Case study erin brockovichs action

Q2 : Do you agree with Erin Brockovich’s action ? why or why not? Yes I’m agreeing with Erin action. Erin as a legal Clerk has doing her responsibility to society. In her investigation, when she runs across some file on a pro bono case involving medical records in real-estate files, she had found that the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) is the cause of water drinking contaminator in the southern California town of Hinkley. This contaminator threatens the health of an entire community.

She finds that PG&E is responsible for the extensive illnesses that the residents of Hinkley have been diagnosed with and fights to bring the company to justice. Erin try to get support from the community on that area by signing the form letter of objection on irresponsibility action of that company, and force them to pay a claim for their wrongdoing. I support the action of Erin that tries to forward this case to the court. In find more accurate evidence, Erin had copies all related document from the water station of Hinkley even without permission by law.

Because of her effort, the society on that area giving a support to her and one of the residents in the area give her very crucial information. The man claimed to Erin to have destroyed documents at PG&E, and discovers a 1966 document that ties a conversation of a corporate executive in the San Francisco PG&E headquarters to the Hinkley station that knew the water was contaminated but didn’t do anything about it and advised to keep it secret from the Hinkley neighborhood.

This evidence was examined by a judge without a jury and PG&E was ordered to pay settlement amount of $333 million that was divided among the 643 plaintiffs. Without Erin passion, the more people who will be adversely affected by the effects of contaminants that was left. As a conclusion, Erin action should be appreciated and praised because she sacrificed her own happiness for the happiness of society.

Reference :

Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Reply