Why Insurance Companies Offer Less to Some Law Firms Than Others
Two identical claims can be valued very differently depending on who is representing the claimant. An explanation of how carriers evaluate opposing counsel, and why it matters before a single negotiation begins.
Clients are often surprised to learn that the identity of their lawyer affects the value of their claim before any negotiation takes place. It is one of the least discussed dynamics in this field and one of the most consequential.
Carriers keep records
Insurance companies maintain institutional knowledge about the firms they face. They know which firms file suit when negotiations stall and which send a demand letter and wait. They know which lawyers have picked a jury in the last five years and which have not tried a case in a decade.
The arithmetic of settlement
Settlement value is roughly the likely verdict multiplied by the probability of the case actually reaching a verdict, less the cost of defending it. For a firm that never tries cases, that middle term approaches zero. The claim gets discounted accordingly no matter how strong the underlying facts happen to be.
What this means when choosing counsel
Ask a prospective lawyer directly how many cases they have tried to verdict in the past three years, and what happens if the insurer's offer is inadequate. The answers are informative. A firm that resolves everything before suit may be perfectly appropriate for a straightforward claim, but for a serious injury the willingness to try the case is what sets the number.
The benefit flows to clients who never see a courtroom
The point is not that your case should be tried. Most should not be. The point is that a credible willingness to try it produces a better offer, earlier, for the overwhelming majority of clients who ultimately settle.