Recording consent law in Delaware
Delaware is genuinely ambiguous: one statute allows one-party recording, another appears to require all-party, and no court has resolved the clash. Treat it as all-party.
General information, not legal advice. Recording law turns on facts — where each person physically is, whether the exchange counts as oral or electronic, and what your profession separately requires. If the answer matters, ask a lawyer licensed in Delaware.
Short answer: Delaware's wiretap statute (11 Del. C. § 2402) contains a one-party-consent exception, but a separate privacy statute (§ 1335) appears to require all-party consent for a private message. No Delaware court has resolved the conflict, so practitioners and the Reporters Committee treat Delaware as effectively all-party out of caution.
At a glance
| Statute | 11 Del. C. § 2402 (wiretap); § 1335 (privacy); § 2409 (civil action) |
|---|---|
| Applies to | Both in-person and telephone / electronic communications |
| Criminal penalty | Violation of § 2402 is a Class E felony, fined up to $10,000, with up to 5 years imprisonment under Delaware's general felony sentencing. |
| Civil liability | Yes, under § 2409 — actual damages figured at $100 per day of violation or $1,000, whichever is higher, plus punitive damages, attorney's fees and costs. |
The detail that catches people out
Delaware is the cleanest example of why “how many all-party states are there” has no settled answer. Its wiretap statute is one-party — § 2402(c)(4) lets a participant record unless doing so to commit a crime or tort. But its separate privacy statute, § 1335, reads as requiring all-party consent to intercept a private message.
No Delaware court has reconciled the two. Faced with that, the sensible move is the cautious one: assume all-party consent is required. The downside of over-asking is a moment of politeness; the downside of under-asking is a Class E felony.
What this means for AI meeting notes
Given the unresolved conflict, don't rely on Delaware's one-party wiretap exception for anything sensitive. Get everyone's consent and you're covered under either statute.
Two things worth separating. Whether a recording bot is visible in the attendee list has no bearing on any of the above — the statute governs the recording, not how obvious your tooling is. And where the recording is processed is a different question again: Delaware law decides whether you may record at all, while your duty of confidentiality decides who may then receive it.
A tool that captures audio through your own machine and processes it locally, like Oats, removes the second problem and leaves the first entirely intact. You still need whatever consent Delaware requires.
If people are in different states
A call with someone in a one-party-consent state and someone in Delaware is not a one-party call. Standard conservative practice is to comply with the strictest rule represented on the call — get everyone's agreement, out loud, and note that you got it. See our overview of US recording consent law for the wider picture and the other all-party states.
Sources: 11 Del. C. § 2402. § 2409 civil action. RCFP — Delaware. Verified July 2026. Laws change — check the primary source before relying on this.
Notes that never leave your Mac
Free forever. No account. No server holding your recordings.
Download for Mac