The Lawsuit: Examining the Characters

The odds of a plaintiff winning in civil court are two to one against. Most people do not even try, they settle. Out of the approximate 780,000 cases filed each year, only 12,000 or 1.5%, ever reach a verdict. These facts are some that are told in the movie A Civil Action. A Civil Action is based on the book by Jonathan Harr and on a true story. This movie, which was filmed in 1998, is about a water contamination case that happened in Massachusetts. The case is known as Anderson v. Cryovac. John Travolta plays the role of the main character Jan Schlichtmann, who is a personal injury attorney. Although typically a water contamination case would not fall into the hands of a personal injury attorney, but in this case, he was just supposed to be handling the case of a woman’s son who died of leukemia. She called him live on a radio talk show and explained that she had called his firm to handle the case, and now they would not return any of her calls. He explains how sorry he was and that he would take care of it as soon as possible.

The movie a Civil Action covers the Woburn Case which was Anne Anderson and other small families who decided to sue the companies Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace. The reason for Anderson and the other families to decide to sue was because they believe the companies dumping of poisonous chemicals was the reason to their children’s leukemia deaths. However, when they reached out to Jan Schlichtmann to handle their case he was not the most positive on wanting to help them, “Ms. Anderson, our firm is very small, three attorneys that's it, which means we can only take on so many cases at once and we have to be very careful on the ones we do take because we can't afford to lose, our clients pay nothing, we pay everything, and the only we get paid back

This claim arises out of a lawsuit filed by Plaintiff, Debra Nathan-Nenn, on her own behalf, and on behalf of her minor son, Grey Hoffman. The Amended Complaint alleges in general that Ms. Nathan-Nenn executed a written lease to rent a house from the insureds starting on June 1, 2013. The plaintiffs further allege that starting on the day the plaintiffs took possession of the house, the drain in the kitchen sink was not working and the insureds failed to correct this condition. The complaint continues to allege additional deficiencies in the rental property such as mold growth in one of the bedrooms and in various locations of the house due to excess moisture and failure to patch exterior openings, insufficient heating, holes in the exterior walls, an unfinished deck, insufficient weather sealants, vermin in the crawlspace, frozen pipes and lack of running water. The plaintiffs further allege that the insureds have failed to address and resolve the above issues. The most serious claim is that the mold present throughout the house caused the plaintiff and her minor son to become ill.

Identified in “General Business Organizations” and has been a successful group in Texas since 1994 is the Texans for Lawsuit Reform (TLR). Business leaders formed this group and were determined to change what they perceived as “Texas’ Wild West Litigation Environment” by changing the state’s tort laws. Torts are wrongful acts; in the Texans for Lawsuit Reform, taking away the right of a citizen who loses in a civil lawsuit can be forced to pay an extra amount as punishment. The Texans for Lawsuit reform is a volunteered-led organization that “seeks to create a civil justice system that discourages non-meritorious lawsuits or outrageous claims for damages” (votesmart.org). TLRPAC, which stands for Texans for Lawsuit Reform Political Action Committee

In the film, A Civil Action, Trial Procedure was shown throughout the entire movie. There are many steps that need to be completed before a verdict and judgment can be reached. These steps are the pleadings, methods of discovery, pretrial hearings, jury selection, opening statements, introduction of evidence, cross examinations, closing arguments, instructions to the jury, and the verdict and judgment. The case in this movie was actually called Anderson v. Cryovac. The plaintiffs are the Anderson family, the Gamache family, the Kane family, the Robbins family, the Toomey family, and the Zona family. The plaintiffs’ attorneys are Jan Schlichtmann, Joe Mulligan, Anthony Roisman, Charlie Nesson, and Kevin Conway. The two co- defendants are

Defendant SARAH MINER, owner, and operator of the Portola apartment complex, recently denied Plaintiff DARLAWILLIAMS, a former tenant, application to continue leasing her unit at the complex. Plaintiff subsequently brought suit against Defendant, alleging discrimination as the basis for her denial. The Plaintiff 's case against Defendant, however, is without merit. Defendant denied Plaintiff 's application because she received several noise complaints throughout her tenancy, disrupting the peaceful residential community. Furthermore, Defendant denied Plaintiff 's application due to her failure to keep her unit in good condition; resulting in substantial damage to the unit and approximately $3,500 in repair costs.

No. According to the Fifth Amendment, "No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself”. This provision governs state as well as federal criminal proceedings.

A Civil Action is about an environmental pollution court case in Woburn, Massachusetts. The case focused on an industrial solvent, trichloroethylene, from a local leather company, which contaminated a local aquifer that eventually had lethal consequences on the inhabitants of the town. After Anne Anderson’s son dies of leukemia, she filed a civil lawsuit along with eight other families against The John J. Riley Tannery by Beatrice Foods and Cryovac Manufacturing W. R. Grace Company because their industrial operations correlated to fatal cases of cancer and leukemia in children as well as other health issues reported among the citizens. Anne implored Jan Schlichtmann, a tenacious personal injury specialist, to take the case. When Schlichtmann

The court order the Defendant to reimburse the Plaintiff the full amount of alimony payments, which have been

7. Deny: we had permits from the city and inspectors came out and approved that our Property did comply with the city’s codes and regulations.

Depending on the status of the employee upon hiring or later, he or she may be granted at a will contract or a property interest contract in a continued employment (Varone, 2012). Because at a will employees cannot expect a continued employment, they can be terminated for any reason or without reason (Varone, 2012). For property interest employees, due process must be provided before job termination stated Varone (2012). Public employees such as municipal and district firefighters even under at a will contract cannot be terminated without just cause or in a violation of law affirmed Varone (2012). A fire chief who was fired due to an alleged incompetence filed a law suit against his employer. The facts, the issues, the ruling, the rationale, a perspective, and example in which the court’s decision might be cited are addressed in this paper.

Throughout the centuries there have been many groups pursuing equal rights for themselves. These groups feel that they are excluded from privileges others possess and are subject to injustices that others are not. These groups feel they deserve better and that their presence in the world is unequal to others’. In the United States a large percentage of women started to feel they warranted equal rights to men. Margaret Fuller was among the supporters of the movement and published ground-breaking article called “The Great Lawsuit.” In “The Great Lawsuit”, Margaret Fuller tries to stop the great inequalities between men and women by describing great marriages where the husband and wife are equal, by stating how society

11. The Plaintiff showed good faith in providing conditional agreement help only, to use the Plaintiff’s Truck and Trailer and for the Plaintiffs to Drive the Truck and Trailer only and not to lift Household items.

The case against Beatrice was thrown out, and the plaintiffs accepted a sum of eight million from Grace. Personally bankrupted, Schlitmann considers himself a failure. Also the demands of the case coupled with self-delusion and sometimes poor professional judgement bankrupted the plaintiff's lead attorney emotionally and financially. The case took two years, Anne and Zonas hired an attorney to check the legal express 80 thousand more than necessary. Grace spent 7 million in legal defense plus millions that Beatrice spent.

The sensation of disgust occurs when we are offended by something, so simply observing someone eating an unsavory meal with an expression of disgust can make us have the same sensation and expression as well. The observer knows to stay away from that particular meal. This incident raises the question of how we each understand this behavioral cue. A group of scientists led by Bruno Wicker questioned whether the same areas in the insula are both active during the experience of disgust and observing disgust in others. The authors suggested two kinds of hypotheses that could explain the activations in our brain as well as our ability to recognize and understand disgust in others. One kind is the "cold" hypothesis, which signifies the recognition of disgust through cognitive mechanisms that do not involve emotion.