What readers think of The King of Torts, plus links to write your own review.

Overall, I enjoyed The King of Torts. It had a great plot, good characters, and entertained me for the most part. I would give it eight thumbs up, but I did not like the ending. It was if Grisham just decided to stop writing. He put great effort into the first 6/9 of the book. But after Clay Carter got beaten by the two men in dark clothes, it just went downhill. Sorry Grisham, nice try on an ending.

I understand that all books can't have happy endings. However, this ending was not typical of John Grisham's usual talent. I feel that the first half of the book was captivating-a dream come true! It was almost as if Clay won the lottery-and I found myself wondering, "Why don't things like this happen to me everyday?" I feel the ending was rushed. I would've appreciated if Mr. Grisham had given us a little hope for a sequel to this book ...To make a long story short(excuse the pun), I think Mr. Grisham could write about the big fees associated with being an author, because it's obvious he compromised his creative talents in order to satisfy the nice advance and deadline he probably got for "The King Of Torts".

I loved this book! I not only enjoyed the easy read, but I also learned a lot about mass tort cases! Grisham does what all writers should do; entertain and teach.

This is definately the poorest book by John Grisham. The plot is thin, the storyline unlikely, the characters mainly unconvincing, and the ending predictable. In writing and publishing this book, he is no better that the tort lawyers he infers have few morals where the making of vast sums of money is concerned. I would like a refund.

I've become a fan of the Grisham novels. I've read A Time to Kill, the Pelican Brief, The Runaway Jury, The Rainmaker, The Firm, The Brethren, parts of The Painted House and finally, The King of Torts. I loved the previous books, the Rainmaker and A Time to Kill my favorites. The King of Torts was a great read for about the first 2/3 of the book. Clay's rise from Public Defender to multimillionaire torts attorney was captivating. However, his demise I feel was haphazardly written and put together in a slipshod fashion. It lacked the deft prose and exquisite descriptions that are trademark of his other novels. This one just seemed lazy. Nonetheless, it was a quick read (six hours) and will make for a great book report.

I was disappointed in this book. It felt like he threw the ending together to meet a deadline. The first part of the book was gripping, but he left too many unanswered questions and loose ends.

I've read all Grisham's novel except "Skipping Christmas", and I founded that "The King Of Torts" was the worst. Once, I've writen my tutorial assignment just to make it exist. Then, I don't care abaut what I wrote because the dateline is coming. I thought Grisham wrote this novel also just to make it exist.

A fun, quick and enjoyable read. It's a book ready made for the beach.

Grisham delves reasonably deep into the business of tort litigation, but only skims the surface of what's driving the main character: Clay. What are his motivations? Why does bite on the offer by Pace? What motivates and defines his friends? Same for his family. For example, one of the characters is willing to give Clay a big chunk of money -- millions. The book's explanation for this generosity is that they worked together for five years. Yeah, right.

By the end of the book you know as much about the characters as you could have guessed in the beginning. I wish Mr. Grisham had spent more time building character in his characters and less time "stringing zeros" in the tort litigation mathematics.

I didn't like Clay, I didn't hate him, I just didn't care what happened to him.

Worth buying? Yes, in paperback, so you can leave it at the beach when you're done.