Re: Erin Brockovich

[Robert A Scott <bobscottchp@juno.com>]

On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 21:52:23 -0600 (CST) "D. Kosloff"
<dkosloff@ncweb.com> writes:
>According to Slate e-magazine, the Wall Stree Journal op-ed page for
3-28-00
>carried a column arguing that although Erin Brockovich is an enjoyable
>movie, the real woman wasn't much of a scientist. 

	Then from FINDLAW, this comment:

A sequel in the making
Brockovich's Work Is Just Beginning
ABC News

In the No. 1 hit Erin Brockovich, many moviegoers are seeing how a brash
young legal secretary forced Pacific Gas & Electric Co. to pay a record
$333 million settlement for poisoning the water in a small California
desert town. But the movie's story of environmental villainy is only the
beginning of the legal and public relations nightmare Brockovich has
created for the utility company. A bigger, broader lawsuit is headed to
trial in November against San Francisco-based PG&E and one of its main
suppliers.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/business/DailyNews/brockovich000327.ht
ml
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

	So, any comment?  The real problem with settlements is that the
assumption from the public's perspective is that the plaintiff is
absolutely right.  Although the short term cost may appear to be greater
when the company litigates, the long-term cost is increased many times
over, because the next case for another company has to be litigated all
over again.  If the companies pooled their resources and litigated this
stuff, then the precedent would be established against the plaintiff
cases.  OR, is it possible that the company is afraid there may be more
truth than fiction in the plaintiff's allegations?

Bob Scott, RPO 
Roger Williams Medical Center
Providence, Rhode Island
bobscottchp@juno.com
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html