Rating: 
Summary: Excellent & Engrossing Read
Review: I love to read but I very rarely read non-fiction books. I've started numerous ones, but have never found them interesting and I always put them down unread. Not this one though. It was totally engrossing.
I finished it it two days. I couldn't put it down, it read like a novel.
Rating: 
Summary: To win a case. one must prove the point.
Review: A CIVIL ACTION
By Jonathan Harr
This is a fascinating book and a tough call
The author presents us with a heart rendering case of eight children living in a small area of East Woburn, MA who have contracted leukemia and who eventually die of the disease. The alleged cause of the cancer is two wells that supply the drinking water for the area. The stories of the victims and their families make you cry out for justice. Anyone with any feelings, intelligence and conscience would demand that the causes of the problem be uncovered, the perpetrators of the pollution be brought to justice, the problem corrected, the toxins removed and the victims compensated, although what compensation could ever make up for the suffering and the loss of life.
Jan Schlichtmann, an obsessive compulsive, who is young and comparatively green as a lawyer and who champions causes where he feels injustices have occurred, finds himself engaged in the Woburn case. He is respected and revered by his staff, open and generous with the people that he works with and although a profligate spendthrift, has no interest in amassing money. Whatever he earns, he must spend as rapidly and as extravagantly as possible. When he is engaged in a case, it becomes the focal point of his life. He interviews hordes of people, finds and hires experts and even goes into the field to gather physical evidence. Costs be damned, the only thing that counts is to be sure that no scintilla of evidence be left undiscovered.
Schlichtmann has been warned by his colleagues that this case is almost impossible to win. Very few personal injury cases hold up in court and he is about to face a highly skilled defense team with unlimited resources. The defendants are Beatrice Foods and W. R. Grace. Jan is a three man firm without financial reserves, representing several blue collar families with almost no financial resources. In May 1982, Schlichtmann files a complaint just eight days before the statute of limitations runs out. He has almost no evidence at this time. His adversaries are Jerome Fasher of Hale and Dorr, (200 lawyers), representing Beatrice and William Cheeseman of Foley, Hoag and Elliot, another large Boston firm. Both men immediately start maneuvering to have case thrown out by filing motions such as violating Rule 11, which concerns frivolous law suits, charges of barratry, which imply that the lawyer solicited people to file the suit and many other complaints that prolonged the case and forces Schlichtmann spend more money. The judge is Walter Skinner, a highly respected jurist with a reputation for fairness and one who will not put up with delaying tactics. He gives the lawyers nine months for discovery.
At this juncture, Schlichtmann's main evidence is "The Harvard Health Study" which found that there was a large increase in the health problems of those drinking the water from wells G and H. The Center for Disease Control in Atlanta, hardly a biased group, called the study flawed. It presented no hard evidence connecting TCE with leukemia. Jan has to start from the very beginning and create his own studies that will link the chemicals found in the wells to the diseases suffered by the East Woburn residents. He hires all kinds of doctors to test his clients and to come up with solid evidence connecting the wells to the sickness, but by the time of the trial, there are no long range, large population studies to support the theories. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence and a layman like myself would be persuaded by the mountains of data that there probably was a link. The cost of these studies is humongous. In order to have a case, Jan must prove two other things, first, that the plants actually dumped the toxins and second, that the toxins actually reached the wells. Jan questions many people and finds a couple from Grace who admit to pouring waste into open ditches. Riley who ran the Beatrice tannery hangs tough and remembers nothing. Geologists and hydrologists are retained and do very extensive and very expensive studies. The discovery deadline is extended and the costs to Schlichtman continue to rise. He is completely overextended. Fasher and Cheeseman continue delaying tactics hoping that the plaintiffs will run out of funds and have to drop the case. The trial date is finally set for February 86, almost four years after filing the complaint.
Judge Skinner divides the trial into two parts, first the plaintiff must prove that the companies polluted the wells. If the jury finds this is so, then the medical part of the case will take place. Fasher offers to settle the case against Beatrice for 1M. per family. Schlichtman turns him down and keeps his most talented foe in the battle. Fasher crushes Schlichtmann, who is completely out of his element in this kind of a dispute. When the first phase is completed, the judge gives the jury four questions to answer and they are really ambiguous. The jury finds Beatrice Foods not liable. The case continues against Grace. Schlichtmann, completely out of money and with very little stomach to continue this one sided battle is in reality, forced to settle. He gets $8,000,000. After expenses and fees, each family receives $350,000 and Jan ends up with $30,000. W.R. Grace never has to admit guilt.
When I read this book, my sympathies were entirely with Schlichtmann. Was this a miscarriage of justice? I am not sure. Jan was a babe thrown in with real professionals. When we get down to facts, his case was to be built on sympathy for the young victims. He amassed huge amounts of data and felt that this alone would overwhelm a court and allow him to win. The judge, experienced and sharp, knew what was valid evidence. Schlichtmann irritated Skinner by being abrasive and disrespectful and the judge appeared rather harsh in his rulings, but was he unfair? It appears so on the surface, but I look at other evidence. In 1990, the Court of Appeals turned Schlichtmann down, based on the case he presented. They commended the judge for the way he ran the trial and endorsed sanctions against Schlichtmann for his conduct. Hardly a biased body. Justice Stephen Breyer, head of the Mass. Court of Appeals, turned down a petition for a rehearing of the appeal. Hardly a biased party. Finally, the United States Supreme Court refused to hear the case.
Did Jonathan Harr slant the story in favor of the victims? Did he believe that a case that could have been a landmark for the environmentalists should have received better treatment in the courts? Was Jan the wrong person, who because of an enormous ego, was unable to decide "when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em"? He had several opportunities to settle the case for what I would consider a very large amount of money. Did he refuse to heed the pleas of his colleagues and advisors to consider settlement because he had his head in the clouds and couldn't envision himself losing the Holy Grail. True, after the case was settled, evidence came out that may have won the case for the Woburn people, but Jan, hindered by a lack of money had to rush to trial in order to survive. Someday, a group with larger resources may mount a case and win it. One thing that the case does prove is that having unlimited funds and using them to manipulate the system never hurts. Is this justice?
Rating:
Summary: The decade's best
Review: Despite the recent avalanche of legal fiction and non-fiction, nothing I've read comes close to this amazing non-fiction opus magnum. The story, the characters, the author's committment and the insights into the justice system are all breathtaking. And it's a damn fine read!
Jim O'Donnel
Rating:
Summary: A Remarkable Book You Won't Soon Forget
Review: Jonathan Harr tells the shattering true story of a Massachusetts community poisoned by industrial wastes and the driven lawyer who represents the victims. Harr's writing is masterful as he portrays plaintiffs, defendants, lawyers, and a judge more astonishing than any you'll find in fiction. The last third of the book moves relentlessly to an extraordinary conclusion--don't miss this superbly written book
Rating:
Summary: Joseph Wambaugh- Move over!
Review: I have read many, MANY legal works, both fiction and nonfiction. I picked this book up strictly by accident, glanced at the first page and was HOOKED! Jonathan Harr has written a book many fiction writers would love to emulate and his is all the better for being true!Everyone in America knows that our legal system disregards justice and Harr proves it in this wonderful book that should be mandatory reading for every judge in the US
Rating:
Summary: Our legal system has got nothing to do with justice
Review: Thoroughly enjoyed this book and really felt for Jan and the poor families of Woburn. A great read, but depressing in that the judge seems to be more concerned with legal technicalities than the deaths caused by the criminal actions of companies like Grace & Beatrice food
Rating:
Summary: Riveting piece of non-fiction
Review: What--a non-fiction book about a toxic waste trial that you actually WANT to read?! Even if you don't know (or care about) the difference between a deposition and an affadavit, you cannot help but get caught up in this account, as Jonathan Harr displays dazzling skill and a sure hand in pacing this narrative. What's more, is the protagonist (Schlichtmann) an obsessed, greedy, self-aggrandizer or is he an intensely committed protector of innocent victims?
You decide.
Read this book.
Rating:
Summary: I have seen Don Quixote and his name is Jan Schlictmann!
Review: I walked by the stand 4 times before I decided to buy this
book. Thank you Jonathan Harr for writing one of the most
inspirational books I have ever experienced. I bought 10 copies for friends and family and they were equally engrossed by the drama, plot twists and human characters that are real heroes. If Harr and Schlictmann can make efforts like this book and this case than surely all of us can do more.
Rating: 
Summary: A Brilliant Book, I Couldn't put it down
Review: One of the Best Books I have ever read, The King of Political Science/ Law book
Rating:
Summary: This book is a legal thriller that just cannot be put down.
Review: The main reason why A Civil Action was such a compelling book was Harr's writing style. Without previous knowledge about this case and this book, I would never had guessed this was a nonfiction work. Harr wrote in a manner that made A Civil Action read like a novel. Since Harr followed the trial from the beginning, he writes the story as if he was in the mind of the characters. In an note about the sources following the afterword, Harr describes how he had inside access to the case. He attended the meetings and strategy sessions, as well as had unprecedented access to documents and records. Thus, even through Harr included reconstructed passages as actual quotes, he does so in a style that doesn't fall under the "novelization" technique employed when scandals and incidents are transformed for books and "made for TV" movies. Another interesting characteristic of Harr's writing style is the way he presented Cheeseman and Facher. Harr includes a fascinating description of their skills and weaknesses, their stratagems, and their obvious manipulation of the judge and jury. Also, to maintain the writing style of getting into the minds of the characters, Harr decreases the role of the EPA and the Department of Justice. If he focused on their trial against W. R. Grace, Harr would deviate from the writing style he used throughout the book. Definitely, Harr's writing style was one of the reasons I usually could not put this book down
|
