Avoiding the Nuclear Verdict or the Defense Verdict
Better understand the rise of nuclear verdicts, or defense verdicts, and how to avoid them, considering both the strategic and psychological factors at play.
According to professionals in the insurance industry and the defense bar, the number of nuclear verdicts, or verdicts that exceed $10M, is on the rise. Although the defense may prevail over plaintiffs more often at trial, when the defense loses, they lose big. And plaintiffs who could have obtained needed resources in settlement, sometimes “roll the dice” at trial and get less, or nothing at all.
Do clients really want to engage in such high stakes showdowns? Is there a better way to administer “justice?”
This webinar addresses these very questions. It is designed for attorneys and other professionals practicing in litigation, mediation, and negotiation who wish to better understand the rise of nuclear verdicts and how to avoid them, considering both the strategic and psychological factors at play.
The objectives of this course are to help you understand why nuclear verdicts are occurring more frequently in recent years; the strategic factors to consider, including retaining control over decision outcomes and playing the percentages; and the psychological factors to consider, including assessing your mediation and negotiation tactics and the accuracy of your predictions of litigated outcomes.
Attendees will come away with strategies for improving their approach to negotiation, mediation, and litigation to curtail instances of self-serving bias and over-confidence which can increase the likelihood of a nuclear verdict, with an eye to avoiding this type of verdict wherever possible.
Your Learning Outcomes:
• Understand and manage heuristics such as overconfidence, anchoring, and confirmation bias. These are only three of many mental shortcuts we make, but they occur most frequently.
• Understand the value of beginning the process early which will positively influence the outcome – even if you litigate all the way to verdict. Assessments should come first, case valuations will follow. Rinse and repeat since the litigation landscape shifts often.
• Learn how the information you get about the other side’s position will influence their response and your strategy. How you ask for a demand, for example, influences the response.
• Learn how your approach to bargaining influences what kind of information you learn about the other side; information is the real currency in negotiation.
• Assess who is on your team. Do you find yourself in an echo chamber that isn’t helping you make the best settlement decision?
• Assess how well, or how extensively, you use your mediator. Is your strategy limited to getting the mediator to deliver the “tough” news to the other side, or your own client?
