| Health | House | News | Basics | Victims | Resources |
Commentary
There Ought to be a Law Against Secrecy Agreements
By Robert Horowitz
Those who would do nothing about the deadly insulation in some 90 percent of America's homes like to say, "If this product is so dangerous, where are the victims?" For more information about why victims often do not come forward, please see the lecture that I gave in Germany. The fact is, however, more victims are coming forward with each publication of a new article or report.
Sometimes I hear about a legal action which could set an important precedent, but then the case just seems to disappear. Not all fiberglass victims win their cases. More frequently, a settlement is offered by the defendant's counsel... with strings attached. A common requirement to receive the settlement is the signing a secrecy agreement, which permanently seals the records of the court so they cannot be viewed by the public, and prevents the injured party from ever talking publicly about their ordeals. If they do decide to talk, they can be held in contempt of court.
The secrecy agreement undermines the precedent-setting nature of our judicial system. Worse, it keeps critical information about frauds and hazards under wraps indefinitely. The time and money necessary to build a winning legal case against a faulty product is enormous. The secrecy agreement ensures this expense and agony is borne by every injured person seeking justice.
Plaintiffs in fiberglass injury cases are always at a financial disadvantage compared to the contractor, insurance company or fiberglass manufacturer who is defending. A settlement averts the intimidating prospect of a long, expensive and painful trial, and an outcome which is not guaranteed. If the plaintiff is sick, they may feel they will not live long enough to hear a verdict. The settlement, even with its secrecy clause, can be very tempting.
That is precisely why we must outlaw secrecy agreements in legal proceedings, especially for product liability cases. If secrecy agreements were illegal, no sick and despondent plaintiff would ever again be forced to sign a piece of paper which will hurt and delay justice for thousands, or even millions, of people just like them. No plaintiff ever wants to sign a secrecy agreement, they do so out of fear and exasperation.
The secrecy agreement, by its very nature, is an obstruction of justice, and should be outlawed immediately.
