%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj<>
endobj
2 0 obj<>
endobj
3 0 obj<>
endobj
5 0 obj<>
endobj
7 0 obj<>
endobj
8 0 obj<>>>
endobj
9 0 obj<>
endobj
10 0 obj<><><><><>]/P 9 0 R/S/Article/T()/Pg 11 0 R>>
endobj
11 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
12 0 obj<>
endobj
13 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
14 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
15 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
16 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
17 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
18 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
19 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
20 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
21 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
22 0 obj<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/Type/Page>>
endobj
23 0 obj[10 0 R]
endobj
24 0 obj<>
endobj
25 0 obj<>
endobj
26 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/381FFGLP.txt)Tj
ET
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
BT
/T1_1 1 Tf
14 0 0 14 10 734.9082 Tm
(In the)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(United States Court of Appeals)Tj
T*
(For the Seventh Circuit)Tj
0 -2.4 TD
(No. 00-3299)Tj
T*
(Albert J. Muick,)Tj
T*
(Plaintiff-Appellant,)Tj
T*
(v.)Tj
T*
(Glenayre Electronics,)Tj
T*
(Defendant-Appellee.)Tj
T*
(Appeal from the United States District Court)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(for the Central District of Illinois.)Tj
T*
(No. 98 C 3187--Harold A. Baker, Judge.)Tj
0 -2.4 TD
(Submitted October 9, 2001--Decided February 6, 2002)Tj
0 -3.6 TD
( Before Posner, Manion, and Rovner, Circuit)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Judges.)Tj
0 -2.4 TD
( Posner, Circuit Judge. Muick, at the)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(time an employee of Glenayre Electronics,)Tj
T*
(was arrested on charges of receiving and)Tj
T*
(possessing child pornography in violation)Tj
T*
(of federal law. At the request of federal)Tj
T*
(law enforcement authorities, Glenayre)Tj
T*
(seized from Muick's work area the laptop)Tj
T*
(computer that it had furnished him for)Tj
T*
(use at work and held it until a warrant)Tj
T*
(to search it could be obtained. He was)Tj
T*
(later convicted and imprisoned. He has)Tj
T*
(now sued his former employer, claiming)Tj
T*
(that Glenayre, acting under color of fed)Tj
T*
(eral law, seized "proprietary and)Tj
T*
(privileged personal financial and contact)Tj
T*
(data" contained in files in the computer,)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/381FFGLP.txt \(1 of 6\)5/19/2007 5:12:16\
PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
27 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/381FFGLP.txt)Tj
ET
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
BT
/T1_1 1 Tf
14 0 0 14 10 753.9082 Tm
(in violation of the Fourth and Fifth)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(Amendments. He also charges that Glenayre)Tj
T*
(violated rights conferred on him by)Tj
T*
(Illinois law. The district court had)Tj
T*
(diversity as well as supplemental)Tj
T*
(jurisdiction over these claims.)Tj
0 -2.4 TD
( The district judge rightly granted)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(summary judgment to Glenayre on Muick's)Tj
T*
(federal claims. The only basis for a)Tj
T*
(federal suit against Glenayre, that is, a)Tj
T*
(suit for damages for violation of a)Tj
T*
(federal constitutional right, is the)Tj
T*
(Bivens doctrine, which the Supreme Court)Tj
T*
(has held to be inapplicable to corporate)Tj
T*
(defendants even when they are acting)Tj
T*
(under color of federal law. Correctional)Tj
T*
(Services Corp. v. Malesko, 122 S. Ct. 515)Tj
T*
(\(2001\). And in any event Glenayre was not)Tj
T*
(acting under color of federal law. The)Tj
T*
(federal agents wanted Glenayre to give)Tj
T*
(them the laptop right away but it refused)Tj
T*
(until the search warrant was issued \(and)Tj
T*
(so it had no choice\) because the computer)Tj
T*
(contained confidential corporate)Tj
T*
(information. It was happy to take)Tj
T*
(thecomputer away from Muick, for obvious)Tj
T*
(reasons--it doubtless would have done so)Tj
T*
(even if not asked to by the government--)Tj
T*
(but it was not happy to turn the computer)Tj
T*
(over to the government. It held on to it)Tj
T*
(for as long as it could, for purely)Tj
T*
(selfish reasons. An agency relationship)Tj
T*
(is created by voluntary agreement and)Tj
T*
(obligates the agent to act on behalf of)Tj
T*
(the principal. There was no agreement,)Tj
T*
(express or implied, between the)Tj
T*
(government and Glenayre to appoint the)Tj
T*
(latter an agent of the former; nor did)Tj
T*
(Glenayre behave as if there were such an)Tj
T*
(agreement. Cf. Hanania v. Loren-Maltese,)Tj
T*
(212 F.3d 353, 357 \(7th Cir. 2000\).)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/381FFGLP.txt \(2 of 6\)5/19/2007 5:12:16\
PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
28 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/381FFGLP.txt)Tj
ET
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
BT
/T1_1 1 Tf
14 0 0 14 10 753.9082 Tm
( Anyway Muick had no right of privacy in)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(the computer that Glenayre had lent him)Tj
T*
(for use in the workplace. Not that there)Tj
T*
(can't be a right of privacy \(enforceable)Tj
T*
(under the Fourth Amendment if the)Tj
T*
(employer is a public entity, which)Tj
T*
(Glenayre we have just held was not\) in)Tj
T*
(employer-owned equipment furnished to an)Tj
T*
(employee for use in his place of)Tj
T*
(employment. If the employer equips the)Tj
T*
(employee's office with a safe or file)Tj
T*
(cabinet or other receptacle in which to)Tj
T*
(keep his private papers, he can assume)Tj
T*
(that the contents of the safe are)Tj
T*
(private. O'Connor v. Ortega, 480 U.S.)Tj
T*
(709, 718-19 \(1987\); Shields v. Burge, 874)Tj
T*
(F.2d 1201, 1203-04 \(7th Cir. 1989\);)Tj
T*
(Leventhal v. Knapek, 266 F.3d 64, 73-74)Tj
T*
(\(2d Cir. 2001\); United States v. Taketa,)Tj
T*
(923 F.2d 665, 673 \(9th Cir. 1991\);)Tj
T*
(Schowengerdt v. General Dynamics Corp.,)Tj
T*
(823 F.2d 1328, 1335 \(9th Cir. 1987\);)Tj
T*
(Gillard v. Schmidt, 579 F.2d 825, 828 \(3d)Tj
T*
(Cir. 1978\); compare United States v.)Tj
T*
(Bilanzich, 771 F.2d 292, 297 \(7th Cir.)Tj
T*
(1985\). But Glenayre had announced that it)Tj
T*
(could inspect the laptops that it)Tj
T*
(furnished for the use of its employees,)Tj
T*
(and this destroyed any)Tj
T*
(reasonableexpectation of privacy that)Tj
T*
(Muick might have had and so scotches his)Tj
T*
(claim. O'Connor v. Ortega, supra, 480)Tj
T*
(U.S. at 719; United States v. Simons, 206)Tj
T*
(F.3d 392, 398-99 \(4th Cir. 2000\);)Tj
T*
(Schowengerdt v. United States, 944 F.2d)Tj
T*
(483, 488-89 \(9th Cir. 1991\); American)Tj
T*
(Postal Workers Union v. U.S. Postal)Tj
T*
(Service, 871 F.2d 556, 560-61 \(6th Cir.)Tj
T*
(1989\); see also Gossmeyer v. McDonald,)Tj
T*
(128 F.3d 481, 490 \(7th Cir. 1997\);)Tj
T*
(Sheppard v. Beerman, 18 F.3d 147, 152 \(2d)Tj
T*
(Cir. 1994\); United States v. Bunkers, 521)Tj
T*
(F.2d 1217, 1220 \(9th Cir. 1975\). The)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/381FFGLP.txt \(3 of 6\)5/19/2007 5:12:16\
PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
29 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/381FFGLP.txt)Tj
ET
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
BT
/T1_1 1 Tf
14 0 0 14 10 753.9082 Tm
(laptops were Glenayre's property and it)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(could attach whatever conditions to their)Tj
T*
(use it wanted to. They didn't have to be)Tj
T*
(reasonable conditions; but the abuse of)Tj
T*
(access to workplace computers is so)Tj
T*
(common \(workers being prone to use them)Tj
T*
(as media of gossip, titillation, and)Tj
T*
(other entertainment and distraction\) that)Tj
T*
(reserving a right of inspection is so far)Tj
T*
(from being unreasonable that the failure)Tj
T*
(to do so might well be thought)Tj
T*
(irresponsible.)Tj
0 -2.4 TD
( Muick's state claims were dismissed)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(under Rule 12\(b\)\(6\), that is, for failure)Tj
T*
(to state a claim upon which relief could)Tj
T*
(be granted. He challenges the dismissal)Tj
T*
(of two of these claims, the first for)Tj
T*
(promissory estoppel. He alleges that)Tj
T*
(Glenayre "committed promissory estoppel)Tj
T*
(by assigning and transferring Plaintiff)Tj
T*
(to Defendant's Milton Keynes UK)Tj
T*
(operation." \(Milton Keynes is an English)Tj
T*
(city.\) Although federal pleading)Tj
T*
(requirements \(which of course are)Tj
T*
(applicable even when the claim pleaded)Tj
T*
(arises under state rather than federal)Tj
T*
(law\) are lax, a claim of promissory)Tj
T*
(estoppel requires the allegation of a)Tj
T*
(promise, Fischer v. First Chicago Capital)Tj
T*
(Markets, Inc., 195 F.3d 279, 283 \(7th)Tj
T*
(Cir. 1999\); M.T. Bonk Co. v. Milton)Tj
T*
(Bradley Co., 945 F.2d 1404, 1408 \(7th)Tj
T*
(Cir. 1991\), here absent. See also Kiely)Tj
T*
(v. Raytheon Co., 105 F.3d 734, 735-36)Tj
T*
(\(1st Cir. 1997\) \(per curiam\).)Tj
0 -2.4 TD
( The second state-law claim is for)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(invasion of the branch of the right of)Tj
T*
(privacy that is called the right of)Tj
T*
(seclusion and, among other things,)Tj
T*
(protects an individual from intrusive)Tj
T*
(surveillance. Restatement \(Second\) of)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/381FFGLP.txt \(4 of 6\)5/19/2007 5:12:16\
PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
30 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/381FFGLP.txt)Tj
ET
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
BT
/T1_1 1 Tf
14 0 0 14 10 753.9082 Tm
(Torts sec. 652B and comments a, b \(1977\).)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(It is unsettled whether the common law of)Tj
T*
(Illinois recognizes such a claim, Lovgren)Tj
T*
(v. Citizens First Nat'l Bank of)Tj
T*
(Princeton, 534 N.E.2d 987, 989 \(Ill.)Tj
T*
(1989\); Johnson v. Kmart Corp., 723 N.E.2d)Tj
T*
(1192, 1195 \(Ill. App. 2000\), but since)Tj
T*
(it is generally recognized we may assume)Tj
T*
(for purposes of this appeal \(and only for)Tj
T*
(those purposes\) that Illinois will)Tj
T*
(recognize it, especially since Glenayre)Tj
T*
(does not argue the contrary. The claim is)Tj
T*
(unrelated to the contents of the laptop.)Tj
T*
(The complaint alleges only, so far as the)Tj
T*
(claim is concerned, that Glenayre,)Tj
T*
("without right or cause, hired)Tj
T*
(Investigative Associates, a private)Tj
T*
(agency, to perform surveillance on the)Tj
T*
(Plaintiff, even though he was no longer)Tj
T*
(in the Defendant's employ, thereby)Tj
T*
(violating his common-law Right to Privacy)Tj
T*
(by invading his seclusion." This is)Tj
T*
(conclusional and rather vague, but it)Tj
T*
(places the defendant on notice that it is)Tj
T*
(charged with having hired a detective)Tj
T*
(agency to investigate plaintiff in a)Tj
T*
(manner that infringed his right against)Tj
T*
(intrusive surveillance, and no more was)Tj
T*
(required to withstand a motion to dismiss)Tj
T*
(under Rule 12\(b\)\(6\). E.g., Scott v. City)Tj
T*
(of Chicago, 195 F.3d 950, 952 \(7th Cir.)Tj
T*
(1999\); Ryan v. Mary Immaculate Queen)Tj
T*
(Center, 188 F.3d 857, 860 \(7th Cir.)Tj
T*
(1999\). The claim may of course have no)Tj
T*
(merit. The surveillance may not have been)Tj
T*
(intrusive, cf. Hall v. InPhoto)Tj
T*
(Surveillance Co., 649 N.E.2d 83, 85-86)Tj
T*
(\(Ill. App. 1995\); Kelly v. Franco, 391)Tj
T*
(N.E.2d 54, 58 \(Ill. App. 1979\); Bank of)Tj
T*
(Indiana v. Tremunde, 365 N.E.2d 295, 298)Tj
T*
(\(Ill. App. 1977\), or Glenayre may have)Tj
T*
(had a valid interest in investigating its)Tj
T*
(former employee. Davis v. Temple, 673)Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/381FFGLP.txt \(5 of 6\)5/19/2007 5:12:16\
PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
31 0 obj<>stream
/Artifact <>BDC
0 0 0 rg
0 i
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
0 Tc 0 Tw 0 Ts 100 Tz 0 Tr 9 0 0 9 18 780.17 Tm
(http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/381FFGLP.txt)Tj
ET
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
0 18 612 756 re
W* n
BT
/T1_1 1 Tf
14 0 0 14 10 753.9082 Tm
(N.E.2d 737, 744 \(Ill. App. 1996\); Mucklow)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(v. John Marshall Law School, 531 N.E.2d)Tj
T*
(941, 946 \(Ill. App. 1988\). Both things)Tj
T*
(may have been true. And the district)Tj
T*
(court \(and ultimately we\) may decide that)Tj
T*
(the line of authority in the Illinois Ap)Tj
T*
(pellate Court that rejects the tort of)Tj
T*
(seclusion altogether represents the)Tj
T*
(better guess as to the position the)Tj
T*
(state's highest court will ultimately)Tj
T*
(take. But these are all matters to be)Tj
T*
(taken up in further proceedings on)Tj
T*
(remand. In all other respects the)Tj
T*
(judgment is affirmed.)Tj
0 -2.4 TD
(Affirmed in Part, Vacated in Part,)Tj
0 -1.2 TD
(and Remanded.)Tj
0 -2.3 TD
( )Tj
ET
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
Q
BT
/T1_0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 18 7.17 Tm
(http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/381FFGLP.txt \(6 of 6\)5/19/2007 5:12:16\
PM)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
32 0 obj(http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/381FFGLP.txt)
endobj
33 0 obj<>
endobj
34 0 obj<>
endobj
35 0 obj<>
endobj
36 0 obj<>
endobj
37 0 obj[34 0 R]
endobj
38 0 obj(http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/381FFGLP.txt)
endobj
39 0 obj(n 7Zh)
endobj
40 0 obj<>
endobj
41 0 obj<>
endobj
42 0 obj(S`a\rA=Ӧ)
endobj
43 0 obj<>
endobj
44 0 obj<>
endobj
45 0 obj<>
endobj
46 0 obj<>
endobj
47 0 obj<>
endobj
48 0 obj<>stream
2007-05-19T17:12:17-04:00
2007-05-19T17:12:06-04:00
2007-05-19T17:12:17-04:00
application/pdf
http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/381FFGLP.txt
uuid:42f690c3-fefb-4866-a9a9-84347c3a5f4b
uuid:bdcad225-61b6-4ce3-b077-56e2a26dd29a
Acrobat Web Capture 7.0
endstream
endobj
xref
0 49
0000000004 00000 f
0000000016 00000 n
0000000143 00000 n
0000000229 00000 n
0000000006 00000 f
0000000405 00000 n
0000000000 00001 f
0000000471 00000 n
0000000571 00000 n
0000000615 00000 n
0000000662 00000 n
0000000879 00000 n
0000001060 00000 n
0000001140 00000 n
0000001164 00000 n
0000001345 00000 n
0000001369 00000 n
0000001550 00000 n
0000001574 00000 n
0000001755 00000 n
0000001779 00000 n
0000001960 00000 n
0000001984 00000 n
0000002165 00000 n
0000002189 00000 n
0000002279 00000 n
0000002365 00000 n
0000004221 00000 n
0000006680 00000 n
0000009218 00000 n
0000011657 00000 n
0000014220 00000 n
0000015501 00000 n
0000015563 00000 n
0000015599 00000 n
0000015678 00000 n
0000015707 00000 n
0000015808 00000 n
0000015832 00000 n
0000015894 00000 n
0000015928 00000 n
0000016074 00000 n
0000016125 00000 n
0000016160 00000 n
0000016203 00000 n
0000016244 00000 n
0000016285 00000 n
0000016371 00000 n
0000016495 00000 n
trailer
<<0EF119862E72F548818630F8AFCD6E24>]>>
startxref
19990
%%EOF
1 0 obj<>
endobj
3 0 obj<>
endobj
49 0 obj<>
endobj
50 0 obj<>stream
2007-05-19T23:12-04:00
2007-05-19T17:12:06-04:00
2007-05-19T23:12-04:00
application/pdf
Albert J. Muick v. Glenayre Electronics
uuid:42f690c3-fefb-4866-a9a9-84347c3a5f4b
uuid:d2ecc95c-959f-4f04-8fe0-fafb28f855b8
Acrobat Web Capture 7.0
endstream
endobj
xref
1 1
0000021125 00000 n
3 1
0000021252 00000 n
49 2
0000021423 00000 n
0000021595 00000 n
trailer
<]/Prev 19990 >>
startxref
25169
%%EOF