Water Pollution In A Civil Action By Jan Schlichtman

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.

Cory quit the navy and went home to his family. The next day Cory and his brother went surfing then Cory's brother was taken under by a shark. Blood was all over in the water. Cory went to help his brother. Cory punched the shark on the nose the shark swam away but the shark's tail keep hitting Cory on the head multiple times until he lost vision. Then he saw something in the water. It was a dolphin and he pushed him onto shore. When he woke up he was in the hospital with his brother. They both ended up fine in the end. After the shark attack Cory decided to go back to the navy to work with animals because he felt like he owned the dolphin for saving him. So he asked the navy if he could train a dolphin to be in the navy. After he asked he

Civil Action, a 1998 film made with Paramount Pictures, tells the story of pollution in Woburn Massachusetts, a small town, that has contaminated many children, adults, and other. This resulted in a law suit against W. R. Grace and J. Riley’s Corporations which was said that the two corporations had dumped trichloroethylene into the rivers which would infect their water supply causing disease and problems with quality as well. Statistics say in the movie that twelve kids got leukemia, and eight of those twelve died. Jan Schlichtmann the main attorney and plaintiffs at first argued about wanting to even do the case and how they’re facing a large company and this could be a very risky case. In reason, on his way back towards the city after telling Anne Anderson about how Jan couldn’t participate in such a risky case he was pulled over by the bridge were he walked and saw the river and how contaminated.

“Several dead kids isn’t enough for this case”[1] said Jan Schlichtmann, a very successful personal injury lawyer, referring to a case that involves Anne Anderson. Anne lost her child to Leukemia as well has five other families in the movie “A Civil Action.” They strongly believed that their children died due to water contamination in the town of Woburn, Massachusetts. The only reason Mr. Schlichtmann found out about this case was because Anne Anderson heard a lawyer on the radio talking about his clients saying “My client’s pain is my pain”. [1]After Mr. Schlichtmann said no to this case, he went down to the lake and saw what was getting dumped in the lake. He then had

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

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

Though Jan put off the Woburn case for a long time, he took it thinking that a public interest firm would brunt the cost and workload. As it turned out, he and his associates had to take on the companies, and their prominent attorneys, single handedly. Even the EPA couldn't conclude a connection in the poisoning and refused to "help an attorney collect a settlement fee." As Jan became obsessive with the Woborn case, a reader is able to tag along on a host of legal battles put forth by the opposing counsel. Rarely used legal rules, such as "Rule 11", were put forth to destroy Jan and the case itself. This is further complicated by the trial judge, Judge

A Civil action is movie based on a true story of court case about environmental pollution that took place in Wilburn, Massachusetts, in the 1980's. The court case revolves around the issue of trichloroethylene, an industrial solvent and its contamination of a local source. Jan Schlichtmann An American Attorney specializing in personal injury Law filed a lawsuit over industrial operation that "cased several children to die from leukemia and cancer, as well as a wide variety of other health problems, among the citizens of the Town."1 Jan originally rejects a seemingly unprofitable case, Jan finds an environmental issue involving groundwater contamination that could be a good case against "some defendants with deep pockets."2 The local tanneries

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 the film, “A Civil Action,” the attorney on the side of the plaintiff's, Jan Schlichtmann, is defending the families, including the Andersons, who lost their beloved children to Leukemia. In the court case, “Anderson and all vs. Beatrice foods and Grace,” the plaintiff’s believed the contaminated drinking water from the city wells was the root cause of the leukemia. At first, Mr. Schlichtmann did not want to take the case, stating there was no value to it. He even stated, “The odds of a plaintiff’s lawyer winning in civil court are two to one against,” (1). Nonetheless, he later discovered the true value the case withheld. In the case, Jan simply wanted compensation for the victims of the contaminated drinking water. Grace and Beatrice,

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

When you think of problems in the world today, water pollution isn’t one that would normally come up. In fact it is one of the worst problems in the world today. Water pollution, by definition, is the contamination of streams, lakes, underground water, bays, or oceans by any substances harmful to living things. All living things contain water and most need water to survive, so water pollution is a big problem. If severe, the pollution can kill off birds, fish, and any animals that use the water source. In some cases even killing an entire species.

The Clean Water Act (CWA) founds the elementary structure for regulating releases of contaminants into the water bodies of the US and also for surface waters it regulates quality standards. The origin of the CWA was passed in 1948 and was named the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, then the Act was suggestively reorganized and prolonged in 1972. as "Clean Water Act" this became the Act 's communal name after amendments in 1972.Further down to CWA, EPA has applied other pollution control agendas such as for industry, the setting wastewater standards. We similarly have set some water quality standards for all pollutants in surface waters.

The industrialization of Canada is severely affecting the nations lakes, streams, and rivers. If something is not done to improve the situation it is going to have some severe environmental problems in its future. The following essay will be looking at the factors that cause pollution, and the effect that pollution has on the environment of Canada. It will also explore some of the methods used to treat and clean-up wastewater, and oil spills.

Air and water pollution is one of the biggest problems the environment faces today. It is one of the highest leading cause of death. Air and water pollution has been affecting the environment for many years causing many diseases among people especially children. I will study and examine the early childhood growth between two countries which are Australia and Tanzania. I will discuss how clean and polluted their air and water is for each country. Their access to clean water. I will also explain the effects that can occur when water is contaminated. How children are affected when they don 't have access to primary essentials and how each country and their environment and living condition might threatened a child 's life.