Risk and expense of trial drive both sides toward settlement

Evidence

What happens, then, to the other grievances? Why do so few potential cases ever get as far as filing suit? Why do so few reach the goal line? The general answer is sim­ ple: trials are risky and expensive. Usually, both sides would be better off settling, and so settle they do. In auto-​accident cases, it makes sense for an insurance company to pay off the claim if the settlement amount is less than what a court case would cost and what the company would probably lose at the trial. Similarly, it makes sense for a victim to settle, even for less than he or she would probably win at a trial. There is always the risk of losing. And the trial itself and the lawyers will cost money, win or lose, in most types of cases. — Lawrence M. Friedman and Grant M. Hayden, American Law, 361

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Settlement terms are shaped by predictions about trial outcomes — Lawrence M. Friedman and Grant M. Hayden, American Law: An Introduction, 362; Lawyer involvement may substitute for judicial supervision in approving employee settlements — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 4623; Civil settlements happen in the shadow of what a trial would produce — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1045 (+6 more)

Broader Connections

• Civil cases are typically settled in the shadow of potential trial #corroborates (0.88) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2161
• Civil settlements happen in the shadow of what a trial would produce #expands (0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1045
• Case negotiations occur in the shadow of the law set by trial outcomes #expands (0.78)