King of Torts ~ John Grisham ~ 3/05
jane
February 4, 2005 - 07:13 pm
|
FROM THE PUBLISHER
"The Office of the Public Defender is not known as a training ground for bright young litigators. Clay Carter has been there too long, and, like most of his colleagues, dreams of a better job in a real firm. When he reluctantly takes the case of a young man charged with a random street killing, he assumes it is just another of the many senseless murders that hit D.C. every week. As he digs into the background of his client, Clay stumbles on a conspiracy too horrible to believe. He suddenly finds himself in the middle of a complex case against one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world and looking at the kind of enormous settlement that would totally change his life...."
|
Discussion Leader: Bill H
B&N Bookstore | Books Main Page | Suggest a Book for Discussion
We sometimes excerpt quotes from discussions to display on pages on SeniorNet's site or in print documents.
If you do NOT wish your words quoted, please contact ginny
Bill H
February 4, 2005 - 11:39 am
This fast moving novel by John Grisham deals with how the greed for money and power overshadows the morale obligations of some powerful attorneys. I realized there were law firms that entered class action suits on behalf of their clients. However, until I read this novel, I never realized to what extent they would go to in order to extract untold millions from corporations not caring what companies were destroyed. . The staggering millions they garnered from these class action suits provided them with an extravagant life style that is hard to imagine but their clients realized so little as to be embarrassing.
Never again will I read about a class action law suite being filed without thinking of this informative novel by John Grisham. This story is a real page turner.
Bill H
GoldenStatePoppy
February 5, 2005 - 07:32 pm
This book is an eye opener about the tort system in the US and certainly demonstrates the need for reform. I would recommend this book to anyone. In order to talk about details, I might need to reread it.
Mippy
February 6, 2005 - 08:40 am
Hi, Bill and SeniorNetters,
I'll buy the book, and then decide whether to join in. I'm always hesitant to post if I don't like a book,
even though it's supposed to be good for the discussion.
Don't want to be a grumpy ol' woman!
But I'm sure it's a quick "read" for me, so I'll let you know soon.
Happy Reading!
Bill H
February 6, 2005 - 10:03 am
Welcome, Golden State Poppy and Mippy. I do hope you decide to enter the discussion. I'm sure we will have a lively time expressing our individual thought about the Tort system in our country. Even if you don't like the book, you can tell us why you didn't dare for it. However, I do think you will like the novel.Bill H
Mippy
February 6, 2005 - 03:44 pm
Bill,
Due to your very quick reply, I ordered the book on line and will read it when it arrives next
week. And I hope to participate. Thanks!
Bill H
February 7, 2005 - 09:54 am
Thank you, Mippy. I hope you do enjoy the book.Bill H
horselover
February 7, 2005 - 11:23 pm
I already have the book, but haven't read it yet. I have read most of his other books. From the reviews here, this one sounds like the dark side of "A Civil Action," which was about some altruistic lawyers pursuing a class action suit that ended by costing them a fortune.
Bill H
February 8, 2005 - 03:42 pm
Hi, Horselover, happy to see you here! I liked the book. Grisham adds so much to all his stories.Bill H
Aberlaine
February 8, 2005 - 08:12 pm
I'm currently reading a Robin Cook book, but figure to be finished with it soon. His books read very quickly. I'll try to get "The King of Torts" tomorrow from the library and join you.
Bill H
February 9, 2005 - 03:04 pm
Aberlaine, welcome aboard. I do hope you can join us because this will give ua a confirmation of four. With these confirms I can move the discussion to UPCOMING and post a reading schedule.Thank you.
Bill H
dancer821
February 10, 2005 - 07:10 am
Books are too expensive for me to buy, but I will check it out of the library, and will be ready for the discussion by the time it rolls around. Will be able to re-read by that time. From the synopsis of this book, I have some knowledge of it, but I also hope that we will read or discuss the opposite side of this view/fiction, which of course is much included much truth.
Bill H
February 10, 2005 - 04:23 pm
Dancer, welcome aboard. Yes, of course, all thoughts on the subject are welcome that's what makes for a lively discussion. Bill H
kiwi lady
February 11, 2005 - 01:51 am
Class actions cannot be dismissed altogether. I think of several well publicised cases regarding chemical poisoning. Children died. I don't think we can let Corporations get away with this sort of thing. However we must be able to also put the breaks on what I call mischevious suits.
I have read King of Torts. If I can get it out of the library in time I would be interested in joining this discussion.
Bill H
February 12, 2005 - 09:46 am
Kiwi Lady, welcome. I hope you can get the book in time for the discussion your posts are always interesting. Bill H
Bill H
February 12, 2005 - 09:51 am
Please don't be concerned with the number of chapters you see in each of the scheduled sessions. They are short chapters and easy reads. As you can see, the discussion is scheduled for seventeen inclusive days. I feel that two weeks, or a few days more, is enough time to thrash out the points of a novel. I have found that dragging it on any longer loses the interest of the participants. I do ask that we adhere to the schedule as much as possible. Jumping way ahead of the discussion schedule will spoil it for the readers who are just starting to read the novel, or are observing the schedule. Thank you.
P.S. You will find the links in heading to be both informative and interesting.
Bill H
Bill H
February 21, 2005 - 01:56 pm
Kevin Freeman posted this URL in First Page Café. The link below will take you to the prestigious IMPAC Dublin Library Award site. I was pleased to see that The King of Torts is on their long list for an award. Please scroll down the page. The authors are listed in alphabetic order. Just to make this list says quite a bit about both the author and the novel.The novel was mominated by:
Nelson Memorial Public Library, Apia, Samoa I'm sure you will find this site to be of much interest.
Kevin, thank you for finding this fine web site
IMBAC DUBLIN LIBRARY AWARD
Bill H
Scrawler
February 26, 2005 - 10:10 am
I'm going to order the book today. Should get here in a couple of days. Plenty of time to read it before the discussion. Looking forward to the discussion.
MurielMcI
February 28, 2005 - 11:55 am
Can I join this discussion? - I have the book already and will be starting it tomorrow - by co-incidence that is but that seemed fated.Scotland has a completely different legal system (even from England lol!) so perhaps I will have different observations.
Bill H
March 1, 2005 - 11:02 am
MurielMcI, Welcome aboard. Sure you can join the discussion!! We would be happy to hear about other countries legal systems. Perhaps it WAS fated for you to join in. . Once again, Muriel, Welcome and Welcome to SeniorNet.Scrawler, I'm happy you are going to be here. Your posts are always worthwhile reading.
Bill H
BaBi
March 1, 2005 - 12:48 pm
I just started reading "King of Torts", and it will be back at the library by Mar.15. I'll look in and see how much I can remember. :>)
Babi
Bill H
March 1, 2005 - 01:23 pm
BaBi, good to see you here. I'm sure you have a remarkable memory.Bill H
newvoyager
March 3, 2005 - 11:51 am
Looking forward to re-reading this novel. I believe that the class action "racket" is giving the legal profession a bad name. Perhaps we will be able to see if the current effort to move these "class" actions into the federal court system will really help to alleviate the effect of these parasites on American life. From what I understand if the change is made then all of the participants will need to be from the same state. Does anyone know if this is correct?
Going to the library now to start.
Newvoyager
Bill H
March 3, 2005 - 05:05 pm
Newvoyager, welcome. I'm happy to have you aboard.. We have quite a few participants in this discussion and if they all show up it promises to be a lively one. Bill H
Aberlaine
March 3, 2005 - 06:08 pm
I went on vacation last week and had enough time to finish the book. A very interesting topic. I look forward to discussing it.
Nancy
kiwi lady
March 3, 2005 - 07:09 pm
I have the book. I wish to join the discussion. I read it some time ago so it will be a re read for me.
carolyn
pedln
March 4, 2005 - 08:44 am
You couldn't have picked a more timely book. I'm reading it now and enjoying it thoroughly. It's due back at the library the day the discussion starts, and I'm not sure if I'll be able to be an active participant, but will surely try.
Bill H
March 4, 2005 - 11:24 am
Nancy, so glad you had time to finish the book. Hope to see you there soon.Carolyn, You are more than welcome to join the discussion. Happy to have you join in.
Pedln, Yes, it is a timely subject, considering how the President signed the new tort laws. I'm looking forward to any posts you do make.
Gosh, we have a room full here.
Bill H
Bill H
March 4, 2005 - 12:12 pm
Pedlin, thank you for that great discussion in Curious Minds.Bill H
MurielMcI
March 5, 2005 - 05:32 pm
I think I may have to give this a miss! I have lost my book. I was teaching in a school last week and remember going in to my bag to find pens for the kids to create posters and I think I may have taken it out then - I will be back next week and will see if it is still there. I will join future reviews even if I don't get myself sorted for this one!
Enjoy all of you and I will watch the reviews even if I don't participate.
Bill H
March 5, 2005 - 06:02 pm
Muriel, Sorry to hear you lost the book but maybe you will find it. Even so, I'M sure you can contribute to the discussion.BIll H
Bill H
March 5, 2005 - 06:04 pm
The last two links in the heading provide information about the Tort Laws, and they offer the pros and cons for this system.At least they give us some understanding of the law.Bill H
horselover
March 9, 2005 - 02:53 am
My father and two of his brothers practiced tort law for many years. The general rational behind tort law is as follows:
"In modern life, there are two obvious ways to address threats to human health and safety that may be presented by private commercial activity. One is by litigation, whereby an individual who has been harmed by private conduct sues a business for compensation under common law (or perhaps even statutory) tort liability principles, with the additional objective of creating incentives for businesses to behave differently in the future. The other possibility is through the regulatory state, whereby the government promulgates rules ex ante and an agency then investigates, judges, prohibits or requires certain conduct in the future, and sometimes awards compensation for harm. Both regimes can serve as regulators who set standards for reasonable conduct. But, how do we prioritize, coordinate, or integrate these two institutions to achieve the desired end? How well suited to the task of standard setting and technical evaluation is the tort system? And, under what circumstances do marketplace forces provide all the incentives necessary to alert the public to possible harms and deter businesses from undesirable activities?"
Unfortunately, in actual practice, greed (of clients and attorneys) often undermines the desired ends of this part of the legal system. I haven't read much of the book yet, but am looking forward to seeing how these issues are dealt with in the book and our discussion.
Bill H
March 9, 2005 - 10:44 am
Thank you for that post. I'm sure your father and two uncles could tell us a lot about the tort system. Are any of them still living?Bill H
horselover
March 9, 2005 - 04:52 pm
Only one uncle is still living, but he is retired and living in Florida. However, I did learn quite a lot from listening to their discussions during the years they were practicing.
Bill H
March 10, 2005 - 11:37 am
Horselover, I'm sure you gained quite a bit of knowledge listening to your father and uncles discussing law. I'm looking forward to your posts.Bill H
pedln
March 12, 2005 - 09:42 am
That's a very interesting link about tort reform and tort management, Bill. It explains a lot, and I highly recommend it. I don't claim to understand tort, but that link helps. And the slide show presentation gives excellent summary and reenforement.
Bill H
March 12, 2005 - 10:29 am
Pedln, yes, I thought the sites those two links take us too goes a long way in helping to explain the tort system. I also enjoyed the slide show. I'm not very well versed on the Tort procedures. Maybe some of the participants can explain it somewhat.Bill H
MurielMcI
March 13, 2005 - 11:55 am
I have done no research on tort.
I am looking forward to hearing your views, I will research as soon as I don't understand a post.
It seems in the UK tort has a different meaning but time will tell!
Aberlaine
March 13, 2005 - 12:00 pm
Several years ago, I was enrolled in a Certified Financial Planning course (thought I'd like to be a CFP in retirement - way above my head!). One of the chapters involved business law, and tort law in particular. I've dragged out my notes and, hopefully, I can explain it in a way everyone can understand.
Nancy
Aberlaine
March 13, 2005 - 01:52 pm
I apologize if there are any lawyers present, but I was reminded of a joke as I went through the slide presentation: If you have a room full of lawyers up to their throats in mud, what do you have? Not enough mud.
In deference to the many lawyers I've met along life's road, not all of them are bad. My divorce lawyer looked out for my interests when all I wanted was "out". I play fantasy football with a wonderful guy who happens to be a lawyer. I think it may be the tort lawyers who advertise on TV and in the news, who give lawyers a bad name.
bimde
March 13, 2005 - 07:36 pm
I am reading the book now, and find it very interesting. Will try to join the discussion, and hopefully learn more about the Tort Law.
Bill H
March 14, 2005 - 09:49 am
Bimde, welcome to the discussion. I,too. hope to learn more about tort from the many participants who have joined this discussion. Again, I welcome you and thank you for joining the book discussion.Bill H
Bill H
March 15, 2005 - 06:10 am
The opening pages of this novel explains the Public Defenders Office of the criminal justice system. The judge presiding in the court room appointed Clay Carter. the main character of the story, to be the defendant' s counsel. As I reread these pages my thoughts drifted to the terrible tragedy that took place in an Atlanta GA courtroom a few days ago when defendant Brian Nichols embarked on a shooting rampage. I thought how timely the opening of this story is as it deals with court room procedures, judges and attorneys.I was surprised at the amount of work Clay Carter of OPD put forth investigating leads in order to defend his client. But, in reality, I wonder how often this amount of work is practiced. by court assigned counsel for the defendant.
Bill H
pedln
March 15, 2005 - 07:47 am
Bill, I know very little about the workings about the OPD or of any defense attorneys, but don't they have to meet some standards for their defense (s)? Can't they be sued or reprimanded or something if they don't prepare a proper defense?
newvoyager
March 15, 2005 - 10:00 am
I remember reading somewhere about court appointed attorneys complaining about not having the funds to investigate cases as private lawyers would. There was also the notion of a limit of time they could spend on a case dictated by their department's budget.
Scrawler
March 15, 2005 - 10:16 am
Tsunami survivors and relatives of victims have sued the federal agency that operates the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center, alleging that the center did not do enough to warn people about the disaster.
The lawsuit was filed in federal court in New York City by a group that includes at least 58 European survivors and family members of victims. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Pacific Tsunami Warning Center, based in Hawaii, monitors seismic and ocean conditions in the Pacific Basin and issues warnings to member nations. NOAA officials refused to comment on the complaint but have previously said the center was not set up to warn nations outside the Pacific Rim. An earthquake Dec. 26 caused the tsunami that killed at least 172,000 in 11 nations. ~ USA Today - Monday, March 14, 2005.
I thought you folks might be interested in the above article. It certainly has the potential of having a phonomenial affect on our court system.
Scrawler
March 15, 2005 - 10:40 am
I can certainly relate to Clay Carter's "burn-out." I worked for 25 years for the state of California in their Worker's Compensation Unit. I worked in their "fraud unit" for a short time and was devastated by the cases that I saw there. It's stressful enough to handle several thousand cases of worker's compensation cases, but the fraud cases are the worst. The "greed" of some people is unbelievable. Their greed puts a strain on the system and many of the people that should have your attention tend to "fall through the cracks" like Tequila Watson did in this story.
I'm all for "reform" but I fear that like in the Worker's Compensation unit "reform" will mean more paper work and less time with the actual "person." The federal government is to far away from the actual client to really do any good; in some cases [like the Worker's Comp. Reform] because of the increase in paper work it actually increased the "greed" of some people.
The Public Defender's Office is not unlike all public agencies. There are more cases than any one person can handle at any one time.[I used to handle between 2,000 to 20,000 cases a month.] This might contribute to the way the public defender handles their cases. To punish them for a lack of defense would be like putting a band-aid on an oozing wound of blood and guts. There's just not enough money coming into the system to hire new defenders and this also contributes to the problem.
Thus, greed and lack of money for those that really need it is the real problem that needs to be solved and the only way to solve it is to handle it one case at a time giving it your undivided attention. But I'm afraid this won't happen in my life time.
pedln
March 15, 2005 - 12:39 pm
Scrawler, I heard something about that tsunami suit on the news yesterday. One would hope at best that such a suit gets thrown out of court as a frivolous lawsuit, but more likely we'll have to content ourselves to throw mud at the lawyers.
I think that is the ultimate of greed and the heighth of callousness.
MurielMcI
March 15, 2005 - 01:14 pm
I have the book back now - just where I left it so obviously the kids did not fancy it!
I will get reading this week-end and will catch up as fast as I can. I am a fairly fast reader.
Aberlaine
March 15, 2005 - 02:04 pm
Where we live in a country that lives by "liberty and justice for all", how can it be that some people get "more" justice than others? High profile cases are tried by high profile, expensive lawyers. We, however, would get someone from OPD.
On the subject of greed, I've found that many of the "baby boomer" generation share that trait. I guess that's where they earned the name "The Me Generation" - thus, the greed, unethical behavior and dishonesty we're now seeing in corporate America and even in the U.S. Congress.
I was brought up to believe, if it's not mine, I can't have it. And that's how I brought up my children. Not even a pack of gum taken from a shelf near a grocery store cash register (true story).
A country singer I admire, Aaron Tippin, sings many songs about honesty. One in particular comes to mind. It's entitled, "I Got It Honest". Okay, I'll stop preaching now. Greed is just such a sore spot with me. And class actions like the one Scrawler mentioned just make me sick.
Nancy
Bill H
March 15, 2005 - 03:29 pm
Pedlin, I don't know a whole lot about the OPD. But for as low pay they receive compared to other attornes, I iimagine the admittance to the Bar (not a saloon) is just about all they need. I have heard that the client can ask for a new trial if can produce evidence that his defense attorney was negligent.
Newvogager, when you say there is a limit of the amount of time the court designated attorney can spend on case, I am inclined to agree with you. I can't see OPD spending an enormous amount of money on a trial. I believe they want the defendant to plea bargain whether he is innocent or not. I'm sure there are innocent people in prison just for this reason.
Scrawler, yes that was interesting what you posted. However, I'm not surprised. It seems the United States is accused of everything, even acts of God.
Scrawker, you posted the following:
" Public Defender's Office is not unlike all public agencies. There are more cases than any one person can handle at any one time.In your experience, are most PDs urged to plea bargain>
Muriel, good for you on finding your book. Now if I could find the expensive camera lens I misplaced I would be even more happy.
Aberlaine, we do live in a country that claims "liberty and justice for all." But money talks and the criminal walks. And, yes most of us would need a PD.
I also was brought up on the believe that if it is not mine I cant have it. To prove what I just said. Yesterday I was in a super market doing my shopping. Well, they had StarKist Tuna on sale for one-dollar a can and I put two in the shopping cart. Well, they slid to the back of the cart, I truly did not see them as I placed the groceries on the check-out counter. When I left the store and started placing the bags of groceries in the trunk of my auto, I saw the two little cans of Tuna that had slid to the back of the shopping cart. With no hesitation whatsoever, . I retuned to the store with the two little cans of Tuna, explained what happened, and paid the two-dollars. I suppose it would've been easy to just place them in the trunk along with the other groceries, but not for me. I just can't do that
Bill H
Aberlaine
March 15, 2005 - 03:35 pm
Bill - I bet the cashier looked at you as though you were crazy.
winsum
March 15, 2005 - 03:43 pm
depending on how far I'd have to walk and how busy the cashier was I'd probably have taken care of my conscience by just leaving the in the cart for someone else to deal with. mobilitiy a problem for me although conscience usually is not. . . . claire
Bill H
March 15, 2005 - 05:52 pm
Aberlaine, I knew the cashier and said, "How like you."Claire, I didn't have far to walk to go back in the store. Besides, I wanted the Tuna.
Bill H
Bill H
March 15, 2005 - 06:25 pm
As Talmadge X was telling Clay Carter about Tequila Watson's stay at Deliverance Camp and how they "cleaned" him up after he had been stoned on crack, My thoughts drifted to how illegal immigrants receive free health care and education. Well, perhaps that's OK. But, if money can be spent on "undocumented" immigrants, wouldn't it be far better for state or local governments to spend that money on institutions like Deliverance Camp. Just a thought.I marveled at the courage Clay had as he toured the neighborhood of Camp D.
Bill H
horselover
March 15, 2005 - 06:55 pm
The problem with our criminal justice system is that "justice" is not necessarily its aim or outcome. The adversary system, where each side devotes its entire resources toward the outcome it desires, theoretically is supposed to produce the correct verdict. But in actual practice, this system cannot work very well. The police often support the prosecutor rather than objectively seeking justice, and although the state appoints a public defender for the indigent, he/she is up against the unlimited resources of the state. Even the innocent are frequently forced to plea bargain for fear that they will be convicted of a higher crime and receive longer sentences if they fail to cooperate with the major aim of the system which is to clear the docket. The salary Clay gets after five years as a PD is a joke compared to the $100,000 minimum per case a private criminal defense attorney will receive from his wealthy clients. What indigent defendent could afford the "dream team" assembled by O.J. Simpson?
Bill H
March 16, 2005 - 09:50 am
Horselover, an interesting post. And it is a shame that the procedures you described are not uncommon. . The more convictions the better the district attorney, the police, the mayor and probably the governor looks. I have no doubt that sometimes "evidence" is manufactured in order to convict the defendant. That is why I feel the death penalty should only be given in cases such as the mass murder that Brian Nichols commuted Atlanta GA.
Bill H
Bill H
March 16, 2005 - 10:08 am
Before a defendant can receive the assistance of a PD, that person must be determined eligible for such assistance. The link below will take you to a site that will explain how the State of Delaware determines this eligibility. Eligibility for the Assistance of a PD
The bottom two links in the heading will do much to explain the Tort system as it applies in the United States. Bill H
Scrawler
March 16, 2005 - 10:19 am
I'm not sure when the term "Let the Buyer Beware" was coined. I think it might come from Roman times, but the bottom line is that we need to be aware of what we are buying. The flaws of a product would quickly be revealed with a little research. In the matter of drugs, I used to tell my clients to be careful of any medications that the "doctor" told them they had to take.
We are all individuals and as individuals have different chemical and physical makeups. I for example can't take any drugs because I'm allergic to everything on the market. I've learned to do without drugs whenever possible and I think in some ways it's made me stronger and healthier. I realize that for some drugs are necessary, but like I said above - be careful. Always check the dosage and the side-effects.
The problem is that whenever we buy something we are usually on an emotional high or in the case of a doctor giving us drugs on an emotional low. Sometimes we don't hear everything that is being said. I used ask my clients to take someone with them to their appointments so they could speak for the patient. And one very important thing get everything in writing.
Because I was a state employee I was on several trials as a juror. Some of them were murder trials. One in particular I remember because I sat above the prosecutor's table and the VERY young lawyer who was prosecuting held on to a legal pad - that was BLANK during the whole trial. After the trial was over and the prosecution had lost, I asked him why he didn't have any notes and he said they had no time to prepare for this case. The prosecution had assumed they had an open/shut case. Unfortunately, the defense attorney [who was the most expensive in town] paraded several doctors and we didn't have enough FACTS on the side of the prosecution to prosecute - it was all circumstantial. Oh, by the way during the whole trial the defendant kept drawing pictures of the jury on a sketch pad - he was drawing the jury in grotesque caricatures and he made sure we saw his drawings. It made us in the jury box feel very squeamish.
bimde
March 16, 2005 - 10:37 am
Bill, Your idea of the Government spending more on places such as Camp D is one that should be considered. It costs, according to the book, something like 40,000 per year per inmate. Why not spend that money to keep them OUT of prison? One of my nephews was lucky enough to have a friend in the prison system who saw to it that he, my nephew, was sent to what they called a "Boot" camp. It made a changed person of the young man.Why aren't more of the young offenders offered such as this? Money is being thrown about everywhere,it seems, but in places where it would really do some good.
Bill H
March 16, 2005 - 11:23 am
Scrawler, good point you make about researching medications. There are ligimsate web sites that can give you much information on any articular drug. I visited a web site that gave me wonderful information that I can expect about cataract surgery.However, there are adverse problems with just about any medication.
When drugs are advertised on TV, I'm amused at the disclamer that is presented by someone speaking rapidly and saying that people with kidney, liver, etc,etc should speak to their doctor before taking the drug. Well, heck, it was the patient's doctor that prescribed the drug.
I wonder just how valid these disclaimers would hold up in a court of law.
Could you tell us something about what you and the other jurors spoke about before reaching a verdict in the murder trial you spoke of?
Bill H
Bill H
March 16, 2005 - 11:38 am
Bimde, you make a valid point about spending money on "boot camps' to rehabilitate the young convict, if the crime is not of very serious nature.As you said, money is being thrown about everywhere except in places where it should be spent.
I feel this money waste in the hands of managers, or others, who are not qualified to hold the positions they are in. So many of these money managers are appointed due to the politcal patronage system. I suppose that many of them just don't care.
Bill H
newvoyager
March 16, 2005 - 12:15 pm
In following the logic of the choice of locations for testing “Tarvan” we read that the company picked three places- Mexico City, Singapore, and Belgrade, “far outside the jurisdiction of the FDA.”. (See page 68, last paragraph) Then on page 70, near top of page we read: “My client deliberately looked at the globe and picked one spot for Caucasians, one spot for Hispanics, and one spot for Asians. Some Africans were needed”
Then we read, “We have plenty in D.C.. SO THOUGHT MY CLIENT.” Why not in Africa? This choice seems to be made to correspond with Clay’s location rather than the pervious logic. This passage does not ring true.
What do you think?
Newvoyager
Aberlaine
March 16, 2005 - 06:49 pm
First, I agree with many of you who have said it would be in everyone's interest to try to keep people out of jail. If places like Deliverance Camp were created, we could keep many people out of jail. I don't know if our prisons have rehabilitation services available for inmates.
Second, our legal system is broken almost beyond repair. The wealthy get justice, no one else. Juries should not be chosen from "our peers". Jurists need at least to be familiar with trial law. In other countries there are professional jurists who are knowledgeable about jury trials and paid for their services.
I also served on a jury for a murder trial. We were not allowed to take notes or see the transcripts of the examinations. The judge read the law about deliberations too quickly. I, for one, do not have a good memory. It was extremely tough for me to make an argument for or against a guilty verdict. And the jury began its deliberations on a Friday afternoon after a week of listening to the arguments of the defense and prosecution. Many of the jurors simply wanted to decide one way or the other, so they could get home for the weekend. I'd hate to be tried for a crime. There is no way for justice to be served.
Nancy
GoldenStatePoppy
March 17, 2005 - 08:59 am
I forgot to subscribe to this newsgroup after first coming here, so I have lost much of the conversation. This book greatly impressed me when I read it. My only complaint was always making the drug companies the enemy. They aren't setting out to hurt people, but to help them. I am sure the make mistakes but they do a great deal of good for many of us.
I will reread the book so I can make at least occasionally rational posts.
Bill H
March 17, 2005 - 09:40 am
Newvoyager, the passage you write about doesn't seem to ring true. But I feel the author had to pick a location in the U.S. in order to bring our judicial system in to play. That is the only thing I can think of at the moment. Perhaps others have ideas about this. Yes, Grisham took "poetic license."Nancy, you introduce a chilling thought, when you wrote "Many of the jurors simply wanted to decide one way or the other...."
How often does the IQ or impaticence of jurors affect the verdict? Not only that, but I know some people whose minds are set in concrete and would not really listen to jury deliberations.
And there should be a conformity about taking notes. Some judges allow this others don't. I feel it is a good idea.
Bill H
Bill H
March 17, 2005 - 09:57 am
Golden State Poppy, you make a valid point about pharmaceuticals wanting to help. I suppose some risks must be taken in the development of any new medication. The adverse affects on some people can often be outweighed by the vast amount good it does for others. If the FDA demanded that all new medications be one-hundred percent perfect before being released, would the advancement in the medical have world achieved it's present day status?It would be interesting to read other comments about what you and I just wrote.
Clay Carter went back to Camp D to obtain the Tequilia's records during his stay there. Clay was told "His medical evaluations are confidential." "The doctor-patient privilege, I believe."For me that begs this question. How serious must be the crime or any situation, for that matter, before the doctor-patient privilege ends. I realize that this confidential relationship between doctor and patient must exist and must not be released for just an insignificant request. But at what point does this relationship end?
Bill H
Scrawler
March 17, 2005 - 10:06 am
As far as the jury that I mentioned earlier, there really wasn't a lot we could discuss. A young man from a very wealthy family strangled a prostitute in his bathtub. Because the police thought this was an open and shut case they didn't bother to investigate anyone else. The defense brought up the fact that the young man was never seen by anyone doing the crime. On top of that he had a room mate that was never investigated. Even though her purse was found in the young man's car; there really wasn't anything linking him to the crime other than circumstantial. It was a he-said/she-said kind of dialogue. Besides the fact that we were over-whelmed by the 72 doctors that the defense paraded before us. At one point one of the doctors stated that because the young man had several shampoo bottles on the side of the tub, it showed and I quote: "that he was a deeply disturbed young man" (end quote). By the looks on several of the faces of the jury I could tell that there were many of us that had shampoo bottles on the edge of our bathtubs. It was that line of testimony that drove us CRAZY! The trial took six months of my life and we were sequestered for one month while we tried to reach a decision. (This was in the early 70s.) I was away from my husband and two babies and this added to my frustration. So I agree there are times when the jurors wanted to get home to their families. I was lucky in that the state was still paying my salary so I didn't loose any money, but there were those on the jury that only got the $5.00 a day for jury duty.
About the Author:
John Grisham is one of the best-selling authors of our times. He uses a "formula" of "David and Goliath" in his courtroom scenes. He sells to everyone from teens to senior citizens.
As a child he was never a "bookworm" but he did read Dr. Seuss, the Hardy Boys, Emil and the Dectives, Chip Hilton, and lots of Mark Twain and Dickens. Another constant was his love of baseball.
I found it interesting that he had a greater success in high school playing baseball than in English composition; a subject that he received a "D grade."
He continued with his baseball career until he realized that he wasn't going to make it in the big leagues.
newvoyager
March 17, 2005 - 11:14 am
Now that we are really started with “King” I asked myself just why I liked John Grisham’s work so much. A major reason is the scope of his knowledge about how the widely disparate levels of society live. We went from the world of drug addicts to the country club set. The latter, at least in the case of Rebecca’s family, compared shabbily with Talmadge X. I was left with the impression that John certainly needed to actually personally be at both the DC city jail and the halls of power in Richmond. And he knew the attitudes and practices of those that lived in both of those places. More later.
What do you think makes his work so compelling?
Newvoyager
horselover
March 17, 2005 - 02:23 pm
I hate to disillusion Goldenstate Popppy, but drug companies want to make money--the more, the better. This is why they spend millions developing a new allergy pill when there are already ten similar ones on the market instead of devoting resources to serious illnesses where the return on investment is less certain. Since I began reading this book, I have become much more conscious of all the advertisements by drug companies that sound just like the ones Clay paid for. Even the FDA is thinking of clamping down on the way the ads depict a wonderful life style for those who take the drug, and gloss over any side effects they are forced to reveal.
Scrawler is right about the need to research any drug you take on your own. The way medical care is delivered in most places today, the doctor has very little time to devote to telling you about the drug himself. In fact, the doctor often knows little beyond what the sales rep has told him/her. But even if we are careful and do our own research, this will not help the problem of drug companies structuring the research in their favor or concealing facts from the FDA and the public.
GoldenStatePoppy
March 17, 2005 - 02:24 pm
Grisham has a wonderful way with words. He writes books that are exciting with interesting characters. He wrote a very different book with "The Painted House", which was moving and from the viewpoint of a child. I found I did not like his book about missing Christmas. It was full of cliches and the movie of it failed miserably.
Nonetheless, I will read every one of the books he writes because he is a wonderful storyteller. I like the fact that the moral character(s) vanquishes the immoral.
Bill H
March 17, 2005 - 05:26 pm
Scrawler, you brought out some interesting points in your last post. First there was circumstantial evidence. I don't believe anyone should receive the death penalty due to this type of evidence. Second, You said the jury was overwhelmed at the parade of doctors. I suspect this would contribute to impatience of the jurors. Third. You said you were away from home all this time. I wonder how often a juror has changed his/her mind and agreed with other jurors just to get home. This could either allow a guilty person to go free or convict an innocent person.Horselover, I also pay more attention now to the adds drug companies place on TV. Also,I notice more now the adds that attorneys air for class action suites.
Bill H
horselover
March 17, 2005 - 06:31 pm
Doesn't Clay have an obligation to tell whomever takes over the defense of Tequila Watson about the mitigating circumstances he discovered while he was the PD? Isn't it unethical for him to withhold this information from his successor despite the agreement he made with Max Pace? This is one of the reasons why there are so many unjust verdicts--information is withheld by attorneys on both sides, and even by the judge. The jury never hears all the facts of the case. Later on, reporters interview members of the jury and ask them if their verdict would have been the same if they had known about some fact. Often the juror will say that he/she would have voted differently if they had known.
bimde
March 17, 2005 - 09:48 pm
Horselover, you are so right about most Doctors knowing only what the Rep of a drug Company tells him/her. How many times have I sat waiting in the Dr's office, when in comes a drug salesman or woman, and in he/she goes ahead of all the patients waiting.And about all the ads on T.V. about this or that drug--"Ask your Doctor" is the by-word. And when the side-effects are listed, you wonder if you might be better off with the ailment than with the medicine!!
I think that John Grisham is a great story-teller, and knows from experience what he tells about.
pedln
March 17, 2005 - 10:31 pm
Regarding whatever obligations Clay might have had to who ever took over Tequila's defense, Clay just sold his soul to the devil, and obligations and ethics must now take a back seat. Is this another modern Faust?
bimde
March 18, 2005 - 09:43 am
About Clay leaving Tequilla behind, I felt just the same as I would if Luke Skywalker turned to the "Dark Side". That's exactly what Clay did. The dark side had MONEY--and that was more than Clay could resist. And he wanted to impress Rebecca--or her family. Not good reasons, but he did it. Wonder how many in that field have done the same??
Bill H
March 18, 2005 - 10:01 am
New VoyagerPerhaps I can shed a little light on the question you asked as to why Washington, D C was chosen along with Mexico City, Singapore and Belgrade. So I reread the passages that said Washington, D C was chosen for the testing of Tarvan in Africans. Max Pace told Clay Carter that "Information is difficult to obtain in the slums of the area of Mexico." Probably the same could be said about Singapore and Belgrade. Max wanted Clay to understand that Tarvan results were more easily obtainable in the district
Bill H
Bill H
March 18, 2005 - 10:26 am
HorseloverClay probably did have an obligation to reveal what knowledge he discovered pertaining to the Tequila Watson defence. But as Pedlin pointed out, Clay valued the enormous amount of money he could obtain more than his obligation to his former client. Now we begin to see the greed of wealth over shadowing the morale issues.
Bimde
I also know the feeling of drug sales representatives going ahead of me while I waited to see my doctor. Most of us in the waiting room were impatient with this procedure. However,this is inconvenience is more easily accepted because my doctor does give us samples of our prescribed medicine that the reps leave with him.
These samples reduce my prescription costs substanily
Bill H
Bill H
March 18, 2005 - 10:32 am
I suppose I am repeating myself. But in your opinion what percentage of adverse side effects are acceptable in any type of drug? Bill H
Scrawler
March 18, 2005 - 12:33 pm
The effects of prescription drugs as well as over-the-counter drugs will be different for each of us because we are all individuals with different physical and chemical balances.
Having gone through burn-out myself while working for the government I can understand why Clay Carter wanted out of his situation. At 18 I thought I could change the world working for worker's compensation, but by 25 I realized I couldn't change a thing not even myself. The only reason I stayed as long as I did was because of the great benefits the state offered. I can't tell you how many good people left state service because they weren't appreciated by the general public.
Did Clay Carter have an obligation to tell someone what Max told him? I'm not sure that he did have that obligation. Max would have disappeared and Clay's "he said/she said" testimony would have been thrown out of court and the testimony or "lack of" would probably have hurt Watson's case. Morally it might have been important, but would it have resulted in a difference in Watson's case - after all the bottom line was that Watson did kill another man and he should be punished.
About the author:
By the time John Grisham earned his law degree from the University of Mississippi his interest had shifted to criminal law. Although his law practice was successful, he grew restless in his new career and switched to the more lucrative field of civil law. But the sense of personal dissatisfaction remained and hoping to make a difference in the world, he entered politics with the aim of reforming his state's educational system. After seven years in politics, he became convinced that he would never be able to cut through the red tape of government bureaucracy in his effort to improve Mississippi's eductional system, and he resigned his post in 1990. Can't you see a Clay Carter in the making?
Bill H
March 18, 2005 - 04:12 pm
ScrawlerThank you for posting the brief biography of John Grisham. The reading of it tells how often the illusions of the young are shattered when they meet an immovable object.
Bill H
Bill H
March 18, 2005 - 07:52 pm
Do you approve of Clay Carter not wanting to obligate himself to Rebecca's family by refusing to take the job Bennett Van Horn had arraigned for him?
Clay's feeling's of obligations didn't run too deeply. Not only did he not feel obligated to explain what he had found regarding Tequila Watson to Tequila's new defense attorney, but he didn't feel any obligation for Rebecca to accept the job her father had arraigned for him This new assignment would've provided a good beginning for their marriage.
I'm not saying any of this is wrong, but I get the impression Clay thought of himself first, as we shall see as the story unfolds.Bill H
Scrawler
March 19, 2005 - 11:33 am
About the author:
Writing his first novel, let alone publishing it, was no easy task for Grisham. "Because I have this problem of starting projects and not completing them, my goal for this book was simply to finish it," he revealed to "Publishers Weekly interviewer Michelle Bearden. "Then I started thinking that it would be nice to have a novel sitting on my desk, something I could point to and say, 'Yeah, I wrote that.' But it didn't consume me. I had way too much going on to make it a top priority. If it happened, it happened."
Once again I can see Grisham's own personality in Clay Carter's. According to Grisham "writing" didn't consume him and I think Clay Carter is very similar in his attitude toward his life. He didn't want his job to "consume" him something that Rebecca's parents did let happen to them. Whether it was her father's real estate projects or her mother's obsession with the "proper" young man for her daughter; this wasn't the life Carter wanted for himself or for that matter for Rebecca.
I think too that perhaps this was what motivated Carter to accept Max Pace's offer. His job as PDO had literaterlly "consumed" him and he wanted out.
pedln
March 19, 2005 - 11:57 am
Clay's goal is to rise in stature in Rebecca's eyes. That's why he wants to earn more money. But he was right to run run run from Van Horn's Richmond offer. He might have won the girl at that point, but he'd be under the father's thumb from then on. And it was very dirty pool for Rebecca to let her father spring this on him. Did she know about it? I can't remember. But she needs to get out from Mama and Papa too.
I remember when Grisham's The Firm came out. I had gone to Memphis for the first time to see a Catherine the Great Exhibit at Convention Center there, and on Sunday morning was sitting in the hotel reading a lengthy review of this wonderful book that took place in Memphis. It sounded so good we got it for our school library. At that time I thought it was Grisham's first because A Time to Kill had not received much press. Later, we got all of his books as they came out for the library. The sociology teacher let the kids read fiction for their book reports (I mean, let's just get them to read), and he would accept both A Time to Kill and The Chamber because they gave such a good picture of the criminal justice process.
horselover
March 19, 2005 - 02:29 pm
I think Pedln is right about the reason Clay had to refuse the job Rebecca's father was offering. If he accepted it, he would never know what he could accomplish on his own, and he would be in debt to this man whom he despised for the rest of his life. This would not be a good beginning to a marriage.
I haven't finished the entire book, so I don't know if Clay comes to his senses at last as so many of Grisham's main characters do, but I agree that it does read like a modern Faust story. Clay has sold his soul for riches. It remains to be seen if he can win it back.
Another thing I wonder about is Clay's shorting of the drug company's stock before filing the law suit. This would definitely fall into the category of insider trading and would land him in the same kind of trouble as Martha Stewart. Patton French also seems to think he "should've shorted the damned thing." You would think lawyers would know better.
As for the free samples you get from your doctor, this can be both a blessing and a curse. In a sense, you become part of the population of guinea pigs for the drug company. You will sometimes be taking a new drug that the doctor himself doesn't know much about and providing data that the doctor can report to the drug company or FDA. Free samples were the way VIOXX became popular so quickly even though there was no solid evidence it was better than the non-prescription drugs people were using. It was patients who had not volunteered to be test subjects who then provided the data that ultimately resulted in the drug being withdrawn from the market.
Bill H
March 19, 2005 - 02:41 pm
Horselover, No. My doctor only gives free samples of the medication that I have been taking for years. Although I don't doubt there are some doctors who do as you suggested.Pedlin, You know what? I have A Time to Kill sitting right behind me as I type this.
Scrawler, I suppose what you suggested did in away motivate Clay's accepting Max Pace's offer. But I feel the strongest motivation was Clay's overwhelming desire for riches. Can't say as I blame him.
Hmmm. I wonder if this selling short did eventualy get Carter into a little hot water!
Bill H
newvoyager
March 19, 2005 - 04:24 pm
I agree that the free samples that many physicians give to their patients are appreciated by those having a problem affording their increasing cost.
I had one interesting experience when my cardiologist gave me some free samples of a drug to use before I filled a prescription and I know that he did it with the best of intentions. Fortunately, the sample box also contained the “detail sheet” that listed all of the known side effects, their rate of incidence and the other results of the drug trials. It was written in terms that were meaningful to a physician or a pharmacist and I resolved to learn them. I also had some familiarity with the use of statistics. So in analyzing the test results I determined that the incidence of cancer while taking the drug was unacceptable. The drug, if it worked at all, would raise my level of “good” cholesterol by about 15%. And the tests cited were not run on the drug itself but a similar drug. (Does that give you a warm feeling?) I sent him a letter containing my findings and stated that I refused to take the drug. He called me about it and after a short conversation he agreed with me.
About six months later the drug was taken off the market.
Have any of you had any similar experiences with “Side” effects?
Newvoyager
newvoyager
March 19, 2005 - 05:00 pm
Several contributors have mentioned greed as a primary motive for Clay and the other lawyers working the class action racket. But on the first page of chapter nine we see Clay asking, “What was the largest verdict in the history of the world?” If you look beyond the obvious reference to fees there is also a strong dose of ego being exhibited. And I have observed that this is not an unusual characteristic among the “officers of the court.”
Newvoyager
Bill H
March 19, 2005 - 07:13 pm
The elevator tripAs a follow up for Newvoyager's …"strong dose of ego..."
"…On the way down, the elevator stopped at the third floor. Three men and a woman stepped in, all nicely tailored and manicured and carrying thick expensive leather briefcases, along with the incurable air of importance inbred in big-firm lawyers. Max was so engrossed in his details that he did not see them. But Clay absorbed them—their manners, their guarded speech, their seriousness, their arrogance. These were big lawyers, important lawyers, and they did not acknowledge his existence. Of course, in old khakis and scuffed loafers he did not exactly project the image of a fellow member of the D.C. Bar.That could change overnight, couldn't it?"
Do you feel this could've been the catalyst that convinced Clay to join Max Pace in the class action suite? Clay was going nowhere in life and seeing these others successful lawyers made him so aware of this. Do you feel that his ego could've been crushed by their lack of acknowledgement?
Bill H
horselover
March 19, 2005 - 07:59 pm
The anecdote posted by NewVoyager about the sample given by the cardiologist proves my point. The doctor agreed with the decision not to take the drug after the patient had done the research. But why did he not know the facts about the drug before giving out samples. And what about the patients who took the samples and may have been injured in the six months before the drug was taken off the market. I'm certainly glad that NewVoyager was not among them. I think too many drugs are rushed to market these days in order to maximize profits, while patients become unwitting test subjects.
Just to say something positive about tort law and class action suits, we need to remember that many of these injured people would not otherwise be able to afford to bring suit on their own. Tort lawyers take on these cases using their own resources against the huge resources of these giant corporations, and if they don't get a judgement, they lose the money they have invested. This branch of the law gives people who c ould not afford a lawyer the chance to pay only if they prevail. Otherwise, there would be no brake on the actions of these corporations except government regulation, and we know that legislators are influenced by corporate contributions to their campaigns, and regulators are influenced by the promise of lucrative jobs at the very corporations they regulate after they leave government service.
The convention described in the book may sound crass and mercenary, but if you attend medical conventions, there are also talks on how to maximize profits that sound very similar.
bimde
March 19, 2005 - 09:42 pm
Bill, Yes, I think that the scene in the elevator did influence Clay to go for the deal that Max offered. Ego, and the desire to "get at" Rebecca's family. He could see that his being with the PDO was a dead end, and when the chance to make a few bucks came, he couldn't refuse. Too bad that the Public defenders don't make a better salary. They are definitely needed. As for abuse in Tort cases, as in everything else, it happens. Clay had his chance to really help Tequila, and turned away. He opted for the big money, and left his ideals behind.
GoldenStatePoppy
March 20, 2005 - 07:48 am
Horselover, the people that I know who have been involved in these class action suits receive very little. The ones I have known received about $12 and $45. It is only the lawyers who make money on these cases, not the victims. So, I can not see a need for a class action suit, ever.
Scrawler
March 20, 2005 - 11:35 am
Ego as stated in Webster under Psychoanalysis is that part of the psyche which experiences the external world through the senses, organizes the thought processes rationally, and governs action; it mediates between the impulses of the id, the demands of the environment, and the standards of the superego.
Looking at this defination I would have to say that it wasn't Clay's ego that got him into trouble but rather it was the impulses of his "id" that whispered in his ear. When Clay was looking at the "big lawyers" in the elevator he was comparing himself to them. At that moment his environment of "kakis and loafers" was not the environment that his "id" wanted. All he saw were dollar signs and what they could buy.
Aberlaine
March 20, 2005 - 01:18 pm
I agree that, in this day and age, patients should be in charge of their own health. Questioning the doctors, knowing their reasons. I've done this for most of my life. I once had a doctor, who, after I asked a question, answered "Who has the medical degree in this room, you or me?" I no longer go to that doctor.
Doctors are so overstressed by their case load you can barely expect answers, let alone a 10-minute appointment. Which is why they all seem to ask the same question when they enter the room: What is your biggest concern?."
If I ever have questions about my prescriptions, I've always asked my pharmacist who has all my meds on record. They always have time to answer my questions.
bimde: I loved your comparison of Clay/Max to Luke/the dark side.
horselover: I wonder, if there were no samples of medications for doctors to hand out, would we get the same prescription anyway?
Bill W: side effects have always been a concern of mine. I watched as my dad took more and more pills - one to treat a medical condition, another to minimize the side-effects. I made a promise to myself not to end up in his "shoes". Drug companies seem to understand that and are beginning to "combine" drugs. The COX2 meds were an attempt at that: provide a pain relieving product with minimal risk of injury to the stomach. I take Ultracet for pain. It's a combination of Ultram and Tyenol, which seem to work better together than alone.
Nancy
horselover
March 20, 2005 - 01:33 pm
Nancy, That is a good question about whether we would get the same prescription if the doctor had no samples. In some cases, we might not because the doctor would substitute a proven drug with a generic alternative that would cost the patient less. Samples are usually for new drugs or name brands still under patent protection. But the problem goes farther than just samples because the doctors often own stock in some of these drug companies, or have some other relationship with them which influences their choices.
Bill H
March 20, 2005 - 03:59 pm
Chapter Ten opens with the first real insight the author gives us of Clays father."Great Abaco Island is a long narrow strip of land at the northern edge of the Bahamas, about a hundred miles east of Florida. Clay had been there once before, four years earlier when he'd scraped together enough money for the airfare. That trip had been a long weekend, one in which Clay had planned to discuss serious issues with his father and discard some baggage. It didn't happen.,"
In this chapter we find that Clay's father is a neer-do-well. However, in your opinion, do you feel the author could have given Jarrett Carter more of a roll in advising his son.?
Grisham could've sobered the old guy up long for a while. How much more interesting that could've made the story.
Bill H
horselover
March 20, 2005 - 09:30 pm
There was an article in the "Financial Times" on March 16 that brings up another aspect of the problem we have been discussing. The headline reads "US medics are worried about 'alarmist' warnings spread by lawyers searching for new clients." The article goes on to talk about mentally ill patients who don't necessarily have the mental resources to weigh what's going on, and who suddenly stopped taking their antipsychotic medication in response to warnings that these drugs can be harmful for schizophrenics. Ads by lawyers claimed that at least three of the drugs can cause diabetes and "even complications that lead to comas or death." The doctors say that the alarmist talk of side effects are drowning out a balanced understanding of important patient benefits. The plaintiffs' attorneys "maintain that their publicity is legal and that the safety concerns are genuine." The lawyers say their ads point out very real dangers, and that any over-the-top ads are no worse than the consumer advertising put out by the drug companies. According to the article, in 2003, 38% of doctors reported patients who stopped taking drugs because of lawsuit advertising. 44% of pharmacists reported that a patient had stopped taking a prescribed medication because of such advertising. Doctors say that the greater menace are ads that target drugs that treat schizophrenia, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, and depression--illnesses that can be dangerous to the patient if not properly managed. They feel it is getting close to yelling 'FIRE' in a crowded theater.
Which of these people really help the public? Or is this whole competition for greater profits going to undermine an already overburdened health care system?
Scrawler
March 21, 2005 - 09:21 am
Perhaps Clay's father should have taken steps to guide his son, but at this point in his life Clay was a grown man and probably wouldn't have appreciated his father's advise.
One thing I found interesting about Clay's father was that at sometime in the book after Clay makes his money, his father asks him if he's going to help his mother. And Clay's answer is "no" because she married a rich man. What does this say about Clay?
It seems to me that Clay's parents were not very good examples for Clay to follow. Nether were Rebecca's parents for that matter. I think we owe it to our children to guide them in the right direction, but at a certain age we have to also allow them to make their own mistakes and hope that they have gained enough of our "good advice" to make informative decisions.
About the author:
According to Tom De haven from "Entertainment Weekly": John Grisham lacks the "literary genius" of John Steinbeck but "does share with him the conscience of a social critic and the soul of a preacher." Also, according to a "Newsweek" reviewer "Grisham's suspense novel format squarely [puts him] in the footsteps of Dickens or Graham Greene."
pedln
March 21, 2005 - 10:30 am
Bill, I think that Grisham deliberately left out any father advice because he wants to show that Clay is alone. Really, who can he turn to? Max? Patton French? He is tied too closely to them to receive objective advice. No, Clay has to do this on his own.
MurielMcI
March 21, 2005 - 11:32 am
I am a Scot who has had various brushes with the legal world and all sorts similarities are crashing in!
Many years ago we had a problem in a Scottish town in that we had many immigration legal problems but no specialists! I remember finding a young lawyer who was at least willing to learn. I sent him several clients and sent out the word to colleagues that this was the guy to use. I created an "expert" by frontloading! I met this guy a few years on and he remarked he could not remember what started him on his "specialism" but it had stood him well. I smiled and said nothing!!!!!!!! - is the same happening to Clay? Will it end so well?
Another co-incidence - my husband has just come through osteo-arthritis and the main drug - dyclophenac - has a side effect! It rots your stomach lining! It also raises your blood pressure! Doctors do a cost-benefit analysis and give you the drug because it is anti-inflammatory and a pain killer but the negatives are glossed over - you can see how I would relate to the story.
I am enjoying this book - Grisham write well and reads fast!!!!
I will post again when I have read, and understood, a bit more.
newvoyager
March 21, 2005 - 12:41 pm
I have observed that some doctors express strong disbelief if I tell them of undesirable side effects of a drug. I believe this is because of the great influence exerted by the drug detailers.
I am now a volunteer for an organization called Project MEDS: Medication Education Designed For Seniors. We send out speakers to inform groups about the problems related to not taking their medications properly and about late-onset alcoholism, alcoholism that starts late in peoples lives.
Believe or not:
Each year more than 30,000 older Americans die because they misuse their medications and/or use alcohol inappropriately.
More seniors die from drug-related deaths than young people and
One out of five seniors is admitted to the hospital with alcohol related problems.
Take care. Follow the directions given by your doctor and pharmacist and the information sheet that comes with the drug and BE ALERT.
Newvoyager
Bill H
March 21, 2005 - 05:06 pm
Scrawler'...And Clay's answer is "no" because she married a rich man. What does this say about Clay?"
When Clay's father asked him when he had talked to his
mother last, Clay told him it been eleven years. well what does all this say about Clay? It ells me that he TRULY believed he had no mother and father as such. I suppose he would've helped her if she needed help, but after eleven years, I don't think he would go out of his way to help her. Besides, what did his mother think of him? Might as well include the father in that as well.
Pedlin, Clay is alone. He is even being patronized by his fiancés parents. What a case of insecurity this guy must've developed over the years. I'm sure this insecurity prompted him to searc for the money that class action suites offered. Subconsciously, or other wise, he felt he needs the riches that he could obtain through Max and French.
Muriel, I commend yourself discipline for not jogging the lawyer's mind. I'm sure I would've. I'm sorry to hear that your town had some immigration problems. However we are having a little immigration problem ourselves .
Newvoyger, I have the same opinion. More seniors should try to find out as much as possible about the meds they are taking. Along with the prescription container, my pharmacy always includes a brief brochure explaining the adverse affects the med might have and the cashier always tells me the pharmacist will answer any questions I have concening the prescription. I wonder how many take the time to read it or ask the pharmacist about their medication?
Bill H
horselover
March 21, 2005 - 05:36 pm
I enjoyed the part about the meeting Clay went to at Patton French's place in Ketchum, Idaho. I recently went skiing at Sun Valley, and our condo was within walking distance of Ketchum. It was nice to be able to picture the place where the group met. Coincidentally, Ketchum is the place where Hemingway had a home, and where he ultimately committed suicide. However, it is a pretty town, and there are lots of rich people like French with homes there.
Bill H
March 21, 2005 - 07:40 pm
"…the Gulfstream sped down the runway and lifted off. Clay used the break to admire the airplane. It was so luxurious and richly detailed that it was almost obscene. Forty, forty-five million dollars for a private jet! And, according to the gossip among the Circle of Barristers, the Gulfstream company couldn't make them fast enough. There was a two-year backlog!"
When Clay realized that an airplane such as this could be his, if he become a successful Tort lawyer, all thoughts of morale obligations for Tequila Watson were pushed from his mind. Also, I'm sure Clay Carter didn't care about the reputation of any established pharmaceutical company that would be ruined due to his law suites.
My question is this:
After being on the low rung of the ladder for so long, can you blame Clay Carter for pursuing wealth instead of having feelings for others?
Bill H
newvoyager
March 21, 2005 - 08:59 pm
How can we answer this question?
"After being on the low rung of the ladder for so long, can you blame Clay Carter for pursuing wealth instead of having feelings for others?"
I guess we could say that he should adhear to the same level of concern that he showed when he did his best to represent his clients when we first met him. He should overcome the condescention of his future in-laws and the need for a show of prosperity so important to Rebecca. That is certainly the "right" thing to say. But (and there is always a "but") unless you experience the same level of temptation presented by this chance to make to the "big time" I really doubt that we can condem Clay. Unless, of course, the story ended now.
I don't think we should even attempt to judge him until we see later just how he sees himself and then what he does. I'm not giving him a "pass", just suggesting that we need to see the final state of the man.
And what's that saying about glass houses and stones?
Newvoyager
kiwi lady
March 22, 2005 - 10:13 am
Regarding the Tsunami suit. The nations concerned in the disaster did not have their own infrastructure set up for Tsunami warning procedures. Therefore they were not able to be warned in time my the Monitoring centre which was primarily set up for the Pacific region Its primarily because unlike the Pacific where I live Tsunamis have historically been a rarity in the area that was devestated on Boxing Day last year.
The law suit you speak of is ridiculous and I believe some lawyer has instigated the suit. Greed rears its ugly head once more!
Carolyn
Scrawler
March 22, 2005 - 11:40 am
One thing I believe is that we have to guide our children to set their priorities sooner rather than later in life. I know that when I was in high school (late 50s/early 60s) the emphasis was against becoming lawyers/doctors etc. and the emphasis was on doing service work like becoming teachers etc.
I realize that we were rebelling against our parents world and trying to establish our own world, but the thought of making money was the farthest thing from our minds. (Don't ask me what we were going to live on (?)) We just knew we didn't want to be part of the "gray flannel suit" crowd so we wore torn jeans and our fathers white shirts or dirty, torn sweatshirts and listened to rock 'n roll. Some of us went so far as being drawn to Eastern religions much to the shock of our parents.
Than to My utter shock my own children wanted to become can you guess - lawyers and doctors and such and wanted big houses, the best clothes and so on and so forth. As sixties' parents my husband and I just shook our heads; similar to what our parents had done.
Our children's priorities may not be our own, but we need to try to point out both the good points as well as the bad and than hope that you have guided your children well enough for them to make intelligent and honest decisions. I used to tell my children that I might not agree with what you say or do, but I'll always be there to listen to you.
I don't think Clay had that opportunity. He was only seeing one side
of what he was doing. To answer your question I can't blame Clay for wanting to get away from a job that consumed him and whose clients, co-workers, and superiors didn't appreciate what he did; I did it myself. But if he'd been able to be guided either by his parents or someone else who could point out the good and the bad in his descion making he might have been able to make a more intelligent descion than he did.
newvoyager
March 22, 2005 - 12:06 pm
For Scrawler:
I trained several succeding groups of young engineers and programmers as they came into our lab. I remember well the wave that were interested in "finding themselves" and doing "meaningfull work." The last wave were, as you say, interested in raises, promotions, SUVs, condos, "the good life", etc. But even though they had widely differing objectives they almost without exception turned out to be fine young people and performed their jobs well.
They are now probably now lamenting the new wave and wondering just what the world is comming to! I don't expect this will ever change, and I hope it doesn't. Got to go, one of my daughters is on IM. More later
newvoyager
horselover
March 22, 2005 - 01:47 pm
Bill, In repy to your question, I think we can blame Clay for being so easily consumed by greed and the desire to impress his girlfriend and her shallow family. After all, he was still a very young man and would have had time to prove himself in a less despicable way. I wonder why he was so determined to turn down his future father-in-law's offer but so anxious to be guided by Max Pace. In neither case was he in control of his own destiny. However, I agree with NewVoyager that we need to wait and see if he comes to his senses and recovers his former concern for the welfare of his clients, including Tequila Watson.
It's interesting that Clay still has such strong feelings for his father despite the fact that his father's mistakes destroyed the future Clay had counted on, after which his father abandoned him. His father thinks Clay's concern is based on an effort to remove the cloud which hangs over both their heads, but I think Clay feels a genuine affection for his father and a desire to be proud of him again as he once was. He would also like to see his dad not living from day to day and drinking himself to death. Most children love their parents no matter what they do.
Aberlaine
March 22, 2005 - 04:54 pm
Jarrett Carter was a famous, tough trial lawyer when Clay was growing up. Clay counted on following his father and becoming a trial lawyer. Clay graduated college with no practice to join when his father was caught up in financial difficulties. He went to visit his father to get some advice and left with none.
How did Clay's ethical compass get turned around? Well, he had his dad as an example. And Rebecca's parents later in his life. His dad played "creative accounting" when his fortune was lost. Bennett the Bulldozer was unscrupulous in his chase after wealth. Slash and burn was the technique he used to amass his fortune. Never mind the little guy. Rebecca's mom was an aggressive social climber. She worshipped at the alter of materialism and status.
But, in the end, we all have the ability to turn our backs on people we identify as bad role models. Unfortunately, Clay didn't.
Bill H
March 22, 2005 - 05:02 pm
Horselover, I can understand Clay's willingness to be guided by Max Pace rather than dear-old-future-father-in-law. He didn't want to be obligated to Rebecca's family. Not only that, he just plain didn't like the Van Horn family. I can understand their breakup. I don't believe either Clay or Rebecca had anything in common other than a physical attractionI must admitt Max isn't the kind of guy that I would want guarding my back in a bad situation.
Aberlaine and Scrawler, you summed up the reason for Clay's mental state very well. In fact, I would say it was right on the mark.
Bill h
Bill H
March 22, 2005 - 06:23 pm
'The Paris adventure cost him $95,300, according to the numbers so carefully kept by Rex Crittle, a man who was becoming more and more familiar with almost all aspects of Clay's life. Crittle was a CPA with a midsized accounting firm situated directly under the Carter suite. Not surprisingly, he too had been referred by, Max Pace. At least once a week, Clay walked down the backstairs or Crittle walked up them, and they spent a half an hour or so talking about Clay's money and how to properly handle it. An accounting system for the law firm was basic and easily installed. Miss Glick made all the entries and simply ran them down to Grime's computer. In Crittle's opinion, such sudden wealth would most certainly trigger an audit by the Internal Revenue Service. Notwithstanding Pace's promises to the contrary."
The first line of this paragraph tells me that Clay has inherited some of the reckless spending nature of his father, and we shall see more of this displayed later in the story. After all, Clay's close associates made a great deal of money on the outcome of the litigation. More than they thought they would ever have. As I read on, I can understand the Van Horne's concern for their daughter. They had a pretty good read on Clay.
Do you feel Rex Crittle was placed in Carter's employ to learn and report to Max the procedures of Clay?
Bill H
bimde
March 22, 2005 - 07:12 pm
Bill. I'm not sure about Crittle. He seems to be more interested in keeping Clay's feet on solid ground. He keeps reminding Clay about how much is going out,and not that much coming in. Clay's response, " You have to spend some to make some" or words to that effect. That shows me that Clay has lost all interest in helping the poor and downtrodden that he took on as public defender. He is after the money that will help him enjoy the good things of life, and in doing that, he shows Rebecca's family that he is, after all, someone who is on his way up in the world.Will Clay learn later that money isn't everything? I wonder. Bim
newvoyager
March 22, 2005 - 08:50 pm
I agree with Bim's assessment of Crittle. I have no doubt that he was informing Max of all of the financial details in Clay's office. But I also think that he was probably the most professional advisor that Clay had. He was an honest accountant, typical of his profession.
Newvoyager
Bill H
March 22, 2005 - 08:55 pm
Bimde, it is going to take some doing on Crittel's part to keep Clay's feet on the ground. Right now, his head is way up in the clouds.Oh,yea, by this time, he has lost whatever interest he might had in helping others when he was a PD. Clay has seen the sparkle of gold.
Newvoager, I agree with you about Crittle. He kept trying to salvage something of what Clay was getting.
Bill H
Scrawler
March 23, 2005 - 12:01 pm
Maybe I missed something but I don't see Crittle being an informant for Max. I think Max was well informed as to what Clay was up to. I think he had other sources though.
I do see Crittle as attempting to warn Clay about his increasing wealth. I don't doubt that an increase as much as Clay was receiving would trigger an IRS investigation. I wouldn't believe Max if he swore on a stack of Bibles. Crittle was Clay's ego to Clay's id. He didn't judge Clay, but he was trying to slow him down. Clay was like a kid in the candy store. He wanted everything NOW!
I don't think there's anything wrong in Clay getting what he thought were his "just desserts" but he needed to slow down and smell the roses and I for one believe that people should earn their money not manipulate others for it.
Bill H
March 23, 2005 - 01:00 pm
Scrawler, your assessment of "…a kid in a candy store" fits Clay's reckless behavior and makes me even more aware the son inherited the father's careless attitude. I realize that Clay Carter wanted to get away for a few days before giving Max his decision. But why visit his father. Even on Clay's visit, Carter Sr. displayed his lack of consideration for his son.. Rather than spend sometime with his son, he dragged Clay along so that he could still hobnob and drink with his old cronies. Even the following hang-over morning, J C Carter Sr. left Clay alone on the boat when he was invited to play cards on a luxury yacht. When Clay explained he would rather relax, the old guy replied, "Whatever" and left Clay standing there. The two of them didn't even have a chance to say goodbye..
I guess the point I'm trying to make is: Why did he visit his father in the first place? Knowing his dad, how could he expect any kind of logical information from him.
Bill H
March 23, 2005 - 01:03 pm
Oh, before I forget. I would appreciate all of you bringing some cake and ice-cream to the discussion on Friday!You see, Friday, March 25th is my birthday.
Bill H
Aberlaine
March 23, 2005 - 02:18 pm
I envisioned Crittle as a skinny older man with glasses perched at the end of his nose - one of the old time accountants who was much more comfortable using an adding machine than a calculator or computer. He was there to keep Clay honest and out of the IRS's way. Unfortunately, Clay had been given a taste of the "good live" and was greedy for more.
Funny, Clay's friends from the OPD knew when to cut and run. So there are some who aren't blinded by greed.
Cake and ice cream, it is Bill!! Or would you prefer an ice cream cake?
Nancy
Bill H
March 23, 2005 - 05:00 pm
Aberlaine, either or both would be great! Thank you.Bill H
horselover
March 23, 2005 - 05:29 pm
HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU! HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU!
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, DEAR BILL. HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU!
Grisham is perfectly correct about how the politicians are trying to subvert tort reform in every way possible. These lawyers are a major source of campaign contributions which both parties want to keep flowing. Never mind what the present system is doing to our health care system and to the rest of our social structure.
Bill H
March 23, 2005 - 05:57 pm
Aberlaine, you came close to describing Crittle. This from the story. "He (Crittle) peered over his reading glasses and gave Clay a look he'd seen before. It said, 'Son have you lost your mind?'"
Clay's old friends of OPD days did leave. Probably they were tired. As these old friends watched Clay by a plane for thirty million and hire two pilots at two hundred thousand dollars a year, and a yacht for his father,along with some of his shady doing, they started thinking of leaving.
When Clay met Ridley who proved to be very expensive, I'm not surprised these old friends figured it was bail out time. Perhaps Crittle's look wasn't far from wrong.
Horselover, Thank you for the birthday song. As I read your post, I put it to music.
Didn't the President recently a new Tort reform law?
Bill H
Scrawler
March 24, 2005 - 10:06 am
Yummy! Cake and ice cream, but I'll wait to "bite" into it -since it's only 8:58 where I am. Happy Birthday Bill!
"Nobody EARNS ten million dollars in six months, Clay," a friend warns. "You might win it, steal it, or have it drop out of the sky, but nobody EARNS money like that. It's ridiculous and obscene."
Of all the lines in this story, this is one that really got my attention. This is so true. It is ridiculous and obscene to get ten million dollars in six months - and yet people do it all the time. But how many of these people actually EARN this money? The line implies that the only way you would get that kind of money is if it were illegal. And if you did get this kind of money; how many people did you have to hurt in order to get it? The "King of Torts" to me is a modern morality tale for our times not unlike the morality tales written by Dickens for his own time.
Bill H
March 24, 2005 - 10:17 am
Scrawlery, the vast majority of people don't earn ten million dollars in six month. Obviously, Clay's friend never have heard of major league baseball players or NFL football players. Some of these players earn millions in the teens or twenties per season which equates to just about six-months. Yesterday, I heard on the sport's news program that major league baseball owner signed a shortstop for eighty-five million dollars. This must be the life of the contract. I don't believe even the insanity of major league baseball has reached the point of 85 million a season.
Bill H
Aberlaine
March 24, 2005 - 11:06 am
I'm just checking in after running a bunch of errands. I have the ice cream cake here. Everyone dig in!
Being retired and not having enough to pay my monthly bills, I see any salary with 6 zeros as obscene. I don't begrudge people the salary if they earn it, but I can't imagine a baseball player, basketball player, football player or tort lawyer honestly earning their salaries. Again, it's just greed.
I do remember some sort of tort reform law being passes. Here's what I found on the Internet: "The first major Republican victory in its efforts to achieve meaningful tort reform occurred in February 2005 when Congress approved a class action reform measure. The legislation authorizes federal courts to hear class-action suits involving over $5 million and involving persons or companies from different states. The objective in moving the suits to federal courts is to make it significantly more difficult for the lawsuits to be approved. The bill would also crack down on "coupon settlements" in which plaintiffs get little but their lawyers get big fees. It would link lawyers' fees to the amount of coupons redeemed."
Later,
Nancy
Bill H
March 24, 2005 - 01:00 pm
Nancy, thank you for your post. It motivated me to search for the new class action law changes. Here's what I found on The Washington Post.com. web site. "By John F. Harris and William Branigin Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, February 18, 2005; 12:40 PM
President Bush today signed legislation that rewrites the rules for class-action lawsuits, opening a second-term campaign he said was aimed at "ending the lawsuit culture in our country."
In a ceremony to sign the Class Action Fairness Act, which was passed by the House yesterday and became the first bill to be signed by the president in 2005, Bush vowed to work for passage of "meaningful legal reforms" to curb medical malpractice and asbestos lawsuits…."
You can read this interesting article by using the link below.Bush Signs Class-Action Changes Into Law
Just an aside: How many can you identify from the photo?
Bill H
bimde
March 24, 2005 - 08:25 pm
Bill. the only one that I can identify for sure is Senator Frist---the heart surgeon. Wonder just what his interest is in this reform???? Of course, Doctors were named as big losers in most tort cases, and in the case of asbestos cases,they got hit. I had a good friend who died at a fairly young age of asbestosis. It was not a pleasant way to go. Still, I know that there are abuses, and the lawyers make out like a bandit.That part is not right. However, for some people, tort lawyers are the only recourse they have. As for the money mentioned, I cringe when I hear of the obscene salaries that these professional sports figures make. They sure "earn" it in a short time, right?
kiwi lady
March 24, 2005 - 09:24 pm
There are partners in Accountancy firms who get 1.5 mill a year plus. I think these salaries are obscene. Nobody needs that much money to live on. They get it because their fees are off the wall! Same with lawyers in prestigious firms - their fees are off the wall.
As for sports people we have got our priorities all wrong. They do not need that much money. If they made half a million a year every year they worked say 10yrs they would still have enough to live on comfortably and heaps to invest for the time they had to give up. They get obscene payments here too even though we have only 4,000,000 people in the land! They often behave as very bad role models too.
Its true that the love of money is the root of all evil!
carolyn
Bill H
March 25, 2005 - 09:20 am
Bimde, yes, if it wasn't for the Tort lawyers advertising a class action suite, some people would not even know they were eligible for damages.Kiwi lady, these sports figures don't need that much. It is just a matter of prestige for them. If X is millions of dollars, then Y an Z want more just to prove they are as good are better than X. The same with Tort firms. It's about prestige as well as money.
Bill H
Aberlaine
March 25, 2005 - 09:51 am
We're on the last half of the book, right? My question, did anyone catch the fact that Clay had done some insider trading early on? I got an "icky" feeling, but didn't think anything of it until the end of the story.
As for identifying the people in the picture - the only one I can identify is the President. Guess I read more about our politicians than see them.
Nancy
Scrawler
March 25, 2005 - 11:17 am
As I understand it most ballplayers that receive large salaries do so on a graduated basis. When you first join a team they pay you the lower amount and than as you graduate to a higher salary you are usually traded to another team unless you have a clause in your contract that states you can't be traded.
"The King of Torts" according to a reviewer for the Yale Law journal commented that, while Grisham's approach is "badly hobbled by a cliche driven plot and a failure to support his argument with substantive, realistic criticims," the author's talent for powerful storytelling and a simple thesis "may yet move millions of "casual" readers to support serious reform of American tort law."
I thought this was an interesting back-door approach to compliment the author on his book. Although I don't consider myself a "casual" reader I would have to agree that I am more aware of the "American tort law" because I have read this book. But, I believe that although we need reform we should be careful not do so because of our emotions toward the subject. We should consider all sides of the issue.
To me the most important issue involved is the manufacture of the product. We need more "quality control" in the manufacture of our products. It might take more time to produce the product but if our products were better for it wouldn't that be worth it? Do we really need so many allergy medicines on the market at any one time?
To answer my own question I think I've learned a lot about "tort law" by reading this book and I'm happy to have been part of this discussion which gave me even more insight into the problem.
Bill H
March 25, 2005 - 03:04 pm
Nancy, yes, we are on the last half of the book. I thought Clay was doing insider trading also, and I did wonder if he was going to investigated.Scrawler, what you say about a graduated pay for ball players is true about Nation Football League players. But I'm not sure this applies to Major League Baseball players.
Scrawler, I'm more aware of Class Actions suite, also. This morning on TV I watched an attorney advertising a toll free number. It had something to do with Arthritis. My thoughts immediately flashed to the King of Torts.
Bill H
Aberlaine
March 26, 2005 - 07:07 am
Even though I'm a "dyed-in-the-wool" Democrat, I believe President Bush's agenda item for tort reform is a good one. It caught my attention when doctors (pediatricians, obstetricians) started moving out of states where liability insurance premiums were going sky-high. It's a vicious cycle of patient greed, lawyer ambulance-chasing and insurance protection. At some point, the cycle has to be stopped or our health system will fail.
As for product liability, I believe if a product fails, causing injury to an individual, that individual should be compensated for his/her injury and associated costs. Being paid for pain and suffering is ridiculous.
Nancy
Bill H
March 26, 2005 - 10:00 am
Nancy, I approve of President Bush's agenda for Tort reform. Something has to be done. On the nightly news the commentator described how a general practisiner stopped delivering babies because of mal practice awards.
Bill H
March 26, 2005 - 10:01 am
As I read Clay's reckless, perhaps childish behavior at Rebecca's wedding, I further understood the Van Horne's dislike of Clay. Just imagine crashing a wedding and having to be escorted from the hall by security! The author's continued writing of Clay's irresponsible behavior convinced me that Clay was a product of his father and mother. I believe his close associates recognized this and left. I thought Max Pace, French and the other wealthy lawyers also realized this and used him to their advantage.
I don't see how Grisham could expect the reader to accept Clay being capable of operating on this large a scale
Bill H
pedln
March 26, 2005 - 10:13 am
Bill says, "I don't see how Grisham could expect the reader to accept Clay being capable of operating on this large a scale"
I agree, Bill. I've enjoyed the book and have learned a lot about tort, through it AND this discussion. But, while within the story it seemed realistic, it was actually a fairy tale complete with fairy godmother. This complex law firm, built within a few months time? I know I'm naive, but I don't thnk this could really happen.
Scrawler
March 26, 2005 - 11:18 am
I don't know about law practices, but I do know that doctor's practices can be "here today and gone tomorrow." I used to get a lot of doctors asking me to use them for my workers' compensation patients. I used to do a background check on them and if I still wasn't satisfied I'd send my investigators to actually go out and check them out. You'd be surprised of how many just hung out there "shingle." What was even worse some of them had come from other states where they had illegal practices and had simply changed their names. On the flip side there was also those doctors who for one reason or the other simply couldn't aford mal-practice insurance in the states they had practiced in.
I came across this while doing research and thought you folks might be interested in it. As I've said before: "Let they Buyer Beware!"
Liability for direct-to-consumer advertising and drug information on the internet:
The Internet and the growing system of managed health care present opporunities and challenges not previously contemplated by the legal community or the judiciary. Manufacturers generally are liable in products liability claims for product defects, including failing to warn consumers of dangers associated with their products. For pharmaceutical drugs, a manufacturer is not liable when it warns physicians regarding the risks inherent in the products. This doctrine, the learned intermediary rule, shields manufacturers from liability to ultimate consumers based on inadequate instructions and warnings accompany its products.
Created in the 1960s, the learned intermediary rule recognized the importance of the physician in providing patients with warnings associated with prescription drugs and the limited ability of manufacturers to provide warnings directly to consumer-patients. The changing nature of the doctor-patient relationship in an era of managed care and availiability of the Internet as a resource for providing information raises questions regarding the continuing vitality of the learned intermediary rule.
The doctrine, however, has continuing validity despite the changing nature of the provision of health care. There is a general framework for limiting a manufacturer's exposure to liability in the creation and maintenance of Internet web sites. Although it is unclear whether the learned intermediary rule continues to apply to products that manufacturers advertise directly to consumers, manufacturers may take steps to prevent the imposition of liability for failure to warn.
~ Defense Counsel Journal; Oct 2001 (author: Justin Lee Heather)
Aberlaine
March 26, 2005 - 12:32 pm
Bill H & Pedlin: I agree with you that this book seemed like a fairy tale. I've read many of Grisham's books and thought this one was actually pretty shallow and quickly written. Many of his other books have more "meat" to them.
Clay personifies the words "money corrupts and power corrupts absolutely". Especially when you get them as quickly as Clay did. I actually had hoped that he'd put his money to better use. When he bought his first jet I was so disappointed with him.
Nancy
MurielMcI
March 26, 2005 - 01:31 pm
The wedding - no that did not upset me - I thought Clay was showing a sense of humour!
Max Pace had me worried from the outset - how right I was.
It all fell like a house of cards - why was this the first card to fall? Not Clay's naivete as French was caught also - this "card" is a threat for the future I think.
In the UK we do not have this system and in fact in England there is a possibility of "aggravated damages" which does not exist in Scotland - sometimes this has been portrayed as a negative as English payouts are always larger. Grisham has portrayed a house of cards with the bigger the possible payout the more readily the cards fall and the more people ready to throw in a card!
Interesting!
Muriel
newvoyager
March 26, 2005 - 04:11 pm
Are there any lawyers or legal secretaries reading these posts? It would be interesting to read their perspectives on this book and the topic of class action suits.
Is there a beneficial aspect to this practice?
Newvoyager
Scrawler
March 27, 2005 - 09:31 am
In little more than a decade, Grisham realized greater success than most writers enjoy in a lifetime. Despite such success, the former lawyer and politician remained realistic about his limitations and maintained that a time might come when he would walk away from writing just as he previously abandoned both law and politics. In his interview with Bearden of "Publishers Weekly," he compared writers to athletes and concluded: "There's nothing sadder than a sports figure who continues to play past his prime." However, well into his second decade as a novelist, Grisham seemed far from that point. Book ideas "drop in from all directions," he told Svelkey in "Entertainment Weekly." Some gestate for years and some happen in a split second. They'll rattle around in my head for a while and I'll catch myself mentally piecing it together. How do I suck the reader in, how do I maintain the narrative tension, how do I build up to some kind of exciting end?...Some of those will work, some won't."
Although, in this story I feel that Grisham's prose and dialogue are only adequate as opposed to some of his other books and his characters not very liable, I really think he tells a very excellent story and one in which the social and ethical importantance makes up for everything else.
Bill H
March 27, 2005 - 10:19 am
When a prescription drug is advertised on TV for arthritis, high cholesterol, etc, the benefits of the medication is explained in detail then in a rapidly speaking voice the adverse side effects of the drug are glossed over. You are cautioned to "...speak with your doctor to find out if the medication is right for you." Well, I often wonder if this is enough of a disclaimer to absolve the maker of the drug from any damages that the patient may incur to his/her health.
Muriel, are prescription drugs advertised this way in Scotland on television?
Bill H
Bill H
March 27, 2005 - 10:28 am
Scrawler, I have read several of Grisham's novels, and, at times, some of his personality is reflected in the characters he writes about Do you find this to be true in some of his writings? Bill H
Aberlaine
March 27, 2005 - 11:26 am
Bill H, I bet most people have tuned out the prescription ad long before the quick, quiet voice lists the side-effects and to discuss this with your doctor. I'd much prefer a written ad that I can read at my own pace.
Luckily, since none of these drugs can be obtained without a prescription, the patient must talk to their doctor. But I've never gotten a warning from my doctor about side-effects. I'm assuming (and you know what that makes her and me) that, since she has a list of the meds I'm on, she'll know if one med might interact badly with another one.
As for the liability of the advertisement, I bet that small voice talking so quickly and quietly we can barely make out what he's saying, is the part that absolves the pharmaceutical company from liability.
Nancy
kiwi lady
March 27, 2005 - 01:34 pm
I check out all meds myself as my doctor has made a couple of errors over the years. (not life threatening but painful!) You can go to the manufacturers site and do a search to find out drug information.
Carolyn
Scrawler
March 28, 2005 - 10:00 am
As a writer myself, I know that "part of the writer" can be found hidden in the author's story. Generally, we write not only about what we know, but what we fell strongly about. As a matter of fact in my short story collection that came out in 2003, I noticed after I wrote it that almost every story had an anti-war "feel" to it. I hadn't done this on purpose; it is just something I feel very strongly about. I think the Grisham's novels are the same way especially the first two or three.
One of the reasons I stopped reading Grisham was his take on the death penalty in his book "The Chamber." Not only that but to me his characters seemed to be colorless and one-dimensional. Now that I have read "The King of Torts" I may go back and read some of his other books. Although, I'm still not very happy with the main character of this story either. I guess I just can't relate to Clay Carter the same way I can get close to other main characters of Grisham's earlier books.
It's interesting that I really liked his first books very much because of his characterization and how passionately he felt about his story, but like I say after "The Chamber" it was as if he didn't put that much effort into creating his characters. However, Grisham has always told a great story. So if you like plot-driven books his are very good.
By the way has anyone here ever read his "Painted House"? I understand that this book has more of an autobiographical feel to it.
Bill H
March 28, 2005 - 11:28 am
I took most of the day off yesterday from books.Scrawler, yes, March a year ago I started reading Grisham's THE PAINTED HOUSE but I just couldn't get interested in the novel and I stopped reading it about half way through the book.
I found his THE SUMMONS a good read.
Bill H
Bill H
March 28, 2005 - 11:48 am
I found the following suggestions in one of the links in heading. Basic Rules That Would Make the System Fairer and More Efficient
The legal system should be designed to compensate those who have suffered harm and be geared toward dispensing justice, not enriching the legal profession financially.
Any damages should be proportional only to the harm caused by each party.
The same laws and rules should apply to all parties involved in a lawsuit.
There should be limits on the ability of political contributors to influence state litigation decisions.
Judges should be fair, competent, and willing to throw out frivolous cases.
What do you folks think of these suggestions?
Bill H
Aberlaine
March 28, 2005 - 12:44 pm
Bill, I'd agree with all of them, but that's like wishing for the moon. The lawyer lobby would never allow any of these ideas to become law. Those statements incorporate ethics into them, and we know that ethics is a rare and valuable commodity these days.
Nancy
kiwi lady
March 28, 2005 - 01:15 pm
My daughter tells me that ethics are becoming an important part of the curriculum in most professions these days. After the recent disgrace of large accountancy firms ethics has become a very important part of her professional examination curriculum. She sits her ACA in November which means she can practice on her own if she passes.
It is true to say that Pure Capitalism does breed the circumstances that is found in the USA today regarding the law suits. You don't find these types of suits in the UK, Australia or NZ where there is more Govt regulation and Govt run compensation schemes.
pedln
March 28, 2005 - 03:21 pm
Bill, what's the old saying --- "if wishes were horses. . . .
And as for "Any damages should be proportional only to the harm caused by each party" you're back to square one again trying to determine just how much "harm" was caused.
Scrawler, SeniorNet discussed Painted House a year or so ago. It was a book I had thought I didn't want to read and wouldn't like, but I was very pleasantly surprised, and enjoyed it very much. It's not like any of Grisham's other books. The TV version of it was also very enjoyable. What was interesting to me was that the setting was not too far from where I live and I know several people who grew up on cotton farms in that area. Their comments? -- "Nah, it wasn't like that."
Bill H
March 28, 2005 - 05:50 pm
I had hoped that Grisham would've brought Clay's mother into the story. How interesting it might have been to read what all she had to say about this. Just imagine her meeting with the Van Horn's Perhaps we would've seen the sparks flying. . I think the author missed out by not bringing her into the story. Clay's father was brought into the novel on two occasions but neither meeting did anything to interest me. I'm not sure that Carter Sr. even thanked Clay for the yacht. Does the name "Rex" have a meaning for Grisham? In some of his other stories he has a character by the name of Harry Rex a lawyer in the small town of Clanton, Mississippi that the lead character usually gets advice from.
I know that Harry Rex appeared in "The Summons," "The Last Juror,." and "A Time to Kill." Now we have Rex Crittle. in this story. I'll have to take a look at the authors biography to see if there was someone by the name of Rex in Grisham's life.
By the way, I think you would like "The Summon." It makes for some good light reading.
Bill H
bimde
March 28, 2005 - 08:45 pm
Bill, I think that the first item in the list:Compensate those who have suffered harm, dispense justice, and not enrich the legal profession financially about says it all. If that were folowed, everything else would fall in place, I think. As it is, too many lawyers are out to be "enriched", and Texas has a few who have done that, And the folks who are doing the suing are left with crumbs.
About Grisham's book "The Painted House". I read it a while back, and enjoyed it. It certainly is diffrerent from any others that he has written. I wondered, too, if it might be sorta auto-biographical. Bim.
horselover
March 29, 2005 - 12:11 am
Bill, I think your suggestions are great in theory, but it's kind of like the old Communist slogan--"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." These ideas sound reasonable, but don't work in practice because human nature requires some motivation in order to make the wheels go round. And unfortunately, as in this book, often the motivation is money or other worldly goods. The original goal of Capitalism was to try to channel these selfish motives into projects that would enhance the greater good. This does not always work perfectly as we see in these lawyers. But this book is a morality play, and since Clay sold his soul to the Devil in return for riches, he must now pay the price. I'm near the end of the book and can't wait to find out if Clay will wriggle out of the trouble he's gotten himself into and live happily ever after with Rebecca. Or whether he will land in jail for insider trading as he should (you would think a lawyer would know better). Too bad Martha Stewart did not read this book!
Scrawler
March 29, 2005 - 10:57 am
I would agree with all your statements, but I still don't think any will get to the root of the problem and that is "equality" under the law or for that matter anywhere. It is sad to say that in today's world "money" talks. Haven't you wondered how some rich guys get off doing time while the little guy gets sent to prison.
I realize that there are a lot of lawyers out there who try their best to be fair and unpartial to their clients, but the PDOs don't have the same money to spend on their investigations as does the wealthy who hire defense attornies that bring in overwhelming evidence.
I go back to the murder trial that I mentioned. While in the jury room we had to sift through boxes of defense material- very little of it had anything to do with the case. We threw most of it out, but we still had to go through it. (At taxpayers expense, I might add.) On the other hand the prosecution had only scraps of evidence.
But if the two lawyers had equal opportunity to gather evidence and present their case not only in money, but also in time I can't help wonder if it would have made a difference in the outcome of the case.
horselover
March 29, 2005 - 02:55 pm
I have finally had time to finish the book, just in time for the end of our discussion. Somehow I feel that the ending was very unsatisfying. All the loose ends were tied up, but we are left with the vision of Clay flying away to live with Rebecca, his future financed by his friends who were contributing some of the ill-gotten gains that escaped the bankruptcy. It's true, we are manipulated into thinking that Clay is a good guy at heart and really feels sorry for the people he hurt, but it should not be so easy to reclaim your soul after you have sold it to the Devil. Grisham is an excellent craftsman, but definitely does not delve too deeply into his characters. In the end, they are very one-dimensional. And even his exploration of the main issue in the book, tort reform, is only superficial. However, like Clay, he does make lots of money.
I did enjoy the book although it did get a little tedious toward the end. I mostly enjoyed the discussion where the issues were explored in somewhat more depth.
Bill H
March 29, 2005 - 03:42 pm
Horselover, My sentiments exactly. I was not satisfied with the ending either. After Clay had a visit from the FBI questioning him about his selling of the Ackerman stock, and Crittle telling him that his insurance company cancelled his coverage, Riddley wanting more money, and the jury finding for the plantif Goffman, it seemed like the house of cards was about to tumble. After all this, it seemed like the author brought the story to a close.
I believed some more lose ends could have been tied up. Maybe I missed something, but did Clay's old associates get the money back they loaned Him?
Bill H
Bill H
March 29, 2005 - 03:57 pm
Another page was borrowed from Carter Sr, by Clay's flying off into the wild blue yonder with Rebecca and leaving all the unpleasantness behind. Mother, father, and now the son seemed to be all alike.Bill H
bimde
March 29, 2005 - 08:40 pm
Right again, Bill. Like Father, like Son, and in this case, like Mother. They all fled and left the mess behind. I think that Clay got what he deserved--he lost all of his ill-gotten gains.If not for his friends, he would have wound up peniless, which is what should have happened.Pay them back? I think not. Clay is selfish. Now he has Rebecca, who gave him up once for a better offer.They deserve each other. Will she stick witth him?? Who knows.There is a lot left unsaid or undone in this book, but I enjoyed it never-the-less. Most of all, I enjoyed the posts from all of you. They made great reading, and left lasting impressions. Thanks to all, and to you, Bill--a great leader!!! Bim
kiwi lady
March 29, 2005 - 08:53 pm
As I read this book I never ceased to marvel how the love of money can corrupt. That is the biggest lesson in the book. How often do we see this in real life? Every day almost!
Aberlaine
March 30, 2005 - 07:30 am
Like many of you, I thought the book ended pretty abruptly. And the idea that, after all the awful things Clay had done, "he gets away with it" (flies into the sunset with his love and his friends' money) sickens me.
I think he should have given some jail time. There are really no consequenses to speak of. Clay goes unpunished. Easy come, easy go.
Thanks, Bill, for being such a great discussion leader. If you decide to lead any other discussions, let me know.
Nancy
Bill H
March 30, 2005 - 10:23 am
Bimde, Kiwi Lady, and, Nancy, I too thought the book ended rather abruptly Several things were left unexplained. It was brought home to me also how the love of money can corrupt a person. I suppose the author intended this. Also, Whenever I hear of class action suites I'll be a bit skeptical because this book will come to mind. I appreciate the compliments you folks gave me. Thank you.<p.
Bill H
March 30, 2005 - 10:27 am
Tomorrow brings to a close the King of Torts discussion. If anyone else wishes to make comments regarding the book or author, now is the time. Bill H
newvoyager
March 30, 2005 - 11:53 am
Thanks to all who posted their diverse opinions about "King". In some respects they were better than the book.
I like John G. as a story teller and many others must also like him, judging by the book sales. I have been disappointed with several of his endings. The ending of "The Pelican Brief" also had a slick, all loose ends tied up, hero out smarted them all theme. His last offering (see, I read them all) was dull, spending much too much time on the travels of "The Broker".
Bye all.
Newvoyager
kiwi lady
March 30, 2005 - 12:24 pm
There are times when class actions are justified such as when companies illegally dump harmful chemicals and people die. Where drug companies market drugs that have harmful side effects that they have documented but not disclosed. I am sure people here can think of other circumstances.
However the law profession in some countries has got on the gravy train and some of the suits are what I would call "mischievious" without real substance.
Thank you Bill for your leadership in this discussion. I think Grisham has got on the pot boiler roundabout and his latest books are very disappointing compared to his first four books. Its become primarily income to him and secondly a craft. He was a lawyer by profession LOL!
Scrawler
March 30, 2005 - 12:28 pm
I, too, felt very unhappy with the ending of this story. It seemed to me that in the end Clay got exactly what he wanted in the beginning - Rebecca.
I would have liked to seen Clay go through his own trial that had been pending. I realize that he got beat up by the thugs which in part did something to show Clay getting his just deserts, but that's not the way we do things in a civilized country. After all what are courts and laws for? If he'd gone through a trial, it would have been interesting if he could have gotten a fair and unpartial jury especially with all the publicity he no doubt was receiving from the press.
Although Grisham tells a good story, I think in this case he sold us short. I'm more aware of what I'm buying now because of this book, and I have to thank the author and all in this discussion for pointing out the specifics of the "tort system," but I agree with you I would have been happier if Clay had taken some responsibility for his action. Don't you think that is part of the problem these days - nobody wants to take responsibility for their actions!
I really enjoyed this discussion. Thanks one and all.
Bill H
March 30, 2005 - 11:57 pm
Today, March 31st, ends our discussion of The King of Torts. I have enjoyed reading your many posts. My thanks to all of you who participated in this discussion. Your posts made it both interesting and informative.formative.
I especially thank Muriel who traveled all the way from Scotland to join us here. If any of you other folks are from other countries, I give you a special thanks also.
I know every time I hear the phrase "class action law suites" I will think of this book and the folks who participated in this discussion.
Many thanks
Bill H
horselover
March 31, 2005 - 12:05 am
Thanks Bill! Your discussions are always interesting and collect an interesting group.
Just one final note: As some of you may have heard, Johnny Cochran died this week. To me, he and the rest of the "dream team" who defended O.J. Simpson during a trial watched every day by millions of people marked the beginning of our fascination with the law in this country. It also marked, for some of us, the beginning of the sad realization that our justice system is unfair and flawed. I hope that wherever Johnny is now, the guilty do answer for their crimes.
kiwi lady
March 31, 2005 - 12:32 am
I watched the OJ trial and was astounded that he was found not guilty. I wonder who got paid off! Thats the only way I could possibly explain the verdict. Did anyone here agree with the jury?
Carolyn
Scrawler
March 31, 2005 - 10:45 am
My guess would be that the prosecution didn't have enough physical evidence in this case or that the judge threw out a lot of evidence that was felt to be prejudicial to the defendant or that the police contaminated the evidence.
I disagree that this was the trial that changed my views on our judicial system. For me it was watching the Kevuer testimonies on a little black and white TV in the 1950s that started me asking questions.
Marjorie
April 1, 2005 - 05:30 pm
Thank you all for your participation. This discussion is now Read Only and is being archived.