IndexA civil role modelAnalysis of the filmConclusionA civil role modelThe word civil carries a lot of weight. The usage must be carefully considered when placed in a sentence or sentence. Civil means a wide variety of things. It can be defined as a way to be respectful of the forms required for good breeding. It can also be a means of satisfying the needs and affairs of the general public. However, the latter of the two definitions can also be extended to include a definition of the private rights and remedies required by an action or suit. The point is that the word civil has a broader meaning that has been embraced by our American legal culture. It is the premise that the law exists to serve the people and lawyers are nothing more than mere guardians of the law. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Film AnalysisThese are the thoughts that were considered while watching A Civil Action in class. Throughout the case, many concerns have been raised about our legal culture. For example, was the search for money so great that it overshadowed the objectives of the case? If the testimony was so technical, was it right for the judge to stop the trial at the point he did, with the questions he wrote? This doesn't even include the degrees of separation that exist from the actual story. Is what was portrayed by the speakers and the film an accurate representation of the case? However, the more important question is whether or not the chief lawyer's actions were done for the public good or out of lust for money. The film itself raises many questions. One of the most intriguing is whether Jan Schlichtmann's drive is money or duty? The film's point of view is clear. Travolta's character starts out with a very profitable malpractice law firm. He continues to provide the field and his opponents with those little tricks that allow him to take home the money. But is it always possible to maintain such a level of superficiality? Early in the film Schlichtmann tells Anne Anderson that money from corporations' deep pockets will be the excuses they are looking for. He doesn't care about their feelings and continues on with the path of trying to get the large sum of money. It was when he told her that money would be all the forgiveness she would need, a great injustice was done not only to Anne Anderson, but to legal culture. It was at that moment that Schlichtmann was no longer a law enforcement officer. First of all, civil action is an action for the public good. Tax compensation for those who have suffered is not a public good. However, if it can be ensured that such violations never happen again, this is a public good. This would be a civil action to help the general public and secure their rights in the law and in providing a healthy environment. Furthermore, Jan should have taken the opportunity in meetings with Anne Anderson to explain to her how money would be the excuse she was looking for. For starters, an explanation was needed as to what kind of apology he would receive. Jan should have made it clear that there would be no verbal communication of apology from WR Grace and Beatrice. If there had been an apology, both companies would have openly admitted their guilt and filed thousands more lawsuits. Furthermore, it was Jan's duty as a lawyer to convey to his clients that an apology in the form of money is sufficient and effective. Companies don't want to lose money and so it serves as an excuse and punishment. If Anne Anderson was looking for someone to take the blame and clean up the mess, this was it?
tags