"It is a disaster that wisdom forbids you to be satisfied with yourself and always sends you away dissatisfied and fearful, whereas stubbornness and foolhardiness fill their hosts with joy and assurance."
--- Michel de Montaigne (1553 - 1592)
Research
Comments About DecisionSet® Research
DecisionSet® research has been cited in briefs filed before the U.S. Supreme Court and in major public and legal publications like The New York Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Dispute Resolution Magazine, Advocate, Commercial Litigation Review, Just Resolutions eNews, Plaintiff, Dispute Resolution Journal, National Law Journal, San Francisco Attorney, ABA Journal Law News Now, Daily Journal and In-House Defense Quarterly. Its research also has been referenced in bar association publications in New York, California, South Carolina, New Jersey, Colorado, Michigan, Oregon, Tennessee, Ohio, Virginia, Vermont, Alabama and Wisconsin.
Recent comments about DecisionSet® research include:
“This sobering study should be read by all attorneys before they write that case evaluation and certainly before they walk away from the table at negotiations.”
Norman L. Gagne, Butt Thornton & Baehr PC, “You Gotta Know When To Hold ‘Em And Know When To Fold ‘Em”
“An exhaustive study conducted over a forty-four year period”
Geoff Drucker, Resolving 21st Century Disputes: Best Practices for a Fast-Paced World
“With clients, particularly plaintiffs who have unrealistic expectations, an excellent resource to consider”
Steve Kruis, Mediator, “Preparing For A Successful Mediation”
“The study authors examined differences in case “context” — types of cases — and in “actors” through characteristics of the lawyers involved and concluded that, for the most part, context accounts for more of the differences in tendency [to] be right. … For this reason, I strongly recommend that ALL attorneys dedicated to accurate prediction obtain a copy of this study.”
Marjorie Corman Aaron, “Client Science: Advice for Lawyers on Counseling Clients Through Bad News and Other Legal Realities”
“A good mediator should be familiar with this study in order to make both parties fully aware of their risks and alternatives to a negotiated settlement.”
Michael A. Pollack, Mediator, Michael Pollack Mediation Services, LLC
“The study demonstrates that it is difficult to assess likely verdicts and awards. This awareness should be part of the counsel we give to parties in settlement negotiations so they can fully assess their risk.”
Steven Meyrich, Co-Chair of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Section of the Boulder County Bar Association
“The study provided several key insights concerning risk-analysis during settlement negotiations.”
Richard Fincher, FINRA Arbitrator and Mediator
“The study has enough information to give pause to both sides and to give comfort to those who have resolved and settled a case at mediation, i.e., take comfort in the fact that statistically, they made the right decision by settling.”
Chester B. Chance and Charles B. Carter, “Statistically, Settling Is Better Than Going to Trial”
“has established a new dimension of risks for both plaintiffs and defendants in rejecting opportunities to settle. … is worth careful reading. It may also be important in reviewing the advantages of settlement versus trial with our clients.”
Guy Kornblum, Platinum Member, The Verdict Club, and co-author, Negotiating and Settling Tort Cases
“Because this statistical study is being referenced widely by mediators, it is important to understand the significance of the report.”
Sanford Gage, past president, California Trial Lawyers Association, and co-author, Insurance Bad Faith Litigation
“a landmark study … I want the audience of The Settlement Channel to take a look at it and use it in your next tough negotiation.”
Mark Wahlstrom, Founder, The Settlement Channel
“The statistics are telling. … makes a good read if you ever want to have a rational discussion with parties about the decision to settle or push forward to trial.”
Paul Godin, Chartered Mediator, Institute of Canada, and Roster Mediator, ADR Chambers
“The study provides us with the opportunity to reflect on the reasons why cases do not settle and the costs and benefits associated with those decisions.”
Susan Hammer, Distinguished Fellow, International Academy of Mediators
“fascinating study of 2,054 California civil cases decided between 2002 and 2005 provides a sobering report about the quality of settlement decision making.”
Kathy Perkins, Mediator, Kathy Perkins LLC, and author, “Improving Settlement Savvy”
“acclaimed study”
Academy of Court-Appointed Masters
“Recommended Reading. … Net-net, the results imply that either lawyers may not give the appropriate advice to their clients (some may advise trial to simply collect extra fees) or that clients are not heeding their lawyers’ advice.”
Colleen Canney, Montieth & Associates LLC
“But the findings, based on a study of 2,054 cases that went to trial from 2002 to 2005, raise provocative questions about how lawyers and clients make decisions, the quality of legal advice and lawyers’ motives. … The findings suggest that lawyers may not be explaining the odds to their clients ― or that clients are not listening to their lawyers.”
Jonathan Glater, The New York Times
“The study is useful in providing warnings as to the types of cases and situations in which parties and their attorneys are more prone to error.”
David Nolte, Certified Public Accountant and Founder, Fulcrum Financial Inquiry LLP
“If nothing else, perhaps this study teaches us that we could all benefit our clients if we continue our own education and training on the mediation of disputes. Maybe one day in the future it will be said that the language of lawyers and clients is the same.”
Jennifer Lee Parrish, Chairperson (2008), Litigation Section of the Virginia State Bar, and State Chairperson, Association of Defense Trial Attorneys
“has attracted media attention throughout the country.”
David F. Herr, President (2008), Academy of Court-Appointed Masters, and President (2004-2005), American Academy of Appellate Lawyers