Evaluating the Risk vs. Reward of Proceeding to Trial in a Personal Injury Lawsuit

The size of the gap between your settlement needs/expectations and the offer can be determinative. If the defendant is willing to provide compensation that can make a significant improvement in your quality of life, trial might not be the best option for you. Often, you can find ways to make up the shortfall. For example:

• -You could invest all or part of the funds in a structured settlement, annuity, or trust. These investments can maximize your return over a longer period, and help you avoid overspending.
•  
• -Although the cost of your future outdoor maintenance (for example) has been calculated and flagged as a “need”, you might have family or friends that can perform these tasks for you.
•  
• -You might be willing to downsize, potentially freeing up profits from the sale of your home while decreasing your monthly expenses.

These and numerous other potential workarounds might turn an inadequate settlement proposal into an acceptable compromise for you.

The defendant’s offer might be unreasonably low for strategic reasons. They could be to attempting to bully you into giving up or trying to prolong the litigation for as long as possible to keep financial and emotional pressure on you. Your lawyer can help you analyze the motives behind the other side’s actions, and whether your case has a reasonable chance of success at trial.

Proceeding to trial involves risk, and each of us has a unique risk tolerance. Some plaintiffs are willing to “roll the dice,” regardless of the relative strength of their case. Often, this sort of plaintiff has adequate financial resources for their future, independent of the lawsuit’s outcome. Others will not take any risk, no matter how good their chances. Most plaintiffs, however, are moderately risk averse and make their choices based on careful consideration.

One of the most intimidating aspects of trial is the potential cost consequences. Generally, the successful party receives an award for partial recovery of their legal costs. This practice is justified by the idea that the unsuccessful litigant should have recognized they would lose, and either dropped the lawsuit (plaintiff) or paid the damages (defendant) without the necessity of trial. Insurers know that many plaintiffs, especially those that have not returned to work, will struggle to pay a costs award against them, and use it as another intimidation tactic. In response, resources like litigation insurance have been developed to offset these potential costs. Your lawyer can advise about the availability of these resources and help you decide whether they could be beneficial in your case.

Suppose your lawsuit is a “slam dunk” – the evidence clearly shows the defendant caused the accident, and your claims are thoroughly supported by medical opinions from leading experts. Your lawyer is confident in the case and thinks your testimony will be viewed sympathetically by the jury. Despite all these positive indicators of success, you might not believe you will win, or be willing to take the risk that you could lose, walking away with nothing. Although your lawyer can advise you based on their expertise, only you can make this decision. Placing your trust in exceptional trial lawyers like Campisi gives you confidence that you have maximized your opportunity to achieve just compensation for your injuries and losses – at trial when it is your best option or after thoroughly prepared and hard-fought settlement negotiations.

Other settlement articles that may interest you:

Before You Settle Your Personal Injury Lawsuit

Receiving a Settlement in Ontario Injury Lawsuits

What to Expect in Ontario Personal Injury Settlement Negotiations