During the pre-settlement negotiations, the 2 opposing sides share one thought. Each side tries to guess at the amount of money that a jury might grant the claimant, if the case were to make its way into a courtroom.
In other words, both sides study the odds for winning a possible court case. Some of the factors that influence such odds relate to tasks assigned to the jury, and challenges to a jury’s final decision.
In some cases, the juries need to apportion the fault.
If the evidence has shown the existence of shared fault, then the jury must follow the principle that is used in that particular legal jurisdiction. Some jurisdictions practice the principle of comparative negligence. Others follow the principle of contributory negligence. Juries that must adhere to the principle of comparative negligence need to assign a given percentage of faults to each party, the plaintiff and the defendant. Ultimately, the amount of money awarded to each party must correspond with the extent of their faults.
A jurisdiction might have damage caps.
If a jurisdiction had chosen to establish damage caps, then that might create a challenge to the jury’s decision. If jury had decided on an award that exceeded the established cap, then the judge would have to alter the size of that suggested award, as per personal injury lawyer in Medicine Hat.
A jury might need to reduce an award to its present-day value.
If a plaintiff had won a request for compensation of future medical costs or loss of future earnings, then that amount would need to be reduced to its present value. That procedure is used, because there are potential pitfalls in any long-term payment plan.
Personal injury lawyers have formulas that can be used, if it becomes necessary to guess at the amount of money that a jury would be likely to award the lawyer’s client. Those figures can help a lawyer to determine the ideal figure for a fair settlement.
A jury’s decision might get changed, following consideration of the collateral source payments.
Juries are not given any information about collateral source payments. Those represent the money that some person or group has already given to the injured victim/client. Once a jury has issued its verdict, the judge calculates the amount of the collateral source payments.
At the conclusion of a settlement, the claimant’s lawyer calculates the size of such payments, and deducts that amount from the client’s compensation. If a personal injury case gets decided in a courtroom, the judge determines the size of the collateral source payments. In either case, the calculations reveal the size of any reduction for the amount of money to be given the claimant/plaintiff. In other words, those payments could affect a payout’s size.