|
DCBA Home Page Articles
for Legal Features
© 1996 - 2004 |
Letters to the Editor Responses to the December Letters to the Editor: In response to the letter of David W. Alspaugh commenting on our article (Commentary, October 2003 issue), while Mr. Alspaugh rightly notes that the concept of political correctness is "[t]he main thrust of the article," (p. 6, para. 2) he erroneously infers that because the commentary opens with the historical context of the Alien and Sedition Acts, that the authors believe the Acts arose out of political correctness. This is most certainly not our view and while we regret any confusion, the confusion is Mr. Alspaugh’s and not ours. Concerning his comments regarding the section pertaining to SLAPP suits, we welcome his informative input but once again question its relevance since we did not allege that SLAPP suits are the product of political rectitude. Regarding his comment to "[c]onsider the Vietnam War" (p. 6, para. 5) the Vietnam War was a matter of National political policy and not a matter of being politically correct or incorrect. Inasmuch as Mr. Alspaugh has merely jumped on the bandwagon and made a blanket statement that the presence of the Ten Commandments has nothing to do with political correctness, suffice it to say we can agree to disagree. After reading Laura M. Phillips lengthy letter in which she wrote that she ultimately "[W]asn’t quite certain of the objective of the commentary, or in the end what its intentions were," (p. 8, col.1, para. 1) the authors must confess a similar reaction to her letter. However, to the extent that the letter of Ms. Phillips, a self-styled "former hippie," (p. 8, col. 1, para. 3) serves as a defense and retread of the whole counterculture and radical peace movements of the 60’s, the authors shall leave the question of the alleged accomplishments and contributions of that era to the sober judgment of history. Robert Phillip Ward and Myrna G. Smith *********************
Dear Editor: Thank you for the thoughtful
article on good faith and fair dealing. One of the great failures of 20th
century jurisprudence was the choice of collective bargaining in preference,
and there going to right, to equity, political and legislative coercion over
legal and private remedy, in the settlement of employment contract disputes.
As will become evident as more and more employers opt for mandatory
arbitration in order to avoid or mitigate charges of discrimination pursuant
to Federal law, there will emerge opportunity to resurrect good faith and
fair dealing via suit for specific performance. For, as the progeny of
Cin-mt City Stores v. Adams, 532 US 105, 121 S.Ct. 1302 (2001) demonstrate,
the ratio decidendi in upholding such provisions in employee manuals and the
like finally dispenses with "at will", a doctrine tortured into a
stronghold for arbitrary and capricious behavior. The authors are correct.
Good faith and fair dealing, as practiced in equity and not by strike, may
still have its day in court. Sincerely, *********************
Dear Editor: I read with interest the
article by Wheaton attorney Dick Bales, with support from Dr. John De Haan
(whom I have worked with and greatly respect) in the forensic investigation
of the Great Chicago fire of 1871. While I admired the "Sherlock
Holmes-like" scientific examination of the evidence, I wondered if this
significantly post-loss investigation included the witnessed confession of
Mrs. O’Leary, obtained by a respected adjuster of the period. Mr. Robert S. Critchell of
Chicago, in his role as agent for the Phoenix of Brooklyn Insurance Company
and Peoples Insurance Company (Reinsurance) witnessed the fire firsthand and
adjusted numerous major losses stemming from the fire. Mr. Critchell
investigated the origins of the fire and reported the results of his
investigation to the president of the Phoenix of Brooklyn. A man of
established credibility and integrity, Mr. Critchell preserved his
investigation in his book, Recollections of a Fire Insurance Man. (Press of
Rogers & Hall Co. Wabash Ave Chicago 1909). "...about eight o’clock
Sunday night, the far-famed and historical lady, known as Mrs. O’Leary,
went out into her barn to milk her cow to get some milk punch with; the
cow kicked over the lamp, set the barn afire and the result was the great
Chicago conflagration of 1871." Mr. Critchell goes on to
note: "The story of the
origin of that fire is strictly true. I never saw the cow, but I did
interview the old lady and was informed by her in rather an ungracious way
that the story was true." Perhaps our space-age,
scientific expertise owes a wink and a nod to a 19th century adjuster? Very Truly Yours, |
