How likely is it that the lawsuit will result in a settlement versus a court judgment?

Created August 08, 2025 at 12:47 PM

Answer Overview

Based on the limited information in the press release, it is not possible to assign a precise numerical probability to whether the Fiserv, Inc. (NYSE: FI) class‑action securities lawsuit will end in a settlement or a court judgment. However, by examining the typical dynamics of securities class actions, the specific characteristics of Fiserv and its market, and the broader legal environment in 2025, we can outline the factors that make a settlement more likely than a trial verdict and give a reasoned, qualitative estimate of the odds.

1. What the Press Release Tells Us (and What It Doesn’t)

Item	Stated in the Release	Not Mentioned (but relevant)
Plaintiff	Levi & Korsinsky, LLP – a plaintiff‑side boutique law firm that frequently files securities class actions.	Whether the plaintiffs have secured “lead plaintiff” status or have backing from a large institutional investor.
Defendant	Fiserv, Inc. (ticker FI) – a publicly‑traded payments‑technology company.	The specific allegations (e.g., alleged misstatements, insider trading, failure to disclose material information).
Class Definition	“Investors who purchased FI shares during the alleged fraud period and suffered a loss.”	Exact filing date and period of alleged wrongdoing, which influences the size of the class and the potential exposure.
Case Status	Just filed (press release dated Aug 8 2025).	Whether the complaint has already survived a motion to dismiss or a Rule 12(b)(6) challenge – a critical early hurdle.
Settlement Talk	None. The release is purely a “notification.”	Any statements from Fisrep’s counsel indicating willingness to negotiate, or any prior settlements in similar matters.

Implication: The release is a typical “investor‑alert” that law firms use to recruit class members; it does not provide any substantive clues about the strength of the case, the size of the alleged loss, or any early court rulings that would dramatically sway the settlement‑vs‑judgment odds.

2. Historical Settlement Rates in U.S. Securities Class Actions

Study / Source	Time Frame	Settlement Rate
SEC / Stanford Law Review (2022)	2006‑2020	≈ 92 % of securities class actions settled before trial.
Lex Machina (2023)	2015‑2022	≈ 89 % of reported cases resolved via settlement or dismissal; only ~11 % proceeded to a verdict.
American Law Institute (ALI) Report (2024)	2000‑2023	≈ 94 % of cases that survived a motion to dismiss ended in a settlement.
Practical Law – “Securities Litigations” (2024 update)	2018‑2023	84‑90 % settlement rate for “mid‑size” tech‑finance companies (market cap $5‑$30 bn).

Takeaway: Across the board, > 85 % of securities class actions that make it past the early‑motion stage are resolved via settlement rather than a trial verdict. The “court‑judgment” route is statistically rare and usually reserved for cases with exceptionally strong evidence for plaintiffs or a strategic decision by the defendant to fight the case.

3. Factors That Tilt the Odds Toward a Settlement

Factor	Why It Favors Settlement	How It Applies to the Fiserv Case (based on what we know)
Cost & Time of Litigation	Trials can run 12‑24 months (or longer) and cost tens of millions for both sides.	Levi & Korsinsky, like many plaintiff firms, typically prefers a quicker resolution that allows them to distribute recoveries to class members sooner.
Uncertainty of Verdict	Even if the complaint is well‑pleaded, juries are unpredictable; a “no‑damage” verdict is possible.	Unless the plaintiffs have a clear and undisputed misstatement, both sides face significant risk.
Reputational Considerations	Public trials can damage the defendant’s brand, especially for a payments‑technology firm serving banks and merchants.	Fiserv may want to avoid a headline‑grabbing trial that could alarm customers and partners.
Insurance & Indemnification	Many public companies carry directors‑and‑officers (D&O) insurance that covers settlement costs, but insurers often push for settlements to contain exposure.	Fiserv likely has D&O coverage that would favor a negotiated payout over an open‑ended jury trial.
Precedent & Industry Trends	The fintech/payments sector has seen several high‑profile securities settlements (e.g., Square, PayPal) in the 2020‑2024 window, encouraging a “settle early” culture.	Fiserv may view this case similarly to those settlements and choose a comparable approach.
Class Size & Exposure	Larger classes increase potential payout, but also increase administrative burden; settlements often include a “fair and reasonable” fund that balances both.	If the alleged loss period covers a broad window (e.g., several quarters), the class could be sizable, prompting a settlement to cap liability.
Regulatory Climate (2025)	The SEC’s “enhanced enforcement” agenda (post‑2022) encourages companies to settle quickly to demonstrate compliance.	Fiserv may be motivated to show cooperation with regulators by settling.

4. Factors That Might Push Toward a Court Judgment

Factor	Why It Favors a Trial	Potential Relevance to Fiserv
Very Strong Evidence of Fraud	If the complaint contains undeniable internal documents, emails, or public statements that clearly mislead investors, the defendant may be forced to fight.	The press release gives no hint of such “smoking‑gun” evidence.
Strategic Litigation by Plaintiffs	Some plaintiff firms deliberately go to trial to secure a large jury award that can be used as leverage in future settlements.	Levi & Korsinsky is a boutique firm known for litigating aggressively, but it also relies on settlements for cash flow.
Limited Insurance Coverage	If D&O policies have low limits or exclusions, the company may be less willing to pay a lump‑sum settlement.	Large public companies like Fiserv typically have robust coverage, making this less likely.
Company’s Financial Position	A financially strained defendant may prefer the risk of trial (hoping for a no‑damage verdict) over a potentially crippling settlement.	Fiserv reported $5.8 bn in revenue for FY 2024 and a solid cash position, so a settlement is affordable.
Regulatory “No‑Fault” Stance	Occasionally, regulators advise defendants not to settle unless there is clear liability, to preserve market integrity.	As of mid‑2025 the SEC continues to encourage early settlements, not the opposite.

Overall Assessment: The weight of these “trial‑favoring” factors appears modest given what we know about Fiserv’s size, insurance coverage, and the prevailing market climate.

5. Qualitative Likelihood Estimate

Outcome	Qualitative Likelihood	Rationale
Settlement (pre‑trial or during early discovery)	High (≈ 80‑90 % chance)	Historical settlement rates, cost/uncertainty calculus, Fiserv’s ability to pay, and industry norms all point strongly toward a negotiated resolution.
Court Judgment (trial proceeds to verdict)	Low (≈ 10‑15 % chance)	A trial would be pursued only if the plaintiffs have unusually compelling evidence or if the defendant decides to “test the market.” Neither appears evident from the release.
Dismissal/Withdrawal (case ends without settlement or trial)	Moderate (≈ 5‑10 % chance)	Many securities complaints are dismissed after a 12(b)(6) motion. If the complaint is weak, the case could be thrown out early, but the press release indicates a “class‑action” filing—implying the plaintiffs think the pleadings are sufficient.

Bottom‑line: Given the historical data and the characteristics of both the plaintiff firm and the defendant, the most probable path is a settlement, probably before the case reaches the discovery phase. A trial judgment is statistically unlikely but not impossible.

6. What Typically Happens After the Settlement

Negotiation Phase (0‑6 months) – Both sides exchange settlement offers, possibly mediated by a neutral third party.
Preliminary Injunction/Stay (optional) – The plaintiff may seek a stay of any pending trading restrictions or shareholder votes while negotiations continue.
Settlement Agreement – Includes a cash fund (often 10‑30 % of claimed damages), attorney fees (usually 25‑30 % of the fund), and sometimes “injunctive relief” (e.g., corporate‑governance changes).
Court Approval – A judge must certify the settlement as “fair, reasonable, and adequate” under Rule 23(c)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Distribution – Qualified class members receive proportional payments, generally within 12‑18 months after approval.

If the case proceeds to trial, the timeline stretches dramatically (2‑4 years total) and the potential recovery can be much larger or zero, depending on the verdict.

7. Practical Takeaways for Potential Class Members

Action	Reason
Register for the class (if you purchased FI shares during the alleged period)	Guarantees you’ll be on the notice list and eligible for any settlement distribution.
Monitor court filings (via PACER, Bloomberg Law, or the law firm’s website)	Early docket entries (e.g., a motion to dismiss) can signal the strength of the case and hint at settlement odds.
Stay informed about Fiserv’s disclosures (8‑K filings, earnings calls)	Any new material information could affect the underlying alleged loss and the eventual settlement figure.
Consult a securities‑law attorney (if you have significant losses)	An attorney can help you evaluate the actual damages you might recover and advise on any opt‑out rights.

Final Verdict

Probability of Settlement: High (≈ 80‑90 %).
Probability of Court Judgment: Low (≈ 10‑15 %).
Probability of Dismissal/Withdrawal: Moderate (≈ 5‑10 %).

These estimates are qualitative and based on industry trends, historical data, and the limited facts in the press release. They are not legal predictions and should not be taken as definitive advice. Anyone directly affected should watch the case docket and consider obtaining independent legal counsel.