What are the advantages and disadvantages of negotiating or going to trial in a meso lawsuit?
When a meso lawsuit is filed, one of the most important decisions to make is whether to negotiate or go to trial. Both options have their advantages and disadvantages, which should be known and weighed before choosing the best strategy for each case.
Negotiate an out-of-court settlement
Most meso lawsuits are resolved through an out-of-court agreement, that is, a negotiation between the parties to reach a consensus on the compensation to be paid to the plaintiff, without the need to go to trial.
Extrajudicial agreements have the following advantages:
• They are faster and simpler than trials, allowing the plaintiff to receive money in a shorter period of time and avoid the stress and uncertainty of a court process.
• They are more flexible and personalized, as the parties can agree to the terms and conditions that suit them best, without having to conform to court rules and procedures.
• They are more confidential, as the details of the agreement are not made public, which can protect the privacy and reputation of the parties.
• They are safer, since they eliminate the risk of losing the case or obtaining less compensation than expected.
However, out-of-court settlements also have some disadvantages, such as:
• They are more limited, since they depend on the willingness and ability to pay of the defendants, who may offer a lower amount than the plaintiff could obtain in a trial.
• They are more waivable, as they involve the plaintiff agreeing to waive his or her right to file future claims for the same reason, which can be detrimental if the illness worsens or if new damages or losses arise.
• They are less justiciable, since they do not establish a legal precedent or formal liability of the defendants, which can make it difficult to prevent and punish negligent or fraudulent conduct by asbestos companies.
Go to trial
Some meso lawsuits do not settle out of court and undergo a trial, that is, a judicial process in which a judge or jury decides the guilt of the defendants and the compensation that should be paid to the plaintiff.
Trials have the following advantages:
• They are more fair and transparent, since they are based on the evidence and arguments presented by the parties, which are evaluated by an impartial third party and in accordance with current laws and rights.
• They are higher, as they can provide greater compensation than could be obtained in an out-of-court settlement, especially if punitive damages are included, which are an additional sanction to punish and deter defendants from acting maliciously or recklessly.
• They are more exemplary, since they establish a legal precedent and formal liability of the defendants, which can contribute to the prevention and repair of damage caused by asbestos and mesothelioma.
However, trials also have some disadvantages, such as:
• They are slower and more complex than out-of-court settlements, which means that the plaintiff has to wait longer to receive the money and face the stress and uncertainty of a judicial process.
• They are more rigid and unpredictable, conforming to court rules and procedures, which may vary by state and jurisdiction, and which may lead to unexpected or unfavorable results.
• They are more public, as the details of the trial are made public, which can affect the privacy and reputation of the parties.
Conclusion
Negotiating or going to trial in a meso lawsuit are two valid options, which have their pros and cons. The choice will depend on the circumstances and interests of each case, as well as the advice and representation of a lawyer specialized in asbestos and mesothelioma cases, who can defend the rights and interests of the plaintiff, and seek the best possible solution.