In Praise of Litigation

by Alexandra Lahav

While the right to have one's day in court is a cherished feature of the American democratic system, alarms that the United States is hopelessly litigious and awash in frivolous claims have become ubiquitous. According to this view, litigation wastes precious resources, stifles innovation and productivity, and corrodes our social fabric and the national character. Calls for reform have sought, often successfully, to limit people's access to the court system. Alexandra Lahav's In Praise of Litigation provides a much needed corrective to this flawed perspective, reminding us of the irreplaceable role of litigation in a well-functioning democracy and debunking many of the myths that cloud our understanding of this role. Exploring cases involving freedom of speech, foodborne illness, defective cars, business competition, and more, the book shows that despite its inevitable limitations, litigation empowers citizens to challenge the most powerful public and private interests and hold them accountable for their actions. In Praise of Litigation shows how our court system protects our liberties and enables civil society to flourish, and serves as a powerful reminder of why we need to protect people's access to justice.

Genres: Law

232 pages, Paperback

Published September 1, 2019

Reviews

[Brooke Salaz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Important and accessible work discussing the critical function litigation serves in fostering democracy. She addresses some of the misconceptions or unproven beliefs that we are an overly litigious society awash in frivolous lawsuits and argues that instead this important right has been eroded over time. Lahav discusses the access to information and transparency that is unavailable through any other avenue, the way debate is encouraged about what constitutes a just society, problems of unequal resources to pursue litigation and possible solutions, erosion of the rights of prisoners, a lot of food for thought in this slim volume. Very worthwhile.

[Ginny · Rating 1 out of 5]

This was a horrible book. It read like a high school term paper. There were references to important cases and I appreciate that (that was not the term paper part). However, the writer was so sophomoric it was a chore to read.

[Robert Whitehouse · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not exactly what Roy Cohn would have written.

[sam hernandez · Rating 3 out of 5]

we do be needing more litigation tho,, rip trials

[!Tæmbuŝu]

Recommended by The Complete Review