Essay Undergraduate 1,499 words

Anderson v. W.R. Grace: The Woburn Leukemia Case

~8 min read 6 sections Law · Litigation

Abstract

This paper examines the landmark civil lawsuit Anderson et al. v. W.R. Grace et al., arising from a childhood leukemia cluster in Woburn, Massachusetts. After families linked their children's illnesses to TCE- and PCE-contaminated municipal wells, attorney Jan Schlichtmann sued three industrial companies for wrongful death and conscious suffering. The paper outlines the plaintiffs' and defendants' arguments, summarizes the final judgment, and evaluates the legal and moral dimensions of the outcome. It also considers the broader difficulty of proving causation in cancer-cluster litigation and reflects on the strategic decisions made by Schlichtmann throughout the trial.

Key Takeaways

Introduction: The Woburn Leukemia Cluster: Origins of the Woburn lawsuit and case overview
Plaintiffs' Argument: Families link contaminated wells to childhood leukemia
Defendants' Argument: Companies dispute direct causation between dumps and cancer
Final Judgment: W.R. Grace found liable; Beatrice Foods dismissed
Legal and Moral Implications: Systemic barriers to winning cancer-cluster litigation
Conclusion: Reflecting on Schlichtmann's strategy and settlement decisions

✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾

What makes this paper effective

The paper follows a clear legal-brief structure — presenting each side's argument in sequence before moving to judgment and analysis — which makes the logical progression easy to follow.
It integrates multiple types of evidence (epidemiological studies, court outcomes, expert testimony) to build a well-rounded picture of a complex case.
The author demonstrates intellectual honesty by acknowledging the legal legitimacy of the outcome while simultaneously arguing its moral insufficiency.

Key academic technique demonstrated

The paper effectively uses concession-and-rebuttal reasoning: it grants that the defendants could not be conclusively linked to the children's leukemia under existing legal standards, then argues that those standards themselves are inadequate to protect public health. This technique strengthens the author's normative claim without dismissing the factual complexity of the case.

Structure breakdown

The paper opens with a narrative introduction establishing the human and legal context, then moves through discrete sections covering the plaintiffs' case, the defendants' response, the court's final judgment, and a broader critical analysis of cancer-cluster law. It closes with a personal reflection on Schlichtmann's strategic choices. References are formatted in MLA/APA hybrid style consistent with undergraduate environmental studies writing.

📘 Read the full essay guide → Build your outline → Generate a thesis → Generate citations → 📚 More Litigation examples →

Essay 1,499 words

Introduction: The Woburn Leukemia Cluster

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, after her son James Anderson was diagnosed with leukemia, Anne Anderson discovered that a number of other children in her neighborhood also had the disease. Concerned about what seemed like an unusually high number of leukemia cases, Anderson and other Woburn, Massachusetts families set out to find a possible source of their children's illness. In 1986, personal injury lawyer Jan Schlichtmann and his two partners filed a civil lawsuit for wrongful death and conscious suffering on behalf of Anderson and the other families against three companies with plants operating in the area. The lawsuit alleged that the companies illegally dumped waste containing the known carcinogens Trichloroethylene (TCE) and Perchloroethylene (PCE), contaminating two of the wells that provided the city's water supply.

Bolstered by a Harvard School of Public Health study that found a link between the contaminated wells and increased instances of leukemia, Schlichtmann and his partners soon found themselves facing obstacles created by an unsympathetic and difficult judge. Furthermore, while Schlichtmann and his partners did an outstanding job, they were no match for the army of lawyers representing the defendants. The final judgment found only one of the three accused companies liable and resulted in a financial settlement significantly less than what was originally requested. Schlichtmann filed for bankruptcy, and many of the families came away with less than $300,000 in awards (Masters, 1986).

While the final judgment may have been technically correct — based on Schlichtmann and his experts' inability to unquestionably link the companies' negligence to the children's leukemia — it was morally wrong. The jury's final decision was made without crucial evidence that Judge Skinner refused to allow the plaintiffs to present. The laws in this country were formed to protect its citizens, not its major corporations. In this decision, however, the citizens did not prevail.

5 Sections Hidden · 905 words

Plaintiffs' Argument155 words

Within a one-block area of Woburn, six children were diagnosed with childhood leukemia between 1974 and 1979, according to a 1986 article in the Harvard University student newspaper The Crimson (Masters, 1986). This is approximately 30 times the normal rate, which is four…

Defendants' Argument110 words

The defendants argued that the plaintiffs did not establish a direct link between the companies' dump sites and the water contamination. They further argued that the plaintiffs failed to show a direct…

Final Judgment230 words

In 1986, more than four years after the trial began, the jury found W.R. Grace negligent in contaminating Woburn's water supplies. However, the jury could…

Legal and Moral Implications210 words

While lawyers like Schlichtmann are glorified in the movies — a book about this case was adapted into a film with John Travolta in the starring role — in reality, American laws and legal proceedings make it nearly impossible for plaintiffs to win lawsuits against corporations suspected of committing health violations. The problem is that plaintiffs must prove a link to cancer…

Conclusion200 words

In the end, Schlichtmann should have been more realistic and less idealistic about his goals. Earlier in the trial, Beatrice Foods offered an $8 million settlement…

View Full Document

Works Cited

Anne Anderson et al. Plaintiffs v. W.R. Grace Co. et al. Defendants. No. 82-1672-S. United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. 405–416.

Gawande, A. (1999, February 8). The cancer-cluster myth. The New Yorker.

Hall, T., Minklei, N., and Sween, K. (2010). Examination of contamination: The Woburn case. Retrieved April 29, 2011, from http://woburntrial.voices.wooster.edu/

Koscielski, G. (2010, March 31). Environmental law. Case no. 1: Anderson et al. v. W.R. Grace et al. Unpublished manuscript.

Masters, B.A. (1986, February 19). SPH study to be used as evidence in Woburn toxic waste damage suit. The Harvard Crimson. Retrieved April 28, 2011, from http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1986/2/19/sph-study-to-be-used-as/

Already a member? Log in

Unlock the rest of this paper

135,000+ research papers · AI writing tools · Plagiarism & AI detection

7-Day Pass

$7.99One-time payment

Does not renew

Get 7-Day Pass

Monthly

$12.99Per month

Renews at $12.99/month until canceled

Start Monthly

Best value

Annual

$99Per year

Renews at $99/year until canceled

Start Annual

Unlimited AI writing tools
Plagiarism and AI text detection tool

Secure checkout

Plan details

Unlimited AI writing tools are for individual, non-automated use and are subject to our Terms of Service and abuse-prevention measures.

TextChecker scans: 3 during the 7-Day Pass, or 5 per month with Monthly and Annual.

Prices exclude applicable tax.

Key Concepts in This Paper

Woburn Leukemia Cluster TCE Contamination Cancer Cluster Litigation Wrongful Death Corporate Liability Causation Standard Environmental Justice W.R. Grace Jan Schlichtmann Public Water Supply