A Civil Action

Book Author: Jonathan Harr
Report Author: Greg Alexander

Book Summary
A Civil Action is a true story of an epic courtroom showdown. Two of the nation’s largest corporation’s stand accused of causing the deaths of children. Representing the bereaved parents, the unlikeliest of heroes emerges: a young, flamboyant Porsche-driving lawyer who hopes to win millions of dollars and ends up nearly losing everything-including his sanity.
A Civil Action is the searing, compelling tale of a legal system gone awry- one in which greed and power fight an unending struggle against justice. Yet it is also the story of how one man can ultimately make a difference.

Major Points Made By Author
The author makes several points in the book about the inner working of our legal system and in essence this is what the book is about. For example, personal injury lawyers are basically commission based sales people which is something I did not know prior to reading the book. They accept cases or decline them based in whether they think they can get a settlement out of the defendant. They prepared the case, which can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars or even millions, of which they put up themselves, and strike a deal with their client that says if they win they get 30-40% of the settlement plus expenses. These lawyers have a very high risk tolerance and take on cases at great personal risk. Another example of the inner workings of our legal system is that the companies being sued pursue a time strategy. This means they realize the lawyers are assuming the costs to pursuer the case and make some judgments on when they think the firm will run out of money. After they have a time frame in mind they go about a legal strategy to push everything to that time limit in hopes the lawyers just simply can not go on and either walk away of accept a very small settlement just to recover some of the expenses.

The book was highlighted by Fortune in the negotiations section of our list because in essence the entire legal profession, at least the civil portion of it, is one giant negotiation. Each party pursues information to better their negotiation stance and create leverage over their opponent to extract a maximum outcome. They use the other players in the legal process as pawns to this end. Judges, jurors, key witnesses, expert witnesses, legal clerks, clients, scientific researcher, etc are really only there for one thing and that is to help build the negotiation position of either side.

The pursuit of the truth does not happen. It is the pursuit of the settlement of lack there of that is the driving factor.

How Are Major Points Applicable To Self
There are several points made in the book while telling the story that really struck me. Not in any order of importance they are as follows:

• Risk and reward are directly correlated in every part of life. The main character in the book Jan Schlichtmann, was/is an extremely wealthy lawyer who earned every dime he ever made by taking on huge risks. His story was one of life in corporate America with a safe job, safe income, and an otherwise normal existence. This was not satisfactory for Jan or his group of associates. Yet, what separated Jan was his courage to take on the risk and go after what he wanted which was wealth while doing good. In his view, anything other than that was simple getting by and a waste of a life. This is applicable to me in that I need to get a better understanding of my risk/reward ratio and make sure that I am being true to it. I think a lot of people wish for things but never actually think through what it will take to get them and answer the question of what are they willing to risk to obtain it.
• Success can not be had unless 1,000% of a person is committed to obtaining it. In the story Jan had many contemporaries who had achieved a level of success that was significant but anywhere near what Jan had achieved. The difference was that other lawyers spread their risk across many cases and played the odds. They figured out the financial ratios of winning and loosing some cases and matched their expenses to it, always coming out ahead. Jan did not do that. He took three cases per year and would work exclusively on one case at a time not moving on to another case until the current case is settled. An all or nothing position. This is why he never lost a single case. He did not play the odds. He bet the farm on one deal at a time. Quote:” Being in trial, Schlichtmann once said is like being submerged in deep water for weeks at a time. The world above became a faint echo. War, scandal, and natural disaster may occur, but none of it seems to matter. The details of the case occupy every waking hour and usually intrude into dreams as well.” The great success stories whether in business, sports, politics, religion, etc. all have this in common. The person in pursuit of their dreams achieves them because their entire life is consumed with this singular focus. Everything else is removed and rendered insignificant.
• Big stakes are the only thing worth going after. If you believe in the two previous points, risk/reward ratio and singular focus, and are willing to live this way then it better be for game changing results. Why would one risk so much and live so dedicated for an incremental gain? The main character applied his unique legal approach to billion dollar cases with the greatest potential. I think people, me included, spend considerable time pursuing incremental improvement in life. This is a waste of time. The one commodity we all have a definitive amount of is time. We are all born, grow, mature, and die. There is no getting around this. How we use the few precious moments we have here on this earth determines the progress made? It take just as much time and effort to go after incremental gain as it does for revolutionary gain. Therefore, logically, it make zero sense to pursue incremental gain. I never really looked at it this way until I read this book.
• The only true way to measure whether or not the payoff is a big enough stakes is to measure how absurd the general view of it is. Each profession, society, family, or whatever has some kind of herd mentality. For some reason, over the years, conventional wisdom was developed and it has become understood by all that pursuit of something inside of the conventional wisdom make sense. However, things inside of the conventional wisdom are almost always incremental gains. They do not concern themselves with big stakes. Jan used as a gauge on what cases to take how many people he spoke to about it that told him he could not win. In looking at a case, if enough people told him now way and recommended running from it then he took it. If when looking at a case the majority of the people he spoke to suggested taking it and could offer views on how to win it then he passed. He believed the sure thing was an incremental gain and he was not after the incremental gain. The best things in life are those hardest to get. He wanted the very best life could offer and realized he could only get them by taking on the hardest possible cases with the lowest odds of victory.
• Game theory in negotiations works best if you follow the four points above. Take big risks, commit yourself 100% to them, big stakes make the fight worth it, and be a contrarian and don’t follow the herd. This allows for the exercising of the number one tactic in game theory, unpredictability. According to the game theorist, the more unpredictable you can be the better and I agree all the way. In A CIVIL ACTION the main character was a game theory master. The corporations he went after could not understand why he would take a case, could not believe it was his only case and he bet the farm on it, and that this approach flew in the face of conventional wisdom. This made him very dangerous but no one could understand him. He was unpredictable before they even met him. This dramatically improved his negotiation position and I believe in some of the cases he won prior to even showing up. The corporations where scared to death.
  

How Are Major Points Applicable To Group

• My recommendations for the group would follow the recommendations I have made for myself above. First, I would calculate the risk/reward ratio you have for yourself. I would ask yourself the following questions: how much of my net worth am I willing to risk, how long can I go without a paycheck, am I willing to dramatically reduce my life style if I had to, can my relationships withstand the massive strain something like this might put on them, how much do I care about what people in my life think about my decisions, am I the kind of person who before jumping into something I need to have a plan b, am I willing to start all over again if I fail?
• Second, have I calculated and fully understand the differences between incremental gain and game changing gain? Do I understand that the amount of time needed for both is roughly the same? Am I pursuing something that if I achieve it results in a truly worthwhile life changing effect? Are the stakes big enough considering the risks I am willing to take?
• Third, I would try and figure out what 100% commitment meant to me. It means different things for different people. According to our protagonist in A CIVIL ACTION it means only one things and that is complete submergence. Everything else in life does not matter. Singular focus taken to the point of dysfunctional. Personally, I have been there before, particularly during the late 1990’s at EMC. Health, fun, friends, family, etc all took a back seat to maximizing what I thought to be a once in a life time opportunity. This involved 7 days work weeks for a few years. This period of my life changed my course forever and looking back on it with the benefit of hindsight I am glad I did it. To me, the pay off was worth it. I emerged from it with a reward in proportion to the sacrifice. Would I do it again? I am honestly not sure. I think so if it thought the reward was worth it. However, I truly believe that unless 100% commitment I put into something then success will not be had. My recommendation is to figure out what 100% commitment means to you.
• Fourth, take an inventory if you are following the herd and playing by conventional wisdoms rules. If you are, then incremental gain is all you will ever receive. Revolutionary gain only comes from swimming against the current, taking a hard right when everyone else if going left, buying when others are selling and selling when others are buying, etc. Being unpredictable with yourself and those around you in most situations is a great strategy.

Recommended Other Readings
The subject of this section of the list is negotiations. The best book on this subject I have ever read is “YOU CAN NEGOTIATE ANYTHING “by Herb Cohen. It was written several years ago, is short, and its lessons are implementable. According to Herb, the three critical inputs in any negotiation are power, time, and information. Who has the perceived power and how can this be changed? Who has better information? Who is under what time pressure and what are the consequences? This is a must read for anyone interested in becoming a better negotiator.