Settling with one defendant can be worth less than the case it removes

Evidence

In spite of all the talk about billion-dollar settlements and “astronomical” verdicts, this was an offer that Schlichtmann had to consider carefully. His firm was deeply in debt. He could use the Beatrice money to finance the trial against Grace, and at the same time put a substantial sum into the hands of the families. Furthermore, getting rid of Beatrice also meant getting rid of Facher, who had proven to be his strongest adversary. Without Facher to complicate matters, the trial against Grace would no doubt be simpler, and probably clearer and more compelling for a jury of ordinary citizens. — , Harr Jonathan - A Civil Action, 1687

Categorization

  • XREF: Connects to the litigation-strategy material on why parties settle and how removing one adversary reshapes a trial. — connects to: A dead child is worth less to a jury than a dead breadwinner. — , Harr Jonathan - A Civil Action , 1144; Trial’s availability as a fallback shapes settlement bargaining in civil cases — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2162; Settlement terms can be engineered to publicly obscure a defendant’s guilt — Jonathan Harr, A Civil Action, 2600 (+15 more)

Broader Connections