Maryland recording consent law for interviews: section 10-402 in practice

Maryland is an all-party consent state. Under Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-402, a person who takes part in a call or private conversation may record it only "where all of the parties to the communication have given prior consent." A willful violation is a felony, and the person recorded can sue for at least $1,000. For an interviewer, that means a phone screen, video interview or in-person interview with anyone in Maryland starts with a clear notice and a yes before any recording or transcription begins.

To check a specific pairing of your state and the candidate's, use the consent checker.

This page covers the exact statutory wording, how Maryland's courts read "willful" and "private conversation," how the rule applies to each interview format, the penalties, calls that cross the state line, and a consent line you can read at the start of the interview.

What the statute says

Maryland's Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Act sits in Title 10, Subtitle 4 of the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article. Section 10-402(a) makes it unlawful to willfully intercept "any wire, oral, or electronic communication," and separately to willfully disclose or use the contents of a communication while knowing or having reason to know it was intercepted unlawfully.

The exception an interviewer would rely on is § 10-402(c)(3). It is lawful "for a person to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication where the person is a party to the communication and where all of the parties to the communication have given prior consent to the interception," unless the purpose is a criminal or tortious act. Two conditions sit in that sentence, and both have to be met: you are a party, and everyone agreed beforehand.

The definitions in § 10-401 set the reach:

• Intercept means "the aural or other acquisition of the contents" of a wire, electronic or oral communication through a device. A tool that turns speech into text acquires the contents, so treat transcription the same as recording.
• Oral communication means "any conversation or words spoken to or by any person in private conversation." This is the in-person category.
• Wire and electronic communications cover phone calls and data transmitted by wire, radio or similar systems, which is where video platforms fall.

Two court decisions that shape the rule

"Willfully" means on purpose, not knowing the law

In Deibler v. State (2001), Maryland's highest court held that an interception not otherwise authorized "is done willfully if it is done intentionally-purposely," which excludes only inadvertence or simple negligence. The practical point for a hiring team: "I didn't know Maryland required everyone's consent" is not a defense. Pressing record on purpose is enough.

In-person conversations need an expectation of privacy

Because "oral communication" is limited to words spoken "in private conversation," the courts ask whether the people talking had a reasonable expectation of privacy. In Agnew v. State (2018), the Court of Appeals said it has "consistently interpreted the word 'private'" to cover conversations in which participants have a "reasonable expectation of privacy," citing Fearnow v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. (1996). A one-to-one interview in a closed office is the kind of conversation that test is likely to protect. The private conversation limit sits in the definition of oral communication; the definitions of wire and electronic communication do not contain it, so do not assume a phone or video interview needs the same showing.

How the rule applies to each interview format

"Prior" consent means the yes comes before the interception. If your tool starts listening as soon as you join a meeting, either start it only after the candidate agrees, or open with the notice so the question and answer are the first things captured, and discard that opening if the answer is no.

Penalties and civil damages

• Criminal. Under § 10-402(b), a violation of subsection (a) is "a felony" punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years, a fine of not more than $10,000, or both. Intercepting, disclosing and using are each covered.
• Civil. Under § 10-410, the person whose communication was intercepted, disclosed or used can recover actual damages "but not less than liquidated damages computed at the rate of $100 a day for each day of violation or $1,000, whichever is higher," plus punitive damages and a reasonable attorney's fee.

The disclosure and use offenses matter in agency recruiting. A recruiter who forwards a recording of a Maryland candidate to a client, or quotes it in a submittal, while knowing or having reason to know it was made without consent, can be liable even if someone else made the recording.

What this means for recording or transcribing an interview

1. Consent is the only route. The other exceptions in § 10-402(c) are for communications providers, emergency communications centers, law enforcement and publicly accessible radio-type communications. None covers recruiting.
2. Transcription counts. The definition of intercept is about acquiring contents, not about saving an audio file. A tool that keeps only text still needs the yes.
3. No bot does not mean no recording. Capturing audio on your own computer avoids a visible meeting participant, but it is still interception under the definition. Software that records locally, such as Interview Signal, needs the same spoken consent as anything else.
4. Candidates are bound too. A candidate in Maryland who records the interview without your agreement is in the same position under § 10-402 as an interviewer who does. Set a policy for candidate requests and give everyone the same answer.
5. Other Maryland rules can apply. Facial recognition during an interview needs a signed waiver under a separate statute; see Maryland's facial recognition consent rule.

Calls that cross the Maryland line

Federal law (18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d)) and most states let a party record with only their own consent, so a recruiter in Virginia, Texas or New York calling a Maryland candidate may assume their home rule decides the question. It may not. Courts in all-party states have applied their own law to protect people on their side of the call: California's Supreme Court did so in Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney (2006) for calls recorded in Georgia. We did not find a Maryland appellate decision that squarely settles which state's law governs a private recording made outside Maryland of a person inside it, which is a reason to plan for Maryland's rule rather than against it.

The reverse also applies. A recruiter working from home in Maryland is a party in an all-party state on every call, including calls to candidates in one-party states. The general approach is in recording calls across state lines.

A consent line to read in Maryland

"Before we start: I'd like to [record / transcribe] this interview so I
have accurate notes for the [role] position. It's used only for this
hiring process, seen by [who], and deleted after [period]. If you'd
rather I didn't, say so and I'll take notes by hand. It won't affect
your application. Is it OK with you if I [record / transcribe]?"

[Clear yes: start capture. No, or anything unclear: capture stays off.]

On a panel, add: "Everyone on our side has agreed to this as well." For written notices and a log you can keep, see the interview recording consent script.

Checklist for interviews with a Maryland end

1. Ask every candidate before capture starts, whether the interview is by phone, video or in person.
2. Never capture a conversation you are not a party to.
3. Get every interviewer's agreement before the call, not during it.
4. Treat transcripts and AI notes exactly like audio recordings.
5. Do not forward or quote a recording unless you know it was made with consent.
6. If the candidate says no, stop, take notes by hand, and note the decision neutrally.
7. Put the rule in your written policy with a date, and review it yearly.

Maryland's rule is one of fourteen state rules compared in two-party consent states, and the broader legal picture, including AI hiring rules that sit on top of recording law, is in is it legal to record a job interview.