Posted October 30:
Regarding your item on the lawsuits by John Denver's survivors (Oct.
4): my will enjoins my estate or survivors for suing any non-governmental
entity or any individual not directly responsible for my death. I had a
hell of a time finding a lawyer to draft THAT clause. --
Kevin O'Brien, Lynn, Mass.
* * *
A true story: a group of youngsters was visiting the Fort Sam Houston
Museum. A museum staff member was explaining the symbolism used in
Army insignia to identify military organizations by showing the youngsters
examples of shoulder patches. The staff member would hold up a shoulder
patch and ask them what kind of unit they thought it signified. After a
few samples, she held up a shoulder patch with a snake and a dagger on
it. "What kind of unit would this be?" she asked. Almost immediately,
one youngster piped up, "Lawyers!" -- John Manguso, Director,
Sam Houston Museum, San Antonio, Tex.
Posted October 26:
I recently read your 1993 article "It
Didn't Start With Dateline NBC" in which you documented how "60 Minutes"
had run footage that supposedly showed the propensity of Jeeps to roll
over, but which had actually been rigged to make that happen.
So it gave me a sense of deja vu to watch Dateline NBC on October
24 trying to stir up more furor against SUVs with a story about their
susceptibility to rollover accidents. They showed some old footage
of a Jeep rolling over under seemingly ordinary conditions. Do you
know whether it was the same footage you criticized in your article? --
Park Burrets, Memphis, Tenn. [No, I don't know whether
it was the same, and missed the latest Dateline. Maybe other readers
can help out -- ed.]
Posted October 19:
The cover story of the November issue of Harper's is a 15-page
transcript of a discussion among four plaintiff's lawyers -- Willie Gary,
Alexander Pires, Richard Scruggs, and Dennis Sweet -- about how to file
a class-action suit for black reparations. It's difficult to describe.
For example, Scruggs spins out a due process claim against the Federal
government -- against Congress, really -- based on a "theory" of a "continuing
constitutional violation" of blacks' civil rights, explaining: "The government
is not doing its duty. So, in essence, it's a malpractice case or
a mandamus case." There are other mystifying "theories" contained in the
article, too many to note here. Res ipsa loquitur. The
article ends with an "editor's note" to the effect that Charles Ogletree
(a professor at Harvard Law School) and lawyers from Johnnie Cochran's
firm have contacted the four attorneys named above to form a "working group"
with the "intention" of filing "a reparations lawsuit for the injustice
of slavery and its aftermath against the government of the United States."
Mike DeBow, Cumberland School of Law, Samford University (webpage)
Posted October 5:
Arguing with sketchy anecdotes isn't normally a fruitful pursuit or
a useful way to make policy. David Rubin (Oct.
3) has not given us enough facts to guess at whether the outcome was
just or fair in the case he describes. I think we could readily
find quite a few clients who felt injustly treated despite extensive lawyering
and lengthy court proceedings.
There is no doubt that small claims courts need more funding, including
money to hire court personnel and purchase technology to better assist
litigants and make the process fair and user-friendly for all parties.
I hope that concerned attorneys like Mr. Rubin will pressure their legislatures
to fully fund projects like California's innovative Small Claims Advisor
Program, which is described in an
article entitled "Small Claims Reform: A Means of Expanding Access
to the American Civil Justice System," by James C. Turner and Joyce A.
McGee. A relevant portion:
California’s innovative Small Claims Legal Advisor
Program requires each county to provide individual assistance and free
advice to small claims litigants. This program employs advisors who help
people through the small claims process by helping them prepare for trial,
providing them with informational materials, referring them to other appropriate
agencies and programs (particularly mediation programs, if available),
and by acting as their guides and teachers. The California Small Claims
Legal Advisor Program was established by law and is funded from small claims
filing fees. While this program does work to increase accessibility, it
has experienced some difficulty in meeting an increasing caseload for small
claims courts. Similarly, this promising program, which has proved to be
extremely helpful to people coming through the small claims process, has
suffered from under funding and under staffing in many locations.
The legal profession seems understandably content to keep small claims
courts in a low-tech and low-budget judicial ghetto. A 1991
study by the American Bar Association found that self-represented clients
were more likely to be satisfied with the judicial system than those using
attorneys. With expanded monetary jurisdiction, full funding, and the intelligent
use of modern technology, small claims courts can offer timely justice
and meaningful access for millions of Americans who are now closed out
of the judicial system. -- David Giacalone, columnist,
* * *
Attorney David Rubin (Oct.
3) is right to complain about a capricious decision by a small claims
court judge. But don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater; the
problem in this case is with the judge, not the entire small claims system.
Not everyone can afford to hire an attorney to protect his interests.
For many thousands of individuals and small businesses, the small claims
system is the only way to obtain justice when they have been wronged.
The fact that the small claims system does not operate perfectly in every
instance should be viewed as a reason to improve it, not to abolish it.
Furthermore, judges can make arbitrary case-deciding rulings at any
level, not just in small claims court. Certainly, the expedited procedure
of small claims court is preferable to hiring an attorney at a cost of
several thousand dollars and waiting for years before a judge makes a decision
in a case with no guarantee that the longer procedure will result in a
decision any less inane than the one related by Mr. Rubin. In either
case, of course, the victim of this incompetence has the right to appeal.
The difference is that the party who has taken the small claims route will
get its appeal sooner than the party who goes through the full trial procedure,
and that the former party will not spend more money on pursuing the case
than it expects to receive as a judgment. -- Thomas
Gordon, Associate Counsel, HALT, Washington, D.C.
* * *
more letters >>
Back to main page