United States v. Szymuszkiewicz

As a revenue officer for the Internal Revenue Service, David Szymuszkiewicz (defendant) was required to visit the homes of delinquent taxpayers as necessary to aid in collection efforts. When Szymuszkiewicz’s driver’s license was suspended for drunk driving, Szymuszkiewicz feared that he would lose his job. Almost three years later, Szymuszkiewicz’s boss, Nella Infusino, discovered a rule that directed her Outlook email application to forward her emails to Szymuszkiewicz. The federal government charged Szymuszkiewicz with violating the Wiretap Act by intentionally intercepting Infusino’s emails to keep watch for communications concerning his employment. Szymuszkiewicz argued first that the forwarding was merely a mistake. However, the government showed that Szymuszkiewicz not only received Infusino’s emails for years but also saved them to a designated folder. Szymuszkiewicz also argued that he did not learn anything valuable from the forwarding. However, the government showed that receipt of valuable information was not required for liability under the Wiretap Act. Finally, Szymuszkiewicz argued that he should have been charged under the Stored Communications Act, not the Wiretap Act, because the rule on Infusino’s computer did not intercept her emails, but instead forwarded him a copy after she received them. However, the government presented evidence that Outlook rules were processed at the server, not at individual computers. Consequently, when an email for Infusino reached the regional server, the server sent a copy to Infusino and a copy to Szymuszkiewicz. The government thus argued that Szymuszkiewicz intercepted the emails at the server, before they reached Infusino. The district-court jury convicted Szymuszkiewicz, concluding that he had both motive and opportunity to intercept Infusino’s emails. Szymuszkiewicz appealed to the Seventh Circuit.