Source:  ABA Journal/ June 1996
			 A DRIVE TO STIFLE LITIGATION

	Chrysler tries to slam door on class actions it calls frivilous with a
lawsuit and a request for sanctions.
				By Mark Hansen

The Chrysler Corp. has launched a new campaign that has nothing to do with the
business of selling cars.

This one is aimed at lawyers who file what the company believes are frivolous
class action suits against the automaker.

The campaign, announced on March 26, got off to a quick start.  That same day,
Chrysler took legal action against five lawyers involved in the filing of
two class action claims against the company that have since been dismissed.

PROLIFERATION PROTECTION 

Chrysler officials say that simply responding to what they see as a       
"proliferation" of class action suits being brought against the company soley
for the benefit of the lawyers who bring them.

The automaker is suing St. Louis lawyers John Carey and Joseph Danis and their
two-lawyer firm in federal cout for allegedly filing one baseless complaint.   
It is also seeking sanctions in federal court against three Seattle lawyers and
the law firm of Hagens & Berman, where two of the lawyers work, for allegedly
filing another.

"These class action cases have gotten out of control," says Lewis Goldfarb,
Chrysler's assistant general counsel.  "It's a widespread problem, and it's
getting worse."

The automaker is currently a defendant in 12 to 15 class action suits, at least
a third of which are without merit, says Goldfarb.  Only five years ago, he
says, the company was defending fewer than five such claims.

By fighting back, he says, Chrysler hopes to make some plaintiff's lawyers
"think twice" about suing the company.  It also hopes its actions will   
encourage other corporate defendants to respond more aggressively to such
suits.

But Carey, one of the lawyers being sued, says the allegations against him and
his partner are untrue.  "It just infuriates me," says Carey, who calls the
complaint "unfounded and scurrilous."  He says the suit is part of a 
"terrorism campaign" by Chrysler that is designed to "chill and intimidate"
lawyers from filing legitimate claims.

Steve Berman, one of the three Seattle lawyers against whom Chrysler is seeking
sanctions, refused comment.  But he was quoted in The New York Times as saying
the motion for sanctions was  "publicity stunt" aimed at drumming up support   
for a tort reform bill in Congress.

Chrysler's suit against Carey and Danis alleges that the two lawyers, who used 
to work for a firm defending Chrysler, used confidential information about the
company to launch their class action.

It accuses the duo of, among other things, committing malpractice by breaching
duties of loyalty and confidentiality.  According to Goldfarb, a ruling
by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals supports the malpractive claim.

But Carey says the work he and his partner did for Chrysler was "completely
unrelated" to the class action suit they filed, which concerned **allegations of faulty anti-lock brakes.***  What Chrysler's suit fails to mention, he adds, is
that the complaint was voluntarily dismissed so that co-counsel could join in
with a different, nationwide class action suit over the same issue.

In its motion for sanctions, Chrysler accuses the three Seattle lawyers of 
essentially "inventing" a class action case over an allegedly faulty paint
job on behalf of a named plaintiff who did not authorize the filing of such
a claim.

However, Berman told other reporters that his firm had relied on the word of
a referring lawyer when it filed the case and that the plaintiff named in the
case had only decided not to pursue the matter after Chrysler offered her
a new car.

A SLAPP IN THE FACE

University of Denver law school Professor George Pring does not put Chrysler's
action in the category of a "Slapp" suit, an acronym for "strategic lawsuits
against public participation."  Such suits often are filed by developers who   
claim that groups opposing their building plans defamed them.

Pring says the suit could more accurately be described as a "Slafl," or a
strategic lawsuit against future lawsuits.

Whatever the suit is called, another expert says, it isn't likely to start
a new trend.

"You can imagine how rarely something like this occurs," says Beverly Moore,
Jr., the publisher of Class Action Reports.  "After all, how many class action
suits have been filed by lawyers who used to represent the defendant?"
*******************************************************************************