The settle-or-try call, before it hardens
Most contested claims are evaluated by experience, a round-table, and whatever verdict research the jurisdiction offers. That works until it meets a venue that has drifted, a plaintiff story with more anger in it than the file suggests, or a damages ask engineered to anchor high.
A simulated panel gives the evaluation something to push against: how many jurors in this venue side with the claimant on these facts, what they award, and, most usefully, why. When the panel's reasoning shows which themes carry the room, you know whether the exposure is the facts or the framing, and whether trying the case is a defensible bet or an expensive way to find out.
Where claims teams put it to work
- Reserve setting. Ground early reserves in a venue-specific damages distribution instead of a single-point estimate carried forward from intake.
- Authority decisions. Bring a panel read to the round-table: verdict distribution, award range, and the themes behind them, on the actual claim file.
- Nuclear-verdict screening. Find the claims where jurors get angry, before a jury does. Anger themes surface in deliberation and juror interviews long before they surface in a courtroom.
- Mediation preparation. Test the damages anchors both sides will use and see which ones the panel adopts.
- Panel counsel evaluation. Run the defense story your counsel proposes against the venue's panel, then run the alternative.
- Venue assessment. The same claim reads differently across venues. Compare panels before deciding where and whether to fight.
Built to work at claims scale
Live jury research prices itself out of everything except the largest exposures: $10,000 to $60,000 and weeks of lead time per exercise, per the industry's own published numbers. Simulation at 10 to 20 percent of that, with results in days, changes which claims get research at all. Litigation managers rerun panels as claims develop, and directors screen a slate of trials rather than one.
Evidence the defense bar has seen
In a head-to-head published in DRI's For The Defense (May 2026), a Viewpoints.ai simulated panel reached the same defense verdict as a live human mock jury on the same case and surfaced the same leading themes. Our methodology page documents the validation program and its known limits, because a claims decision deserves to know both.
Confidentiality, answered up front
The platform is SOC 2 Type II audited and built for privileged case material, with strict access controls. Zero-data-retention agreements cover our AI providers, and claim files are never used to train AI models, ours or anyone else's.
"Reserves move when someone shows the round-table what the venue's jurors actually do with the claim. That evidence used to cost $40,000. It doesn't anymore."
Common questions from claims teams
How do claims teams use jury simulation on a settle-or-try decision?
Run the claim past a panel matched to the trial venue. The verdict distribution and damages range frame the exposure; the themes and juror reasoning show whether a better defense story changes it. Rerun with that story and compare before committing either way.
Can it help with reserves?
Yes. A venue-specific damages distribution on the actual claim file gives reserve-setting a documented, repeatable input, and it can be refreshed as the claim develops.
Is claim data secure?
The platform is SOC 2 Type II audited, access is strictly controlled, zero-data-retention agreements cover our AI providers, and your files never train AI models.
What does it cost relative to a mock trial?
Typically 10 to 20 percent of a comparable live exercise, with reruns included. The full comparison is in our cost guide.