Anyone that has submitted a personal injury claim has one obvious goal: Obtaining a fair deal. That deal could be made inside or outside of a courtroom. If the disputing parties were to finalize their deal outside of the courtroom, their arguments might be made during pre-settlement negotiations or during procedures that were part of a lawsuit.
When negotiations have ended with a settlement, that endpoint represents the resolution of the associated dispute
A settlement does not have to come at the end of negotiations. Two disputing parties might elect to settle after one party has filed a complaint. The filing of a complaint is the first step in initiation of a lawsuit.
The procedures that follow completion of the filing action could lead to a settlement. Settlements can be made before a trial has started. That would represent the culmination of actions that could qualify as suing out-of-court.
Advantages to settling out-of-court with insurance of responsible party
• Aids attainment of quick resolution
• The plaintiff has more control over the situation.
• It costs less than proceeding with a trial
• It is less risky than a trial; it provides plaintiffs with a greater level of certainty
Drawbacks to settling out-of-court with insurance of responsible party
• The amount of money awarded to the victim in form of compensation could be small
• It creates a permanent solution; the plaintiff cannot go after money for other damages
Drawbacks to foregoing any settlement, and moving ahead with a trial
The plaintiff must share detailed answers to a lawyer’s questions with everyone that has come into the courtroom. That could mean sharing facts about some of the plaintiff’s most private information. By the same token, the outcome for the settlement could be kept private. Members of the public would not know what sort of agreement the disputing parties had reached.
There would be no guarantee that the judge or jury would decide in favor of the plaintiff. If either of them was to decide in the defendant’s favor, the plaintiff would not receive any money. At conclusion of trial, the plaintiff could not be sure that all issues had been resolved. The defendant would have the right to appeal the jury or judge’s decision.
A feature common to both approaches
Both claimants that sue out-of-court and those that choose to pursue a lawsuit must handle a face-to-face confrontation with the allegedly responsible party. Not everyone that walks away from such a confrontation feels fully satisfied.
Both parties could opt for another alternative: That of taking part in a mediation session. That calls for the presence of a neutral party during a face-to-face meeting between the disputing parties. The Personal Injury Lawyer in Miramichi knows that the resulting compromise offers benefits to all concerned.