Rich Segal Comments on Hospitality Litigation So Far in 2014

In one of those cases, a divided Ninth Circuit reinstated a class action that accused Hilton Worldwide, Inc., of violating California privacy law by recording incoming customer service phone calls. According to Law360, the decision knocked a district court for glossing over an added legal protection that cellphone calls are afforded over landline calls.

“It basically highlights the fact that it's easier to bring and maintain a claim for cellphone callers, rather than landline callers, to the extent that confidentiality is not required to be proven for a cellphone call,” said Richard M. Segal, managing partner of Pillsbury’s San Diego office and a partner in the firm’s Litigation practice.

Law360 added that the lower court more recently concluded that the statute only restricts third-party interception of cellphone calls and does not extend to recordings done for service monitoring purposes. But the case could still remold the litigation landscape over this issue, the publication said.

"The district court's dismissal of the case on remand will be a very important decision if upheld because it finds that the cellphone statute covers only third-party interception of calls, rather than the recording of calls by the parties themselves," Segal said.

Segal said that even with the second dismissal, the case highlights the need for attorneys to make sure they advise hospitality clients to have a message at the start of calls that can't be bypassed and that warns that the call may be recorded. Such a message, he said, is “essentially a get-out-of-jail-free card.”