THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1997, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Thursday, January 23, 1997 TAG: 9701230029
SECTION: DAILY BREAK PAGE: E6 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Book Review
SOURCE: BY ROSS C. REEVES
LENGTH: 85 lines
IN ``NO CONTEST: Corporate Lawyers and the Perversion of Justice in America,'' Ralph Nader, the quintessential crusader, joins with fellow consumer advocate Wesley Smith to expose corrupt practices of what they choose to call ``corporate lawyers.''
In normal parlance, the term means business lawyers who are not litigators. Nader and Smith, on the other hand, mean any attorneys who represent ``big business'' as defense lawyers in tort (civil liability) cases. This nuance is important and reveals the authors' intent to take the steam out of tort reform (which thus far has focused primarily on seemingly outrageous plaintiffs' verdicts) and direct attention instead to misconduct by lawyers who defend ``big business.''
Nader has always been a fact and figure man, and ``No Contest'' painstakingly documents every recent instance of corporate misbehavior. In a chapter right out of today's newspapers, the authors chronicle cases in which corporations have purged their files of embarrassing documents in anticipation of possible litigation. Another blast is aimed at confidentiality agreements, under which highly publicized cases end in a shroud of silence that purportedly keeps product defects out of the head-lines.
Nader and Smith also take corporations to task for imposing arbitration on consumers and for filing so-called ``SLAPP suits'' - attempts by big business to stifle public-interest litigation by countersuing the plaintiffs. They even shed a few crocodile tears for corporations that suffer from inflated bills and overworked files. Needless to say, what some lobbyists refer to as reforming the tort system, the authors infelicitously call ``tort deform.''
Some in the legal profession will probably see ``No Contest'' as a ``how to'' book, but the vast majority will view the authors' ``exposes'' as aberrations or overdramatizations. ``No Contest'' is flawed as a serious call for reform, not because of what it says but because of the pains it takes to avoid any semblance of balance.
Lawyers who defend businesses are ``corporate lawyers,'' but plaintiffs' lawyers are not, even if they represent corporations. The most notorious case of document destruction cited by Nader and Smith was one in which the victim as well as the perpetrator was a corporation; yet only the defendants were represented by ``corporate lawyers.''
One of the examples cited as evidence that corporate lawyers run up litigation costs to extort settlements involved a corporation on the other side. It nevertheless proceeded because the plaintiff's lawyers valiantly proceeded on a contingency basis. Were these not ``corporate lawyers''?
Similarly, Nader and Smith lament ``corporate lawyers'' who mount tenacious defenses but offer no alternative for a defendant faced with a demand for millions of dollars in punitive and speculative damages. They take pains to point out the profits of every corporate defense firm mentioned but do not once mention (much less question) the propriety of multimillion-dollar contingency fees earned by plaintiffs' attorneys.
Which brings us full circle to Nader's agenda, made clear in his recent presidential campaign. Big business has too much power over consumers and society in general, the argument goes. Tort suits effectively regulate the marketplace and restore power to the people. By defending cases, even by lawful means, corporations insulate themselves and ``pervert injustice.''
Nader and Smith have prodigious research talents, and much of their criticism of tort reform initiatives is right on the mark. A greater service would have been performed if their skills were applied in an even-handed analysis of what is right and what is wrong with our legal system, and what is unfairly criticized in the tort reform debate and what is properly called into question.
There are a number of excellent books on this topic, including Jonathan Harr's ``A Civil Action,'' Peter Huber's ``Galileo's Revenge'' and Mary Ann Glendon's ``A Nation Under Lawyers.'' None is flattering to ``corporate lawyers,'' but each is free of the demagoguery that dilutes the impact of ``No Contest.'' MEMO: Ross C. Reeves is a corporate attorney for Willcox & Savage, P.C.,
in Norfolk. ILLUSTRATION: AP FILE PHOTO
Ralph Nader sets out to expose corrupt practices of corporate
lawyers.
Graphic
BOOK REVIEW
``No Contest: Corporate Lawyers and the Perversion of Justice in
America''
Authors: Ralph Nader and Wesley J. Smith
Publisher: Random House. 370 pp.
Price: $25.95