In 1994, I had the privilege of representing a man who lost part of his leg after four doctors failed to repair the damage done by a motorcycle accident. It was a difficult, time consuming and expensive case, with the liability of each doctor being seriously contested by each of their four capable lawyers. For reasons too complicated to explain in a brief summary, the client elected to settle his claims against three of the doctors for $300,000, and proceed to trial against the fourth, hoping to receive additional compensation from a jury. But the jury turned him down, leaving him to forever wonder what would have happened had he gone to war with all four. Were three birds in the hand worth four in the bush? We'll never know.
Then, in 1995, I had the additional privilege of representing an elderly woman who had aggravated her already bad back after slipping on water due to faulty plumbing in a hotel bathroom. At the start of the trial in Federal District Court , we demanded $700,000 to settle the case, but the hotel offered only $150,000. The trial seemed to be going very well, and the hotel kept upping their offer. On the last day of trial, the hotel offered $500,000, but the client turned it down because the trial had truly led her to believe that she could do better, and not much worse, with the jury. After all, the hotel owner thought so, and frankly, off the record, so did the Judge. But the jury decided that her injuries were only worth $240,000, and that she was 1/3 responsible for the accident, so she wound up with only $160,00, instead of $500,000. Of course, Monday morning quarterbacks with 20/20 hindsight, myself included, would say that she should have accepted the $500,000, but who among us can chastise another for not having a crystal ball in the heat of battle?...
