What is a medical malpractice case worth? It's the question every prospective plaintiff wants answered and the one attorneys struggle most to answer with precision. Settlement values depend on so many variables—injury severity, liability strength, defendant resources, local legal culture—that predicting outcomes involves as much art as analysis.
The Damages Foundation
Settlement value starts with damages: what did the malpractice cost you? Economic damages have calculable components. Medical expenses—past bills and projected future costs—can be tallied. Lost income can be computed from wage records and work history. Future earning capacity lost to disability can be estimated by vocational experts. These numbers provide a floor, though disputes about projections and causation can affect even "calculable" damages.
Non-economic damages are inherently harder to value. What is a year of chronic pain worth? What compensation makes sense for the inability to pick up your grandchildren, or the loss of intimacy with your spouse, or the daily reminder of function you'll never regain? Juries in different venues assign wildly different values to similar non-economic losses, making prediction uncertain.
Wrongful death cases add another dimension. Economic damages include lost financial support and funeral expenses. Non-economic damages vary by state—some allow recovery for the decedent's suffering before death, some for survivors' grief and loss of companionship, some for both or neither. The specific damages available significantly affect case values.
The Liability Discount
Settlement values reflect not just damages but the probability of proving them. A case with clear liability and strong damages is worth more than a case with the same damages but contested liability. The discount for liability uncertainty can be substantial.
Consider a case with potential damages of $2 million. If liability is nearly certain—clear negligence, solid expert support, sympathetic facts—the case might settle near full value. If liability is contested—competing expert opinions, judgment call defenses, unsympathetic plaintiff—the case might settle at 30 or 40 percent of damages to account for the meaningful chance of losing at trial.
Attorneys apply these discounts when evaluating cases and negotiating settlements. A settlement offer must be weighed not against full damages but against expected trial recovery adjusted for the probability of prevailing. Accepting 50% of damages may be reasonable if trial presents a 50% chance of losing entirely.
Jurisdiction Matters
Where a case is filed dramatically affects its value. Some jurisdictions have plaintiff-friendly juries that return large verdicts. Others have conservative juries skeptical of malpractice claims. These local variations aren't fair or logical, but they're real—and defendants know them.
Damage caps impose legal limits on recovery in many states. A case that might be worth millions in an uncapped state may have its non-economic damages capped at $250,000 elsewhere. These caps directly reduce settlement values because they reduce what plaintiffs can recover at trial.
Local legal culture also matters. How judges in the venue handle malpractice cases, what experts are available, how long cases take to reach trial, what similar cases have settled for—all of this contextual information shapes settlement negotiations.
Defendant Resources
Settlement requires defendants with ability to pay. A judgment-proof defendant with minimal insurance can't settle a case for more than their coverage regardless of damages. Conversely, deep-pocket institutional defendants may pay substantial settlements to avoid trial risk and publicity.
Insurance policy limits often set practical ceilings on settlement values. A physician with $1 million coverage typically won't contribute personally beyond that amount to settle. The $1 million becomes the effective maximum from that defendant. Multiple defendants with separate coverage may provide additional sources, but each source has limits.
What Settlements Actually Look Like
Published settlement data shows enormous range. Minor malpractice causing temporary injury might settle for tens of thousands of dollars. Serious permanent injury to working adults often settles in the mid-six figures to low seven figures. Catastrophic injury—permanent brain damage, paralysis—may reach multiple millions in the right circumstances.
But averages and ranges mask enormous variation. Cases with superficially similar facts settle for vastly different amounts based on jurisdiction, defendant resources, expert strength, plaintiff appeal, and dozens of other factors. Anyone who quotes a specific expected value for a case they haven't thoroughly analyzed is guessing.
The Decision to Settle
Settlement involves tradeoffs. Accepting a settlement provides certain recovery without the time, stress, and risk of trial. Rejecting settlement to pursue trial means risking adverse verdict (and no recovery) while potentially achieving much larger compensation.
Attorneys advise clients on these tradeoffs, but the decision belongs to the plaintiff. Understanding what a case is realistically worth—not in fantasy but in the actual legal environment where it exists—enables informed decision-making about settlement offers. The goal isn't maximum dollars in theory but maximum value given real-world constraints and uncertainties.