Contents
Steven Zaillian made the film from Jonathan Harr’s nonfiction book about a real case. John Travolta plays the lawyer Jan Schlichtmann, Robert Duvall the defense attorney Jerry Facher. The film shows two sides with two strategies, the two forms of the Principle of Annihilation and Exhaustion: one seeks annihilation, the other exhaustion. And it shows what happens when the weaker side does not recognize this in time.
A case that is one size too big
Situation
Anne Anderson (Kathleen Quinlan) asks Schlichtmann to take on the cause of the families in Woburn, Massachusetts, whose children have fallen ill with leukemia or died of it. At first he declines. Then he sees an opportunity: the groundwater may have been contaminated by plants belonging to W. R. Grace and Beatrice Foods. Two large corporations with a lot of money and experienced lawyers.
Link to the principle
Schlichtmann thinks in terms of annihilation: a big trial, a big verdict, millions for the families and glory for the firm. He does not calculate how long his small firm can survive a fight that the other side can drag out.
The other side’s strategy
Situation
Jerry Facher, Beatrice’s lawyer, appears relaxed, almost indifferent. He uses procedural rules, objections and the length of the trial. The expert reports, drilling and expert witnesses that Schlichtmann needs for his proof cost a great deal of money. In addition, the judge rules against the plaintiffs on an important question.
Link to the principle
Facher does not have to win the case with a single blow. It is enough if his opponent can no longer afford it. That is exhaustion in its pure form: the costs of time hit the weaker side harder.
The firm burns through its reserves
Situation
The partners take out loans and go deep into debt. The firm’s bookkeeper, James Gordon (William H. Macy), searches ever more desperately for money. Schlichtmann turns down settlement offers. By now he is convinced that this is about more than money, and he wants to win at any price.
Link to the principle
If you are stuck in a war of exhaustion and cling to annihilation, you use up your means for an objective that keeps moving further away. The sober question of how long the firm can hold out is drowned out by conviction.
The rejected offer
Situation
While the jury is deliberating, Facher offers $20 million. Schlichtmann turns it down. The jury decides in favor of Beatrice. With Grace, the plaintiffs reach a settlement that barely covers the costs of the litigation. The partners dissolve the firm, and Schlichtmann carries on alone and eventually files for bankruptcy.
Link to the principle
In a war of exhaustion, there is often a moment when the other side offers a price for ending it. That is the moment of decision. If you miss it, you can lose everything you have fought for up to that point.
An ally with greater staying power
Situation
In the end, Schlichtmann hands over his files to the Environmental Protection Agency, the EPA. Title cards at the end report that, on this basis, the agency took action against both companies and that they had to pay millions for the cleanup.
Link to the principle
Against an opponent with deeper pockets, often the only thing that helps is an ally with even greater staying power. The agency could carry on what the firm could not sustain. So the choice of form applies not only to you but also to the question of who wages the fight.
Key takeaways
Key lessons
- Before the fight, calculate how long you can finance it.
- If your opponent is playing for time, every week is a gain for them.
- Before you are emotionally committed, decide which offer you would accept to get out.
- Look for allies who can hold out longer than you.
- Don’t confuse conviction with strategy.
Summary
“A Civil Action” shows a lawyer who plans a case as a quick, big win, and an opposing side that forces him into a long, expensive fight. Schlichtmann clings to annihilation long after exhaustion has taken over, and he loses his firm. The film makes you feel why you have to recognize the form of a conflict early and measure your means against it.
