Take the offer, or take it to trial?
Enter the offer, what winning is worth, your win-chance assumption, and what trial still costs you. Three principled decision policies score the same choice — and they don't always agree.
All free tools →The calculator builds the two options as outcome distributions: accepting is a sure payment; fighting pays damages minus your remaining costs if you win, and costs you those expenses outright if you lose, at the win probability you set. Then three policies score them — the same selectable mathematics (the mathPick module) that drives the Decision Walk in the full Juricratic war room, vendored verbatim and pinned by parity tests.
Max EV picks the higher expected value — right on average, indifferent to risk. Robust (maximin) picks the option with the best worst case: it will usually favor the sure offer, because trial's worst case is losing and still paying your costs. Risk-adjusted subtracts a penalty of half the outcome spread (EV − 0.5σ) — a middle temperament between the two.
When the policies disagree, that disagreement IS the answer: your decision hinges on risk appetite, not arithmetic. And every figure here moves with your win-chance dial — an assumption, not a prediction. Sweep it and watch where the recommendation flips.
- Should I settle or go to trial?
- This tool cannot answer that — it ranks the options implied by YOUR assumptions under three explicit decision policies. What it shows honestly is when the choice is close, when it hinges on risk appetite, and how fast it flips as your win-chance assumption moves.
- Why do the three policies disagree?
- Because they value risk differently. Expected value ignores spread; maximin looks only at the worst case; risk-adjusted splits the difference. A risky trial with a slightly higher average than a sure offer is exactly the case where they split.
- Why does losing at trial show a negative number?
- Because litigation costs are real money: if you lose, you have paid your remaining costs and recovered nothing. The tool nets your remaining costs out of both trial outcomes so the comparison against the offer is apples to apples.
- What win probability should I use?
- Nobody knows that number — that is the point of making it a slider. Use your counsel's candid range, then sweep the slider across it. If the recommendation is stable across your whole range, the choice is robust; if it flips inside the range, the case turns on that uncertainty.
- Is this legal advice?
- No. It is decision arithmetic on the numbers you enter, for education. It creates no attorney-client relationship, and settlement decisions should be made with counsel who knows the facts.
This tool is a simulation artifact, not legal advice, and creates no attorney–client relationship. Every probability-like input is your assumption — a dial, not a prediction. Your inputs never leave your browser. Verify all deadlines and figures against the rules and orders of your court.
This is one dial. Your case has fifty.
Juricratic models your whole matter as a solvable game — every motion, every deadline, every settlement posture — and shows how the picture moves when the assumptions do.
Request access →