Erin Brokovich (2000) Movie Review

* This is a will contest case involving a codicil to the Last Will and Testament of Wheelock A. Bisson, M.D., deceased.

The main ethical dilemma encountered occurs because two major companies, Woburn, W.R. Grace and J Riley Leather, were responsible for polluting Woburn’s drinking water through the negligent dumping of carcinogenic solvents. This negligence is further compounded by the fact that the companies blatantly knew that their actions were polluting the local drinking water with trichloroethylene, a labeled carcinogenic. Furthermore, the companies made no attempt to clean or contain the hazardous waste, and the companies systematically hide their conspiracy. Their actions can be justified through the utilitarian ethical theory. Utilitarianism is a normative theory that focuses the moral correctness of an action on the consequence rather than the action itself. Additionally, this view is based on the hedonistic view that humans naturally seek pleasure and avoid pain. In regards to the companies in the film, they dumped toxic waste into the water supply to save time and expenses that would otherwise be utilized to hire a company to clean up the toxins. In their perspective, they avoided the pain of extra expenses and sought the pleasure involved in saving the money for personal

Erin Brokovich, based on a true story, is a story about an intriguing single mother named Erin whose actions eventually lead to the biggest lawsuit against any corporation in history. Struggling, the ball starts rolling for Erin when she gets into a car accident. Her lawyer thinks she will win in a court case from her accident, but they lose. In compensation for the loss, Erin is given a job at the law firm and begins to dig into a case against Pacific Gas and Electric when she finds out they are trying to buy a resident of Hinkley, California’s home to cover up their depositing of a danger chemical. After her research, she finds that many people in Hinkley have all had medical issues related to this and that there is acknowledgement from

Regarding this, Erin takes an objectivist approach, knowing that the chromium levels are too high and could potentially (and already did) cause life-threatening diseases for the people of Hinkley. The public’s reaction was not exactly what she expected. Initially, some families seem skeptical and even uncaring about the situation, but Erin is able to connect with the residents and gain their trust and respect. This allows for them to truly begin questioning PG&E’s intentions.

The appellants complain that the tax court fail to apply debt-equity principles. The secondary inquiry cannot be reached unless the first question concerning whether an economic

The Plaintiff’s estate was sequestrated in Federal Magistrates Court on May 12 2009, for failure to pay Council court costs [10]. An application by the Plaintiff for an extension in time to appeal this sequestration was

Did Lorman’s wastewater emissions play any role in this tragic outcome?” Although these are Ben’s thoughts, this is not definitely the case; there is no definite proof that there is a link between the chemicals in the wastewater emissions and health problems. Ben must put aside his our pre-conceived notions and work objectively on the data. This is another good example of his responsibility to use integrity when making a decision to avoid conflicts of interest. 4. To the board of directors: o “Although collected with meticulous care, the data Ben had painstakingly gathered was composed only of educated estimates, leaving him with an uneasy feeling.” Although Ben may want to present his data in a way that supports his decision, it is important that his audiences know the legitimacy of his data. It is his responsibility to communicate information fairly and objectively and to disclose any deficiencies in the data. 5. To shareholders of Lorman Lumber Co: o “Company and shareholder profitability would certainly be affected.” In order to support Ben’s credibility, it is important that he disclose all relevant information to the investors of Lorman Lumber Co. Although shareholder equity would most certainly be affected by such a significant capital investment and reduction of revenue in the short run, Ben could be ensuring shareholder value over the long run by improving productivity, lowering negative

case brief---Gregory, a comedy writer, entered into a contract with Wessel, a comedian. The contract provided that Gregory would provide Wessel with a 15 minute monologue for his upcoming appearance on the comedy hour and Wessel will pay $250 to Gregory. All performers could make $500 per appearance on the comedy hour. and when Wessel was scheduled to aper on the comedy hour, Gregory informed him that he was unable to provide the monologue, because last time Wessel was asked to make special guest appearances at three local comedy clubs performance during the comedy hour. and Wessel bought lawsuit to Gregory for beach of contract and request damages of $1250.

Moving forward into the movie and the case, looking at the big picture, there are several leads and connections that point towards “Beatrice Foods” and “W.R. Grace” to blame. Throughout the entirety of the case, it seemed that it was becoming obvious that they were the companies that caused the toxin contamination in the town’s water supply.

Facts: The plaintiff was an employed for the defendant. The defendant informed the plaintiff that his position would be eliminated because of budget constraints. The defendant gave him the option of resigning and retiring or waiting until the December when the position would be terminated. The decision had to be made before the date of June 30th however there was new retirement policy taking effect on July 1st which would cause the plantiff not to receive his post-retirement medical benefits.

Attorney Jan filed suit against the two corporations for contaminating the drinking water. Jan used geological evidence, experts, and eyewitnesses to prove that the plants owned by Beatrice and Grace had contaminated the water. Some of the elements in this case was negligence, breach of duty, duty of care, and actual harm. Beatrice and Grace Foods owned companies that are contaminating the water supply, both companies are at fault for disposing of waste in the water supply, they have a duty to properly dispose of waste, this is the cause for some many deaths of children in the Woburn area. All the facts of negligence are displayed in this case, so there is no reason not to prosecute these companies to the fullest extent of the law. Big corporations think that they won’t be held liable for mistreatment of action, but Grace and Beatrice need to face the consequences for their actions. Some of the witnesses came forward and stated chemicals were being disposed of improperly by the plant, so these companies should be held liable and do the right thing to compensate all the families affected bu this unruly negligence. No amount of money can replace the loss and suffering these families have to endure, all they wanted is an apology, someone to take responsibility and clean up the water supply in Woburn. Whether it was intentional or not, both companies are liable for negligent to cause intentional harm. Some of the employees knew that they had been contaminating the water supply of Woburn, Massachusetts. Their poor actions had resulted in a chemical of TCP, a cancer causing agent. The water was not safe to drink. Many children drank the water and developed cancer and died from drinking the contaminated water. They should be held accountable for their actions. There is no doubt that they are guilty of negligence. When Jan pleads and contacts the EPA

The attempt to link the harm to the behavior of the defendant produced its share of successes and failures for the Schlichtmann team. Not only did the plaintiffs have to prove that the corporations contaminated the water, but they also had to show that the contamination caused the leukemia and the other health problems. To do this they enlisted the help and expertise of numerous doctors and specialists. Naturally the defending side recruited their own set of experts. As in any case, each side is going to have an expert who will refute the testimony of the other side’s expert. This is a normal part of arguing a case, but can cause confusion and complication on the part of the jurors.

British Petroleum has a large operation in the United States and it has made investments to ensure that it develops these operations to maximize its production and increase profits. One such investment was the acquisition of the vast oil field at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. This acquisition represented a good increase in the percentage of oil production in the United States and ensured that the company could increase its production and further its goals and objectives for the United States market. As early as 2001 there were incidents at the facility that the company internally accounted for and management was made aware of the safety concerns that existed.

Erin Brockovich, a 2000 Jersy Film Production, staring Julia Roberts is based on a true story that involved Pacific Gas and Electric Company using hexavalent chromium or chromium six as a rust inhibitor to prevent corrosion of pistons used in engines. According to the movie, for fourteen years, the Pacific Gas and Electric Company had been dumping water containing chromium six into ponds and covering them over. The ponds were not lined and the chromium based water leaked into the local water supply exposing residents of Hinkley, California to chromium six. Repeated exposure to hexavalent chromium causes chronic headaches, cancer, nose bleeds, bone and organ deterioration, respiratory failure, liver failure, heart failure, bone or organ

The court of appeal in Akindele briefly referred to a new approach to the personal liability of a recipient known as the unjust enrichment approach. This approach does not disregard the issue of dishonesty entirely, rather it restricts the issue of dishonesty to the application of the change of position defence in that only an innocent recipient can avail themselves of this defence .