Anthony Roisman '60, co-counsel with Jay Schlictmann in a 1979 trial that set the tone for the novel and film "A Civil Action," used the case to portray the inequities in the American legal process in a lecture in 101 Collis yesterday.
"When enough is at stake, companies will do anything" -- such as employing unethical tactics to give their clients the litigative advantage, Roisman said. "That's the legal system as it is today."
"They're just hired to provide a service -- they don't care who they provide it for or what they've done," he said. "In more common parlance, [they're] whores."
Roisman cited the trial portrayed in "A Civil Action" as an example of this type of legal behavior.
In the case, eight families accused two companies of releasing chemicals that contaminated the local water supply. The families claimed that the chemicals caused several people to develop leukemia.
In order to avoid paying a settlement, the companies' lawyers deliberately withheld important information linking the companies to the contamination, and as a result prolonged the trial for six years.
Despite these tactics, typical in cases where large damage settlements are at stake, Roisman said Americans still put incredible faith in the legal process.
He said this is apparent in Anne Anderson, real-life mother of one of the leukemia victims who sought revenge for her child's death.
"I would have thought you would go to a gun dealer," Roisman said. "She went to a lawyer -- that is remarkable."
He said that overall, Americans are a "suspicious" and "litigious group of people." For this reason, Roisman said he does not believe the system should be seriously reformed.
Roisman said other countries have different court systems, but Americans would have a hard time accepting their less formal legal methods. Other countries' systems also present more opportunities for involved parties to conceal evidence, he said.
The problem with American courts is not that the process is flawed, he said. The real problem occurs when very expensive rates prevent people from having their day in court -- but in most common cases this does not happen.
However, Roisman cited several cases in which the costs did become a major limiting factor.
When individuals sue large corporations such as tobacco or drug companies, it is in the best interest of the companies to extend the process over a period of years, Roisman said. Most individuals do not have the means nor the time to battle multibillion-dollar corporations in court.
Roisman also said it is in a company's interest to avoid paying settlements for as long as possible. Given the choice of a $5 million payment now or a costly five-year trial and then a payment, most corporations would choose the later payment.
He said this is because the plaintiff usually could not carry the suit against the company for five years and would therefore settle for much less.
Overall though, Roisman said that the American courts function well. "For all its flaws, I think it's a pretty good system," he said.
