How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Naturel Rivera Your Own Question
Naturel Rivera
Naturel Rivera, Academic Writer
Category: Homework
Satisfied Customers: 10
Experience:  BA in Spanish, MA in the Old Testament. Eight (8) yrs. in academia, 7 mos. as pro academic writer.
Type Your Homework Question Here...
Naturel Rivera is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

watch and review the movie Erin Brockovich about the law and

This answer was rated:

watch and review the movie Erin Brockovich about the law and apply the issues we have covered this semester. For example, a movie about crime would require the reviewer to discuss some of the crimes, define them and discuss whether the movie accurately included the elements as reflected in the text.

The paper is to be no more than 2 pages double spaced with 12 point font and one inch margins.

I need this back by next saturday night. 06/05/09

                               Erin Brockovich:
               An Analysis from a Legal Perspective

     Erin Brockovich is a movie about the woman of same name, played by Julia Roberts. Brockovich heads up the impromptu legal research team at the law office of Ed Masry, a sharp but understaffed small-time lawyer in California’s suburb of Hinckley. Brockovich and Masry uncover a long litany of illnesses that their plaintiffs suffer, due to a large company’s negligence which employs most of the town of Hinckley and its surrounding environs. The main premises of the movie include the three ideas of negligence, demurs, and binding arbitration.

The negligent company, PG&E (Pacific Gas & Electric), knowingly allowed the chemical substance hexavalent chromium to slip into the ground water of Hinckley for 14 years (all the while telling the townspeople that hexavalent chromium was good for them). This concept of negligence includes the fact that an entity must be acting in an improper manner according to how one of the entity’s parties would be normally treated. Additionally, an entity that is considered negligent is not acting with the duty of care required of itself.

Ultimately, in order to see if they had a case, Brockovich and Masry go to a hearing to file complaints with the court. PG&E submits demurs on all 84 complaints, basically denying that they have any fiscal responsibility--when in actuality their financial responsibility to the people hurt by their policies range between $50 and $400 million total. The judge sides with the plaintiffs in the hearing, stating that he was disturbed by the fact that there was evidence which suggested PG&E contaminated the groundwater and then told the people of Hinckley that hexavalent chromium was a beneficial substance.   In the end, the judge warned PG&E that they should get ready to go to trial.

PG&E lawyers come to Masry’s firm offering a settlement of $20 million in a lump sum for the 634 plaintiffs who are involved in the would-be class-action lawsuit. Brockovich counters that $20 million is insufficient considering the suffering that the people of Hinckley have gone through, and it would not be nearly enough money to give each plaintiff a fair settlement. At this point there is still no smoking-gun document which ties PG&E in Hinckely to the corporate PG&E office headquarters.
In the midst of obtaining signatures from the required 90% of plaintiffs for binding arbitration, Masry explains to the plaintiffs at a town hall meeting that binding arbitration is the the best way to get everyone some money quickly. Getting into a lawsuit with PG&E could be dragged out for years, and then the plaintiffs would never see their money, some of them being too sick. Masry explains that binding arbitration is decided by a judge, not a jury, and that there is no appeal. Ultimately, Brockovich and Masry are still short by over 100 signed documents from the plaintiffs. So, Brockovich goes door-to-door obtaining the required signatures.
It is around this point that Brockovich meets one man, a Charles Embry, while she is picking up coffee from a local bar. Embry starts talking to Brockovich and mentions he has information about PG&E’s activities. Embry gives Brockovich a document stating that PG&E corporate knew about the hexavalent chromium being harmful since 1966, effectively linking PG&E in Hinckley to PG&E corporate offices.

In the end, a judge awards $333 million to the plaintiffs. PG&E resolves to line all of its ponds. Erin Brockovich explains the concepts of negligence, demurring, and binding arbitration.

Customer: replied 8 years ago.

I will accept but want to know if this is your work or copied from the internet. We have to turn our assignments in to a site called Turitin which can determine is something is totally from the must have 75% your own material...let me know. Otherwise this looks great.



You need to spend $3 to view this post. Add Funds to your account and buy credits.
Naturel Rivera and other Homework Specialists are ready to help you