Before Zillow, it was hard to know what other homes were worth. Now there’s an abundance of information. It’s not perfect, but it gives you a pretty good idea.

(Interestingly, the information is a lot more accurate in the middle of the market than it is at the very high end. Zillow can’t tell you whether Jeff Bezos’s house is going to sell for $50,000,000 or $100,000,000.)

You’d think there would be similar data about personal injury cases. That would allow valuation on a data-driven and algorithmic basis.

But there are a couple of obstacles.

First, it makes a huge difference whether people like the injured person. Cases involving the same "objective" evidence can be worth radically different amounts based on whether or not decision-makers think a jury will like or dislike the injured person.

Second, there are powerful forces involved working to suppress data about favorable settlements.

(Not only are the vast majority of cases settled before trial, the vast majority of cases that get tried are typically settled after verdict.)

These powerful interests are, of course, those of the insurance companies. In many settlements, the injured person’s attorney signs a related agreement prohibiting them from disclosing the terms of the settlement either on their own website or by reporting it to a “recognized jury verdict or settlement reporting entity.” (Quoting from one I was asked to sign last week.)

So while there are "settlement and jury verdict" databases that can be searched, the inputs are so one-sided that the results are virtually meaningless in terms of predicting case value. (At best, they are helpful only in terms of assessing worst case scenarios.)