 |
Lawsuit Results Often Distorted
by Charles C. KellerLegal authorities have often been dismayed by the media reports and resultant public perception of the size and outcome of lawsuits. The reality is often far less flamboyant. A recent study by the American Bar Foundation (ABF) of distorted depictions by the media between 1990 and 2000 is instructive. The study concentrated on employment discrimination cases, but the results may apply as well to commercial, accident and other kinds of litigation (where one study found mean jury awards in media-reported cases was $1,547,000, as opposed to actual mean awards of $408,000 in federal courts and $51,000 in state courts). Employment discrimination cases usually involve claims of discrimination based on ethnic, racial, gender, disability or age factors. A broad array of federal, state and municipal laws and regulations are involved. These cases are tried in federal and state courts and agencies, such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). They may be initiated by individual claimants, government lawyers, or public interest agencies and attorneys. The exaggeration in media accounts, even if unintended, occurs both in plaintiff victories and the size of jury awards. Plaintiffs prevailed in 32% of actual cases, but in media reported cases, Plaintiffs won in 85% of adjudicated cases and 98% before juries. Moreover, inflation in the amount of awards and verdicts is dramatic. The actual median jury award in U.S. District Courts was $150,000, but for media-reported cases, it was $1,100,000. This inflation is more than seven times the actual award. Even the identity of plaintiffs is often misrepresented. Media reports list the EEOC as complainant 15% of the time, whereas it is in only 3% of cases, actually. Another misleading factor is the repetition in reporting the few cases picked up by the media. Over-reporting a few large cases has a particularly adverse effect on public perception and understanding. The ABF study's authors concluded "The media representation of employment discrimination litigation and outcome can only be described as a misrepresentation of what happens in court." Do these demonstrated discrepancies in the reporting of employment discrimination cases actually cause any mischief? The researchers concluded they did on at least three levels. First, the media is an important source of information that shapes people's understanding of the law. They influence real-life expectations and decisions. An impression of easy, frequent and large awards shapes the legal conscience of the public. It builds false expectations. Secondly, media accounts are used by business and professional decision makers to create and justify workplace practices. This can range all the way from personnel policies to insurance decisions. Media portrayals are used to create markets for products and services which may be unnecessary. Employee morale may be undermined by media accounts, and on the other hand, employers tend to overreact to the risk of employment practices. Governmental response by legislation and regulation to public perceptions is yet a third result of media versions of employment discrimination cases. Political leaders not only read and view the media, but they listen to constituents. A misled public can be a force for change, even in the wrong direction. What is the answer? Exaggeration, inflation and other misleading information extended through varied types of litigation (medical malpractice, for example) seriously exacerbates the public's misconceptions. Obviously, more responsible media reporting of the legal and judicial process in the United States is required. The media must be guided by more than commercial factors. But an informed public is not limited for its information to the commercial media. Our clients are always free, even encouraged, to address their questions on the legal process to responsible professional bodies like the Pennsylvania Bar Association, or the local county bar association. Yes, you can even consult with your Peacock Keller attorney! |
 |
|
|
Home ·
About the Firm ·
Attorney Directory ·
Practice Areas ·
News and Events ·
Contact Us · © 2006 Peacock Keller & Ecker, LLP, 70 East Beau Street, Washington, PA 15301 · Phone: (724) 222-4520 or in PA: 1-800-242-8897 · Fax: (724) 222-3318 · Terms and Conditions |
|