Review - Defining the Objective

     Any sensible litigation must begin with understanding what outcomes are possible and likely. Whether you are defending or bringing a claim, you can make no sound decisions without a firm handle on this.

     This section should have taught you that simply having (or being exposed to) a valid legal claim is only the start of the process. Before that means anything, you must know:

• What remedies can the court award if you prevail? If those remedies do not meet your needs, litigation may not be the best path.
• Can those remedies be enforced? Will the defending party be subject to the court's injunctive relief or, if the claim is for damages, can it be enforced where the defendant has assets? As you will quickly learn in some of your other classes, there is little point in pursuing a 'judgment proof' target. A party may have deep pockets with plenty of money in them, but if a judgment cannot be enforced where those assets are it means little.
• What are the procedural costs of getting to where you can obtain that recovery? We use the appeals process to illustrate that having a winning claim, or a winning appeal, is not at all the same as having a claim or appeal that you can afford to pursue. 

     In any system, such concerns should inform the decision about whether litigation should be pursued or whether some other method of resolving the conflict should be pursued. In the US system, where few cases go to trial and many are resolved by settlement, these kinds of issues inform settlement negotiations just as much as pure liability calculations.