Not everyone that files a personal injury case ends up facing members of the opposing side in a courtroom. The majority of cases end with a pre-trial settlement. Why is that the case?
Claimants that settle manage to save time.
Once a trial has been scheduled, the claimant must wait at least one full year, before enjoying any monetary compensation. Even after a trial has ended, the opposing side could appeal the jury’s decision. That would extend the time that the plaintiff must spend waiting for any possible compensation.
If a trial does take place, the size of the claimant’s compensation could get reduced by the payment of court-related costs.
During a trial, reports must be prepared. That adds to the expenses that become a part of what the client owes the retained injury lawyer in Waterloo. If the trial’s location gets changed, the plaintiff could need to travel a fair distance. If it becomes necessary to hire a specialist, then that adds to the list of trial-related expenses. If the other side appeals the jury’s decision, that adds to the trial-related costs, as well as the time that passes before the plaintiff gets compensated.
Unlike a negotiated settlement, the need to await a jury’s verdict introduces a large amount of risk and uncertainty.
No one can predict what the jury will decide. After a jury decides that a plaintiff should be compensated for any injuries, it then determines the size of that compensation package.
Unexpected evidence might get introduced, usually at the time of a discovery session.
Some testimony from a witness during discovery might provide the other team of lawyers with material that could be used for shaping a decidedly-probing question. That question might then be asked during the trial.
It is always possible that a witness might fail to show up during a scheduled hearing in a courtroom. That deprives the legal team of the chance to strengthen its case.
A plaintiff does not benefit from any privacy protections in a courtroom.
The lawyers for the opposing side can ask questions about any aspect of the plaintiff’s life. Sometimes that allows for the unearthing of facts that the plaintiff would have wanted to keep hidden.
If investigators have been following the plaintiff’s actions, it could be that they taped those same actions. The investigators’ tape might be shown in the courtroom. If the tape was made while the plaintiff was in his or her yard, then a measure of the plaintiff’s privacy has been fractured.
Investigators might also speak with the plaintiff’s neighbors, or with co-workers.
The plaintiff’s actions in the courtroom get scrutinized by the jury. Twelve pairs of eyes are studying the plaintiff’s every action throughout the trial.