This is a good article. Click here for more information.

The Litigators

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Litigators
Grisham - The Litigators Coverart.png
First edition cover
Author John Grisham
Country United States
Language English
Subject class action lawsuit, pharmaceutical drugs
Genre Legal thriller
Publisher Doubleday (US)
Hodder & Stoughton (UK)
Publication date
October 25, 2011 (hardcover)
June 26, 2012 (paperback)
Media type Hardcover, Paperback, Audiobook and E-book
Pages 385 (Hardcover 1st edition)
ISBN 978-0-385-53513-7
Preceded by The Confession
Followed by Calico Joe

The Litigators is a 2011 legal thriller novel by John Grisham, his 25th fiction novel overall. The Litigators is about a two-partner Chicago law firm attempting to strike it rich in a class action lawsuit over a cholesterol reduction drug by a major pharmaceutical drug company. The protagonist is a Harvard Law School grad big law firm burnout who stumbles upon the boutique and joins it only to find himself litigating against his old law firm in this case. The book is regarded as more humorous than most of Grisham's prior novels.

The theme of a young lawyer being fed up with a giant law firm and bolting away to a less lucrative but more satisfying career is shared with "The Associate". The theme of a lawsuit against a giant corporation appeared in "The Runaway Jury" - but in the present book, the corporation is vindicated and proven to have been unjustly maligned (at least on the specific drug which is the subject of the lawsuit) and the mass tort lawyers are seen as greedy and unscrupulous, ultimately bolting and leaving the protagonist's tiny Chicago firm in the lurch.

Critical reviews were mixed for the book, with several opinions noting a lack of suspense. Nonetheless, the book has achieved both hardcover and ebook #1 best seller status on various lists, including both The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal. However, since some services do not separate fiction and non-fiction books, it did not debut as a #1 bestseller on certain lists, such as the USA Today. Some reviewers noted that this story would lend itself to an adapted screenplay.


Having sold 250 million copies of his previous 24 novels in 29 languages, Grisham had produced an international bestseller with each prior book.[1][2] Including the release of The Litigators, Grisham has produced 23 adult fiction novels and 2 children's fiction novels as well as a short story collection. In addition, he has produced one non-fiction book. Thus, various sources claim this to be his 23rd,[2] 25th,[3] or 26th book.[4]

In the first of a two-part interview with The Wall Street Journal, Grisham claimed that although he usually attempts to include humor in his submitted drafts, it is usually removed during the editorial process. However, in this case much of the humor survived editing.[5] In the second part of the interview the following week, Grisham noted that his inspirations for the book included television advertisements and the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.[6]


Leading book retailers such as,[7] Barnes & Noble,[8] and Walmart[9] released the book in hardcover format in the United States as a Doubleday publication on October 25, 2011. In the United Kingdom, the book was published with different cover art by Hodder & Stoughton on the same date.[10] Random House published the paperback version on June 26, 2012.[11]

The book is also available as an audiobook, narrated by Scott Brick,[12] and in ebook format.[8] Other formats available on October 25, included large-print, compact disc and abridged compact disc.[13] A limited edition will be available on November 22, 2011.[8] An excerpt from the book was included in some editions including the iTunes Store edition of The Confession, which was his prior adult novel.[14]


Oscar Finley and Wally Figg are the bickering partners of a small law firm in the South Side of Chicago - in fact, for much of the time they are just a pair of ambulance chasers. Oscar's character holds the firm together despite the childish and unethical behavior of Wally, his junior partner.[3] Their bickering is often mediated by Rochelle, the highly competent African American secretary, who had learned a lot of law in her eight years in the office. Meanwhile, David Zinc, a graduate of the Harvard Law School, is completely fed up with the grinding and dehumanizing - though well-paid - life of an Associate in the giant law firm of Rogan Rothberg, where in five years of work he had never seen the inside of a courtroom (In fact, David's expertise was in long-term bonds[3] - a work he hated). David suddenly breaks away, goes on a drinking binge and by chance finds himself at the Finley & Figg office. Feeling an elevating sense of freedom and vowing never to go back, Zink willingly relegates himself to working for the two disreputable street lawyers and ambulance chasers.

While Wally goes to a funeral home to attend the wake of a former estate client, the client's son claims that his father was killed by Krayoxx, a cholesterol-lowering drug developed by the (fictional) pharmaceutical company Varrick Labs.[15] Ecstatic at the possible monetary returns on the case, the firm finds several former clients who appear to have valid claims about Krayoxx. Oscar and Wally generate publicity in the Chicago Tribune with a picture of their filing; this induces an avalanche of communications and leads them to several additional claimants.[16] In fact, however, Wally and his fellows are far out of their depth. None of the three Finley & Figg lawyers had ever argued in a United States federal court, and they have only a vague idea of what is involved in confronting a major corporation which is able to hire the best legal talent around (which would turn out to be Zinc's old firm.[17]).

For a time, however, is seems that Finley & Figg will not need to bother about all that, but would be able to have a big payday while riding on another firm's coattails. There are many other lawyers all over the US who had filed Krayoxx tort suits. The blossoming class action lawsuit against Varrick Labs is coordinated by Jerry Alisandros of Florida, who had become rich out of previous suits against Varrick.[18] Wally flies to Las Vegas to meet the other mass tort interests. Alisandros offers Wally "a ride" back to Chicago in his luxurious private jet and makes clear that all Wally needs to do is locate some more Krayoxx cases in Chicago - and then he would become part of a mass settlement, with Alisandros taking care of all the rest, such as finding experts to testify on the harmful effects of Krayoxx.

The calculations of Jerry Alisandros and the other mass tort lawyers are based on their previous experience. Several times before they had caught Varrick marketing seriously faulty drugs, as well as ruthlessly trying out their products in Third World countries. In all these cases, Varrick preferred to negotiate lucrative compensations for these lawyers' clients (of which the lawyers got a big cut). Alisandros expects the same to happen again: the suits from all over the US would be concentrated in South Florida, with a Federal judge which Alisandros considers amendable; Varrick would negotiate, reach again a settlement out of court, and everybody will grow rich.

However, in this case there are some complications which neither Wally nor the experienced Alisandros anticipated.[19] This time, Varrick's CEO Rueben Massey feels sure that there is nothing wrong with Krayoxx. The drug works as advertised, it has no ill effects and is unjustly maligned; Varrick has first-rate experts with impeccable records willing to so testify.The Varrick CEO flies to Chicago and engages Nadine Karros, the Rogan Rothberg ace litigator, who asks for a five million Dollars' non-refundable retainer and bills at a thousand Dollars per hour - and those who could afford it consider her worth every penny. With Karros' help, Varrick sets a trap for the mass tort lawyers. This time Varrick will only pretend to negotiate - their true aim would be to have a jury completely vindicate Krayoxx and deny any kind of tort.

To achieve that result, Varrick takes care to prevent the case from getting to Florida, Alisandros' favorite battleground. It is much better for them to let jurisdiction be claimed by Chicago federal judge Harry Seawright, with whom Rogan Rothberg has some ties. A bonus from Varrick's point of view is the fact that the Chicago tort suit was filed by such a minor and inexperienced firm as Finley & Figg; it is confidently assumed that Karros would make short work of them in court.[20] The case is soon expedited on Seawright's docket with Finley & Figg's claim singled out of the tort claimants[21] and Karros takes action to have Finley & Figg's eight death cases heard separately.[22] The specific case singled out to serve as the test case is one in which Finley & Figg represents the widow of a man who died after taking Krayoxx - but he was also taking prior to his death a mixture of some ten other drugs, so that it is virtually impossible to pinpoint the effect of Krayoxx.

Finley & Figg are still blissfully unaware of the storm ahead of them. With a large settlement seemingly looming, Oscar hastens to start divorce proceedings against his wife, Paula, with whom had long been at at odds - so as to cash out before the big Krayoxx money comes in.[23]

Meanwhile, David Zinc starts taking his own legal initiatives. He stumbles upon a lead poisoning brain damage case involving the child of Burmese immigrants. Expending his own time and resources on this case,[24][25][26] Zinc gathers enough evidence that - if only he can find the identity of the American company which imported the child's toxic toys from China - he would have an "open and shut" tort case.[27] Zinc also succeeds in representing immigrants in a labor law case, giving him an increasing confidence in his ability to go to court and effectively represent clients.[28] During the labor case, the employer attempted to have Finley & Figg's offices burned down and the would-be arsonist stumbled upon Oscar at the office. Oscar shot him and added an unnecessary debilitating shot that shattered his leg.[29] He was sued for using excessive force.[23]

Meanwhile, the chagrined Alisandros learns that tests of Krayoxx yield benign results and that there is in fact no substance to the tort proceedings regarding this drug. Also, it becomes clear that Varrick did not seriously intend to negotiate.[30] Thereupon, Alisandros withdraws as co-counsel in the Chicago case, leaving Finley & Figg holding the sack.

Sensibly, Wally seeks to cut the firm's losses and motions to withdraw the tort claims.[31] However, Varrick has no intention of letting Finley & Figg off the hook; the giant company is determined to have a jury trial which would vindicate them. Since the mass tort bar had vociferously attacked Krayoxx in the mass media, and Varrick has spent 18 million dollars preparing their legal defence, Karros has grounds to motion for very substantial frivolous lawsuit sanctions. Additionally, Varrick took care to initiate motions for legal malpractice against Finley & Figg, regarding Wally's letters that promised his "Krayoxx clients" a 2 million dollar settlement apiece, as well as his having filed motions to dismiss without notifying his clients. Varrick had obtained the services of a lawyer who specializes in suing other lawyers for malpractice and who is very through and effective in his chosen field.

The bottom line is that withdrawing the Krayoxx Case would cause Finley & Figg to be sued for both defense costs and malpractice - which would completely ruin the small firm. There is no choice for Finley & Figg but to give up their motion to withdraw the tort case - and prepare to go through the motions of a jury trial which they have absolutely no chance of winning.[32] Moreover, going through the motions is quite expensive: in order to present any kind of case they must bring experts to testify against Krayoxx - and even disreputable experts (the only ones who can be found) charge fees in the tens of thousands of Dollars.

The trial opens as originally scheduled[33] - but the two Finley & Figg partners prove unequal to the task. During opening statements, Oscar suffered a myocardial infarction. Wally attempted to make light of the situation by proclaiming it an example of Krayoxx effects. Karros moved for mistrial and the motion was granted, leading to the need to pick a new jury - and the judge imposes a fine on the already financially-strained Finley & Figg.[34] Wally stood in for Oscar as lead attorney while a new jury was seated and for the first day of testimony.[35] The next day, the recovering alcoholic Figg was nowhere to be found although an empty pint bottle of Smirnoff Vodka was.[36]

After Wally goes AWOL for a second day, David is pressed into service. He admits to Karros and the judge in chambers that he has never seen the inside of a courtroom. Karros, in a moment of humanity, offers a deal - if David finishes the trial, she would not pursue sanctions against Finley & Figg. Judge Seawright offers to help David through the trial and also adds that Finley & Figg probably wouldn't suffer from any malpractice suits if the trial goes through. David agrees to finish the trial but there is hardly any real case for him to present.[37] Karros tears to pieces the main Finley & Figg expert witness - a Russian doctor of very questionable credentials and whose English is atrocious even after fifteen years in the US. The second expert, an equally shady pharmacologist, escapes without testifying, pocketing the 50,000 Dollars he got from Finley & Figg. Rueben Massey, Varrick's CEO, instructs Karros not to move for likely-successful summary judgment - he is determined to have a jury clear Krayoxx of all charges, and Varrick's public relations machine stands ready to trumpet this decision in all the media.[38] Zinc declined to cross-examine the row of expert witnesses that Varrick called - all having impeccable credentials and David having no facts with which to shake their defense of Krayoxx.[39] Rather, he spends the time studying Karros' methods - "learning from a master" as he puts it in his own mind.

Eventually, however, Karros makes one of her rare mistakes, letting a senior Varrick executive testify on the company's record as a whole, rather than on Krayoxx only. This opens the door for David to pounce and start a through cross-examination on Varrick's very shady past record, making the Varrick witness sweat for several hours. Knowing that the jury included several Catholics and several Blacks, David concentrated on one particularly atrocious aspect of Varrick's past record - clinical trials of an intended "abortion pill" which was tried on pregnant women in Africa and which resulted in severe bleeding, causing the death of eleven women.[40] David, along with some of his former colleagues watching the trial, realizes he has some serious untapped talent as a litigator.

In her summation, however, Karros managed an effective damage control - pointing out to the jury that the case in question was not the past record of Varrick but solely the effects of Krayoxx, and that Finley & Figg had in no way proven a connection between Krayoxx and the death of their client's late husband. The jury was convinced and rendered a very quick verdict totally rejecting the Krayoxx tort claim and giving Varrick their expected vindication.[41] Still, Zinc's former colleagues of Rogan Rothberg expressed their grudging respect for his spirited cross examination, and even helped Zinc to get even with an obnoxious blogger who had been ceaselessly maligning Zinc (and Zinc's wife). Moreover, Karros keeps her promise and agrees to drop all the frivolous lawsuit and legal malpractice proceedings against Finley & Figg. Varrick has no special grudge against this small firm - through they intend to settle accounts with their old foe Alisandros and exact from him big sums on a frivolous lawsuit case.

Still, Finley & Figg remains in bad shape. The Krayoxx affair has left them deep in debt instead of the expected big profit, their office building - the firm's sole asset - heavily mortgaged, and the two partners ailing, in a bad shape physically and mentally. Meanwhile, however, David managed to complete his lead poisoning product liability case, finding that the destructive toys were imported from China by a subsidiary of Sonesta Games, the third-largest toy producer in the US.[42][43] Unlike the Krayoxx case, this provides David with a water-tight case. A jury seeing the poor child, completely disabled as a direct provable result of using the toy, would be certain to grant a high sum in compensations. Knowing this, the Sonesta CEO and his senior executives hasten to meet with David - seeming to show a genuine remorse, aside from being aware of the grave damage which the publicity around such a case could cause their corporation. They readily agree to give David's clients - the child's Burmese immigrant parents - five million Dollars in out-of-court compensations, provided that the case remain secret. David insists, however, that $1.5 million in legal fees would not come out of his clients' compensations but be paid separately by Sonesta; knowing himself to have the upper hand, Zinc is a tough negotiator and the Sonesta directors have no choice but agreeing to pay a total of 6.5 millions. In parting, a Sonesta executive discreetly slips Zinc an unmarked envelope with information on lead poisoning caused by the products of Sonesta's competitors...[44]

David has no obligation to share with the Finley & Figg partners the proceeds of this case, which was his own initiative. However, his sense of loyalty prevents him from leaving an ailing firm and ailing fellows in the lurch. David returns to the office and tells Oscar and Wally of his settlement. He offers to pay the debts left from the Krayoxx fiasco, amounting to 200,000 Dollars, and pay off the mortgage on the film's office building; give the loyal secretary Rochelle a 100,000 Dollar bonus; and split the reminder, 1,200,000 Dollars, evenly with them (a far more generous settlement than they planned to give him, had the Krayoxx money come in). In return, the three of them are to sign a 12-month contract to enter an equal partnership and will no longer be an ambulance-chasing firm. A bit embarrassed, Oscar and Wally agree to the new contract. However, the two of them can't really function under these new terms, and later that year the partnership fell apart. Finley began spending less time in the office and eventually retired a happy man, having recently remarried and being much more satisfied with his new wife, while Figg packed up and moved to Alaska. Zinc opened his own product liability practice, David E. Zinc, Attorney-at-Law and hired Rochelle as his new secretary.[45] Soon winning two further lead poisoning cases, he seems well embarked on a professionally and financially satisfying career.

List of characters[edit]

  • Oscar Finley, Finley & Figg Senior Partner - A lazy, unhappily married, nearing retirement "fender-benders, slip-and-falls and quickie divorces veteran" and former police officer,[5][46] who took the bar exam three times.[47]
  • Wally Figg, Finley & Figg Junior Partner - A former DUI convictee and four-time divorcé who trolls funeral parlors and sickrooms for clients.[46] A University of Chicago Law School grad who took the bar exam three times.[47]
  • David Zinc, Finley & Figg Associate attorney - Prototypical Grisham young hot shot Harvard graduate lawyer whose life is turned upside down.[46]
  • Rochelle Gibson, Finley & Figg secretary - Former claimant against Finley & Figg who holds the firm together.[46]
  • Nadine Karros, Defendant's leading litigator recruited by Varrick.[48]
  • Harry Seawright, federal judge.[48]
  • DeeAnna Nuxhall, repeat Finley & Figg divorce customer and eventual love interest of Wally's
  • Jerry Alisandros, mass tort operator who brings F&F into his firm's fold.[49]
  • Paula Finley, Oscar's wife
  • Rueben Massey, CEO Varrick.
  • Helen, David's wife
  • Anderson Zinc, David's father (Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Minnesota) (per Ch. 15)
  • Caroline Zinc, David's mother (art and photography teacher) (per Ch. 15)
  • Lana, David's secretary

Critical review[edit]

The Litigators is said to be "an amusing and appalling look into the machinations of a nationwide class-action suit," according to Tobin Harshaw of Bloomberg L.P.[3] The Wall Street Journal's Christopher John Farley noted that the book is lighter than Grisham's other works.[5] Publishers Weekly called it a "bitingly farcical look at lawyers at the bottom of the food chain".[50] CNN described the book as an original perspective of "the best and worst the American system of justice has to offer".[1] Louis Bayard of The Washington Post, who described himself as someone who abandoned Grisham after his first three novels, noted that this book might be a good starting point for those who have tired of Grisham.[17] Andrea Simakis of The Plain Dealer describes the book as a "heartier meal" than Grisham's usual "potato-chip fiction".[46] Publishers Weekly also notes that the fairy tale ending is not really in keeping with the introduction's dark humor.[50] Rick Arthur of The United Arab Emirates publication The National describes the book unfavorably as a cross between prior Grisham works The Street Lawyer and The King of Torts and similarly describes the protagonist unfavorably to those of The Firm and The Rainmaker.[4] Geoffrey Wansell of the Daily Mail presented one of the more favorable reviews describing the book as "a spectacular return to form, displaying the clarity and passion that were there in his first thrillers but seemed to ebb away."[2] Wansell notes that Grisham returned to one of his seminal themes of the idealistic young lawyer fighting with the realization that corporations only care about maximizing profits.[2]

The book has been derided for its lack of suspense. Carol Memmott of USA Today says that Grisham's latest attempt to capture the spirit of the legal David and Goliath story is missing "the ratcheting-up of suspense" that he has employed successfully in recent adult and youth novels.[51] Harshaw claims that the book is lacking in the suspense that made The Firm so successful.[3] Arthur finds elements of the plot implausible and the story unsuspenseful as well as unsatisfying.[4] Although the book is somewhat predictable, Bayard notes that "Grisham swerves clear of the usual melodramatic devices. Corporations aren’t intrinsically venal; plaintiffs aren’t lambent with goodness. And best of all, no one is murdered for stumbling Too Close to the Truth."[17]

Some sources noted that the book has potential to become an adapted screenplay. Irish Independent describes Grisham's new book as "following his usual route to the bestsellers list" and projects it as a candidate to be his next Hollywood film. Although it is standard Grisham fare, Independent noted that it provides the usual thrills in Grisham's comfortable legal world and should be a gripping read for his usual fans.[52] The Sunday Express noted that the book could be readily converted to a screenplay, but its critic, Robin Callender Smith, viewed the "ambulance chasing" ethos as a foreign thing that Brits might have to worry about in the near future.[53]

Simakis praised the book for having more depth of character than Grisham's novels customarily do.[46] She compares the protagonist to Mitch McDeere from The Firm and Rudy Baylor from The Rainmaker.[46] Memmott says that most of the claimants that they find are unsympathetic, but a few are from somewhat sympathetic immigrant families.[51] Simakis notes that Wally trades sex for legal services with one claimant.[46] Harshaw says that the book is a bit sentimental and comparatively lacking in terms of secondary character development for Grisham.[3] Larry Orenstein of Canada's Globe and Mail notes that on the dramatic scale this book has instances of laugh out loud humor that make it more like Boston Legal than The Practice, which Boston Legal was spun off from.[54]

Commercial success[edit]

According to The Huffington Post, this book is the ninth best-selling fiction book of the year in 2011,[55] while according to the USA Today this was the 16th best selling book overall in 2011.[56] According to the book was the number eight overall best seller.[57]


It immediately was listed as the Publishers Weekly #1 best-seller among fiction hardcover books according to Reuters.[58] It was also listed as the #1 best-seller by The New York Times in the November 13, 2011 book review section for the week ending October 29, 2011 for Hardcover Fiction, E-Book Fiction, Combined Hardcover & Paperback Fiction, and the Combined Print and E-Book Fiction.[59] It dropped from the #1 position in its second week on the list.[60] It remained on the Combined Hardcover & Paperback Fiction list until the February 19, 2012 list (15 weeks) for the week ending February 4.[61] It remained on both the Hardcover Fiction list and the Combined Print and E-Book Fiction list until the February 26 list (16 weeks) for the week ending February 11.[62][63] It remained on the E-Book Fiction list until the March 11 list (18 weeks) for the week ending February 25.[64]

The Wall Street Journal announced that on Saturday October 29, it would begin incorporating digital book sales in its best seller lists.[65] When the book debuted in The Wall Street Journal list on November 5 for the week ending October 30, it was listed first in Hardcover Fiction, Fiction E-Books and Fiction Combined.[66] It retained the hardcover lead the following week, but lost the other leads.[67] After two weeks it was surpassed on the hardcover list as well.[68] It remained on The Wall Street Journal Hardcover Fiction, Fiction E-Books and Fiction Combined best seller lists until the January 7 listing for the week ended on January 1, 2012.[69]

The book was released the day after Walter Isaacson's biography of Steve Jobs, entitled Steve Jobs, was released by Simon & Schuster. Jobs had died on October 5 and the release date was moved forward.[70][71] The Jobs book's release had been moved forward twice; It had been moved from spring 2012 to November 21 after Jobs stepped down and then to the October 24 date after his death.[72] When The Litigators debuted on November 3 on the USA Today best-seller list, which does not separate fiction and non-fiction, it debuted at number 2 behind the Jobs book.[73]


It debuted at #1 on the New York Times Paperback Mass-Market Fiction Best Sellers list on July 15, 2012 (reflecting sales for the week ending June 30, 2012).[74] The book remained at #1 until the August 12 list (reflecting sales of the week ending July 28, 2012), making a five-week run.[75] It continued to appear on the list until the January 13, 2013 list (reflecting sales for the week ending December 29, 2012).[76] On the USA Today list, which include fiction and non-fiction as well as hardcover and paperback, it debuted at #10 in the week of July 5, following its paperback release.[77]


  1. ^ a b DuChateau, Christian (October 28, 2011). "Grisham talks ambulance chasers, eBooks". CNN. Retrieved October 30, 2011. 
  2. ^ a b c d Wansell, Geoffrey (November 4, 2011). "Thrillers". Daily Mail. Retrieved November 5, 2011. 
  3. ^ a b c d e f Harshaw, Tobin (October 25, 2011). "Grisham's Ambulance Chaser Pulls Gun on Deadbeat Client: Books". Bloomberg L.P. Retrieved October 26, 2011. 
  4. ^ a b c Arthur, Rick (November 4, 2011). "John Grisham: The Litigators". The National. Retrieved November 3, 2011. 
  5. ^ a b c Farley, Christopher John (October 28, 2011). "John Grisham Gets the Last Laugh on the Law". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved October 29, 2011. 
  6. ^ Farley, Christopher John (November 3, 2011). "Will There Ever Be Another John Grisham? John Grisham Has Some Thoughts". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved November 5, 2011. 
  7. ^ The Litigators [Hardcover]. ISBN 0385535139. 
  8. ^ a b c "The Litigators". Barnes & Noble. Retrieved September 18, 2011. 
  9. ^ "The Litigators". Walmart. Retrieved September 18, 2011. 
  10. ^ The Litigators [Hardcover]. UK. ASIN 1444729705. 
  11. ^ "The Litigators". Random House. Retrieved February 17, 2013. 
  12. ^ "Major Audio Releases". Library Journal. 136 (16): 46. October 1, 2011. 
  13. ^ "The Litigators". American Booksellers Association. Retrieved September 18, 2011. 
  14. ^ "The Confession by John Grisham". Apple. Retrieved September 18, 2011. 
  15. ^ Grisham, Ch. 4.
  16. ^ Grisham, Ch. 13.
  17. ^ a b c Bayard, Louis (October 20, 2011). "Book review: John Grisham's "The Litigators" a swerving, stirring retort". The Washington Post. Retrieved October 22, 2011. 
  18. ^ Grisham, Ch. 16.
  19. ^ "The Litigators". Random House, Inc. Retrieved September 18, 2011. 
  20. ^ Grisham, Ch. 17.
  21. ^ Grisham, Ch. 19.
  22. ^ Grisham, Ch. 23.
  23. ^ a b Grisham, Ch. 33.
  24. ^ Grisham, p.163.
  25. ^ Grisham, pp. 171–2.
  26. ^ Grisham, Ch. 27.
  27. ^ Grisham, Ch. 20.
  28. ^ Grisham, Ch. 31.
  29. ^ Grisham, Ch. 29.
  30. ^ Grisham, Ch. 32.
  31. ^ Grisham, Ch. 34.
  32. ^ Grisham, Ch. 35.
  33. ^ Grisham, Ch. 37.
  34. ^ Grisham, Ch. 38.
  35. ^ Grisham, Ch. 39.
  36. ^ Grisham, Ch. 40.
  37. ^ Grisham, Ch. 41.
  38. ^ Grisham, Ch. 43.
  39. ^ Grisham, Chs. 44–5.
  40. ^ Grisham, Ch. 45.
  41. ^ Grisham, Ch. 46.
  42. ^ Grisham, p. 364.
  43. ^ Grisham, Ch. 48.
  44. ^ Grisham, Ch. 49.
  45. ^ Grisham, Epilogue.
  46. ^ a b c d e f g h Simakis, Andrea (October 24, 2011). "In 'The Litigators,' John Grisham fleshes out his characters". The Plain Dealer. Retrieved October 25, 2011. 
  47. ^ a b Grisham, p. 3
  48. ^ a b Grisham, Ch. 17
  49. ^ Grisham, Ch. 16
  50. ^ a b "The Litigators". Publishers Weekly. October 24, 2011. Retrieved October 26, 2011. 
  51. ^ a b Memmott, Carol (October 24, 2011). "Verdict: Grisham's 'Litigators' falls short". USA Today. Retrieved October 25, 2011. 
  52. ^ Walsh, Rowena (October 22, 2011). "Review: Fiction: The Litigators by John Grisham". Irish Independent. Retrieved October 22, 2011. 
  53. ^ Smith, Robin Callender (October 30, 2011). "Book Review - The Litigators, John Grisham Hodder & Stoughton, £19.99". Sunday Express. Retrieved October 31, 2011. 
  54. ^ Orenstein, Larry (November 4, 2011). "A visit to Grisham country north". Globe and Mail. Retrieved November 5, 2011. 
  55. ^ "Bestselling Books Of 2011". The Huffington Post. December 28, 2011. Retrieved February 18, 2013. 
  56. ^ DeBarros, Anthony, Mary Cadden and Chris Schnaars (January 12, 2012). "100 best-selling books of 2011, from the top down". USA Today. Retrieved February 18, 2013. 
  57. ^ " Announces Best-Selling Books of 2011". The Wall Street Journal. December 12, 2011. Retrieved February 18, 2013. 
  58. ^ ""The Litigators" tops best-sellers list". Reuters. November 4, 2011. Retrieved November 3, 2011. 
  59. ^ "Best Sellers: November 13, 2011". The New York Times. November 13, 2011. Retrieved November 5, 2011. 
  60. ^ "Best Sellers: November 20, 2011". The New York Times. November 20, 2011. Retrieved November 15, 2011. 
  61. ^ "Best Sellers> Combined Print Fiction". The New York Times. February 19, 2012. Retrieved March 20, 2012. 
  62. ^ "Best Sellers> Combined Print and E-Book Fiction". The New York Times. February 26, 2012. Retrieved March 20, 2012. 
  63. ^ "Best Sellers> Hardcover Fiction". The New York Times. February 26, 2012. Retrieved March 20, 2012. 
  64. ^ "Best Sellers> E-Book Fiction". The New York Times. March 11, 2012. Retrieved March 20, 2012. 
  65. ^ "Wall Street Journal to Debut E-Book Best-Seller Lists Provided by Nielsen". The Nielsen Company. October 28, 2011. Retrieved November 5, 2011. 
  66. ^ "Best-Selling Books, Week Ended Oct. 30: With data from Nielsen BookScan". The Wall Street Journal. November 5, 2011. Retrieved November 5, 2011. 
  67. ^ "Best-Selling Books, Week Ended Nov. 6: With data from Nielsen BookScan". The Wall Street Journal. November 12, 2011. Retrieved November 15, 2011. 
  68. ^ "Best-Selling Books, Week Ended Nov. 13: With data from Nielsen BookScan". The Wall Street Journal. November 19, 2011. Retrieved November 19, 2011. 
  69. ^ "Best-Selling Books, Week Ended Jan. 1: With data from Nielsen BookScan". The Wall Street Journal. January 7, 2012. Retrieved January 31, 2012. 
  70. ^ "Bookmarks: News and notes from the First Coast world of books". The Florida Times-Union. October 23, 2011. Retrieved October 25, 2011. 
  71. ^ Lynch, Rene (October 6, 2011). "Steve Jobs biography: Release date moves up, skyrockets to No. 1". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved October 25, 2011. 
  72. ^ Minzesheimer, Bob (November 3, 2011). "Steve Jobs bio tops USA TODAY's Best-Selling Books list". USA Today. Retrieved November 5, 2011. 
  73. ^ "Best-Selling Books". USA Today. November 3, 2011. Retrieved November 5, 2011. 
  74. ^ "Best Sellers: July 15, 2012: Paperback Mass-Market Fiction". The New York Times. July 15, 2012. Retrieved February 17, 2013. 
  75. ^ "Best Sellers: August 12, 2012: Paperback Mass-Market Fiction". The New York Times. August 12, 2012. Retrieved February 17, 2013. 
  76. ^ "Best Sellers: January 13, 2013: Paperback Mass-Market Fiction". The New York Times. January 13, 2013. Retrieved February 17, 2013. 
  77. ^ "USA TODAY's Best-Selling Books list: Week of July 5, 2012". USA Today. July 5, 2012. Retrieved February 18, 2013. 

Grisham, John (2011). The Litigators. Doubleday. ISBN 978-0-385-53513-7. 

External links[edit]

Preceded by
The Best of Me by Nicholas Sparks
The New York Times Combined Print & E-book Fiction #1 best-seller
October 29 – November 4
Succeeded by
Zero Day by David Baldacci
Preceded by
The Best of Me by Nicholas Sparks
The New York Times Combined Hardcover & Paperback Fiction #1 best-seller
October 29 – November 4
Succeeded by
Zero Day by David Baldacci
Preceded by
The Best of Me by Nicholas Sparks
The New York Times Hardcover Fiction #1 best-seller
October 29 – November 4
Succeeded by
Zero Day by David Baldacci
Preceded by
Bonnie by Iris Johansen
The New York Times E-book Fiction #1 best-seller
October 29 – November 4
Succeeded by
The Next Day by Nora Roberts
Preceded by
The Best of Me by Nicholas Sparks
The Wall Street Journal Fiction Combined #1 best-seller
October 30 – November 5
Succeeded by
The Next Day by Nora Roberts
Preceded by
The Best of Me by Nicholas Sparks
The Wall Street Journal Hardcover Fiction #1 best-seller
October 30 – November 12
Succeeded by
Inheritance by Christopher Paolini
Preceded by
Bonnie by Iris Johansen
The Wall Street Journal Fiction E-Books #1 best-seller
October 30 – November 5
Succeeded by
The Next Day by Nora Roberts