Court Appointed Monitorships: Effective Remedy or Modern Misstep?

Authors

Jean Joun

First Page

509

Abstract

When a corporate entity or organization violates the law, there are several remedies the courts may enforce against the bad actor. Most common are damages—both compensatory and punitive—and injunctive relief. The class of injunctive relief that most are familiar with is the kind that restrains the bad actor from a conduct or behavior. However, courts in certain instances may decide, either on their own volition or after being asked to consider such a remedy by a prosecuting entity, to appoint a compliance monitor with the function of ensuring that the bad actor continues traversing a legally sound path. Although court-ordered monitors are not a new remedy per se, over the past decades a new trend of court ordered monitors gaining increased power has emerged. This trend has concerned those who believe an improperly unrestrained monitor is a dangerous overreach of judicial power in an entity’s private affairs. This Note delves into the history of how the court ordered monitor has become what it is today, provides theories as to how and why the touted issues have come to be, and offers a solution for creating a more consistent application of the remedy in the future.

Recommended Citation

Jean Joun, Court Appointed Monitorships: Effective Remedy or Modern Misstep?, 19 Brook. J. Corp. Fin. & Com. L. 509 ().
Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjcfcl/vol19/iss2/8