Only about 5% to 7% of medical malpractice cases ever go to trial. The vast majority—approximately 90% to 95%—are resolved through out-of-court settlements. This trend reflects a strategic decision by both plaintiffs and healthcare providers to avoid the time, cost, and unpredictability of trial proceedings.
Why So Few Cases Go to Trial
At Rodie and Rodie, we’ve seen firsthand how complex and emotionally taxing malpractice litigation can be. Most clients and defendants choose settlement for several key reasons:
-
Unpredictability of Jury Verdicts
Trials can result in unpredictable outcomes. Even strong cases may not persuade a jury, while others can lead to multi-million-dollar verdicts. Healthcare providers often settle to avoid the risk of a larger jury award. -
Time and Expense
Malpractice trials can take years to resolve. Legal fees, expert witness costs, and court expenses can quickly add up for both sides. Settling is often a faster and more cost-effective path to resolution. -
Emotional Toll
For patients and their families, reliving traumatic medical experiences in a courtroom can be deeply stressful. Many opt to settle in order to secure compensation without the additional emotional burden. -
Confidentiality and Reputation
Settlements are typically private, whereas trials are public record. Hospitals and physicians may settle to protect their reputations and maintain patient trust.
From the Plaintiff’s Perspective
At Rodie and Rodie, we help our clients weigh the pros and cons of trial vs. settlement based on the strength of the evidence, potential damages, and personal circumstances. While we are fully prepared to go to trial when necessary, our goal is always to secure the best possible outcome for our clients—whether through a negotiated settlement or a courtroom verdict.