, kept in the medical record or used to make decisions about the patient), the patient generally has the right to access it under 45 CFR § 164.524.
Wisconsin also has its own state-level medical privacy law. Under Wis. Stat. § 146.82, all patient health care records must remain confidential and may generally be released only with the patient's informed consent. This statute governs provider behavior, not patient recording rights.
Healthcare Facility Recording Policies
Can a Hospital or Clinic Prohibit Recording?
Healthcare facilities in Wisconsin can establish internal recording policies. These policies do not override state wiretapping law. A recording made by a patient under one-party consent remains legal even if it violates the facility's policy. However, facility policies carry practical consequences.
A non-emergency provider may refuse to continue an appointment if a patient records against the facility's policy. The provider-patient relationship is generally voluntary, and a provider can set conditions for continued care. Emergency care providers, however, cannot refuse to treat patients under EMTALA (the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act) regardless of recording.
Common Facility Recording Policies
Wisconsin hospitals and medical practices vary widely in their approach to patient recording. Some facilities prohibit all recording in clinical areas. Others allow audio recording but restrict video. Many have no formal policy addressing patient recording at all.
Facilities that restrict recording typically cite concerns about other patients' privacy, disruption to clinical workflows, and liability. These are internal business policies, not legal prohibitions. A patient who records in violation of a facility policy may face consequences related to their care relationship but has not committed a crime under Wisconsin law.
Best Practices for Patients
Patients who wish to record their medical appointments in Wisconsin may consider informing their provider beforehand. While disclosure is not legally required, it can preserve the therapeutic relationship and reduce conflict during the appointment. Some providers respond more positively when they understand the patient's reasons, such as wanting to review instructions at home or share information with a caregiver.
If a provider objects, patients can explain their reasons, ask the provider to document the objection in the medical record, or seek care from a provider who permits recording.
Recording Other Patients in Healthcare Settings
Privacy in Waiting Rooms and Common Areas
Recording in hospital waiting rooms, lobbies, and other shared spaces presents privacy risks. While one-party consent covers conversations you participate in, recording in common areas may capture other patients' identifiable health information, including their names, conditions, or conversations with staff.
Wisconsin's invasion of privacy statute (§ 942.08) makes it a crime to install or use surveillance devices in private places with the intent to observe any nude or partially nude person without consent. Medical examination rooms and treatment areas qualify as private places under this statute. Waiting rooms are more ambiguous, but capturing other patients' health information raises both legal and ethical concerns.
Patients should limit recordings to their own medical conversations and avoid capturing other patients' information whenever possible.
Recording Staff and Other Employees
Recording your own conversations with medical staff (doctors, nurses, technicians, billing representatives) falls within one-party consent protection. You do not need staff permission to record a conversation you are participating in. However, recording staff conversations that you are not part of would not be covered by one-party consent and could violate the wiretapping statute under § 968.31(1).
Telehealth Recording in Wisconsin
Patient Recording of Telehealth Visits
Wisconsin patients can record telehealth appointments under the same one-party consent rule that applies to in-person visits, because § 968.31 covers wire and electronic communications as well as oral ones. Separately, under Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter Med 24, physicians providing care via telemedicine are held to the same standards of practice and conduct as in-person care, including patient confidentiality and recordkeeping. Med 24 does not address patient recording.
Patients can use screen recording software, a second device to capture audio, or the telehealth platform's built-in recording features if available. Some telehealth platforms have terms of service that address recording, but violating a platform's terms does not make the recording illegal under Wisconsin law.
Provider Recording of Telehealth Visits
Providers who record telehealth sessions must comply with HIPAA, Wis. Stat. § 146.82, and applicable administrative regulations. A recording the provider keeps may become part of the patient's medical record and must be handled in accordance with state and federal privacy requirements. Many telehealth platforms automatically notify participants when recording is active.
Cross-State Telehealth Recording
When a Wisconsin patient has a telehealth visit with a provider in another state, the recording law question becomes more complex. If the provider is located in a two-party consent state (such as Illinois or California), that state's stricter law could apply to the provider's end of the communication. Courts have not definitively resolved which state's law controls in interstate telehealth recording scenarios. The safest approach for patients connecting with out-of-state providers is to inform the provider about the recording.
Mental Health Recording Considerations
Therapy and Counseling Sessions
Wisconsin's one-party consent law applies to therapy and counseling sessions the same way it applies to any other conversation. A patient participating in a therapy session can lawfully record that session without the therapist's knowledge or consent.
However, mental health recording raises unique clinical considerations. Many therapists strongly discourage recording because it may alter the therapeutic dynamic, inhibit candor from both parties, and potentially interfere with treatment effectiveness. Some therapists may refuse to continue treatment if a patient insists on recording.
Wisconsin provides enhanced confidentiality protections for mental health treatment records under Wis. Stat. § 51.30. This statute requires that all treatment records related to mental health, developmental disabilities, and alcohol or drug abuse remain confidential and privileged to the subject individual. Treatment records may be released only to persons designated in the statute or with the informed written consent of the patient. These protections apply to providers and treatment facilities, not to patients recording their own sessions.
Psychiatric Facilities
Patients in psychiatric facilities retain their one-party consent right to record conversations they participate in with staff and providers. However, psychiatric facilities may impose stricter recording restrictions as part of their treatment protocols, particularly for safety reasons.
Federal protections under 42 CFR Part 2 provide additional confidentiality for substance use disorder treatment records. These protections are stricter than both HIPAA and Wisconsin's § 51.30, and restrict provider disclosure of substance abuse treatment information. Like HIPAA, these rules govern providers, not patients recording their own treatment.
Using Medical Recordings as Evidence
Medical Malpractice Cases
Wisconsin medical malpractice claims are governed by Wis. Stat. § 893.55, which requires a suit to be filed within three years of the injury or within one year of when the injury was or should have been discovered, whichever is later, but a discovery-based claim cannot be filed more than five years after the act or omission. Longer periods apply when a provider concealed the error or left a foreign object in the body (§ 893.55(2) and (3)), so talk to a lawyer promptly. Recordings of medical appointments can help you and your lawyer reconstruct what was said, although they may not be admissible as evidence themselves (see Admissibility below).
A recording may document what a provider communicated about risks and alternatives, whether informed consent was adequately obtained, specific statements about the patient's condition, and any discrepancies between what was said during the visit and what appears in the medical record.
Personal Injury Cases
Recordings of medical evaluations can also help in personal injury and workers' compensation claims, subject to the same admissibility limits. Independent medical examinations (IMEs) ordered by insurance companies are particularly important to document, as the examiner is hired by the opposing party. Recording preserves exactly what questions were asked and what responses were given.
Admissibility
Making a one-party recording is legal in Wisconsin, but using it in court is a separate and stricter question. Wis. Stat. § 885.365 makes recorded telephone conversations "totally inadmissible" in Wisconsin civil actions, and its notice exception covers only a recording "made in a manner other than by interception"; Wisconsin defines interception as acquiring a communication's contents with any device (§ 968.27(9)). For in-person conversations too, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held in State v. Waste Management of Wisconsin, 81 Wis. 2d 555 (1978) that one-party consent tapes are lawful but their contents "cannot be admitted as evidence in chief" under § 968.29(3).
Narrow exceptions exist, for example speech made without a reasonable expectation of privacy (State v. Duchow, 2008 WI 57) and small-claims cases, which are not bound by the ordinary rules of evidence (§ 799.209(2)). Where a recording can be offered, it must still be authenticated and relevant. Talk to a Wisconsin attorney before planning a malpractice or injury case around a recording.
The purpose limit in § 968.31(2)(c) also matters here. Recording to preserve medical advice or document a provider encounter is a legitimate purpose; recording to commit a crime, a tort, or any other injurious act, such as to threaten or extort a provider, removes the participant exception.
Wisconsin Recording Laws by Topic
Audio Recording | Dashcam Laws | Landlord-Tenant | Phone Call Recording | Recording Police | Recording in Public | Schools | Security Cameras | Video Recording | Voyeurism & Hidden Cameras | Workplace Recording
Back to Wisconsin Recording Laws
More Wisconsin Recording Topics
More Wisconsin Laws
- Wisconsin AI Meeting Recording Laws
- Wisconsin Dashcam Laws
- Wisconsin Data Privacy Laws
- Wisconsin Deepfake Laws
- Wisconsin Employee Monitoring Laws
- Wisconsin GPS Tracking Laws
- Wisconsin Police Bodycam Laws
- Wisconsin Smart Glasses Recording Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I legally record my doctor in Wisconsin?
Yes. Wisconsin is a one-party consent state under Wis. Stat. § 968.31(2)(c). As a participant in the conversation, you can record your medical appointment without informing your provider. The recording cannot be made for the purpose of committing a criminal or tortious act or any other injurious act.
Does HIPAA prevent patients from recording medical appointments?
No. HIPAA governs healthcare providers and their handling of protected health information. It does not apply to patients. Your right to record comes from Wisconsin state law. Wisconsin also has its own medical privacy law (§ 146.82), but it governs provider disclosure, not patient recording.
Can a Wisconsin hospital ban me from recording?
A hospital can have an internal recording policy, but it cannot make your recording illegal under state law. Non-emergency providers may refuse to continue treatment if you record against their policy. Emergency providers must treat you regardless under EMTALA.
Can I record a telehealth visit in Wisconsin?
Yes. Telehealth appointments follow the same one-party consent rules as in-person visits. You can use screen recording software, a second device, or other methods. If your provider is in a two-party consent state, consider informing them about the recording.
Are medical recordings admissible in court in Wisconsin?
No, not as a rule. Making a one-party recording is legal in Wisconsin, but using it in court is a separate and stricter question. Wis. Stat. 885.365 bars recorded phone calls from Wisconsin civil cases, and its notice exception covers only recordings not made by a device interception. The Wisconsin Supreme Court has held that a lawful one-party recording generally cannot be admitted as evidence in chief (State v. Waste Management, 1978). Narrow exceptions exist, for example speech made without a reasonable expectation of privacy, recordings made with police in felony cases, and small-claims cases, which use looser evidence rules. Talk to a Wisconsin attorney before planning a case around a recording.
Updates
Corrected the description of Wis. Stat. 942.08: the offense turns on intent to observe a nude or partially nude person, not on whether the surveillance is secret.
Corrected the evidence section to explain that lawful one-party recordings are generally not admissible as evidence in chief in Wisconsin courts (Wis. Stat. 885.365; State v. Waste Management, 1978), corrected the malpractice deadline to run three years from the injury (or one year from discovery, capped at five years from the act), added the 'any other injurious act' limit, and attributed the telehealth recording rule to the wiretap statute rather than Med 24. We corrected two descriptions of Wisconsin's invasion-of-privacy statute (§ 942.08) to include its required intent to observe a nude or partially nude person without consent.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected our description of HIPAA and provider recordings: HIPAA generally lets providers use health information for treatment, payment, and operations without patient authorization, and a patient's access right applies when the recording is part of the designated record set.
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.
Wisconsin Statutes, Chapter 968: Commencement Of Criminal Proceedings
§ 968.31Interception and disclosure of wire, electronic or oral communications prohibited.In forcecited in 22 of our articles
(1) Except as otherwise specifically provided in ss. 196.63 or 968.28 to 968.30, whoever commits any of the acts enumerated in this section is guilty of a Class H felony: (a) Intentionally intercepts, attempts to intercept or procures any other person to intercept or attempt to intercept, any wire, electronic or oral communication. (b) Intentionally uses, attempts to use or procures any other person to use or attempt to use any electronic, mechanical or other device to intercept any oral communication. (c) Discloses, or attempts to disclose, to any other person the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic or oral communication in violation of this section or under circumstances constituting violation of this section. (d) Uses, or attempts to use, the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic or oral communication in violation of this section or under circumstances constituting violation of this section.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-24 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at docs.legis.wisconsin.gov
Cited in 23 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):State v. Maloney held recordings made with one party's prior consent fall under Section 968.31(2)(b) and (c), and that aiding a police sting is not an "injurious act." State v. Gilmore pointed to 968.31(2m) damages and 968.31(1)(e) penalties, reserving suppression for illegal interceptions.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Maloney (Wisconsin Supreme Court 2005, 281 Wis. 2d 595)✓A homicide suspect's girlfriend let police record her hotel room conversations with him in Las Vegas; the court held the videotapes lawful under 968.31(2)(b) and (c) because she was a consenting party, and that helping a lawful sting is not an injurious act.
- State v. Popenhagen (Wisconsin Supreme Court 2008, 309 Wis. 2d 601)“…Arnold, 51 Wis.2d at 442 , 187 N.W.2d 354 (citing Wis. Stat. § 968.31 (2)(b)). However, in considering all th…”
- State v. Gilmore (Wisconsin Supreme Court 1996, 201 Wis. 2d 820)✓Prosecutors filed a public complaint quoting 27 pages of lawfully wiretapped calls; the court held the unsealed filing violated the surveillance law but refused suppression, pointing to the civil action in 968.31(2m) and the criminal penalty in 968.31(1)(e) as the remedies.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Wisconsin Smart Glasses Recording Laws, US Recording Laws by State (2026): All 50 States Explained, One-Party Consent States: Complete 2026 Guide
Wisconsin Statutes, Chapter 146: Miscellaneous Health Provisions
§ 146.82Confidentiality of patient health care records.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) Confidentiality. All patient health care records shall remain confidential. Patient health care records may be released only to the persons designated in this section or to other persons with the informed consent of the patient or of a person authorized by the patient. This subsection does not prohibit reports made in compliance with s. 253.12 (2), 255.40, or 979.01; records generated and disclosed to the controlled substances board pursuant to s. 961.385; testimony authorized under s. 905.04 (4) (h); or releases made for purposes of health care operations, as defined in 45 CFR 164.501, and as authorized under 45 CFR 164, subpart E. (2) Access without informed consent. (a) Notwithstanding sub. (1), patient health care records shall be released upon request without informed consent in the following circumstances: 1. To health care facility staff committees, or accreditation or health care services review organizations for the purposes of conducting management audits, financial audits, program monitoring and evaluation, health care services reviews or accreditation. 2.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at docs.legis.wisconsin.gov
Cited in 33 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Johnson v. Rogers Memorial Hospital, Inc. (Wisconsin Supreme Court 2005, 283 Wis. 2d 384)“…ing there is an exception to confidentiality of records in Wis. Stat. § 146.82 (2)(a)11 (2001-02) [6] when child abus…”
- State v. Patrick J. Lynch (Wisconsin Supreme Court 2016)“…es, including release of the privileged records pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 146.82(2)(a)4. Third, Justice Prosser would no…”
- Hart v. Bennet (Court of Appeals of Wisconsin 2003, 267 Wis. 2d 919)“…of Wisconsin-La Crosse. The complaint alleged violation of Wis. Stat. § 146.82 (2001-02), 1 which concer…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Wisconsin Data Privacy Laws: Breach Notification & Consumer Rights (2026)
Wisconsin Statutes, Chapter 51: State Alcohol, Drug Abuse, Developmental Disabilities And Mental Health Act
§ 51.30Records.In force
(1) Definitions. In this section: (ag) “Health care provider” has the meaning given in s. 146.81 (1) (a) to (p). (am) “Registration records” include all the records of the department, county departments under s. 51.42 or 51.437, treatment facilities, and other persons providing services to the department, county departments, or treatment facilities, that are created in the course of providing services to individuals for mental illness, developmental disabilities, alcoholism, or drug dependence. (b) “Treatment records” include the registration and all other records that are created in the course of providing services to individuals for mental illness, developmental disabilities, alcoholism, or drug dependence and that are maintained by the department; by county departments under s. 51.42 or 51.437 and their staffs; by treatment facilities; or by psychologists licensed under s. 455.04 (1) or (2) or licensed mental health professionals who are not affiliated with a county department or treatment facility. Treatment records do not include notes or records maintained for personal use by an individual providing treatment services for the department, a county department under s.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at docs.legis.wisconsin.gov
Wisconsin Statutes, Chapter 893: Limitations Of Commencement Of Actions And Proceedings; Procedure For Claims Against Governmental Units
§ 893.55Medical malpractice; limitation of actions; limitation of damages; itemization of damages.In forcecited in 3 of our articles
(1d) (a) The objective of the treatment of this section is to ensure affordable and accessible health care for all of the citizens of Wisconsin while providing adequate compensation to the victims of medical malpractice. Achieving this objective requires a balancing of many interests. Based upon documentary evidence, testimony received at legislative hearings, and other relevant information, the legislature finds that a limitation on the amount of noneconomic damages recoverable by a claimant or plaintiff for acts or omissions of a health care provider, together with mandatory liability coverage for health care providers and mandatory participation in the injured patients and families compensation fund by health care providers, while compensating victims of medical malpractice in appropriate circumstances by the availability of unlimited economic damages, ensures that these objectives are achieved. Establishing a limitation on noneconomic damage awards accomplishes the objective by doing all of the following: 1.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at docs.legis.wisconsin.gov
Cited in 95 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Paul v. Skemp (Wisconsin Supreme Court 2001, 242 Wis. 2d 507)“…ions for medical *514 malpractice claims in Wis. Stat. § 893.55 (1995-96) 1 bars this act…”
- Aicher Ex Rel. LaBarge v. Wisconsin Patients Compensation Fund (Wisconsin Supreme Court 2000, 237 Wis. 2d 99)“…tion to dismiss and then sought summary judgment, invoking Wis. Stat. §§ 893.55 (1)(b) [2] and 893.56. [3] Section 89…”
- Phelps v. Physicians Insurance (Wisconsin Supreme Court 2009, 319 Wis. 2d 1)“…f a health care provider subject to Wis. Stat. ch. 655 and Wis. Stat. § 893.55 (4) (1997-98); 3 and *9 (2) whether G…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Medical Malpractice Laws in Wisconsin (2026): Deadlines & Caps, Wisconsin Statute of Limitations: Filing Deadlines by Case Type
Wisconsin Statutes, Chapter 942: Crimes Against Reputation, Privacy And Civil Liberties
§ 942.08Invasion of privacy.In forcecited in 13 of our articles
(1) In this section: (a) “Nude or partially nude person” means any human being who has less than fully and opaquely covered genitals, pubic area or buttocks, any female human being who has less than a fully opaque covering over any portion of a breast below the top of the nipple, or any male human being with covered genitals in a discernibly turgid state. (b) “Private place” means a place where a person may reasonably expect to be safe from being observed without his or her knowledge and consent. (c) “Surveillance device” means any device, instrument, apparatus, implement, mechanism or contrivance used, designed to be used to observe, or capable of observing, the activities of a person. “Surveillance device” includes a peephole. (2) Except as provided in sub. (4), whoever does any of the following is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor: (a) Knowingly installs a surveillance device in any private place, or uses a surveillance device to observe in a private place, with the intent to observe any nude or partially nude person without the consent of the person observed.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at docs.legis.wisconsin.gov
Cited in 7 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Wisconsin courts have applied Wis. Stat. 942.08 to hidden surveillance of nudity. Gillund v. Meridian Mutual Insurance (2009) concluded that secretly videotaping a houseguest violated 942.08(2) and that, unlike the civil privacy statute, it requires specific intent. State v. Jahnke (2008) described 942.08 as addressing live viewing.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Gillund v. Meridian Mutual Insurance (Court of Appeals of Wisconsin 2009, 323 Wis. 2d 1)✓An uncle secretly videotaped his niece undressed in his home; applying Wis. Stat. 942.08(2) (1999-2000), the court held his admitted conduct violated the criminal invasion of privacy statute even though he was never convicted, so the penal-law exclusion barred coverage.
- State v. Culver (Court of Appeals of Wisconsin 2018, 384 Wis. 2d 222)✓Convicted of posting nude photos of a woman online, Culver attacked the definition of "nude or partially nude person" that the post-or-publish statute borrows from Wis. Stat. 942.08(1)(a); the court declined to analyze it in detail and said it reasonably tracked common usage.
- State v. Jahnke (Court of Appeals of Wisconsin 2008, 316 Wis. 2d 324)“…nces. As the State points out, at least one other statute, Wis. Stat. § 942.08 , our "Peeping Tom" law, addresses live…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Wisconsin Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules, Wisconsin Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws: Cameras, Surveillance, and Privacy (2026), Wisconsin Laws on Recording in Public: Filming, Photography, and Privacy (2026)
Code of Federal Regulations Title 45
§ 164.524Access of individuals to protected health information.In forcecited in 31 of our articles
(a) Standard: Access to protected health information —(1) Right of access. Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (a)(2) or (a)(3) of this section, an individual has a right of access to inspect and obtain a copy of protected health information about the individual in a designated record set, for as long as the protected health information is maintained in the designated record set, except for: (i) Psychotherapy notes; and (ii) Information compiled in reasonable anticipation of, or for use in, a civil, criminal, or administrative action or proceeding. (2) Unreviewable grounds for denial. A covered entity may deny an individual access without providing the individual an opportunity for review, in the following circumstances. (i) The protected health information is excepted from the right of access by paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 88 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Webb v. Smart Document Solutions, LLC (2007) held the reduced, cost-based fee in section 164.524(c)(4) applies only when the individual himself requests his records, not a law firm acting as his agent. Ciox Health, LLC v. Hargan (2020) vacated 2016 guidance that extended that patient rate to third-party directives.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Webb v. Smart Document Solutions, LLC (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2007, 499 F.3d 1078)✓A law firm ordered its client's hospital records and was billed a copying company's higher third-party rate; the Ninth Circuit held Section 164.524(c)(4)'s cost-based fee limit applies only when the individual or a personal representative asks, not an attorney acting as agent.
- Evenson v. Hartford Life & Annuity Insurance (District Court, M.D. Florida 2007, 244 F.R.D. 666)✓A therapist refused a subpoena for her psychotherapy notes, citing Section 164.524(a)(1)'s exclusion of those notes from a patient's right of access; the court held that exclusion governs only individual access, not discovery, and ordered the notes produced.
- Ciox Health, LLC v. Hargan (District Court, District of Columbia 2020)“…fee that can be charged for such production. See generally 45 C.F.R. § 164.524. For requests brought by an individual…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: How Long Do Hospitals Keep Medical Records? (2026), How to Find Old Medical Records Online, North Carolina Medical Recording Laws: Patient Rights and Provider Rules
Sources and References
- Wis. Stat. § 968.31 - Interception and disclosure of communications prohibited(docs.legis.wisconsin.gov).gov
- HIPAA - Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act(hhs.gov).gov
- HHS - Your Rights Under HIPAA(hhs.gov).gov
- Wis. Stat. § 146.82 - Confidentiality of patient health care records(docs.legis.wisconsin.gov).gov
- Wis. Stat. § 51.30 - Mental health treatment records(docs.legis.wisconsin.gov).gov
- Wis. Stat. § 942.08 - Invasion of privacy(docs.legis.wisconsin.gov).gov
- Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter Med 24 - Telemedicine(docs.legis.wisconsin.gov).gov
- 42 CFR Part 2 - Substance Use Disorder Patient Records(ecfr.gov).gov
- Wis. Stat. § 893.55 - Medical malpractice limitation of actions(docs.legis.wisconsin.gov).gov
- 45 CFR § 164.506 - Uses and disclosures to carry out treatment, payment, or health care operations(ecfr.gov).gov