Ruling Against Sleuth Upheld in O.C. Case

Christopher G. Coulter was collecting evidence for a sexual harassment claim against Bank of America when he launched a covert investigation. He hid two tiny recorders in his pockets and secretly taped more than 160 private conversations with co-workers and supervisors.

Bank employees caught wind of Coulter’s taping and filed their own lawsuit, accusing the ATM repairman of invading their privacy.

An Orange County judge awarded the bank and 11 employees $132,000 in damages. This week, the 4th District Court of Appeal in Santa Ana upheld the judgment, ruling that Coulter had gone too far.

“Christopher Coulter was an amateur sleuth,” Acting Presiding Justice Edward J. Wallin wrote in a ruling made public Thursday. “In this case, his sleuthing has cost him $132,000.”

Coulter, who lives in Spring Valley in San Diego County, was working at Bank of America branches in Orange, San Diego and Los Angeles counties when he began taping in 1989. He contended that a former girlfriend who worked for the bank was harassing him and he began taping employees chatting, gossiping and griping about work, according to the ruling.

The conversations involved bank vice presidents, field managers and others. Topics included Coulter’s transfers on the job, his career objectives, disciplinary matters and a co-worker’s complaint that Coulter was harassing her.

Orange County Superior Court Judge Thomas N. Thrasher dismissed Coulter’s sexual harassment lawsuit but upheld a countersuit filed by 11 unhappy co-workers who complained Coulter invaded their privacy without permission.

Coulter’s attorney did not return repeated phone calls Thursday, and Coulter could not be reached for comment.

Attorney Paul W. Cane, one of several lawyers who represented the bank and its employees, said the court ruling affirms workplace privacy rights.

“Employees who surreptitiously tape record employees or supervisors face substantial risk in doing so,” Cane said. “This helps further workplace privacy rights because employees now know, just as companies have long known, that this kind of surreptitious taping is illegal.”

After filing his lawsuit, Coulter boasted during depositions about secretly taping co-workers. But when the admission led defense attorneys to demand the tapes under law, Coulter then alleged that the employees were aware the conversations were being taped, according to court records.

California’s Privacy Act prohibits recording communications without the consent of all parties.

Coulter filed his lawsuit in December, 1991, alleging sexual harassment and other grievances at work, court records show.

During pretrial meetings, Coulter turned over 16 tapes containing 160 secretly recorded conversations. Thrasher later found 44 specific violations of the Privacy Act, and awarded $3,000 in damages for each violation.

In rejecting Coulter’s appeal, Wallin pointed out Coulter’s contradictory statements, noting “ . . . Coulter admitted that all of the recordings were done without the knowledge or consent of the persons involved. He cannot now claim there was a factual issue regarding consent.”

The repairman left Bank of America more than a year ago, Cane said.

Times staff writer H.G. Reza contributed to this report.