Question 1

The state that helped pioneer case law concerning workplace e-mail privacy specifically is______.

Accepted Answer

A)   Ohio
B)   Pennsylvania
C)   California
D)   Nevada C

Question 2

The courts have consistently ruled in favor of the employer in workplace e-mail privacy cases.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False  True

Question 3

An established rule of law set by previous courts, deciding similar facts and legal issues is defined as ______. (precedent)

Accepted Answer

An established rule of law set by previous courts, deciding similar facts and legal issues is defined as precedent. Precedent refers to a legal principle or rule that is created by a court decision. This decision becomes an authoritative example and standard to be followed in future cases with similar circumstances. In common law legal systems, precedents are binding and must be adhered to by lower courts when the same legal issues are presented. This system of precedent, known as stare decisis, ensures consistency and predictability in the law.

Question 4

Most employer privacy guidelines prohibit unauthorized parties from accessing and disclosing employee e-mail and other personal workplace effects.
D. Production Technologies

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 5

Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 did not protect human-to-computer or computer-to-computer communication.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 6

Your belief that you are entitled to a reasonable expectation of privacy with regard to yourbriefcase, personal mail and other workplace items is referred to as an objective expectation ofprivacy.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 7

Future workplace e-mail privacy cases are expected to favor the employee.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 8

Similar cases should be decided in a similar way according to the legal concept of ______.

Accepted Answer

A)   precedent
B)   reasonableness standard
C)   actual malice
D)   stare decisis

Question 9

The court ruled that an employee did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in theworkplace if tight security and ongoing surveillance at the workplace existed in ______.

Accepted Answer

A)   O'Connor v. Ortega
B)   Schowengerdt v. General Dynamics
C)   Michael Smyth v. Pillsbury
D)   Richard Fraser v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance

Question 10

Privacy protection can be traced back to the ______.

Accepted Answer

A)   First Amendment
B)   Fifth Amendment
C)   Sixth Amendment
D)   Fourth Amendment

Exam 18: E-Mail Privacy

The state that helped pioneer case law concerning workplace e-mail privacy specifically is______.

The courts have consistently ruled in favor of the employer in workplace e-mail privacy cases.

An established rule of law set by previous courts, deciding similar facts and legal issues is defined as ______. (precedent)

Most employer privacy guidelines prohibit unauthorized parties from accessing and disclosing employee e-mail and other personal workplace effects. D. Production Technologies

Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 did not protect human-to-computer or computer-to-computer communication.

Your belief that you are entitled to a reasonable expectation of privacy with regard to yourbriefcase, personal mail and other workplace items is referred to as an objective expectation ofprivacy.

Future workplace e-mail privacy cases are expected to favor the employee.

Similar cases should be decided in a similar way according to the legal concept of ______.

The court ruled that an employee did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in theworkplace if tight security and ongoing surveillance at the workplace existed in ______.

Privacy protection can be traced back to the ______.