The stakes are high. Trial is scheduled for next week and negotiations are at an impasse. You have already offered more than the case is really worth, but you recognize the risk that a jury might award far more than you have offered. Keeping in mind the ultimate goal of claim handling, you believe the case will settle if you add a little more money to your last offer. On the other hand, you have a good attorney, strong liability and damages defenses, and genuinely believe the jury may return a defense verdict. What should you do?

The liability claim business is, by definition, a risky business. Ideally, the decision to position a case for trial or settlement is made early and the defense costs are allocated appropriately. Often, elements that are out of the control of the defense (i.e. unreasonable or unresponsive claimant counsel), prevent an early disposition.

The approaches to resolving liability claims are as varied as the number of companies and individuals practicing the craft. At one end of the spectrum is the "play it safe" strategy of resolving every claim short of trial by paying just enough money to secure a release. At the opposite extreme is the "roll the dice" strategy of taking close cases to trial and trusting that a jury will see it your way. While there is no one-size-fits-all answer to the question, a number of factors should be considered when the defense is deciding whether to take a liability case to trial. Many are case-specific, but some of the important factors are universal:

• Is there a ceiling on an adverse award?
• Will the costs and expenses of proceeding to trial justify a higher offer?
• Is it likely that the claimant will accept your higher offer?
• What has changed since you evaluated the case for settlement?
• How much stress are you willing to endure?

Assuming the case has been properly valuated for settlement, the final process of making the trial-or-settlement decision flows from a related, yet separate, methodology.