The effect of motions practice on settlement

Motions practice in business litigation can be expensive, with the key question often being “is it worth it?”  A recent study based on a sample of 585 federal district court cases provide some worthwhile findings on the interplay between filing non-discovery motions and the timing of settlement:

• The likelihood of settlement increases by 375% after a substantive motion is filed;

• A granted motion increases settlement speed by 270%;

• If the plaintiff’s motion is granted there will be a stronger effect on settlement timing (an increase of 450%) than a motion from the defendant;

• There is no statistically significant difference in settlement timing based on the type of substantive motion filed;

• Motions that apply law to fact or are pleading-based show no statistically significant impact on settlement timing in the initial month after denial but both motion types exhibit a positive (though not statistically significant) effect on settlement timing after the first month.

In short, the study finds that that the initiation, content, and outcome of motions, as well as whether the plaintiff or defendant filed the motion, can significantly influence the timing of settlements.   See Boyd, Christina L. Boyd, Christina L. and Hoffman, David A., "Litigating Toward Settlement" (2013), https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/2551/