Medical Malpractice Settlements vs. Trials: Weighing the Pros and Cons in Georgia

The decision whether to pursue a settlement or proceed to trial in a medical malpractice case can be a pivotal moment for both plaintiffs and defendants. Each avenue comes with its own set of advantages and disadvantages, influencing the outcome and overall experience for all parties involved. Understanding these nuances is crucial for informed decision-making and achieving the best possible resolution. Here, we delve into the intricacies of medical malpractice settlements versus trials, shedding light on their respective pros and cons within the legal landscape of Georgia.


Opting for a settlement in a medical malpractice case offers several enticing benefits. Foremost among these is the promise of a swift resolution. Unlike trials, which can stretch out over months or even years, settlements provide a timely conclusion to the legal proceedings. This expeditious closure can be particularly appealing for plaintiffs seeking financial compensation to cover medical expenses, lost wages, and other damages without enduring prolonged litigation.

Moreover, settlements offer a degree of certainty that trials often lack. By reaching an agreement outside of court, both parties can avoid the uncertainties associated with judicial outcomes. For plaintiffs, this means securing compensation without the risk of an unfavorable verdict or lengthy appeals process. Conversely, defendants can mitigate the potential for substantial financial losses and reputational damage by resolving the matter efficiently and confidentially.

Another advantage of settlements is the flexibility they afford in crafting terms that accommodate the specific needs and interests of both parties. Through negotiation, plaintiffs can often secure more favorable terms than they might receive through a trial verdict. Additionally, settlements allow for the inclusion of non-monetary provisions, such as apologies or changes in medical procedures, which can contribute to closure and facilitate healing for all involved.


While settlements offer certain advantages, trials remain a vital avenue for pursuing justice in medical malpractice cases. Trials provide a platform for presenting evidence, cross-examining witnesses, and advocating for the rights of injured patients. By engaging in adversarial proceedings, plaintiffs have the opportunity to hold negligent healthcare providers accountable for their actions and seek appropriate redress under the law.

One of the primary benefits of trials is the potential for higher monetary awards. Juries may award greater damages than what defendants are willing to offer in settlement negotiations, particularly in cases involving severe injuries or egregious misconduct. For plaintiffs facing significant medical expenses and long-term care needs, the prospect of a substantial verdict can outweigh the uncertainties and time investment associated with trial litigation.

Matthew Powell Testimonial Keenan Law Firm
"Without a doubt Don Keenan is the greatest trial lawyer ever! His service to the community to help keep us all safe. He obtains justice to stop careless corporations and people who take shortcuts and put us all at risk because it is just easier and cheaper for them to violate the rights of the public."

Matthew Powell

"I have known Don Keenan for over 5 years. He is one of the finest attorneys in this country. More importantly he is a giver of the highest calibre. He gives his time, talent and treasure to his clients, to his fellow lawyers and to his community, enriching us all and creating a safer world for us to live in."

Katherine Rinaldo

"Don is an amazing person, and one of the best lawyers on the planet. Highly recommended."

Don Truskett

"Don is a professional mentor and educator of lawyers. He is also one of the best trial lawyers in the United States. But what really sets him apart is his compassion for his clients, and his dedication to helping injured children in particular. I highly recommend this attorney for any severe injury case."

Michael Strong

Trials also offer transparency and public scrutiny, serving as a mechanism for exposing medical errors and promoting accountability within the healthcare system. By bringing cases before a judge and jury, plaintiffs contribute to the broader discourse on patient safety and the standards of care expected from medical professionals. This advocacy role can have far-reaching implications beyond the individual case, influencing policies and practices to prevent future instances of malpractice.

However, trials also entail inherent risks and challenges. The litigation process can be protracted and emotionally draining for plaintiffs, requiring patience, resilience, and substantial resources to see through to the end. Additionally, the outcome of a trial is subject to the unpredictable nature of jury deliberations, making it impossible to guarantee a favorable result regardless of the strength of the evidence presented.

Navigating the Decision-Making Process

In the complex landscape of medical malpractice litigation, the decision whether to pursue a settlement or trial requires careful consideration of numerous factors, including the nature of the injuries, the strength of the evidence, the preferences of the parties involved, and the potential long-term consequences. To navigate this decision-making process effectively, it is essential to seek guidance from experienced attorneys who focus in medical malpractice law.

At Keenan Law Firm, we understand the challenges facing individuals and families impacted by medical negligence in Georgia. With decades of experience representing plaintiffs in complex malpractice cases, our team of dedicated attorneys is committed to advocating for the rights of injured patients and securing fair compensation for their losses. Whether through negotiated settlements or aggressive trial litigation, we stand by our clients every step of the way, providing personalized legal counsel and unwavering support throughout the legal process.

Factors Influencing the Decision

In deciding between settlements and trials, several key factors must be taken into account. The strength of the evidence is paramount; cases with clear-cut liability and substantial damages may be more suitable for trial, where the potential for a favorable verdict is higher. Conversely, cases with complex legal issues or disputed facts may be better resolved through settlement to avoid the uncertainties of trial litigation.

Another critical factor is the cost of litigation. Trials can be expensive, requiring extensive preparation, testimony, and courtroom fees. For plaintiffs with limited financial resources, the prospect of a costly trial may outweigh the potential benefits of pursuing a verdict. Settlements, on the other hand, offer a more cost-effective option for resolving disputes, as they typically involve lower legal fees and expenses.

Verdicts & Settlements


Construction Site


Commercial Vehicle


Medical Malpractice


Nursing Home


Medical Malpractice




Bicycle Accident 


Tractor Trailer




Medical Malpractice

Trials can be stressful and emotionally draining for plaintiffs, particularly those dealing with serious injuries or the loss of a loved one. Settlements offer a way to avoid the rigors of trial and achieve closure without enduring the trauma of courtroom proceedings. However, for some plaintiffs, the opportunity to confront the responsible party in court and seek justice may outweigh these concerns.

The timing of a settlement or trial can also influence the decision-making process. Settlements can be reached at any stage of the litigation process, offering a way to resolve disputes quickly and avoid prolonged legal battles. Trials, on the other hand, require a substantial time commitment and may take years to reach a resolution. Plaintiffs must weigh the benefits of a swift settlement against the potential for a more favorable outcome at trial.

The reputation and track record of the opposing party can also play a role in the decision-making process. If the defendant has a history of settling cases for substantial amounts, plaintiffs may be more inclined to pursue a settlement. Conversely, if the defendant is known for vigorously defending against malpractice claims, plaintiffs may be more inclined to take their case to court.

Legal Considerations in Georgia

In Georgia, medical malpractice cases are subject to specific legal considerations that can impact the decision whether to pursue a settlement or trial. One such consideration is the statute of limitations, which limits the time frame within which a plaintiff can file a lawsuit. In Georgia, the statute of limitations for medical malpractice cases is generally two years from the date of the alleged malpractice, or from the date the injury was discovered, whichever is later.

Another important legal consideration is the potential for damage caps in medical malpractice cases. Georgia has a statutory cap on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases, limiting the amount plaintiffs can recover for pain and suffering, emotional distress, and other non-economic harms. This cap can influence the decision whether to settle or go to trial, as it may limit the potential recovery at trial.

Fighting for Your Full Compensation

The decision whether to pursue a settlement or trial in a medical malpractice case in Georgia is a complex and multifaceted process that requires careful consideration of numerous factors. By weighing the pros and cons of each option and seeking guidance from experienced attorneys, plaintiffs can make informed decisions that align with their objectives and priorities. At Keenan Law Firm, we are committed to providing our clients with the information, guidance, and advocacy they need to navigate this decision-making process with confidence. Contact us today to learn how we can assist you in your medical malpractice case.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *