Lou La Cava and Andrew Hudson recently tried a case in Pinellas County in which, by the end of Plaintiff’s case, the Plaintiff dropped their demand to a number well below what the Defendants had offered prior to the start of trial. This case demonstrates the importance of a firm’s willingness to go to trial, even on a tough case with catastrophic damages. (loss of both arms and feet due to an infection). In this case, the defense was able to discredit plaintiff’s expert and client to the point that the plaintiffs’ attorneys became convinced they needed to settle the case for a number far below their demands before trial. The plaintiff, before trial, wanted many, many millions of dollars to settle the case. After the Plaintiff attorneys presented their case, which should have been their high point, the demands began to drop. Ultimately, they dropped their demand to a number even below what was offered before the trial began. While the clients were informed that we certainly anticipated a defense verdict, the clients felt it was best to avoid all risk and resolve the case in light of just how low Plaintiff’s demand had fallen. Therefore, the case resolved. As expected, when the jurors were released, they all said based on the evidence they had seen and heard, they all would have rendered a defense verdict. This was the case even though they had not even heard from the defense experts who would have reinforced the points the defense made during Plaintiff’s case. While we certainly would have been very happy to let this case go to a jury and notch another defense verdict for the firm, the clients’ decisions must always be respected and followed. The clients were extremely pleased with the result.