Whether or not America has experienced a "litigation explosion," n1 or is suffering from "legal pollution," n2 or is in thrall to an [*6] "imperial judiciary," n3 there has surely been an explosion of concern about the legal health of American society. A battery of observers has concluded that American society is over-legalized. n4 According to these commentators, government, at our urging, tries to use law to regulate too much and in too much detail. Our courts, overwhelmed by a flood of litigation, are incapable of giving timely, inexpensive and effective relief, yet simultaneously extend their reach into areas beyond both their competence and legitimacy. A citizenry of unparalleled contentiousness exercises a hair trigger readiness to invoke the law, asking courts to address both trifles unworthy of them and social problems beyond their grasp. In short, these observers would have us believe that we suffer from too much law, too many lawyers, courts that take on too much -- and an excessive readiness to utilize all of them. As a convenient label for this whole catalog of ills, n5 I borrow the term "hyperlexis" from one of these observers. n6 This Article will examine one component of the hyperlexis syndrome -- the alleged high rates of disputing and litigation -- in the context of current research. I shall then offer a few reflections on the hyperlexis perspective.
