Rating: 
Summary: Trial Lawyers versus the Democratic Process
Review: American Attorneys sometimes wonder why the general public holds then in such low esteem. Are they being unfairly perceived as legal charlatans contemptuous of all that is good and decent? The answer, at least in regards to trial lawyers, is an adamant no according to "The Rule of Lawyers." Moreover, Walter Olsen raises the alarm that numerous members of this particular profession threaten our democratic institutions. They are using our precious legal system to blackmail targeted companies. If the unlucky business entity dares fight back, points out the author, it may ultimately be forced to declare bankruptcy. The cost of litigation itself might be a death sentence for even a financially sound company. A gang of attorneys filing in different courts against the same company is analogous to piranhas feasting on a virtually defenseless large animal. The poor creature cannot possibly survive such a multifaceted attack. Sadly, one need not be an attorney with a high batting average to become extremely wealthy. Trial lawyers generally throw a lot of stuff at the proverbial fan hoping that merely one piece sticks. A judge and jury in a particular district may not go along with their shenanigans. This, regretfully, does not stop these relentless and greedy legal hooligans. They have mastered the art of filing law suits until eventually obtaining the final desired results. Some courts lack the integrity and backbone to oppose these white collared thugs. This is especially true for those judges requiring financial contributions for the next election. Many morally challenged trial lawyers have partnered with politicians (usually Democrats) to win in the courts what is impossible to achieve at the ballot box. For instance, the voters mostly reject gun control proposals. But a gun manufacturer facing insolvency may be forced to capitulate to the wishes of these left wing attorneys. We rightfully should have little sympathy for businesses that lie and break the law to bolster their bottom line. Olsen argues, though, it is a mistake to conclude that the end justifies the means. Our nation is premised upon the rule of law and constitutional protections. We are all endangered when trial lawyers are able to abuse the system and intimidate their chosen victims. I whole heartedly recommend that you give serious consideration to Walter Olsen's cogent and very convincing arguments. Please note that I earlier criticized the Democrats. In all fairness, I am obligated not to ignore the vices of the Grand Old Party. There is plenty of blame to go around. Thus, I also encourage you to view the brilliant 1999 movie "The Insider" starring Al Pacino and Russell Crowe concerning the disgraceful behavior of the tobacco executives. Am I contradicting myself? Not in the least. There is indeed such a thing as corporate malfeasance that must be taken to task. Nonetheless, the constitution must not be jeopardized in our zeal to address these legitimate issues. It's a question of reaching a proper balance. You might also wish to send a copy of "The Rule of Lawyers" to some of your elected officials.
Rating:
Summary: A Hidden Gem
Review: As a former (and now retired) business lawyer in California, I have observed the antics (and, yes, the anti-social tendencies) of the class action trial lawyers over the years with a great deal of embarrassment and chagrin, and have wondered how and when they would be reined in. That day is still a ways off, unfortunately, for the reasons Mr. Olson relates in his book. Mr. Olson "tells it like it is," citing a mountain of well-researched facts and anecdotes, and he builds his case with the reader relentlessly. The author demolishes the myths that the trial lawyers' bar would have us believe, and explains why the system is out of control. Concludes he, "Year upon year we do nothing to govern our elite litigators, and the result at length is that they have decided to govern us." The ultimate victims are the taxpayers and the integrity of the legislative and judicial system. This book should be required reading of every legislator and judge, both federal and state, as well as by every well-informed American, whether of conservative, liberal, moderate or agnostic bent. I rarely write book reviews for posting on www.Amazon.com, but this book was extraordinarily good.
Rating: 
Summary: good read
Review: I have worked for the plaintiffs' class action bar since I got out of law school a few years ago. I like to visit Mr. Olson's website overlawyered.com, where the firm that I work for is routinely slagged. Anyway, I finally got around to reading The Rule of Lawyers, and I thought it was pretty good. I certainly can't question the main premise, that the Master Settlement Agreement with the tobacco industry a few years ago generated massive cash for the plaintiffs' class action bar that has been plowed back into new class actions aimed at (1) enriching counsel for the proposed class(es) and (2) promoting some kind of social agenda. As Mr. Olson discusses in his book, class litigation is mostly a kind of cozy shell game where a specialized group of lawyers on both sides broker settlements with each other, at the cost of insurers and their customers, although recently the verdicts are getting to be the size of the GNPs of some countries (like the Philip Morris case in Illinois), and I think it's probably not a good idea for trial lawyers to have that kind of power. Mr. Olson obviously has legal training and mostly gets the law right. I think the main flaw in his premise is just that it's not really reasonable or fair to expect the plaintiffs' bar to be better than the society they operate in. Sure they are crazed with greed and self-aggrandizing fantasies, but so are a lot of people. My point is, they are really a symptom of the society more than anything else. The real solution is to try to encourage the public to develop a better understanding of what the law is supposed to do. I don't think ad hoc legislative interventions like the Class Action Fairness Act are the answer. I worked for a district court and I can tell you that reports about overcrowded federal dockets are very true. Unless people like Mr. Olson want to shell out extra taxes to appoint new federal judges and support staff, the likely result of the CAFA is just going to be to bring the work of the federal courts to a total halt (and I'm not exaggerating, it's well-documented how enactment of the Reconstruction Era civil rights statutes drowned the federal courts in lawsuits for decades). Actually, this is the reason that the Federal Judicial Conference and Chief Justice Rehnquist support the outright abolition of diversity jurisdiction--it's too much of a burden on the limited resources of the federal courts. Anyway, to conclude, I thought the book was pretty good. The class action device probably does have a role to play in our law (hey, it's been around for centuries), but currently things have gotten very much out of hand (that's trite, but it's late). I tend to think that federalizing class actions is not the answer. The resolution of the problem of the entrepreneurial plaintiffs' bar probably can't come until there is some serious effort made to try to interest the public in our democratic institutions.
Rating: 
Summary: Pounding square pegs into round holes
Review: I hestitated before buying this book. It was by someone who worked at a one of those tax deductible foundations suposededly dedicated to improving the planet for their fellow man. Then it was published by St. Martins a house big in quick read mysteries not non fiction books offering social political economic etc. commentary. Well the writer of this book is constantly twisting facts to fit his preconceived conclusions or to say it another way, pounding square pegs into round holes. I am going to demand my money back so I can buy something that dosen't insult my intelligence. I wonder who wrote all those all those five star reviews. I guess you know who.
Rating:
Summary: Rise of the Fourth Branch of Government
Review: In this, his third outstanding book on problems with the American civil justice system, Olson takes on the newest class of billionaires in our economy, the class action litigators. He thoroughly documents the reasons for the rapid rise of influence by the plaintiff's bar, and how that power has translated into the development of a Fourth Branch of government.
The original intent of the contingency fee system was to permit persons of limited means access to the courts if they had been wronged. Fast forward to the tobacco lawsuits which paid billions of dollars to the politically connected few tort lawyers who were working on behalf of the states, or so they said. The states could have saved billions by hiring the attorneys on an hourly basis, but the state attorneys general had debts to pay to their political supporters.
Asbestos litigation has bankrupted whole sectors of the economy, while most of the actual significant injuries occured to workers in the government contracted shipyards during WWII. Since the government cannot be sued, everyone else in the manufacturing and distribution chain has to pay.
More billions were paid out to lawyers and supposed victims of silicone breast implants before good science conclusively proved that there was no connection between the implants and increased incidence of disease. Despite this there is no recourse against the lawyers, their junk science experts, or the wrongly paid plaintiffs.
Plaintiff's lawyers have cleverly arranged to try their class action suits in friendly, if ill-informed, jurisdictions, mostly in the rural south, "The Jackpot Belt". Olson proposes that multistate class action suits be forced into Federal courts to prevent such venue shopping and curb the influence of provincialism. Federal courts are also more immune to influence peddling and less tolerant of lawyers' demagoguery.
Another reform that he proposes is segregating liability from damage awards, much as guilt and punishment are segregated in criminal trials. He believes that judges would be less likely to grant runaway and unreasonable awards than inexperienced lay juries.
This is a very well written, well reasoned and timely piece of work. It should be required reading for all legislators at both the Federal and state levels.
Rating:
Summary: Clear and Direct
Review: The author writes that in the 1970s legal writings began proposing that judges create
some new rights to sue noting that some thinkers in the law schools and elsewhere had
come to see lawsuits as a king of surrogate social insurance, identifying deep pockets
from which accident victims might obtain compensation. In addition, law schools began to encourage lawyers to be entrepreneurs. Under this philosophy "...more than half of the nation's GNP would be routed through lawyer's offices. A lot would stay there." The author states that trial lawyers are usurping the power vested by the Constitution in an elected Congress. He develops his thesis by reviewing the methods used by trial lawyers in litigation involving the tobacco settlement, gun control, silicone breast implants, asbestos, etc. In addition, the book discusses how some states, referred to as "The Jackpot Belt," are overly supportive of class action lawsuits and trial lawyers. In fact one southern town has class action lawsuits as its major industry and their wealthy trial lawyers are its elite citizens. The text notes that the class action/mass tort litigation business is basically unregulated with the Washington Post newspaper lamenting that "we now have government by and for lawyers," who had "hijacked the public policy for private enrichment" in a "daring inventive and brazen" campaign. The author notes that all pretense of legitimacy was tossed aside when the trial bar referred to itself as a Fourth Branch of government, and notes that "...we allowed the Fourth Branch to seize the historic powers of government while escaping the long-evolved constraints on the abuse of that power." While lamenting the rule of lawyers, the author notes that rise of the class action lawyers has been facilitated by the failure of congress and legislators to address critical social issues. However, the book ends stating "The new rule of lawyers brings us many evils, but perhaps the greatest is the way it robs the American people of the right to find its own future and pursue its own destiny." The reader may not agree with the author's approach or all of his conclusions. Nevertheless, this book is worth taking time to read.
Rating:
Summary: America needs to read this book
Review: There's an old Latin maxim that asks, "Who watches the watchmen?" I just finished _The Rule of Lawyers_ and Olson should be thanked for piecing together more than a mere series of judicial outrages. Olson shows how trial lawyers have syphoned billions of dollars into their own pockets while manipulating legislatures and judges in order to shield themselves from accountability. This is nothing short of an assault on the Constitution. Every American who cares about the future of the country (please forgive the purple prose, but I'm serious here) needs to read this book.
Rating:
Summary: Clear and Direct
Review: Walter Olsen has done a fine job of analyzing the inherent conflict of interest between the legal profession and Justice and the threat it posses to the ideals of Democracy. Even those who support our odd system of civil justice will find things to think about.
Rating:
Summary: Class Action/Crass Action
Review: Walter Olson's latest truth telling on a class action lawyers is an outstanding analysis of a festering and costly problem in our legal system. Whether it's guns, tobacco, or some other vice, the plaintiff class action lawyers have found a real honeypot of fee generating lawsuits. Unfortunately, many in corporate America enter into sweetheart settlement deals to buy peace (and res judicata) while enriching the attorneys with millions of dollars in fees. This is an important book that should influence public policy on this very significant civil justice issue.
Rating:
Summary: A Highly Relevant Expose
Review: Walter Olson's The Rule of Lawyers is a highly relevant book for our ever more litigious society. In a well-written 307 pages, Olson presents a scathing indictment of what he refers to as "the Fourth Branch of Government"- trial lawyers. Olson clearly and persuasively argues in this book against the tort industry- beginning the book with a history of how our nation has allowed open season on a variety of industries- tobacco, car manufacturers, and gun manufacturers (among others) and walks the reader through the various campaigns the litigation elite have waged against Dow Corning, asbestos suppliers, and others. Olson also examines other litigation phenomena such as how TV newsmagazines act as mouthpieces for trial attorneys and how attorneys manipulate our jury system to achieve huge verdicts for their clients. Particularly interesting to me was the chapter entitled "The Jackpot Belt" where Olson analyzes trends in jury awards in states from Texas to Florida (the Jackpot Belt supposedly stretches from Beaumont to Pensacola) where juries have been especially generous in punitive damage awards. I would recommend this book for anyone from lawyers, to law students or even to the layperson with an interest in this subject. Olson avoids technical, complex language and jargon and the book is highly readable.
| 
