At The Clark Law Office, not every injury automatically becomes a case. Evaluating whether a personal injury or wrongful death claim should move forward requires judgment, experience, and a realistic understanding of how insurance companies and courts actually evaluate risk.
This page explains how Matthew R. Clark evaluates potential cases and what factors matter most when deciding whether a claim is worth pursuing.
Not Every Injury Case Is the Same
Two people can suffer similar injuries and end up with very different legal outcomes. Injury severity alone does not determine whether a case is strong.
What matters is how the injury happened, how it can be proven, what defenses are likely to be raised, and whether the facts will hold up under scrutiny. Some cases appear strong at first glance but weaken once records are reviewed. Others require deeper investigation to understand their true value.
Part of my job is identifying those differences early.
Why Careful Case Evaluation Matters
Insurance companies begin evaluating claims immediately. They assess fault, medical records, coverage limits, and exposure long before a lawsuit is filed.
If a case is accepted without understanding its strengths and risks, it can be difficult to recover fair compensation later. A careful evaluation process allows cases to be positioned properly from the beginning and helps clients receive honest advice about what is realistic.
That includes telling someone when a case may not be worth pursuing.
Who Evaluates Your Case
At The Clark Law Office, case evaluations are handled directly by me.
Your case is not screened by a call center or passed to a junior attorney. I personally review the facts, available evidence, medical records, and legal issues before deciding whether to move forward.
That approach reflects how I practice law. I handle a limited number of cases so I can stay directly involved and make informed decisions at every stage.
“An honest evaluation matters. I would rather tell someone early that a case may not succeed than take it on without the facts to support it. That honesty protects clients and leads to better outcomes when a case does move forward.” — Matthew R. Clark
The Core Factors I Evaluate
Every case is different, but several factors consistently shape whether a claim should proceed.
Liability and Fault
How the incident occurred is often the most important issue in a case. I evaluate:
- Whether fault is clear or disputed
- Police reports and witness statements
- Physical evidence and scene dynamics
- Comparative fault risks and likely defenses
Even serious injuries can result in limited recovery if liability is unclear or contested.
Injury Severity and Medical Proof
Injury claims must be supported by medical evidence. I look closely at:
- Diagnostic findings and treatment history
- Whether injuries are permanent or ongoing
- Consistency of care
- Whether treatment aligns with the claimed mechanism of injury
Medical records often determine how a case is valued.
Causation
Causation addresses whether the incident actually caused the injuries being claimed. Evaluation includes:
- Pre-existing conditions
- Prior injuries or treatment
- Timing of symptoms
- Alternative explanations insurers may raise
Clear causation strengthens credibility and leverage.
Insurance Coverage and Practical Limits
Even strong cases can be limited by insurance coverage. I evaluate:
- Available policy limits
- Employer or commercial insurance exposure
- Government defendants and immunity issues
- Uninsured or underinsured motorist considerations
Understanding these limits early helps clients make informed decisions.
Red Flags That Can Affect a Case
Some issues do not prevent recovery but can affect value or strategy, including:
- Delayed or inconsistent medical treatment
- Conflicting statements or reports
- Gaps in documentation
- Social media activity that may be taken out of context
- Prior claims history
Identifying these risks early allows them to be addressed rather than ignored. In some situations, these issues are significant enough that pursuing a claim would not serve the client’s best interests, even when the injury itself is real.
When Litigation or Trial Becomes Necessary
Not every case resolves through early negotiation. Some require litigation to obtain evidence, challenge defenses, or force accountability.
I evaluate whether a case:
- Can realistically resolve before suit
- Requires filing to move negotiations forward
- Must be prepared for trial to achieve a fair result
Trial preparation often influences settlement outcomes even when a case does not ultimately go to trial.
How Past Results Inform Judgment, Not Guarantees
Prior verdicts and settlements provide insight into how similar cases have been evaluated and resolved, but no two cases are the same.
Experience helps anticipate defenses, assess risk, and identify what matters most. It does not guarantee outcomes.
For readers interested in how specific challenges were addressed in complex matters, select cases are discussed in greater detail in our case studies, which focus on the process and issues involved rather than just the final result.
What This Means for Potential Clients
An honest case evaluation benefits everyone.
Clients deserve straightforward answers, realistic expectations, and clear guidance, even when the answer is not what they hoped to hear. Accepting only cases that justify the time, resources, and commitment required allows me to give each client the attention their case deserves.
Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Each case is different and must be evaluated based on its own facts and circumstances.