CASE STUDY

When facing a high-stakes commercial auto claim, understanding potential outcomes is essential for making informed decisions. This case study highlights how Quaker Analytics employed Quaker Focus™, our advanced focus group tool, to analyze liability and damages in a serious intersection accident case. The combination of input along with results and sentiment analysis helped our client confidently move forward with a settlement, avoiding the risks of trial in a contentious case involving complex liability issues.

Facts of the Case

The case arose from a serious accident at an intersection. Our client’s insured driver, operating a commercial truck, entered the intersection on a “stale yellow” light. The insured’s truck dashcam footage showed the light was a “stale yellow,” meaning it was yellow before the insured reached the intersection. At no time does the dashcam video show the insured’s light as red, though the plaintiff and their expert argued that “the defendant’s light must have been red when they entered the intersection given the amount of time it was yellow.” The claimant entered the intersection from the right of the insured; there is no evidence to show what light the claimant had when they entered the intersection. The claimant broadsided the insured’s vehicle, causing the claimant driver to sustain a severe spinal injury that required cervical fusion surgery. This injury left the claimant with permanent physical limitations.

There were no independent witnesses, and it was unclear whether the claimant’s light had actually turned green at the moment of the accident. The case was venued in a modified comparative negligence state, meaning that the claimant could recover damages if they were found to be 50% or less at fault.

The initial demand from the claimant was $4 million, and our client’s offer was $250,000. With such a large gap between offer and demand, the client approached Quaker to assess the likelihood of their insured being found more than 50% at fault. The client was particularly concerned about whether they should increase their offer or prepare for trial, knowing that even a 50/50 liability finding could lead to a significant payout.

Where Quaker Focus™ Comes In

To address these uncertainties, Quaker Analytics implemented Quaker Focus™, our advanced focus group tool designed to capture how actual jurors might perceive the case if it were to go to trial in this venue. In order to get a significant sample, we selected 100 real human participants for the focus group who matched the demographics of the county where the case would be tried. In this venue, six jurors are selected to make up a whole jury for each trial.

**Exhibit 1 - Participants demographic profile, taken from the Quaker Focus result dashboard**

The primary focus of the case was on comparative negligence, as the client was most concerned with the allocation of liability. However, by also including questions on damages within the Quaker Focus™ participant survey, we were able to conduct a damages simulation, enabling the client to assess potential offers and risks.

In the below survey questions, taken from Quaker Focus™, participants were asked to assess both liability and damages, with a particular emphasis on the question of comparative negligence.

**Exhibit 2 - Liability verdict survey, taken from Quaker Focus™ web app**

**Exhibit 3 - Liability verdict survey, taken from Quaker Focus™ web app**

**Exhibit 4 - Liability verdict survey, taken from Quaker Focus™ web app**

Key Focus Group Findings:

72% of participants found the plaintiff more than 50% at fault, with fault allocations ranging up to 100%
18% of participants believed the insured driver was more than 50% at fault, with fault ranging from 51% to 80%
10% of participants found liability evenly split at 50/50

One of the key advantages of Quaker Focus™ is the ability to include open-ended questions, allowing participants to provide detailed feedback in their own words. Participants have the option to record their own voice or type their answers, which offers deeper insight into their reasoning and perceptions.

Participants consistently noted that, while the insured could have attempted to stop more quickly, slamming on the brakes might have created a dangerous situation. They also concluded that the insured couldn’t reasonably have seen the claimant entering the intersection from their right. This feedback confirmed that participants were unlikely to assign more than 50% fault to the insured driver.

**Exhibit 5 - Overall liability results, taken from the Quaker Focus™ result dashboard**

Jury Simulation Tool

We asked the participants to determine what they consider a fair amount for the total damages in this case. Since the decision on damages is made collectively by jurors (six jurors in this venue), we input the 100 individual damage verdicts into our jury simulation tool.

Randomly selects groups of participants from the survey, matching the number of jurors in the target venue (six in this case)
Calculates the total awards for each group
Repeats this process 1,000 times, generating 1,000 different combinations of random participant groups
Provides the overall simulation result

**Exhibit 7 - Jury Simulation Results Zoomed In**

Impact of Quaker Focus™ Findings

With these insights, the defense reevaluated their strategy and refined their position in mediation. Participant feedback confirmed that proceeding with trial carried less risk than anticipated, and the defense adjusted their final offer to $400,000.

Additionally, the focus group explored potential damages awards. While the plaintiff's demand remained at $4 million, the focus group suggested damages in the range of $1.2 million, which was significantly higher than the defense's offer but well below the plaintiff's expectation. This feedback gave the defense a clearer understanding of a feasible trial outcome, allowing them to argue that a verdict in favor of the plaintiff was far from guaranteed.

Key Findings from Quaker Focus™:

Liability Clarification: The focus group overwhelmingly found the claimant primarily at fault, with 72% of participants assigning more than 50% fault to the plaintiff.
Damages Assessment: Participants indicated they would likely award $1.2 million, much lower than the plaintiff’s demand but higher than the defense’s initial offer.
Leverage at Mediation: The client chose to share some of the focus group results with the plaintiff, which favorably impacted the result.

Mediation and Settlement

The defense confidently presented the focus group’s findings at mediation. The defense argued that in nearly three out of four scenarios, the plaintiff would recover nothing, while 10% of jurors would find liability equally shared at 50/50. The mediator and opposing counsel recognized the reliability of the focus group data, and despite pushback from the plaintiff’s attorney, the case settled for $400,000, far below the initial demand.

Projected Litigation Expense Avoided: $150,000 in LAE (Litigation Adjustment Expense)

Without Quaker Focus™, the client would have been more likely to view the case as unfavorable in terms of liability and based on the rough numbers of the case we can project that they would have settled in the $750,000–$1.5 million range. The focus group results proved it was far more likely the client would prevail on liability, which prevented an overpayment on the claim. The $150,000 in avoided LAE was offset by the modest cost of the focus group of $7,500.

Appetite for Risk

Appetite for risk can also play a critical role in determining how much to offer, especially after a focus group like this determines there’s a good chance of paying nothing. Some of Quaker’s clients have reported similar cases where Quaker Focus™ results provided the basis for making a very low offer, barely exceeding the cost of defense. Other clients have told Quaker they are very hesitant to try spinal surgery cases, especially in risky venues.

In this case, the client felt that $400,000 was an excellent result when combining the potential of a verdict in excess of $600,000 and the cost of trying the case. Notwithstanding where an organization may fall on the risk appetite spectrum, a quick and affordable focus group tool like Quaker Focus™ ensures confidence in decision making and results that control loss costs.

Final Thoughts

This case shows how valuable Quaker Focus™ can be in evaluating complex commercial auto claims. By providing real-world, human juror feedback on liability, damages, and witness credibility, Quaker Analytics helped the client make a data-driven decision to settle, reducing their exposure and avoiding a potentially costly trial.

Quaker Focus™ also recognizes there will be times when results are needed quickly, especially if there are critical dates approaching for mediations, extensive discovery, expert designation and even trial. In this case, the client asked for the project to be completed within two weeks and our team was able to deliver on this request.

Focus groups empower claims managers, litigators, and attorneys with insights that minimize risk and uncertainty. Whether for mediation or trial preparation, Quaker Focus™ enables teams to make informed decisions that result in more favorable outcomes.

Client Leverages Quaker Focus™ to Reduce Risk in a High-Stakes Commercial Auto Claim