61 pages • 2 hours read
Ronald H. BalsonA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
In early December 2004 Liam learns that the gray Camry parked outside Catherine’s house on Thanksgiving is registered to Carl Wuld. Meanwhile, there’s been no sign of Otto Piatek in Cleveland. After an evening of pizza and wine, Catherine and Liam spend the night together.
The next morning, Catherine is awkward with Liam. While she enjoyed their night together, her life is too stressful at the moment to embark on a committed relationship with her best friend. She apologizes, “I’m sorry, Liam. I truly am. It’s a crisis of confidence. It’s all about me and my doubts. I doubt my judgments. I doubt my competence as a lawyer. I doubt my ability to sustain a relationship” (279).
Liam learns that Carl Wuld’s real name is Carl Henninger and that 15 years ago the state of Arizona convicted him of statutory rape. After tracking Carl down, Liam threatens to expose his past, which would force him to register as a sex offender in Chicago. Armed with this leverage, Liam learns from Carl that he made up the story about Otto Piatek in Cleveland to milk more money out of Elliot.
With the help of a researcher at NBC News, Liam acquires a photo of Otto in the 1940s from a Nazi propaganda article. They compare it to a photo of Elliot in a 1953 issue of Life magazine, and the resemblance is uncanny. If the characters still harbor any doubts that Elliot is really Otto, these finds eliminate those doubts.
At Elliot’s mansion, an officer of the Cook County Sheriff’s Department delivers a lawsuit to the house: Benjamin Solomon v. Elliot Rosenzweig a/k/a Otto Piatek.
At Jeffers’ office, he and Elliot discuss how to deal with the lawsuit. Jeffers suggests dismissing the case on a technicality and countersuing, but Elliot strongly advises against this, arguing that the public will judge him as a Nazi. Eager to fight this battle in the court of public opinion, Elliot agrees to a televised interview with NBC News’s Carol Mornay.
Catherine receives a stack of paperwork delivered to her door that includes extensive discovery demands and a 28-day deadline that is virtually impossible to meet without a small army of lawyers working under her. Later that day Jenkins offers Catherine her job back with a $200,000 salary bump if she drops the case against Elliot. Rather than persuade Catherine, Jenkins’s offer steels her resolve more than ever.
Catherine expresses anxiety over her ability to handle a case of such magnitude on her own. Liam assures her that Charles Ryan, the judge in charge of the case, will grant her an extension to fulfill Jeffers’s onerous discovery demands.
At a morning hearing Catherine explains to Judge Ryan why she should be granted a discovery extension because she is a sole practitioner. Judge Ryan agrees to a two-week extension, giving Catherine 45 days to fulfill the discovery demands or else he may grant Jeffers’s motion to file a summary judgment, which would end the case without a trial. On the way out, Jeffers tells Catherine that if Ben does not drop the suit, Elliot will sue him for a million dollars to recoup attorney’s fees and fines.
While Catherine is loath to drop the suit, she feels obligated to inform Ben of Jeffers’s threats to sue him for a million dollars. Ben replies that someone—presumably the ghost of Hannah—has assured him that they will uncover evidence beyond the photos that implicate Elliot as Otto.
Catherine, Ben, and Liam gather around the TV to watch Carol Mornay’s interview with Elliot. At first Elliot handles the Nazi allegations eloquently and magnanimously. Catherine notes, “He’s so self-assured. He’ll be magnificent in front of a jury” (306). But Carol catches Elliot off-guard when she shows him the 1940s photo of Otto and the 1953 photo of Elliot. He immediately regains his composure, but the slip in his controlled demeanor is evident. A superficial physical resemblance to a Nazi, Elliot argues, is not enough to erase his decades of accomplishments, including his ample donations to the State of Israel.
After the telecast, as if by divine inspiration, Ben tells Catherine and Liam he knows the two keys to winning the case: Elliot’s wife and “numbers.”
At his Winnetka mansion, Elliot angrily berates Jeffers for failing to uncover the existence of the photos before NBC did. Jeffers lists Catherine’s discovery requests, which include a deposition with Elisabeth, Elliot’s wife. Elliot adamantly opposes her involvement in the case and demands that Jeffers have the deposition request thrown out.
On Christmas Eve, Catherine apologizes to Liam for her cold reaction to their night of lovemaking. She invites him to Christmas mass at Holy Name Cathedral, a ritual she’s never participated in but feels she must, given her recent experiences with Ben and his case. Later, Catherine and Liam spend the night together.
In January 2005 Liam travels to Europe to uncover corroborating evidence for Ben’s case. On the phone Catherine tells him that Ben’s deposition went poorly, with Jeffers behaving very aggressively. He and Catherine say they love each other.
During Elliot’s deposition, Catherine grills him on the supposed details of his fabricated biography. Every time Catherine catches him in a contradiction or fabrication, Elliot attributes the error to emotional distress. A visibly angry Elliot misremembers his own father’s name and claims he doesn’t know his wife’s maiden name. The deposition goes off the rails completely when Ben asks Elliot in Polish, “What happened to the box of jewelry?” and Elliot screams, “Wouldn’t you like to know!” (334).
Although Jeffers is certain he can have the case dismissed, Elliot wants to meet with Ben in private, alone in a room. He fears a summary judgment would leave his guilt an open question to be debated in the court of public opinion.
From this point forward, the narrative shifts entirely to 2004. Meanwhile, the dominant character arc shifts from Ben back to Catherine, who continues to struggle with self-doubt amid the emotional and legal stakes of the case. She tells Liam, “I committed a lawyer’s blunder—I became emotionally invested in a client’s case” (272). Struggling to endure the emotional highs and lows of Ben’s case, Catherine leans more heavily on Liam, with whom she spends the night following a particularly taxing day. The next morning, however, she projects her doubts over the case onto Liam, telling him, “I’m sorry, Liam. I truly am. It’s a crisis of confidence. It’s all about me and my doubts. I doubt my judgments. I doubt my competence as a lawyer. I doubt my ability to sustain a relationship” (279).
The narrative also explores Elliot’s character more closely. During the first two sections of the novel he is largely a cipher, a necessary consequence of keeping the reader in the dark about his true identity. But after Chapter 38, in which the two photos all but confirm that he is Otto, the novel is better able to construct his character and flesh out his motivations. That Elliot is a generous philanthropist, including to Jewish charities, raises a question: Is his charity an attempt to atone for his past evils committed as a Nazi? In truth, there is little to suggest this is the case. It’s more likely that the pathologically careerist Elliot simply enjoys his status as the “Great Benefactor” of Chicago. He tells Jeffers, “All a man has is his reputation. Everything that’s gone before—my work, my charities, my foundations—everything that I’ve accomplished in my life will be tarnished if these accusations continue to find safe harbors” (290). The consistent motivation that ties Elliot to his old life as Otto is that the man will do anything to gain the professional and personal respect of his peers. In America that means building a fortune and giving a large portion of it away. In Nazi Germany it meant participating in the systematic dehumanization and murder of Jews.
The novel also reveals many of the inequities of the American justice system. Contrary to the idealistic notion of a legal system that is blind to everything but the facts, there are a number of maneuvers available to big law firms with limitless resources to crush the opposition before a case is even argued in court. For example, Jeffers’s discovery demands and deadline are literally impossible for a single litigator like Catherine to meet. Not only are the demands prohibitively onerous, they also require Catherine’s legal team to be at multiple hearings in different places at the same time. And because Catherine’s legal team is made up of Catherine alone, she cannot possibly meet such a demand.
Despite these challenges, the narrative offers faith in the legal system’s ability to remedy injustice. This is most apparent during the scene in which Catherine takes Elliot’s deposition. Thanks to her sharp legal mind and interrogation skills, Catherine throws Elliot off-balance, catching him in a number of lies and contradictions that strongly suggest his guilt. Over the course of the deposition, Elliot becomes progressively more angry, defensive, and evasive. Compare this to Elliot’s “self-assured” and “magnificent” (306) performance during his interview with NBC News. When so many issues of truth and criminality are litigated in the sphere of public opinion, the deposition scene strongly suggests that the court of law—while far from perfect—is still the best arena for uncovering the truth and delivering justice.
Plus, gain access to 8,800+ more expert-written Study Guides.
Including features: