In our increasingly connected world, the concept of privacy feels more fragile than ever. We often hear general terms like “invasion of privacy,” but in the legal landscape, these claims are broken down into specific categories. One of the most important—and sometimes misunderstood—is Intrusion Upon Seclusion.
If you feel like someone has crossed the line and improperly pried into your private life, you have legal protections and rights you can explore.
What is Intrusion Upon Seclusion?
Intrusion upon seclusion represents one of the four ‘privacy torts’—legal categories that allow people to sue for invasions of privacy. Essentially, it means that someone has intentionally intruded into a place or situation that is explicitly private to you, and that this intrusion is considered highly offensive to a reasonable person.
It’s important to understand that this claim doesn’t require the information to be published or shared with others (which is a different privacy tort). The offense lies purely in the act of prying itself.
The Three Elements of an Intrusion Upon Seclusion Claim
To successfully bring a claim for Intrusion Upon Seclusion, a claim must have the following three elements:
1. An Intrusion into a Private Matter
The defendant must have intruded, physically or otherwise, into a place, conversation, or matter that the plaintiff has a right to keep private.
- Examples: Trespassing into someone’s home, secretly recording conversations in a private office, or illegally accessing private emails or bank accounts.
- Key Distinction: If the “private matter” is in plain view in a public space (e.g., taking a picture of someone walking down a public sidewalk), it is generally not considered an intrusion upon seclusion.
2. Seclusion, Solitude, or Private Affairs: The Target of the Intrusion
The claim requires the intrusion to violate a plaintiff’s reasonable expectation of privacy. The target of the intrusion must involve one of the following:
- Seclusion (Private Space): An area or location where the person is physically set apart from the public (e.g., inside a home, a locked room, or a private office).
- Solitude (Private Status): The state of being alone and undisturbed, often related to confidential conversations or personal time.
- Private Affairs (Confidential Information): Personal records, communications, or sensitive information that is intentionally kept confidential and out of public view (e.g., medical records, private emails, or financial data).
The matter intruded upon must be truly private. There must be a reasonable expectation of privacy in the setting or activity.
- No Expectation of Privacy: You usually don’t have an expectation of privacy in public spaces, during public conversations, or for information you willingly share with third parties.
- High Expectation of Privacy: A very high expectation of privacy exists in your own home, bedroom, private bathroom, or confidential medical records.
3. Highly Offensive to a Reasonable Person: The Severity Test
This element is an objective standard designed to filter out minor or trivial invasions. It focuses not on the victim’s subjective feelings, but on how an impartial third party would view the conduct.
What the Standard Means
- “Highly Offensive” means the intrusion is egregious, shocking, or utterly lacking in propriety. It must go beyond the bounds of what society accepts as tolerable behavior.
- “Reasonable Person” refers to a hypothetical, ordinary, and moderate individual. If the intrusion wouldn’t deeply disturb this reasonable person, the legal claim fails.
Key Factors Courts Consider (Context Matters)
Courts examine the complete picture when evaluating this element, looking at several factors:
- Degree of the Intrusion: How deeply did the defendant pry? Secretly placing a camera in a bedroom is a high degree of intrusion; reading over someone’s shoulder in a public café is a low degree.
- Context and Setting: Where did the intrusion occur? An intrusion in a public park is less likely to be a valid argument than the exact same intrusion occurring in a private home.
- Defendant’s Motive and Purpose: Why was the intrusion carried out? Prying for information because of personal gratification is viewed more harshly than, for example, a business necessity (though the latter may still be offensive).
- The Manner of the Intrusion: Was the method of prying extreme? Continuous surveillance (e.g., following someone for weeks) or the use of highly technological devices (e.g., long-range listening equipment, hacking) is more likely to meet the standard than a “single, fleeting glance.”
Why the “Thin Skin” Rule is Important
The concept of “Not About Thin Skin” means that a plaintiff cannot sue simply because they are easily embarrassed or hypersensitive. The law requires a robust showing that the act was fundamentally and universally unacceptable.
| Likely to Meet the “Highly Offensive” Standard | Unlikely to Meet the “Highly Offensive” Standard |
| Secretly recording activities inside a person’s private home. | Asking an employee personal questions at work. |
| Hacking a person’s private medical or bank records. | Taking a photograph of a person having lunch in a public restaurant. |
| Continuous, close-range surveillance of a person in their yard. | An annoying, single instance of staring or loitering. |
Not Every Annoyance is an Intrusion
It’s crucial to remember that this is a high standard. Many actions that feel invasive are not legally considered an Intrusion Upon Seclusion.
- Prying Questions: Asking personal questions, while rude, is generally not a tort.
- Public Observation: Observing someone in a public place, even if done in an annoying way (like a paparazzo taking photos on a public street), is rarely an intrusion upon seclusion.
- Workplace Monitoring: Employees often have a reduced expectation of privacy when using company-provided devices or accessing company networks, which can complicate these claims.
The Digital Age Challenge
Intrusion Upon Seclusion has become increasingly relevant in the digital age. Claims often arise from:
- Digital Snooping: Hacking into personal accounts, using spyware, or secretly installing cameras (often called “upskirting” or “downblousing” when physical presence is involved).
- Remote Surveillance: The use of sophisticated drones or long-range listening devices to monitor private activities within a home or private property.
Key Takeaway
Intrusion Upon Seclusion is a powerful legal tool designed to protect your peace of mind and personal space from unauthorized and egregious prying. It protects the right to be left alone when you are legitimately entitled to solitude.
If you believe your personal space or private affairs have been improperly invaded, you should seek legal counsel.
Need Legal Help with an Invasion of Privacy Claim?
If you believe your privacy has been violated, you may wish to consult with an attorney experienced in this area of law.
Attorney David Head is that attorney. Call 801-691-7511 to set up your consultation.