Bork on Court Dramas

* Former Judge Robert Bork says “Court Movies Don’t Mimic Life” (Commentary, April 5). Well, neither does his article. Bork must not know many plaintiffs’ lawyers if he can show such an incredible bias against them. How can he get away with such a sweeping generality?

Maybe he has not had professional contact with plaintiffs’ lawyers. (Bork’s background is as a professor and a judge, so I bet any personal contact with lawyers for the “little people” was rare. He probably has underlings do that.) I practiced law 10 years, defending large auto companies from product liability suits. I met many plaintiffs’ lawyers. Only one was truly the sort of money-grubbing lowlife described by Bork. And that lawyer was from a large law “corporation” (owned by himself) that files class-action lawsuits all over the country.

The vast majority of plaintiffs’ lawyers I worked against were indeed noble and selfless, in it for justice for the little people they represented. We enjoyed friendly and vigorous debates but I always believed their priority was “avenging wrongs against the little guy.” Sure, they made a good living in the process, but that is what product liability is all about.

I’m glad Bork didn’t make it onto the Supreme Court. Just think of the corporations he could have protected against these avengers.

KATHLEEN J. SMITH

Ojai

* No doubt because of its remarkable success at the box office--not to mention its positive portrayal of plaintiffs’ attorneys--Bork attempts to cite the movie “Erin Brockovich” as an example of Hollywood productions that he claims routinely “mischaracterize the legal process.”

The fact is, not one of the participants in the case dramatized in the film--not the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs’ attorneys, the judge, or even any of the defendants--has questioned the movie’s accuracy. So aside from venting his obvious hostility toward lawyers who dare challenge corporate greed, what is Bork talking about?

ERIN BROCKOVICH

Westlake Village