Words to the Heat of Deeds

Lisa J. Sharon

In his book "Tort Wars," Joel Levin discusses the philosophical and practical aspects of the often disparaged law of tort in the United States. The book travels from the specific and farcical world of a hapless tortfeasor/victim, to the broad effects of the presence or absence of tort law on an international scale. The route of travel takes the reader through the lessons of the Bible, the philosophies of Socrates, the political discourse of the peacemonger Gladstone, and through the academic view of tort law from Professor Marshall S. Shapo. The misfortunes of a seventeen year old fast food employee, the driver of a defective vehicle, and the imaginary conflicts between billiard balls, are visited as illustrative examples of the workings of tort law to address day-to-day conflicts in which important interests are represented by both the tortfeasor and the victim.

The reader is plunged into despair over the impossibility of achieving truth or justice in a world of law populated by unintelligent judges, win-at-all-costs lawyers, litigants whose self-interest eclipses all other concerns, and uneducated juries given inadequate or misleading information upon which to base their decisions. Were the ultimate goal of the law of torts truth or justice, these failings would be its death knell, but Levin emphasizes persuasively throughout the book that the ultimate goal is neither truth nor justice--although the achievement of either may be a happy by-product of the practice of tort law--but peace.

The book treats the law of tort as an organism subject to change and evolution which creates structure and promotes democratic values, by which the minority or disadvantaged--i.e. the poor, the non-white, the disabled--can partake of the benefits of society even at the expense of the majority. The law accomplishes this not by establishing broad over-encompassing rules which encapsulate moral judgments applicable to groups (although, of course, the law does this, albeit frequently through legislation rather than tort) but by addressing each case on an individual level whereby the parties achieve some measure of satisfaction, if only that of having had their day in court, and the perceived need for vigilantism is dispelled. Over time, and in small increments with periodic digressions into absurdity, greater justice is offered to more people.

The book is a highly satisfying read on two levels. In the first instance, the reader feels in good hands. These are not the rantings of a litigator sick of the law and needing to vent (although there is some venting that offers comic relief on occasion) but the considered ruminations of a person with an interest in philosophy which has apparently endured throughout his legal career. Thus, the references often relegated to footnotes are a rich resource for further study should one feel so inclined, as well as an avenue for the author's digression into related but otherwise cumbersome areas.

The second level that offers satisfaction to the reader is in the methodical approach the author takes to his contentions whereby questions raised implicitly in the premise are thoroughly responded to in the discussion. Levin manages for the most part, to take the hand of the reader and walk her through his arguments without seeming to condescend or oversimplify. For instance, Levin divides the theories behind tort law into traditional and cost-benefit camps. He then proceeds to discuss them in terms of his Socrates-Gladstone paradigm. In doing so, Levin identifies and solidifies many of the difficulties in the law of tort that may already linger inchoate in the mind of anyone who has practiced tort law, or even given much thought to it. The reader may respond to Levin's concrete discussion of an otherwise vague concept with, "Ah yes, of course that is what has always bothered me about such and such aspect of the law."

While addressing its many flaws from the standpoint of one who has experienced them from the trenches, Levin is able to mine the jewel hidden deep within the messy law of tort and demonstrate to the reader the effectiveness of the process that removes individual conflicts from the back alleys or from large and destructive family feuds, to the courtroom where they may be dissipated or at least refocused. Thus, Levin's book leads the reader through the morass of tort law, around the inconsistencies, over the absurdities, to the ultimate conclusion that the circuitous route leads to peace. Like the golden thread extolled by the great litigator, Horace Rumpole of the Old Bailey, Levin weaves a line of redemption through his thoughtful and ultimately uplifting book.