Author Jonathan Harr details the case of Anderson v. Cryovac, a famous water contamination case, in A Civil Action. Harr writes in a relatively fast-paced and an exciting manner, successfully delivering a non-fiction work that, at times, reads more like a thriller than a straightforward account of a legal case. Unfortunately, while Harr’s writing style may make for easy reading, his message in A Civil Action is ultimately harmful as it seemingly discourages average people from getting involved with environmental struggles. tHarr begins his account by introducing his audience to Anne Anderson, a woman living in Woburn, Massachusetts whose son Jimmy contracts leukemia. Mrs. Anderson grows suspicious as she notices for the first time that a surprisingly high number of children from the town of Woburn have contracted leukemia as well. The discovery is soon made that the origins of this leukemia come from toxic pollution from the city’s water wells. The pollution, as it would turn out, derives from two powerful corporations operating nearby Woburn called Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace that knowingly dumped out carcinogens including trichloroethylene. Upon discovering that Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace were dumping these carcinogens into the ground, Mrs. Anderson and seven other Woburn families proceed to challenge the corporations’ practices in court.tThe rest of A Civil Action follows Jan Sclichtmann, a lawyer who takes on the case. Harr follows the case in its entirety, meticulously describing every detail of Schlichtmann’s attempts to track down evidence against Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace. In the end, Schlichtmann manages to win a $8 million settlement with Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace. While this may sound like a victory, Harr ends A Civil Action on a sad note, leaving Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace relatively underwhelmed by paying what is for them a relatively inexpensive settlement fee and Schlichtmann going into bankruptcy and shutting down his law practice after spending too much on the case. tHarr deserves praise for capturing the human story in this environmental case. All too often, media coverage of large environmental disasters fails to convey how that particular disaster influenced real individuals. Instead the focus tends to be on statistics, the financial impact, and how politicians will react to the event. Harr takes a different approach, starting his story with the actual victims of the toxic pollution before moving on to focus on the legal details. Even when Harr does provide legal detail, he does so in a way that humanizes the struggle. For instance, Harr uses quotations throughout A Civil Action that makes the feel like a story with characters and dialogue, rather than simply a bland description of an event.tUnfortunately, Harr frames his story in a way that is ultimately far too simplistic. Harr gives the impression, or least does nothing to dispel the impression, that incidents like the one that occurred in Woburn happen frequently. Of course, A Civil Action is based on a real case of toxic pollution and other toxic pollution cases involving carcinogens such as trichloroethylene occurred. Epidemiological studies conducted by the National Research Council in 1991 found that, although scares of toxic waste ran rampant following the Woburn incident and another toxic waste spill in Love Canal in 1978, the threat of toxic waste was largely overblown given that it had a minimal effect on overall health in the U.S. To be fair, Harr’s intentionally chose to narrow his focus on a particular story he found compelling rather than write a much broader, more academic book about toxic waste contaminations in general. With that said, A Civil Action arguably contributed to the toxic waste hysteria that occurred after the Woburn incident rather than educating the public and providing a more nuanced portrayal of the situation. tIn addition to portraying the issue of toxic waste in an overly simplistic way, Harr portrays his character’s struggle in an overly simplistic way. Harr paints the world in white and black, giving his audience a display of a manichean struggle between the poor victimized citizens of Woburn and Schlichtmann against the evil corporations Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace. Harr’s world needs a bit more gray splashed on it. Unlike Harr’s depictions, corporations and the people who work for them do all do terrible things for the sole purpose of making a profit. More importantly, corporations are not the only ones responsible for environmental harm. In A Civil Action the emphasis is always on the corporations being entirely blameworthy for toxic contamination that harms the blameless citizens of Woburn. What’s missing is any consideration for how demand for these corporation’s products by normal citizens drives corporations like Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace to take environmentally harmful actions in the first place. Harr would have us believe that Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace act alone, and take unilateral action to harm the environment. Clearly, corporations do cause environmental harm, but this is not the whole picture. The relationship between corporation and consumer is reciprocal and environmental degradation is never entirely unilateral.tThe biggest problem with A Civil Action is that its ultimate lesson that taking an ethical stand against environmental problems is fruitless. In A Civil Action average citizens like the residents of Woburn are portrayed as being at the whims of powerful corporations. The only individuals who dare take a stand against these corporations, men with unshakable notions of maintaining justice like Schlictmann, are ultimately bound for failure. As stated previously, A Civil Action ends on a deceptively happy note. True, Schlictmann technically does score a victory by forcing a major legal settlement with Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace. To compare A Civil Action from a much more low-brow piece of media, the popular movie 300 which depicts the three hundred Greek troops fighting in the legendary battle of Thermopylae against an overwhelming Persian army, Schlictmann is like the Greek King Leonidas who dares pierces the flesh of the God-King Xerxes. In what is the climax of 300, King Leonidas launches a spear and pierces Xerxes’ flesh, showing that he is no god and can bleed. This is supposed to be a glorious moment, although it is soon followed by each and every one of the Greek men being slaughtered. In a similar way, Schlictmann demonstrates he can cause the seemingly all-powerful Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace to bleed, in a sense. But ultimately, just like the Greeks in 300, Schlictmann standing up against more powerful forces simply causes him to lose everything. Perhaps the biggest difference between the Greek army and Schlictmann is at least the Greek army got to go out in an epic fight that was remembered in history. Instead Schlictmann goes out rather pathetically, losing all of his material stability and status. One of the final scenes in A Civil Action depicts Schlictmann swimming out into the ocean outside of Hawaii, arguably contemplating suicide and acting like a completely defeated man.tThe message Harr sends is that those who fight for ethical causes such as justice or environmental protection may win, as Schlictmann did, in the short term, but they will never win in the long-term. Schlictmann won his ethical victory, but lost literally everything else afterwards. By contrast, Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace may have been publically embarrassed and lost a bit of money in the short term, but will clearly live to see another day without much cause to worry in the long term. Once again, it is important to emphasize that Harr is telling a true story so he does not have the license to make up an ending that would inspire more people to go out and become justice-defending, environmental advocates. However, Harr definitely does not spin the ending in a way that makes Sclichtmann someone one would wish to emulate. Instead Harr makes clearly that, in his understanding, good people who fight for something will inevitably lose to bad people who have more money and power. This is, ultimately, far too discouraging of a message and one that taints an otherwise fairly well written book.tSomeone looking for a legal thriller that will keep themselves entertained while they hit the beach might want to check out A Civil Action. But those who seek to take a more substantial look at environmental issues or to be inspired to fight for a more just society should look elsewhere. In A Civil Action one will only find cynicism.
An amazing book that opens a window on the world of civil lawsuits.The book concerns a leukemia "cancer cluster" of half a dozen children that popped up in the mid-1970s, in Woburn, Massachusetts, about half an hour North of Boston. Besides the cancers, the children and their families also developed a host of strange ailments: rashes, fatigue, headaches, constant nausea. After some tests it was proved that two wells that were pumping Woburn's water were infested with trichloroethylene (TCE), and were ordered shut down. It looked like two factories in the area, one owned by W.R. Grace and the other by Beatrice Foods, might have been the culprits. Jan Schlichtmann, a relative newbie lawyer, took the families' case, and then almost bankrupted his own firm in the process. He spent over two million dollars on geologists, epidemiologists, doctors, and law professors, as well as on medical and groundwater tests, all trying to prove that the two companies knowingly polluted the water and poisoned his clients. The discovery process lead to years of deposed witnesses and experts, and the actual trial lasted for months. Of course, the aftermath of appeals and counter-appeals, settlement offers and negotiations, lasted for years. It's a real-life Jarndyce v. Jarndyce, straight out of Dickens. This may sound like potentially tedious material, but Jonathan Harr, a former writer for the New Yorker, makes it constantly vital, alive, and real. The people in the story, from the fanatically determined Schlichtmann to the droll Jermore Facher, the Hale & Dorr lawyer for Beatrice, to the ornery District Judge Walter Skinner, to the families of the children, all come across with their own qualities and foibles, and one gets the sense of a real honest appraisal of their characters and their role in the drama. The trial and discovery process offer innumerable twists, and demonstrate the real thought and intelligence that must be put into these efforts by all sides.So I heartily recommend this for anyone wanting to read about the American legal system in process, or for anyone who just loves a great story.
What do You think about A Civil Action (1996)?
A frightening look at how the legal system can be completely biased, self-serving, and how one judge can destroy the lives of so many - not to mention the Court of Appeals holding up inadequate, ridiculous decisions all based on res judicata. For anyone wanting to be a lawyer, or who is currently a lawyer, this book resonates. Incredibly well researched by the author. You think the novel is going to end with a Hurrah!, but instead goes a completely different way, inevitably questioning how long you should hang on, and when it is time to give up.
—Aric Cushing
An inside look at the case that made Jan Schlictmann famous: unscrupulous corporations poisoning the ground water supply, causing deaths and illness in the local community, and working to cover it up. Really sheds light on the adverse effects of litigation on plaintiffs' attorneys (as opposed to Class Action, which sheds light on the adverse effects of litigation on plainitffs). You really have to be able to disconnect and balance, or else a case can eat you alive. And no matter how right you are, life just sometimes is the pits, like when opposing counsel might be rather cozy with a judge who doesn't want his friend to look bad. This book will also make anyone think twice about Tea Party / Republican claims that "corporations know best" and "we have too much regulation" and "regulations kill jobs." Regulations might kill a job or two, but unregulated corporations kill people. This book makes the reader realize he or she must add this reality to the equation before continuing to support or disparage a particular political position.
—Peterladwein
A depressing story of injustice and lies and liars. I want to be a lawyer, and I want to be a good lawyer, and I want the best for my clients if/when I may have clients, but I justice to be served. This book had me thrilled until the very end when time after time justice and a sense of right was ignored. I try to look at the judgement in an unbiased manner and I feel like I can, but I still feel a bubble of fury. Just a gross display. I wish the outcome were better, I wish the system caught the errors and corrected them, I believe it's a good system, but I was pretty depressed after finishing this tale. I would recommend it but with the caveat of being saddened by it.
—Nathaniel Spinney
