The Steel Kiss

“The spring was a convenience, not a necessity.”

Rhyme liked this one too. Double-barrel legal theories. “They should never have added a spring. Workmen could unlatch the panel and use a hook to pull it up, or just lift it. Good.”

The attorney got a call on his mobile and listened for some time, asking questions and jotting notes in his perfectly linear handwriting.

When he disconnected he turned to Rhyme, Archer and Cooper. “I think we may have something here. But to understand it fully, you need some background in the law.”

Not again…

Rhyme nonetheless lifted a please-continue eyebrow and the lawyer launched into yet another lecture.

“Law in America is a complicated creature, like a platypus,” Whitmore said, removing and cleaning his glasses once again (Rhyme could only think of them as spectacles). “Part mammal, part reptile, part who knows what else?”

Rhyme sighed; Whitmore missed the impatience waft and kept up the narrative. Eventually he got to his point: The Frommer case would be largely determined by “case law,” not legislative statutes, and the court would look to precedent—prior similar decisions—to decide if Sandy Frommer could win a judgment against Midwest.

With what hovered near enthusiasm in his voice, Whitmore said, “My paralegal, Ms. Schroeder, found no cases where escalators were considered defective because of the lack of interlocks. But she did unearth several cases of heavy industrial machinery—printing presses and die stampers—in which liability was found when the devices continued to work after safety guards were moved or access panels opened. The facts are close enough to support a finding that Mr. Frommer’s injury occurred because of a design defect.”

Archer asked, “Is it possible to find escalators made by other companies that do have an interlock switch?”

“A good question, Ms. Archer. Also researched by Ms. Schroeder. I’m afraid, though, that the answer is no. Because Midwest Conveyance seems to be the only escalator manufacturer on earth that makes a product with the ill-chosen feature of a pop-up access panel. However, she did find an elevator manufacturer whose cars have a cutoff—to apply the brakes in the event the car moves when a worker is in the shaft with the access panel open.”

“And that would be a good case to cite,” Archer said, “since ‘escalator’ sounds a lot like ‘elevator.’ ”

Impressing Whitmore once again. “It does indeed. I’ve found there’s an art to subliminally guiding the jury to favor your client. Now, again, I don’t intend to go to trial but I’ll include a reference to those cases when I contact Midwest Conveyance about settlement. Now we have our theory. A sound one. A good one. I’ll spend the next few days preparing the complaint. After we file I’ll subpoena the company’s engineering records, history of complaints, safety reports. If we’re lucky we might find a CBA memo that shoots them in the foot.”

Archer asked what that was; apparently her TV show legal education had failed her on this point. As for Rhyme, he had no clue either.

Whitmore added, “Cost-benefit analysis. If a company estimates that ten customers a year will die because of its carelessness in building a product and that it will have to pay out wrongful death judgments of ten million dollars in compensation but that it will cost twenty million dollars to fix the problem ahead of time, the manufacturer may choose to release the product anyway. Because it’s economically more sound.”

“Companies actually make that calculus?” Archer asked. “Even though they’re signing death certificates for those ten people?”

“You may have heard of U.S. Auto. Not too long ago. An engineer wrote an internal memo that there could be gasoline leaks, resulting in catastrophic fires, in a very small percentage of sedans. It would cost X amount to fix it. The management decided it was cheaper to pay the few wrongful death or personal injury judgments. And they went with that decision. Of course the company’s out of business now. The memo came to light and they never recovered from the public relations disaster. The moral of the story, of course, is—”

Archer said, “To make the ethically right choice.”

Whitmore said, “—to never commit decisions like that to paper.”

Rhyme wondered if he was joking. But there was no smile accompanying the words.

Whitmore continued, “I’ll assemble information on Mr. Frommer’s earning potential—how he would have returned to a white-collar job like he used to have. Managerial. To increase our claim for future earning potential. I’ll take depositions from the wife and his friends, former fellow workers. Expert medical witnesses on the pain and suffering he experienced. I want to hit Midwest with everything we can. A case like this, I believe, they’ll do whatever they must to avoid trial.”

His phone hummed and he glanced at the screen.

“It’s Ms. Schroeder, in my office. Maybe some new cases we can use.” He answered. “Yes?”