Is it legal to record phone calls in New Hampshire?
Only with everyone’s consent. New Hampshire is an all-party consent state: every participant in a phone call must consent to being recorded. The standard mechanism is a clear announcement — a party who stays on the line after hearing “this call may be recorded” is generally treated as having consented.
What New Hampshire law says
New Hampshire is one of roughly a dozen US states that require all parties’ consent to record a phone call. Recording without consent can carry criminal penalties and civil liability, so the practice to adopt is simple: announce the recording at the start of every call, or use a tool that announces it for you.
New Hampshire is an all-party consent state: RSA 570-A:2 makes it unlawful to intercept or record a telecommunication or oral communication without the consent of all parties. The statute draws an unusual line in the penalties - a stranger who taps a call commits a class B felony, while a participant who records their own call with only their own consent commits a misdemeanor. Disclosing or using an illegally intercepted communication is separately prohibited.
"A person is guilty of a class B felony if, except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter, he willfully intercepts or attempts to intercept any telecommunication or oral communication without the consent of all parties to such communication." — N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 570-A:2, I
Federal one-party consent under 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d) does not preempt New Hampshire's all-party rule. Recording a call with a New Hampshire resident without everyone's consent can violate RSA 570-A even when federal law would permit one-party recording.
Everyone on a New Hampshire call must consent before it is recorded. Consent may be express or implied - continuing to talk after a clear recorded-line announcement is generally treated as consent, which is how businesses comply. The statute's two-tier structure matters: intercepting a communication you are not part of, without any party's consent, is the class B felony; knowingly recording a call you are a party to (or with one party's consent) without everyone's consent is the misdemeanor tier under RSA 570-A:2, I-a. The New Hampshire Supreme Court added an important mens rea gloss in Fischer v. Hooper: a violation must be "willful," meaning intentional or reckless disregard for the lawfulness of the conduct, so a genuine good-faith belief that the recording was lawful is a defense. Oral (in-person) conversations are protected only where the speaker has a reasonable expectation the conversation is not subject to interception.
| Consent rule for phone calls | All-party consent |
| Recording calls you're part of | Only with every participant’s consent — announce the recording. |
| Calls with people in other states | The stricter state's rule may apply — when in doubt, disclose. |
What breaking the law costs in New Hampshire
Intercepting or recording without all-party consent is a class B felony (up to 7 years in prison and a $4,000 fine). A person who records a communication they are a party to, or with one party's consent, is instead guilty of a misdemeanor (up to 1 year and a $2,000 fine).
Yes - RSA 570-A:11 lets anyone whose communication was intercepted, disclosed, or used in violation of the chapter recover the greater of actual damages, $100 per day of violation, or $1,000, plus punitive damages, attorney fees and costs. Illegally intercepted communications are also inadmissible as evidence.
Exceptions worth knowing
- Consent of all parties to the communication - including implied consent by continuing after a recording announcement.
- Communications carriers and providers intercepting in the normal course of providing service.
- Law enforcement one-party interception for enumerated offenses, but only with attorney general (or designee) authorization based on reasonable suspicion.
- Police body-worn and cruiser cameras during stops, emergency dispatch recordings, and school-bus audio authorized by a school board with parental notice.
How New Hampshire courts have ruled
Statutes set the rule; cases show how it plays out when a recording ends up in front of a judge. These are real, decided cases under New Hampshire law.
What happened: After a guardian ad litem suggested both divorced parents agree to record calls concerning their daughter, David Hooper unilaterally taped his ex-wife's phone conversations without her consent, then revealed the tapes at a meeting; she sued under RSA 570-A and for invasion of privacy, winning $10,000 on the wiretap claim and $15,000 on the privacy claim.
The ruling: The Supreme Court held that "willfully" under RSA 570-A:2 requires intentional or reckless disregard for the lawfulness of the conduct - a good-faith belief the recording was legal is a defense - and reversed and remanded for a new trial because the jury was wrongly instructed.
What happened: Neighbors overheard Karen Karch's cordless-phone conversation with a co-worker on a radio scanner and reported it to her employer, BayBank, which used the contents to accuse her of misconduct, threaten termination, and paper her personnel file.
The ruling: The court held that cordless-phone transmissions fall within RSA 570-A's protection and that the employer's reliance on the intercepted conversation to discipline her qualified as "use" under the statute, allowing her claims against the neighbors and the employer to proceed.
What happened: The defendant moved to suppress a recording offered by the State, arguing it was an unlawful interception under RSA chapter 570-A.
The ruling: The Supreme Court held suppression under RSA 570-A:6 is required only when the underlying interception was a felony violation — clarifying when illegally recorded communications must be excluded.
Personal calls vs. business calls in New Hampshire
Recording personal calls
Recording your own calls without the other person's consent is illegal in New Hampshire even though you are a participant - it is the misdemeanor tier rather than the felony, but it still carries up to a year in jail, a $2,000 fine, and civil damages, and the recording will generally be unusable in court. Fischer v. Hooper is the cautionary tale for family disputes: an ex-husband who taped his ex-wife's calls ended up on the wrong end of a wiretap and privacy verdict. If you need to document harassment or a custody dispute, get consent on tape ("I'm recording this, okay?") or stick to voicemails and texts, which the sender knowingly gave you. Note also that people who merely pass along or use an illegally recorded call can be liable, as the employer in Karch learned.
Recording business calls
Companies recording calls with anyone in New Hampshire need all-party consent, which the standard pre-call announcement supplies - a caller who stays on the line after hearing it has impliedly consented. Employers cannot quietly monitor employee calls; recording workplace calls requires the same all-party consent, and using the contents of an illegally intercepted call for discipline is itself a statutory violation under Karch. Out-of-state call centers dialing into New Hampshire should assume New Hampshire law applies and play the announcement, since the state's felony classification and $100-per-day civil damages make it one of the higher-risk states in the country. Law-enforcement-style one-party recording is available only to police with attorney general authorization, not to private businesses.
Calls that cross state lines
New Hampshire's appellate courts have not settled a choice-of-law rule for calls that cross state lines, so there is no New Hampshire equivalent of California's Kearney decision. Practically, a recorder in a one-party state calling into New Hampshire risks New Hampshire criminal and civil exposure, and New Hampshire courts protect their residents' conversations under RSA 570-A. The safe rule on any interstate call is to satisfy the strictest state on the line - here, get everyone's consent.
The safe way to record in New Hampshire
Whatever the local rule, one habit covers every situation: say the call is being recorded at the start. Consent is then on the recording itself, and cross-border calls stop being a legal puzzle. Callmark can play "This call may be recorded" automatically on your calls, so the disclosure never depends on your memory.
For the full national picture — every all-party state, cross-border rules, and consent mechanics — see our state-by-state consent guide.
Sources and further reading
Statutes, court opinions, and reference guides cited on this page. Laws change — verify current text before relying on it for anything consequential.
- RSA 570-A:2 (official text, NH General Court)
- RSA chapter 570-A full chapter (NH General Court)
- Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press - New Hampshire recording guide
- Fischer v. Hooper, 143 N.H. 585 (1999) (FindLaw opinion)
- Karch v. BayBank FSB, 147 N.H. 525 (2002) (FindLaw opinion)
- NH Law Library - Recording Conversations guide
Common questions
Only if everyone on the call consents. An announcement at the start of the call, followed by the other party staying on the line, is the standard way consent is established in New Hampshire.
Courts have applied different states' laws to interstate calls, and you often can't verify where a mobile number is. The practical rule: assume the strictest state applies and disclose the recording.
In most states, continuing a call after a clear "this call may be recorded" announcement is treated as implied consent — the same mechanism customer-service lines rely on.
Not without everyone's consent. Unlike most states, New Hampshire treats a participant's secret recording of their own call as a crime - a misdemeanor carrying up to a year in jail and a $2,000 fine - and the person recorded can sue for statutory damages under RSA 570-A:11. Announce the recording and get agreement first.
This is exactly what Fischer v. Hooper involved, and it went badly for the recorder: the ex-wife won damages under the wiretap statute and for invasion of privacy. New Hampshire has no established vicarious-consent doctrine letting a parent consent on a child's behalf, so recording the other parent's calls is a genuine legal risk, not a gray area.
Intercepting a communication you are not part of - tapping a line, planting a bug - is a class B felony (up to 7 years). Recording a conversation you are a party to, but without the other parties' consent, is a misdemeanor (up to 1 year). Both versions also expose you to civil damages of at least $1,000 or $100 per day, plus punitive damages and attorney fees.
Generally no. Communications intercepted in violation of RSA 570-A cannot be used as evidence, and the act of disclosing or using them is itself unlawful - Karch v. BayBank held an employer liable for using an intercepted call to discipline an employee.
It can. Fischer v. Hooper held that RSA 570-A:2 requires a willful violation - intentional or reckless disregard for the lawfulness of your conduct - so an honest, reasonable belief that the recording was legal is a defense. But relying on that after the fact is a gamble; getting consent is the reliable path.
Record responsibly in New Hampshire, automatically.
Built-in disclosure · automatic transcripts and summaries · 200 minutes included
Get Callmark