Civil Litigation Dynamics Simulator

Case Day: 0 Phase: Pre-Filing

Case Value Distributions

Plaintiff's View

Expected Value: $845,000
Range (90% CI): $420K - $1.4M
Confidence: 42%

Defendant's View

Expected Value: $680,000
Range (90% CI): $280K - $1.1M
Confidence: 68%

Settlement Bargaining Zone

P's Minimum (reservation price)
D's Maximum (walk-away point)
Zone of Possible Agreement
P's Reservation: $520,000
D's Maximum: $780,000
ZOPA Width: $260,000
Settlement Probability: 72%

Case Timeline & Costs

Plaintiff Costs $45,000
Budget: $300,000 Burn: $2,500/day
Defendant Costs $62,000
Budget: $500,000 Burn: $3,200/day

Information State

Plaintiff Knowledge
55%
Defendant Knowledge
75%
Shared/Common Knowledge
35%
Information Gap: Moderate
Significant asymmetry favoring defendant. Discovery likely to shift valuations.

Decision Cascade & Strategic Flow

How to Use This Simulator

🎯 What This Simulates

This simulator models how civil lawsuits unfold over time, focusing on the strategic dynamics that drive settlement negotiations. You'll see how information revelation, cost accumulation, and risk preferences interact to create (or destroy) opportunities for settlement.

🚀 Quick Start

  1. Configure your case using the left panel (or use defaults)
  2. Click "File Complaint" to start the lawsuit
  3. Use Play ▶ to watch time advance, or trigger events manually
  4. Watch how the visualizations update as the case progresses
  5. Try to reach settlement or go to trial

📊 Understanding the Visualizations

Case Value Distributions

The blue curve shows what the plaintiff believes the case is worth. The orange curve shows the defendant's view. These start far apart (information asymmetry) and typically converge as discovery reveals facts.

Settlement Bargaining Zone

The blue line is plaintiff's minimum acceptable settlement. The orange line is defendant's maximum they'd pay. When defendant's max exceeds plaintiff's min, a green zone (ZOPA) appears—settlement is possible!

Timeline & Costs

Track how much each party has spent. When costs approach budget limits, settlement pressure intensifies. The dashed lines show budget caps.

Information State

Shows what each party knows. The gap between them represents information asymmetry—a key driver of failed negotiations.

⚙️ Key Configuration Options

Liability Strength

The "true" probability plaintiff wins. Neither party knows this exactly—they estimate based on available information.

Risk Tolerance

Risk-averse parties (low values) prefer certain outcomes and settle more readily. Risk-seeking parties (high values) are willing to gamble on trial.

Information Levels

How much each party knows at the start. Defendants often know more (they have the documents). Discovery closes this gap—at a cost.

Fee Arrangements

Contingency: Plaintiff's lawyer paid from recovery (reduces plaintiff's cost pressure)
Hourly: Costs accumulate regardless of outcome
English Rule: Loser pays both sides' fees (increases risk)

🎬 Actions You Can Take

Motions

Motion to Dismiss: Defendant tries to end case early. Usually denied, but partial grants narrow the case.
Summary Judgment: Expensive but can win without trial if facts are clear.

Discovery

Reveals information but costs money. Choose intensity: limited (cheap, little info) to scorched-earth (expensive, maximum revelation).

Settlement Offers

Make demands (plaintiff) or offers (defendant). The system will auto-respond based on the opposing party's calculated reservation price.

Surprise Events

Inject chaos: smoking gun evidence, witness changes, media attention, budget crises. See how shocks cascade through the system.

💡 What to Watch For

  • ZOPA formation: When does settlement become possible?
  • Cost pressure: How does budget exhaustion affect bargaining?
  • Information effects: Does discovery help or hurt settlement prospects?
  • Motion outcomes: How do rulings cascade through valuations?
  • Asymmetric resources: How does a funding mismatch create leverage?

🔬 The Underlying Model

Each party maintains probabilistic beliefs about case value. These beliefs update (Bayesian-style) when new information arrives. Settlement decisions compare:

  • Expected trial value (probability × damages)
  • Remaining litigation costs
  • Risk adjustment (based on tolerance)
  • Time/reputation factors

When defendant's adjusted maximum exceeds plaintiff's adjusted minimum, settlement is economically rational—but it still requires negotiation to find the right number.

1 of 8