A look at ugly side of tort law

This is in response to the “Business Spotlight” on June 27: “Newport

law firm holding court.”

The story shows and tells about two well-dressed trial lawyers

smiling about their new offices that resemble a basketball court --

and gloating over their hefty paychecks.

Let’s state from the start that there are some legitimate

personal-injury cases, in which the plaintiffs deserve to be

well-compensated and the lawyers deserve reasonable fees.

However, the glare of the “spotlight” does not mention the other,

negative side of uncontrolled and frivolous litigation.

Unfortunately, where we live -- Newport Beach, Costa Mesa, Orange

County and California -- is among the most litigious locales in the

nation.

You may have recently read about Ralph Nader’s ongoing plans for

an American Museum of Tort Law in his home state of Connecticut. If

this becomes reality, he owes it to the American people to show the

ugly side of tort law, the one that is abused and manipulated by

those lawyers who have done much less than a “socially redeeming”

job.

Whether Nader would be willing to devote the time and resources to

such an enormous undertaking as this -- the repulsive side of civil

justice -- is doubtful.

Here are a few humble suggestions on how the American Museum of

Tort Law should showcase the reckless abuse, gamesmanship and

degradation of our legal system by some of these social redeemers:

First, how about a Frivolous Lawsuit Room. Wallpapered in dollar

bills representing taxpayers’ money wasted on lawsuit abuse each

year, this room will be dedicated to every lawyer and litigant who

has laughed all the way to the bank. The main exhibit, encased in

plastic, would be the veritable holy grail of civil justice, the

McDonald’s cup that held the coffee Stella Liebeck spilled on herself

as she left the drive-through. She sued the company and won an

initial award of $2.7 million.

On another pedestal, let’s place the jar of chunky peanut butter a

prison inmate sued California over because he wanted the smooth

variety instead.

And, among many, many others, we should be sure to include the

six-pack of beer a woman sued her supermarket over because she

dropped it on her foot, winning more than $400,000.

The highlight of the Frivolous Lawsuit Room, though, will be a

huge digital counter that continuously tells visitors how much the

legal system has cost them so far that year. As a baseline, the

American Tort Reform Assn. estimates this cost to be $1,200 per

person, per year, for a total annual cost of $152 billion.

Surrounding the display would be such threats to humanity as a

stepladder and a football helmet, of which 20% to 50% of the cost

goes strictly to cover liability.

The next room would be the Junk Science Room. On the walls, we can

display images of all the dubious “experts” on whom personal-injury

lawyers have relied over the years to manipulate judges and juries.

The centerpiece of the room will be a statue of Tara Ransom, a young

child who relies on a brain shunt, made of silicone, to keep her

alive. Her statue would be a reminder that even though real science

has shown no link between silicone breast implants and disease, junk

science has all but driven silicone from the market, limiting Tara’s

access to the only device available to keep her alive.

Elsewhere in the room would be shrines to products like silicone

heart valves, pacemakers and vaccines that are too expensive because

of avaricious lawsuits. And finally, the room will contain a large,

clear plastic empty box, to symbolize all the life-saving products

that will never be available because of the risk of lawsuits.

The final room would be the Class Action Room. At the entrance, a

sign would read: “Class-action suits were intended to help victims.”

As visitors walk inside, they would see case summaries of famous

class actions, and a breakdown of what the victims received and what

the lawyers received. One example is the recently settled

class-action lawsuit over the size of a computer monitor screen,

where each class member received a $13 rebate toward the purchase of

$250 in new computer equipment, while the attorneys filing the suit

negotiated $5.8 million in legal fees.

Another example would be a class action against the makers of a

popular breakfast cereal over a food additive with no evidence of any

injury to consumers. The lawyers who sued the company received fees

of almost $2,000 per hour, for a total of nearly $2 million.

Consumers received coupons for a free box of cereal.

Quarterly, this writer receives a check for one penny from a

class-action suit he barely knew he was part of. The lawyers made

over $50 million. The check is un-cashable!

In conjunction with this room, we should run a side contest, in

which visitors can attempt to find the socially redeeming work in

these cases.

Nader claims his 7,000-square-foot American Museum of Tort Law

will be “a major slice of American history.” Indeed, lawsuit abuse

has, unfortunately, become very much a part of our American

legislative, executive and judicial heritage.

Let’s pray that no public funds will be used to build the museum.

The public has already given more than its fair share. In fact, after

everything Americans pay to support lawsuit abuse, the museum

admission should at least be free.

* EDITOR’S NOTE: Michael Arnold Glueck is a Newport Beach

resident.