Private Corporate Justice: Store Police, Shoplifters, and Civil Recovery

Davis, Melissa; Lundman, Richard J.; Martinez, Ramiro

doi:10.2307/800606

Cited by 21 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The fourth apparent form of internalization of law since 1974 is the rise-or, more correctly, the reemergence-of corporate private security. 21 Theory and research on this development re-main sparse (Marx 1987:188; but see Shearing & Stenning 1981Cunningham et al 1990;Davis et al 1991); there are, however, sound grounds for believing that just as large bureaucratic organizations may be internalizing legal governance, dispute resolution, and expertise, they may also be internalizing enforcement.…”

Section: The Private Security Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 99%

When the “Haves” Hold Court: Speculations on the Organizational Internalization of Law

Edelman¹,

Suchman²

1999

Law Soc Rev

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marc Galanter's 1974 essay, “Why the ‘Haves’ Come Out Ahead,” portrayed large bureaucratic organizations as the archetypal repeat players in the legal system; Galanter's account, however, devoted relatively little attention to the distinctive legal capacities of organizations as organizations. This article extends Galanter's analysis by considering the ability of large bureaucratic organizations to “internalize” legal rules, structures, personnel, and activities. Specifically, we posit that the relationship between law and organizations has undergone four interrelated shifts in recent years: (1) the legalization of organizational governance, (2) the expansion of private dispute resolution, (3) the rise of in-house counsel, and (4) the reemergence of private policing. These processes interact with one another to transform the large bureaucratic organization from being merely a repeat player in the public legal system to being a full-fledged private legal system in its own right. Although “have not” groups may gain some short-run advantages from the introduction of citizenship norms into the workplace, the organizational annexation of law subtly skews the balance between democratic and bureaucratic tendencies in society as a whole, potentially adding to the power and control of dominant elites.

show abstract

Section: The Private Security Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 99%

When the “Haves” Hold Court: Speculations on the Organizational Internalization of Law

Edelman¹,

Suchman²

1999

Law Soc Rev

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Others indicate that inconsistent corporate policies and practices related to the use and application of these laws could be a concern (Aronsohn, 1999). For example, racial bias may exist, where minorities may be disproportionately prosecuted because of their race or inability to pay the civil recovery costs (Davis et al, 1991;Austin, 1994). By its very nature, civil recovery also operates invisibly, lacking external review of its practices, making some question, "how private entities determine the guilt of those that are apprehended by their own police" (Simmons, 2007, p. 943).…”

Section: Drawbacks To Civil Recoverymentioning

confidence: 96%

Combating the Shoplifter: An Examination of Civil Recovery Laws

Johnson

Carter

2009

Journal of Applied Security Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This exploratory study examines the nature and extent of civil recovery laws in the United States. Civil demand/recovery laws allow merchants to financially punish offenders who shoplift and then recover their losses in the civil courts, if necessary. Through the content analysis of state laws (n = 50) this study found that all states have recovery laws that allow retailers to recoup any losses related to actual damages from adult offenders, and in some states, juveniles. Additionally, some state statutes also allowed for retailers to levy additional fines (n = 12), above and beyond actual damages, while 49 states also allowed merchants to further financially penalize offenders based on a fixed, variable, or multiplier-based penalty structure. The civil recovery process was also found to consist of four elements: (1) apprehension; (2) demand; (3) recovery in civil court; and (4) termination.

show abstract

“…In the context of corporations, retailers in particular, security professionals work within a private system of justice which monitors, investigates and prosecutes both those who work for the given firm, as well as all those who come into contact with it (Davis et al, 1991;Shearing and Stenning, 1981). Challenging the liberal model, the lords of private justice receive less public scrutiny and greater legal authority to impinge the privacy rights of individuals and search and detain suspects than the public system of justice (Bishop, 1988).…”

Section: Security Guardsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Medieval Security in the Modern State

Woods

2010

Space and Polity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Private Corporate Justice: Store Police, Shoplifters, and Civil Recovery

Cited by 21 publications

References 22 publications

When the “Haves” Hold Court: Speculations on the Organizational Internalization of Law

When the “Haves” Hold Court: Speculations on the Organizational Internalization of Law

Combating the Shoplifter: An Examination of Civil Recovery Laws

Medieval Security in the Modern State

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About