No, I get what you are saying. I am just not getting your logic for why you are saying it. I understand with the amount of posts you have and from the threads I've read that you are probably frustrated thinking here is another person only looking for the answer they want to hear. However, I assure you that isn't the case and I am taking in your replies with an open mind.
So is leverage only defined by having all the elements of a lawsuit? I am legitimately asking. I would think having consent of negligence and the likelihood of future damages could be considered leverage? But hey, I could be wrong. It just seems (common sense wise) to me that an admittance of negligence with possible future damages would hold some weight in negotiations.
Well there are many reasons to settle and I suspect they will settle just because of the cost of trial alone. I mean, don't settlements happen everyday for that reason?
If they were suing me for say $100. (Assuming the average court case cost them $80) If I said, look the court case is going to cost you $80 and you may not win, how about I just give you $70 now and we'll settle?
Well, that wouldn't be extortion would it? I suspect that is negotiation of a settlement.
How about if I said, look the court case is going to cost you $80. ALSO, let's not forget, you just did something negligent that COULD be grounds for a lawsuit from me in the future. I'll waive my right to sue you later, should I suffer damages and give you $50 to settle the suit in which you’re suing me.
Is that extortion? Maybe in the legal definition it is, again I don't know. Are you really telling me it is? I am just really surprised to find out that your saying it is. I just assumed from my limited knowledge that deals like that are made all the time. I assumed it to be part of the negotiation process of a settlement.
Maybe it won't carry any weight with them, maybe they will say, we could care less about you waiving your rights to sue us later if you are ever damaged. Which I would be fine with, I am offering something, they have the right to reject it.
My stance is, I don't think it hurts to offer, if they reject it, fine. However, I certainly don't want to even make the offer if it's going to be considered EXTORTION by a judge or something.
So you saying it's dangerously close to EXTORTION is what scares me and why I am continuing the discussion.
I can understand your point that they may not give my offer any merit, but Extortion really? If you REALLY think that, could you elaborate for me? That's the only part I am not getting, how it's extortion?
Thanks,
James
Again, I am really not trying to be argumentative. I just want to understand why you say its extortion. My offer could have no merit, I get that, extortion, I don’t.

