The plaintiff railway company sought interlocutory injunctive relief after former employees joined a direct competitor and allegedly downloaded and circulated confidential commercial information, including customer lists and revenue data, to solicit the plaintiff’s clients.
The parties agreed to an injunction preserving confidential information and restricting its use, but disputed whether an independent court-appointed monitor should oversee compliance with the order.
The court found the defendants had initially fallen short in complying with an earlier undertaking but had taken substantial remedial steps, including forensic searches, employee discipline, and written directives prohibiting use of the information.
The court concluded that appointing a monitor with broad investigative and supervisory powers would be overly intrusive into the defendant corporation’s business operations.
The court held that the contempt power and the existing order sufficiently protected the plaintiff’s interests.
