Everyone has to agree
New Hampshire asks for the consent of all parties to a private conversation. Being one of the two voices on the call is not enough.
That applies to phone calls and in-person talk where people expect privacy. Parents who move from a one-party state often carry the wrong rule with them.
Two grades of the same crime
RSA 570-A:2 treats outsiders and participants differently. An outsider who records a private conversation commits a felony.
A participant who records without the other side's consent commits a misdemeanor instead. The same is true of someone recording with one party's consent. The grade is lower, but it is still a crime.
The Fischer case
In Fischer v. Hooper (1999), divorced parents had joint custody of their daughter. The father had been taping the mother's telephone conversations, and revealed it to a therapist.
The mother sued. A jury found the father liable under the wiretapping statute. The Supreme Court ordered a new trial over how the jury had been told to judge implied consent.
Consent can come from conduct
Fischer matters for a second reason. The court said a jury should look at a person's actions, not only their words, when deciding whether they consented.
So if someone clearly knows a call is being recorded and carries on, that may count as consent. The safer course is to say it out loud at the start, and keep a note of what you said.
The civil claim
The person recorded can sue under RSA 570-A:11. They can claim the greater of actual damages, $100 a day of violation, or $1,000.
Punitive damages and legal fees can be added. The Fischer case shows that parents do bring these claims against each other.
Your child's calls
A call between your child and the other parent is one you are not part of. New Hampshire's all-party rule makes recording it especially risky.
Some courts let a parent consent for a young child under Pollock v. Pollock. New Hampshire has not clearly adopted that for its own statute. Take advice before recording anything involving your child.
What a New Hampshire court is weighing
New Hampshire allocates parental rights and responsibilities on the child's best interests. Judges watch how each parent supports the child's relationship with the other.
A secret recording can be a crime and a lawsuit at once. A clear written record makes the same point without either.
What to keep instead
Write events down the same day, with the clock time, the words in quotation marks and who was present. The all-party rule does not apply to your own notes.
A call log for custody records keeps calls in order. A factual incident report covers single events. Take both to a New Hampshire family lawyer.
A New Hampshire parenting note that needs no one's consent
New Hampshire makes even a participant's secret recording a crime. A written note is not. Write it the same day.
Keep the New Hampshire record the law allows
Casewell keeps your dated entries, the words you heard and the files behind them in one private place. A note written on the day is stronger than a memory rebuilt later. Export a focused PDF for a New Hampshire lawyer.
Is New Hampshire a one-party or two-party consent state?
New Hampshire is an all-party consent state. RSA 570-A:2 bans recording a private conversation without the consent of all parties.
Is it a crime to record a call I am on in New Hampshire?
Yes, if the other party has not consented. A participant who records commits a misdemeanor. An outsider commits a felony.
Can my ex sue me for recording them in New Hampshire?
Yes. RSA 570-A:11 allows a civil claim. In Fischer v. Hooper, a jury found a father liable for taping the mother's calls, though a new trial was ordered.
Can I record my co-parent if I tell them first in New Hampshire?
Consent is what the statute needs, and courts may infer it from conduct. Saying clearly at the start that you are recording is the safer course.
Can I record my child's calls with their other parent in New Hampshire?
That is a conversation you are not part of, in an all-party state. Take advice before recording anything.
Sources
This page describes RSA 570-A:2 and 570-A:11 and the New Hampshire Supreme Court decision in Fischer v. Hooper. It explains the law and is not legal advice.
- RSA 570-A:2 โ interception without the consent of all parties, graded by whether the person is a party checked
- RSA 570-A:11 โ civil damages for unlawful interception checked
- Fischer v. Hooper, 143 N.H. 585 (1999) โ a father's taping of the mother's calls, and implied consent checked
- Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press โ New Hampshire recording guide, penalties and civil damages checked
- Pollock v. Pollock, 154 F.3d 601 (6th Cir. 1998) โ the vicarious consent doctrine checked