In personal injury law today, out-of-court settlements are becoming quite common. Plaintiffs are often encouraged to resolve their cases without ever stepping inside a courtroom. While settlements can offer clear benefits, avoiding trial altogether may cost plaintiffs more than they realize. This article explores what is truly at stake when a case never reaches a jury.
The Allure of Settlement
Many plaintiffs choose to settle because of faster and more predictable outcomes. The prospect of avoiding the stress and uncertainty of a courtroom appeals to injury victims who are often already under significant strain. Insurance companies play a key role in this dynamic, frequently presenting early settlement offers that seem reasonable at first glance.
Yet, plaintiffs may not fully recognize that in seeking certainty, they could be accepting far less than their case is worth. In fact, settling too soon can become an example of what you risk by going cheap, as the compensation may fail to reflect the true impact of the injury.
Missed Opportunities at Trial
When plaintiffs avoid trial, they forgo the possibility of higher compensation. Juries have the power to award damages that far exceed what insurers initially offer, particularly in cases involving emotional harm or conduct that merits punitive damages. Beyond financial recovery, trials serve an essential function in holding defendants accountable in a public forum. Defendants such as corporations, hospitals, or insurers must answer for their actions in a way that private settlements often conceal.
Moreover, trial outcomes can set important legal precedents that influence future behavior. A verdict may prompt changes in corporate policy or industry standards—an outcome no settlement can achieve. Plaintiffs also miss out on the emotional closure that comes from having their experience validated in court. Telling one’s story before a jury can provide a sense of justice that a confidential agreement simply does not offer. This is where firms like The Rodd Firm in Albany, GA advocate for clients by being unafraid to take cases to trial when justice demands it.
When Settling May Undermine Justice
Settling too early or without full consideration may leave defendants off the hook. Big organizations are not new to making low settlement offers in the attempt to evade attention or causing a legal precedent that may influence succeeding suits. This strategy preys on the disparities of power, in which individual plaintiffs are intimidated by the mere amount of resources and influence conferred by insurers or corporations. In most cases, fear of trial or the unknown about the trial process is exploited in persuading plaintiffs to take less than they may be owed. This is especially true in situations where plaintiffs are navigating complex cases with multiple parties or significant damages.
The Role of a Trial-Ready Attorney
A skilled attorney prepares every case for trial. Such preparation sends a loud warning to lawbreakers and the insurance companies: the plaintiff is determined to secure complete compensation. A strong trial posture often results in better settlement offers because the opposing side recognizes that the risk of a large jury award is real. Plaintiffs ought to find litigators who go into court with this kind of attitude and do not shy away from the courtroom when it is in the client’s best interest.
Endnote
Settlement does seem like the safer or easier path, it can leave justice (and fair compensation) on the table. Plaintiffs should consult with legal counsel who understand the value of trial and are prepared to pursue it when necessary.
