April 2, 2001

San Francisco Chronicle
Letters to the Editor
901 Mission Street
San Francisco, CA 94103-2988

VIA FACSIMILE - 415-543-7708

Dear Editor:

It is surprising and disappointing to see the Chronicle endorsing the "guilty until proven innocent" approach (editorial, April 1, 2001) in the plaintiffs' lawyers' latest attempt to strip away the privacy rights of anyone sued or questioned in many civil lawsuits. That's the way these bills (AB36 - Steinberg and SB 11 - Escutia) work. Just by being named in a lawsuit a person or company can forever lose personal information, business plans, and invaluable research data. Competitors, gossip mongers, and lawyers looking for copy cat lawsuits all will rejoice.

The "legalistic arguments" expressly dismissed by the Chronicle go to the core of protecting privacy and property. These "legalistic arguments" have in the past led California and every other state to reject similar proposals. A federal court study described these proposals as unneeded and harmful to the legal process.

Why should the Legislature, at a time when our state's electricity problem is grabbing headlines nationally, want for a minute to let the rest of the world think we are even considering such a discredited proposal?

It's the worst time for a bad idea.

Sincerely,

John H. Sullivan
President
Civil Justice Association of California