skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 78852 Find in a Library
Title: Private Action for Injunctive Relief (From Techniques in the Investigation and Prosecution of Organized Crime - Materials on RICO, P 407-427, 1980, G. Robert Blakey, ed. - See NCJ-78839)
Author(s): D A Bailey
Date Published: 1980
Page Count: 21
Document: PDF
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: Private action for injunctive relief under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is discussed.
Abstract: Under Section 1964(a) of RICO, Federal courts have jurisdiction to issue injunctions to enjoin activities that are RICO violations. Section 1964(c) should be interpreted as granting the right of private persons to sue and obtain injunctive relief. The usefulness of a RICO injunction to a private citizen is clear. Without having to wait for the Attorney General to act, a citizen can get a court order requiring RICO activities to terminate. The injunction could include a divestiture order, restrictions on personal associations, or other restrictions to ensure that the prohibited activities will cease. Even if the courts interpret the language of 18 U.S.C. section 1964 as not specifically granting the right of private persons to obtain injunctive relief, they may imply the right. In Cort v. Ash, the U.S. Supreme Court outlined four factors relevant to determining whether a private remedy is implicit in a statute not expressly providing it. These factors are (1) the plaintiff's being one of the class for whose special benefit the statute was enacted; (2) an indication of legislative intent, explicit or implicit, to create or deny such a remedy; (3) consistency with the underlying purposes of the legislative scheme to imply such a remedy for the plaintiff; and (4) the cause of action not being traditionally relegated to State law. A total of 76 footnotes are provided.
Index Term(s): Criminal infiltration of business; Injunctions; Organized crime; Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act
Note: Available in microfiche from NCJRS as NCJ-78839.
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.