Settlement and Mediation Brief Template
Three sheets and four documents that take a demand apart component by component and price each one against the findings it needs.
Free download · No account needed
Marbury Cold Chain v. Levanter Logistics · Issue Chain
Every finding, and what disagreeing about it is worth
Illustrative figures for a fictional cold chain dispute. Marbury is the plaintiff and demands $8,400,000. Levanter is defending and paying.
| The finding a fact-finder has to make | Carries | Marbury | Levanter | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The limitation clause does not cap recovery at the freight charge | Everything | 45% | 15% | $420,373 |
| Breach: the excursion is Levanter's equipment, not Marbury's loading | Everything | 80% | 60% | $120,106 |
| Lost profits recoverable: foreseeable, and proved with reasonable certainty | Lost profits | 40% | 15% | $111,205 |
| Causation: the excursion caused the spoilage found on arrival | Everything | 90% | 75% | $76,431 |
| Quantum: the fraction of the claimed lost profits a jury allows | Lost profits | 65% | 35% | $73,395 |
| Cover freight is Levanter's, not the second carrier's | Cover freight | 55% | 30% | $28,357 |
| Lost future customers proved at all | Lost customers | 15% | 3% | $26,689 |
| Common chain, the three findings everything needs | multiplied | 32.4% | 6.75% | 17.3% mid |
| The same three findings averaged instead | check row | 71.7% | 50.0% | 60.8% mid |
Read the last column, not the two before it
The top row is a question about one clause, and it is worth 2.3 times the entire lost-profits fight. It is also the only finding here that no further evidence can move, because nothing factual touches a question of contract interpretation.
The bottom row is on the sheet as a check and never as an output. At the midpoint, averaging the three common findings values the claim at $5,110,000 and multiplying them values it at $1,455,300.
Both probability columns stay empty until a lawyer writes a number in. Everything to the right of them is arithmetic.
A demand is several claims wearing one number, and a percentage applied to the total prices none of them. Marbury Cold Chain wants $8,400,000 from Levanter Logistics over eight rejected refrigerated loads, and the demand letter it arrived in treats it as a single figure. The invoiced cargo loss needs liability, a limitation clause and causation. The lost profits claim needs those three plus recoverability and a quantum finding. Findings along a chain multiply rather than average, so 45, 80 and 90 percent is 32.4 percent, not 72.
At the midpoint of both sides' estimates the claim comes to $420,373, five percent of what was demanded. The $4,800,000 lost profits line is 57 percent of the demand and 27 percent of that value. The $1,200,000 claimed for lost future customers is worth $18,711, because it has a round number and no named account behind it, which is what grading each proposition against the record exposes before a mediator does.
Then each disagreement gets priced. Hold every finding at the midpoint, swap one to the other side's number, and measure the swing. The top row here is the limitation clause, worth $420,373 against $184,600 for the entire lost-profits argument. Authority follows in two halves that are never summed without both being shown: exposure of $420,373 and $1,180,000 still to spend, so 73.7 percent of it is the price of finding out. Of 407,379 civil cases terminated in the year to September 2025, 1,681 reached trial.
What's in the pack
Damages Model
One row per component, with the amount, how it is computed, the evidence that exists, and the evidence that does not, named rather than described.
Issue Chain
Every finding as a proposition, which components it carries, both sides' probabilities with the basis for each, and the dollar value of the disagreement.
Risk-adjusted Outcome Range
Each component through its own chain at three sets of estimates, with the averaged figure alongside as a check row rather than as an output.
Mediation Brief
Structured from the sheets, in a shared version or a confidential one, with the same discipline about sourcing that a motion package needs.
Client Risk Memo
The expected value, why it is so far under the demand, the components that will not survive contact with the evidence, and what it costs to find out.
Settlement Authority Note
The number to ask for, split into exposure and remaining cost, with the concession order and the sensitivity table on the highest-swing finding.
What a Number Actually Assumes
The method behind all of it. Why a chain multiplies, why components fall by different amounts, and how the authority number splits in two.
How to use it
- 1
Open in River, or take it blank
Open the pack in River and hand it the demand, the pleadings and the damages evidence, or take the Word documents and CSV sheets from the template library.
- 2
Components before any percentage
Every part of the demand on its own row, with the computation and the document behind it, and every missing document named rather than summarised as a weakness.
- 3
Write the findings, then ask for the probabilities
One row per finding, phrased so it is either found or not found, with the components it carries. Both sets of numbers are asked for and never generated.
- 4
Multiply, rank, then split the authority
Run the chain three ways, sort the findings by what disagreeing about each is worth, and report exposure and remaining cost as two separate lines. The second line comes off the priced calendar in the litigation status and client reporting pack, which already splits remaining cost into what can be estimated and what depends on a ruling nobody has yet.
Frequently asked questions
Is this template free?
It is, with no account and no card. The zip holds four Word documents and three CSV sheets. Edit with AI is the other route: the agent fills the sheets from your record and asks for the one thing it will not produce. Everything in the template library works the same way.
What format are the downloaded files?
Word (.docx) for the brief, the risk memo, the authority note and the method doc, and CSV (.csv) for the three sheets, in one zip. Excel, Numbers or Google Sheets opens the sheets directly. Nothing is proprietary and there is no conversion step.
Where do the probabilities come from?
You. Every probability cell stays blank until a lawyer writes a number in it, and nothing in the pack will generate one. That number is the only judgement in the exercise, and a figure produced to fill a column would launder an opinion into arithmetic that then looks objective.
Why estimate what the other side believes?
Because the ranking needs two numbers per finding to produce a swing, and the swing is what tells you which argument is worth the afternoon. Infer their estimate from behaviour rather than rhetoric: what they briefed, what they moved on, and what they never bothered to depose.
Can what happens in the mediation be used later?
Largely not. Compromise offers, and conduct or a statement made during compromise negotiations, are inadmissible to prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim. The pack still records positions, amounts and dates only, because a working file of caucus conversation helps nobody.
Does it tell me whether to make a formal offer?
No, and that is deliberate. A defending party can serve one at least 14 days before trial. If the judgment the offeree finally obtains is not more favorable than the unaccepted offer, the offeree must pay the costs incurred after the offer was made. The pack gives you the exposure and the cost. The tactic is yours.
What does Edit with AI actually do?
It signs you up, installs this pack as a private workspace, and puts the agent in front of an empty Damages Model. Send the demand, the pleadings and the damages evidence. What comes back first is the list of components with nothing behind them, and the authority on any clause that decides one.
Take the demand apart before anybody argues about it
Take the Word documents and CSV sheets blank, or open this exact pack in River and hand it the demand and the record.
Edit with AI