Jan Shlichtmann Case Summary

Facher gets his way in not letting the families testify because the judge agrees with him that it would be too much for the families. When repeat players and relationships between lawyers and judges come into play this can change the course of a case as it has severely hurt Mr. Schilichtmann’s plan. This led to no closing augments in the trial in Beatrice Foods being found not liable and the trial against W.R. Grace continues. The reason W.R. Grace is able to continue is because they have deep pockets and can afford to continue in a trail. However, Schilichtmann and his firm did not have deep pockets and after a long trail finally took a settlement and this was the end of their fight. Schilichtmann later went on and had the case sent to the EPA where they were able to appeal it because they had the money and the resources to unlike Schilichtmann. So from this we can see that money plays a huge roll in the litigation

Penny Ann Beernsten, a thirty-six year old small business co-owner and physical fitness instructor, went through a traumatic experience on the afternoon of July 29, 1985. She jogged at a stretch of Lake Michigan shoreline in Wisconsin. She was planning on meeting with her father at the beach at 4:00 PM and she started the jog at 3:50 PM, but was grabbed and taken to the woods where she was raped and deprived her of oxygen by suffocation until she passed out. When she woke up, she walked out of the woods, where couples comforted her until she found her husband and finally the police. (Possley).

In 2002, Fred Kaufman was appointed to the case, in response to a request by the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted. He was the same lawyer that helped with another miscarriage of justice of Guy Paul Morin. If Fred Kaufman had been originally signed to the case, it would have been easily dealt with. Therefore, because it took 50 years to finally clear his name, the investigation was insufficient.

In the movie “A Civil Action” Jan Schlichtmann takes on the case of his life as he prepares to take down, deep pockets, Beatrice Co. and Grace Foods. At first Schlichtmann does not see any money in the case and tosses it aside. When he goes to tell the families who lost their children that he can not take the case, Anne Anderson tells him about a tannery in the woods behind the neighborhood. After Schlichtmann goes and sees that these tanneries have deep pockets connected to them, he agrees to take on the case. Soon he gets emotionally invested; which was his one rule: to never get attached to a case and sympathize over the victims. In law he can not cloud his judgment with emotions because he will make irrational decisions based on the victims and forget what is best for

FACTS: Douglas E. Metzger lived in an apartment in Lincoln, Nebraska. About 7:45 a.m on April 30, 1981 a residence of the apartment complex was parking his vehicle directly in front of Metzger’s apartment window. Metzger was standing naked with his arms at his side for five seconds. At 8:00 a.m two officers had arrived to the apartment, they observed Metzger standing naked in front of the window eating cereal. The officers said that Metzger was nude from mid-thigh on up and he was standing a foot of the window. Douglas Metzger had violated the Lincoln Municipal Code which stated, that it was unlawful for a person in the city of Lincoln to commit any indecent exposure in the presence of another person.

Jan Schlichtmann initially didn't want to take the case because he doesn't think that there will be any money in it for him and his firm. Even though he goes and sees how much pain this company has caused to the people in Woburn Wells, he still doesn't care because of the money. Not until he realizes how big the companies are does he take the case.

The man charged with the decapitation murder of Broadwater's Edward 'Ned' Kelly has been committed to stand trial. Jonathon Stenberg appeared by video link at Lismore Local court this morning. Stenberg did not enter a plea or apply for bail. By doing so Stenberg waived his right to have a committal hearing to answer the charge of murder. Magistrate R Denes committed Stenberg to stand trial in the Supreme Court in Sydney on June 7.

The Woburn case is an example of a complex tort case. A tort case involves any personal injury someone sustains due to the negligence of someone else. The plaintiff is taxed to prove three features: the defendant must have a duty of care for the plaintiff, the defendant breached this duty of care, and general causation. Without general causation, the defendant could have a duty of care and breached this duty of care, but there would not be a tort case only with the association between the defendant’s behavior and the personal injury sustained by the plaintiff.

In the last four years New York City taxpayers have paid out approximately $1 billion in awards for personal injury actions. Well over half of that amount was attributable to “pain and suffering,” a highly subjective and amorphous concept, as opposed to economic damages such as lost earnings or medical expenses. Of the total amount paid, 33 to 40 percent went to attorneys in the form of contingency fees or to experts or other in reimbursements for expenses. In FY 1977 the City’s total payout in tort actions was less than $25 million compared to $120 million in FY 1987 a mere ten year difference, and a staggering $282 million for FY 1996. Would you believe half of that money could have been used to hire 2,800 police officers or over 3,600 teachers? The time for corrective legislative action for New York has come.

Levy introduced me to is contractual law. Mr. Levy allowed me to assist on insurance cases, which included observing meetings, summarizing depositions, and reviewing contracts. Even though I had experience reviewing contracts while working a couple of summers for a General Counsel at a large business, this was completely different because these agreements were among insurance companies and individuals, instead of insurance companies and businesses. Mr. Levy works on behalf of insurance companies, mostly State Farm, when they have disputes with their clients over wind and hail coverage. These cases are interesting because Mr. Levy has to not only deal with the individuals that are claiming the insurance company didn’t follow the contract, but he also must deal with the adjuster in each case. Mr. Levy gave me the responsibility of summarizing the depositions of the adjusters to confirm that none of them said anything that was contradictory or detrimental to State Farm’s case. Often these cases end with settlements or dismissals because either the insurance company decides to compensate the individuals or the attorney representing the insurance company gets a favorable summary judgment. Mr. Levy and other attorneys representing insurance companies frequently seek summary judgments when the plaintiffs don’t have significant evidence to prove that the insurance companies violated the contract. In most of the insurance cases that I assisted Mr. Levy on he was able to receive summary judgment because the plaintiffs didn’t have enough evidence to prove that State Farm was responsible for paying the

1 The service I will be choosing the ticket sales of the Ohio State football team over the past twenty years. The price of this service has fluctuated over the past years. There are many reasons why these ticket prices have changed such as the scandal in the 2010 season, the National Championship in 2014 with Ezekiel Elliot and the rest of the Buckeyes, or the stadium renovations in the early 2000’s.

* Research for similar cases with the same injury but with settlements far greater than $100,000. The bigger its difference from the client’s demands, the better it would be. Present these case citations to the court and by the principle of perceptual contrast, it will drive home the point to the jury that the plaintiff’s demand is indeed very

Jan Schlitmann was a lawyer in the upper bracket as far as money was concern. He lived in a luxury condo, worn only hand-tailored Dimitri suits and silk Hermes ties, Bally shoes and drove a Porsche. Schlitmann not only was a well to do lawyer, he also was a lawyer that believed in justice, whether he got paid or not, in regards to this case. He spent nine years of his life, lost all of his assets, gave up his personal possessions and personal life to see this case to the end, and justice would be served.

In this report is a fully reasoned quantification of, our client, Mr. Steven Pearson’s personal injury claim against Mr. Fred Prendergast.

Perhaps the greatest insight provided by my colleague's discussion is the deconstruction of the process by which the concept of negligence did ultimately emerge as a new tort standard. Here, the discussion illustrates the challenge before a judicial body when a legal conflict appears to bring about a new and previously unforeseen point of contention. In this case, as my colleague highlights so effectively, the charge of fraud would be the only theretofore existent way of legally addressing liability for a business or organization such as the defendant in this case. The great insight provided by my colleague is in acknowledgement of the exhaustive review of existing legal documents engaged by the ruling parties and arguing parties. This process demonstrates well that even where no precedent existing for what would become the charge of negligence,