Abstract
This Article offers the observations, analysis, and commentary of Beatrice's chief trial counsel about some of the important issues and rulings in Anderson, the accuracy of the events reported in A Civil Action, and the misimpressions created by the book's undoubted tilt in the plaintiffs' direction. Wherever possible, this Article's effort to balance the scales relies on court records, trial and hearing transcripts, and on other actual trial materials in Anderson to present the relevant facts and events in the context in which they arose. Contrary to the erroneous impression of justice gone astray created by the book and movie, a complete and balanced view of the Anderson case reveals a properly working civil justice system that afforded the plaintiffs, at both the trial and appellate levels, with a full and fair opportunity for a trial before a jury and full and fair appellate review of the jury's verdict in Beatrice's favor.
Recommended Citation
Jerome P. Facher, The View from the Bottomless Pit: Truth, Myth, and Irony in A Civil Action, 23 SEATTLE U. L. REV. 243 (1999).
