The Nature of Us Civil Justice System in a Civil Action by Jonathan Harr

Introduction

American’s civil justice system is important because it gives people a chance to receive justice through the legal system when they are injured by misconduct or negligence by others, even if it means taking on large corporations. Although it does not get as much attention as criminal justice because its issues are not apparent, many Americans are involved in it every day. "A Civil Action" by Jonathan Harr presents a civil justice system that is plagued by complexity and high costs. For instance, Jan Schlichtmann (the plaintiff’s lawyer) faced what ought to have been a straightforward case, but it transformed into a legal conundrum full of technicalities that took an extended period to settle. "A Civil Action" offers practical and theoretical insights into the nature of civil justice system processes and how the mass character in most civil case litigation puts the victims at stake.

The Challenges in Identifying Plaintiffs

One of the principal problems that Jan Schlichtmann encountered while litigating the Woburn case was identifying potential tort plaintiffs and all victims of the contaminated water. Woburn had many people, and due to this significant population, it was challenging to determine which children were affected by contaminated water. Schlichtmann initially struggled to establish that the children's cases of leukemia were indeed caused by contaminated water from Wells H and G. However, it was later agreed that most of Woburn's leukemia cases were caused by toxins exposed to the environment, which were suspected to be carcinogenic. Therefore, civil cases should be tailored according to the nature and size of the dispute and provide solutions based on what the disagreement requires.

The Problem of Indeterminate Defendants

The second problem that civil lawsuits present is the issue of indeterminate defendants, which Schlichtmann encountered while litigating the Woburn Case. The issue of indeterminate defendants arises when there is difficulty, by practice or principle, in accurately allocating the injurers the responsibility of causing harm. This problem of indeterminate defendants is clearly evident in Schlichtmann's lawsuit, where he is unable to establish which company is liable for the contamination of water in Wells G and H. The civil justice system is not consistent in determining which defendant should bear the burden when there are multiple defendants, as in the Woburn case.

The Struggle to Prove Liability

Schlichtmann launched formal complaints to prove that W.R. Grace and Beatrice Foods companies’ contamination of groundwater was the cause of leukemia. The main difficulty Schlichtmann encountered was proving that these defendants were responsible. William Chessman, the defendants’ lawyer, refuted the claim by quoting research from the plaintiff, who had admitted there was no firm proof of the relationship between families, chemicals in the wells, and Beatrice and Grace Companies. This case was clouded by establishing the causation fact of the two companies as the main polluters. Therefore, one can comfortably describe the American civil justice system as complicated and one that is shrouded by procedures and technicalities that delay justice while making it expensive; Schlichtmann had invested a fortune in this case, which later made him file for bankruptcy.

The Role of Lawyers in Civil Litigation

"A Civil Action" presents an opportunity to understand various undertakings of the civil justice system, especially the irresponsibility of the lawyers in the Woburn litigation. Jan Schlichtmann meant well for the Woburn residents. Harr’s story portrays him as balanced, sympathetic, and with essential attributes such as generosity, astuteness, candor, industry, and tenacity. However, these positive traits dwindle because of greed, ostentatious and spendthrift financial behavior, not listening to others carefully, self-centeredness, and temper. This behavior made Schlichtmann place his interests ahead of his responsibilities to victims who were seeking an adequate and fair verdict. Schlichtmann failed to appease his client by agreeing to a settlement of eight million dollars with Grace Co. The lawyer did not discuss the risks and advantages of representation with the Woburn families, which violated the professional rules due to the conflict of interest. This instance shows that many lawyers in civil justice case litigation are often after their interests.

Emerging Trends in the Civil Justice System

Harr’s "A Civil Action" reflects on the emerging trend in the American civil justice system, where most civil cases are against government bureaucracies and large corporations. The lawsuits often involve underemployed and minority groups, who are unable to obtain the scientific evidence required to hold these corporations liable for damages. Courtrooms have become amphitheaters of toxic battles, armed with legal gladiators, trial judges, and less-educated jurors who find it difficult to navigate the arduous process. This perception clouds the pessimism of justice in civil cases, which the public views as a theater where “money talks.” "A Civil Action" perfectly depicts this problem within the American civil justice system.

Perceptions of the Justice System

Harr’s account also provides an intriguing observation on how laypersons perceive the law. Laypersons often view the justice system as a display of legal pomposity, involving legal institutions and lawyers. For example, the tearful reaction of Patti D-Addieco, a twenty-two-year-old woman who was hired in Schlichtmann's office, occurred after she failed to obtain medical records. Another example that shows pessimism about the justice system is Reverend Bruce and Anne Anderson's negative reactions to Schlichtmann’s counsel on Grace's settlement. Bruce's cynical view is based on discussions suggesting that the lawyer sold out the case for his benefits and was patronizing his clients disingenuously regarding the value of the settlement. Anderson equated the negotiations on the settlement to childish patronage, systematically excluding clients’ input.

Conclusion

In conclusion, one prevalent theme throughout the novel is the conflict between finding the truth and adhering to judicial procedure. The two are not compatible with each other. Trial tactics used by defendants often overtake the pursuit of truth. These procedures characterize the civil justice system, where defendants and plaintiffs use underhand tactics to create the verdict rather than relying on the facts of the case. The complexity and procedural barriers in the American civil justice system not only delay justice but also make it an expensive endeavor, often leaving victims without adequate resolutions.