THE APPEAL
John Grisham

Century, £18.99

Neil Rose

There are many things about the American legal system that cause British jaws to drop, with the chief among them arguably the practice of electing judges. How can raising money from various interests and running on a manifesto aimed at currying favour with an electorate be consistent with an unbiased and independent judiciary?


It is this potential corruption of the US judicial process that is the focus of John Grisham’s latest novel. Back from one of his periodic sojourns away from the law, we are plunged straight into very familiar Grisham territory: a class action against a ruthless corporation in deepest Mississippi.

The novel begins with a jury handing down a massive verdict against a chemical company accused of dumping toxic waste into a small town’s water supply, so much so that Cary County had been dubbed Cancer County after the worst cancer clusters ever seen are found there.

The verdict is a decision that offers hope to the husband and wife legal team who fought on behalf of their townsfolk and almost lost their livelihoods in doing so. But despite tort lawyers from all over the country flocking to the area after the ruling, the pair knows that the war has still to be won – the company’s appeal to the Mississippi Supreme Court.

The court as constituted was likely to vote 5:4 to uphold the verdict, but with judicial elections in the offing, the company’s cold-blooded owner, Carl Trudeau, is presented with an opportunity to change the balance. The cost? Eight million dollars – nothing compared to the billions wiped off the company’s value and Trudeau’s personal wealth after the verdict. And so a brutal battle for the seat on the court begins, as a shady company with a track record of winning judicial elections across the country – 31 US states elect their appellate and supreme court judges – finds itself a suitable judicial patsy as frontman on a Christian-conservative, business-friendly ticket.

There is no doubt where Mr Grisham stands on the issue of such judicial elections. In fact, in an author’s note at the end, he observes that ‘as long as private money is allowed in judicial elections, we will see competing interests fight for seats on the bench’. Though this is not a categorical statement against judicial elections per se, there is no real debate in the book – could they be, actually, a way to ensure there are judges serving who are in tune with their society? After all, no judge makes a decision in a social vacuum.

Amid all this is a story that is, as ever, told well enough, and Mr Grisham keeps the pages flipping, at least until the finale, which feels rushed and forced. It is a disappointing and unsubtle end to a perfectly enjoyable, if not overly taxing, read.