The Benefits of Settling Personal Injury Cases Out of Court

Ebenstein & Ebenstein, a law firm in Hartford, Connecticut, provided a full range of high-quality legal representation. Having focused much of its practice on personal injury law and litigation, Ebenstein & Ebenstein attorneys expertly argued on behalf of clients both in and out of court.

Settling personal injury cases out of court is beneficial for a variety of reasons, one of which is that it is typically less expensive. Not only is the percentage received by the attorney often less when compared to trials, settlements also reduce the number of billable hours an attorney works on the case.

Trials are also very stressful for all those involved. Both sides must complete extensive examinations and cross-examinations while also having their character scrutinized. Trials require being present at various depositions and mediations in addition to the actual court hearing, causing more physical and emotional stress. Further personal details are protected with a settlement and the added option of a confidentiality agreement prevents the case from being spoken about in public at all, whereas trial cases are public record and available for everyone to review.


Basic Litigation Terms

Ebenstein & Ebenstein, a former law firm based out of Connecticut, provided clients with a wide range of services and legal expertise. Ebenstein & Ebenstein featured a team of multi-talented lawyers, particularly those with litigation experience.

Whether you are a law student, a defendant, or a victim working with the prosecution, the complex litigation process can seem like another language. There are a few key terms that individuals should become familiar with before entering into a court setting. To begin with, an acquittal is an important term for the defense; in the case of an acquittal, either a judge has deemed the current evidence lacking and not substantial enough to continue a trial, or a jury has returned with a non-guilty verdict. In either case, the trial is over. In order for the prosecution to avoid an acquittal, all of the evidence used in the case must be considered admissible. This means that the evidence adheres to the letter of the law and can be presented in court to a judge and jury.

A common litigation term heard in the mainstream is “objection.” The expression is most commonly heard when one side of the litigation breaks procedure in order to make their case, forcing the opposing side to object. If the judge sustains the objection, the offender must cease their line of questioning or withdraw unsanctioned evidence.