A Civil Action: Environmental Issues that Led to the Court Case - Essay Example

The second issue was gross poisoning and environmental discomfort caused by the ill-smelling of polluted water by the accused companies’ effluents. In May 1982, Jan Schlictmann’s law firm filed a compensation case against the responsible companies for willful and carelessness in poisoning the town’s water supply.

Grace and Beatrice Corporation, a food-manufacturing company claimed responsibility for the contamination, associated deaths, and sufferings that the locals underwent (Tisdale 32: 50). However, a court process was necessary to determine the extent and guilt of the companies involved. The civil settlement is essential to the facilitation of the cleanup and corrective measures meant to restore the fit nature of the environment. Legal Concepts and Procedures used by the Plaintiff to argue the CaseThe plaintiff presented a complaint to the court and served the accused corporations with a copy of the complaint.

Before the case filing, the plaintiff secured substantial evidence from the site before any form of interference attempt by the accused. Substantial evidence helps in demonstrating and proving to a court the sufficient link between the corporations accused and the pollution and associated deaths. The plaintiff and their lawyers reported to the EPA, a state agency that was enjoined to prove the credibility of the evidence after conducting their assessments prior. A clerk appeared and provided evidence of the W.R. Grace plant attempting to cover up the toxic dumping.

The substantial evidence offered compelled the court to drop Beatrice from the case and direct Grace Plant to cover the $ 8 million settling cost. The $8 million cost was meant to facilitate the cleanup and corrective measures for the local community that filed the complaint. The settlement leads to content and peaceful coexistence between the locals and the industries operating within the area. I agree with the ruling since only the guilty corporation bears the cost of settling its mess. Dropping Beatrice from the case was fair and just since there was no substantial evidence for their victimization.

The plaintiff (s) prepared substantially for the case by accumulating credible evidence to defend and prove their case. In 1996, the court based its ruling on Romer v. Evans case based on justified and substantial evidence supplied (Schacter 392). Victimizing Beatrice Corporation could be unfair since the company was not involved in the mess that the plaintiff forwarded.