Legal action against a listed company: settling vs ongoing litigation

Discussion in 'Professional Trading' started by Option Trader, May 17, 2010.

  1. Why do these cases so often settle for 10 cents on the dollar? If the case is great and the named plaintiff is determined, can it not go to court, and get a judgment for the full value?

    Thank you in advance.
  2. LeeD


    Because the monetary value in many cases is difficult to determine. Most cases are very different from unpaid loan where the monetary value is usually clearly spelled out.

    Because of highly uncertain claim value the usual practice is to claim well above the reasonably expected payout. As the court hearing progresses the claim value tends to go down and almost never up. So, it's like bargaining... when the value both parties find acceptable is found, the settlement is reached.
  3. Juries in a civil trial are the biggest crapshoot in the entire legal industry.

    A settlement is based on negotiation, and the final number is the closest to fair that everyone with a stake in the outcome can agree to. One side makes an offer, the other side a counter-offer, back and forth. The parties both have to agree, both of their counsels have to agree, and the judge has to agree. Rational decisions are the rule.

    The members of jury, by legal requirement, are completely disinterested. Send the wronged party packing without so much as a nickel towards their legal bills? Maybe somebody on that jury got dumped by a guy who looks like the plantiff. Award a record-breaking punative and compensatory fine against the defendant? Maybe that company laid off once somebody's brother-in-law and he beat up a juror's sister. Wildcards are the rule.

    Jury trials are the last resort, a kind of systematic threat, designed to guide both sides towards a settlement and get on with life.