JIMMARIE C.

GUZMANA LAW 3 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION RESPONSE OF THE MOVIE A CIVIL ACTION

1. A Civil Action depicts a civil lawsuit that takes place in the United States. The portrayal of justice that the movie conveys is not just the stereotypical or deformed depiction of the legal profession and the legal system that Hollywood movies tend to portray. Instead, the movie seems to suggest that in our adversary system of law, where two opposing sides fight with the sole intention to win, there is no place for apology. This contention has a strong resonance not only in legal philosophy but also among lawyers. The two words that will best describe the movie is that it is both a REALITY and INFORMATIVE. 2. A. REALITY The movie is a REALITY because it is what is happening in our justice system nowadays. The real world of the law, this movie argues, has less to do with justice than with strategy and doesn't necessarily arrive at truth. The law is about who wins, not about who should win. The movie is more concerned with how the law works, and how perhaps the last thing you want is a lawyer who is committed heart and soul to your cause. What a person need is a superb technician. "A Civil Action" is also about the gulf between skill and justice. In the law as in chess, the better player usually wins. It has nothing to do with which is the better person. B.INFORMATIVE The Movie leads me to the idea in relation to alternative dispute resolution that ADR is better than courtroom processes in such a way that it provides for lesser opportunity cost. The Woburn case proves to be extremely expensive; it gets out of hand and has to enter the court system because the parties can't agree on a settlement and their negotiations prior to trial are highly unsuccessful. Negotiation, however, is not final hence it is crucial to relay any information during the process and bears a huge part during the trial of the case. Also, Court processes don't encourage meaningful apologies. Rather, it is clear that there is little room in the court system for apologizing because it may be treated as an admission of guilt which, in turn, may easily lead to a finding of liability. This is very unfortunate, because it is natural for people to expect an apology for the inflicted harm. Inasmuch as this can be achieved in out-of-court reconciliation processes, such as mediation, it cannot be done in the adversary system because of the risk of creating prejudice against the defendants and thus denying them the right to a fair trial. The movie depicts that defendants can be encouraged to apologize for wrongs as a means for avoiding trial altogether. A Civil Action illustrates this problem all too well. However, this might not be correct in all situations.