Queen’s Castle v. Drone: Expectation of Privacy Rights and Avoidance of Evidentiary Concerns Regarding Chain of Custody in Workers’ Compensation Sub Rosa Surveillance

ELIZABETH BATISTA JOSEPH E. RICHARDS, ESQ.

Santa Ana, California

Note: Elizabeth Batista, one of the authors of this article, is a law student in a supervised law school for-credit externship setting with a licensed attorney co-author. The research and views expressed herein should not be considered legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is created between the author(s) and the reader. Readers should consult a licensed attorney and research original sources of authority.

Picture this: Applicant Allison has a pending claim for workers’ compensation due to an alleged injury to her right shoulder while working for her employer. Within the initial correspondence from her attorney was notice that because Allison’s medical status was in issue, her employer’s insurance company could hire a private investigator to conduct sub rosa surveillance whereby she would be recorded and photographed.