---

name: settlement-analysis-expert description: Settlement vs. hearing decision analysis with probability-weighted outcomes. Compares settlement offers against hearing expected value using BATNA, assesses owner holdout risk, litigation probability, performs sensitivity analysis. Use for expropriation settlement decisions, hearing risk evaluation, litigation decision tags: [settlement-analysis, expropriation, hearing-risk, BATNA, expected-value, litigation-risk, decision-analysis] capability: Provides comprehensive settlement decision analysis including BATNA calculation, ZOPA analysis, probability-weighted scenario comparison, holdout risk assessment (0-30), litigation risk evaluation, sensitivity analysis, and clear SETTLE/HEARING/NEGOTIATE recommendations proactive: true

You are an expert in settlement scenario analysis vs. expropriation hearing risk, providing decision-focused guidance using probability-weighted expected value, BATNA/ZOPA calculations, and strategic negotiation planning.

Settlement Analysis Expert

Expert in settlement scenario analysis vs. expropriation hearing risk with probability-weighted outcomes, BATNA/ZOPA calculations, and strategic negotiation planning.

When to Use This Skill

Use this skill when:

• Analyzing settlement offers vs. proceeding to expropriation hearing
• Calculating BATNA (Best Alternative to Negotiated Agreement)
• Evaluating ZOPA (Zone of Possible Agreement)
• Assessing owner holdout risk and litigation probability
• Developing concession strategies for settlement negotiations
• Quantifying expected value of hearing outcomes with uncertainty
• Comparing multiple settlement scenarios with probability weighting

What This Skill Provides

Core Analysis Capabilities

1. Settlement vs. Hearing Analysis

   • Probability-weighted expected value of hearing outcomes
   • Settlement scenario comparison (current offer, counteroffer, midpoint)
   • Net benefit calculation with risk adjustment
   • Breakeven settlement determination

2. BATNA Calculation

   • Expected award calculation across low/mid/high scenarios
   • Total hearing costs (legal fees, expert fees, time costs)
   • Net BATNA (total expected cost to buyer)
   • Uncertainty analysis (standard deviation, coefficient of variation)

3. ZOPA Analysis

   • Zone of possible agreement identification
   • Optimal settlement range recommendations
   • Opening offer, target, and walkaway points
   • Negotiation leverage assessment

4. Risk Assessment

   • Owner holdout risk scoring (0-30 scale)
   • Litigation probability estimation
   • Expected hearing duration and cost ranges
   • Risk factor identification and mitigation strategies

5. Strategic Planning

   • Concession strategy with diminishing increments
   • Negotiation rounds planning
   • Timeline and action items
   • Decision confidence levels

Key Metrics Calculated

• Expected Hearing Cost: Probability-weighted award + legal/expert fees
• Net Benefit: Settlement savings vs. hearing
• Holdout Risk Score: 0-30 scale (motivation + sophistication + alternatives)
• Litigation Probability: 0-100% based on valuation gap, owner profile, case complexity
• ZOPA Range: Lower bound (seller min) to upper bound (buyer max)
• Optimal Settlement: Target, floor, ceiling within ZOPA
• Risk-Adjusted Benefit: Net benefit minus uncertainty premium

Calculator: settlement_analyzer.py

Location: .claude/skills/settlement-analysis-expert/settlement_analyzer.py

Purpose: Analyze settlement scenarios vs. hearing risk with probability-weighted outcomes

Architecture: Modular design following Issue #21 requirements

• Thin orchestration layer (main calculator)
• Separate modules for validation, calculations, analysis, output formatting
• Shared utilities integration (negotiation_utils, risk_utils, financial_utils, report_utils)

Modules

validators.py

• Input validation against JSON schema
• Probability distribution validation (must sum to 1.0)
• Owner profile and case factors validation
• Award amount ordering validation (low <= mid <= high)

calculations.py

• Settlement scenario calculations
• Hearing expected value (BATNA)
• Net benefit and savings analysis
• Scenario comparison with probability weighting

analysis.py

• Settlement vs. hearing decision analysis
• ZOPA and optimal range calculation
• Concession strategy generation
• Owner holdout risk assessment
• Litigation risk assessment
• Sensitivity analysis

output_formatters.py

• Comprehensive markdown reports
• Executive summaries
• Scenario comparison tables
• Financial summaries

Usage

Copy# Basic usage (markdown report to stdout)
python settlement_analyzer.py samples/sample_1_transmission_easement.json

# Generate report to file
python settlement_analyzer.py samples/sample_1_transmission_easement.json --output report.md

# JSON output for programmatic use
python settlement_analyzer.py samples/sample_1_transmission_easement.json --json > results.json

Input Schema

Required Fields:

• case_id: Case identifier
• settlement_offer: Current settlement offer amount
• hearing_probabilities: {low_award, mid_award, high_award} (must sum to 1.0)
• hearing_costs: {low/mid/high_award_amount, legal_fees, expert_fees, time_cost}

Optional Fields:

• counteroffer: Owner's counteroffer
• buyer_max_settlement: Maximum buyer willing to pay (defaults to BATNA)
• settlement_costs: {legal_fees_to_settle, settlement_risk}
• owner_profile: {motivation, sophistication, alternatives}
• case_factors: {valuation_gap, property_value, legal_complexity, precedent_clarity, jurisdiction_history}
• discount_rate: Annual discount rate for NPV (default 5%)

Full Schema: See settlement_input_schema.json (JSON Schema Draft 2020-12)

Sample Input

Copy{
  "case_id": "HYDRO-2025-001",
  "property_description": "Transmission line easement across 50-acre farm",
  "settlement_offer": 180000,
  "counteroffer": 220000,
  "hearing_probabilities": {
    "low_award": 0.2,
    "mid_award": 0.5,
    "high_award": 0.3
  },
  "hearing_costs": {
    "low_award_amount": 150000,
    "mid_award_amount": 185000,
    "high_award_amount": 230000,
    "legal_fees": 50000,
    "expert_fees": 30000,
    "time_cost": 10000
  },
  "settlement_costs": {
    "legal_fees_to_settle": 5000,
    "settlement_risk": 0.1
  },
  "owner_profile": {
    "motivation": {
      "financial_need": "low",
      "emotional_attachment": "high",
      "business_impact": "moderate"
    },
    "sophistication": {
      "real_estate_experience": "medium",
      "legal_representation": true,
      "previous_negotiations": 1
    },
    "alternatives": {
      "relocation_options": "some",
      "financial_flexibility": "medium",
      "timeline_pressure": "low"
    }
  },
  "case_factors": {
    "valuation_gap": 40000,
    "property_value": 200000,
    "legal_complexity": "medium",
    "precedent_clarity": "mixed",
    "jurisdiction_history": "neutral"
  }
}

Output Report

The calculator generates a comprehensive markdown report with:

1. Executive Summary

   • Recommendation (SETTLE / PROCEED TO HEARING / NEUTRAL)
   • Rationale and confidence level
   • Financial impact

2. Financial Summary

   • Settlement total cost vs. hearing total cost
   • Net benefit and savings percentage
   • Breakeven settlement amount

3. Hearing Risk Analysis

   • Expected award with probability distribution
   • Total costs breakdown (legal, expert, time)
   • Award range (low/mid/high scenarios)
   • Uncertainty metrics (standard deviation, coefficient of variation)

4. Settlement Scenarios

   • Scenario comparison table (current offer, counteroffer, midpoint)
   • Probability-weighted costs
   • Scenario descriptions

5. ZOPA Analysis (if counteroffer provided)

   • ZOPA existence and range
   • Optimal settlement range (opening, target, walkaway)
   • Negotiation room and leverage

6. Owner Holdout Risk Assessment (if owner profile provided)

   • Risk level (LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH/CRITICAL)
   • Holdout probability
   • Score breakdown (motivation, sophistication, alternatives)
   • Key risk factors and mitigation strategies

7. Litigation Risk Assessment (if case factors provided)

   • Litigation probability
   • Expected duration (months) and cost
   • Risk factors

Shared Utilities Used

negotiation_utils.py:

• calculate_batna(): Calculate hearing expected value
• calculate_zopa(): Identify zone of possible agreement
• probability_weighted_ev(): Probability-weighted scenario comparison
• hearing_cost_benefit(): Cost-benefit analysis settlement vs. hearing
• optimal_settlement_range(): Calculate optimal negotiation range
• calculate_concession_strategy(): Generate diminishing concession pattern

risk_utils.py:

• assess_holdout_risk(): Owner holdout risk scoring (0-30)
• litigation_risk_assessment(): Litigation probability and duration
• sensitivity_analysis(): Impact of variable changes

financial_utils.py:

• npv(): Net present value calculations
• safe_divide(): Division with zero handling

report_utils.py:

• generate_executive_summary(): Decision-focused summaries
• format_markdown_table(): Scenario comparison tables
• eastern_timestamp(): Report timestamps
• generate_document_header(): Standard headers
• format_number(): Currency/percentage formatting

Decision Framework

Recommendation Thresholds

SETTLE (High Confidence):

• Net benefit > $10,000
• Settlement saves material amount vs. hearing
• Low hearing uncertainty acceptable

SETTLE (Medium Confidence):

• Net benefit $0 - $10,000
• Settlement saves small amount vs. hearing
• Uncertainty may be concerning

NEUTRAL (Continue Negotiations):

• Net benefit between -$10,000 and $0
• Costs roughly equivalent
• Room for negotiation exists within ZOPA

PROCEED TO HEARING:

• Net benefit < -$10,000
• Hearing expected to save material amount vs. settlement
• Settlement offer insufficient

Risk Adjustment

Hearing Uncertainty Premium:

• Calculate standard deviation of hearing outcomes
• Apply risk premium = std_dev × 0.5 (risk aversion factor)
• Risk-adjusted benefit = net_benefit - risk_premium

Holdout Risk Scoring (0-30 scale):

• 0-9: LOW risk (15% holdout probability)
• 10-14: MEDIUM risk (30% holdout probability)
• 15-19: HIGH risk (50% holdout probability)
• 20-30: CRITICAL risk (70% holdout probability)

Litigation Probability Factors:

• Valuation gap percentage
• Owner risk profile
• Legal complexity
• Precedent clarity
• Jurisdiction history

Workflow Integration

Typical Use Cases

1. Initial Settlement Evaluation

Copy# Evaluate initial settlement offer vs. hearing
python settlement_analyzer.py case_data.json --output initial_analysis.md

2. Counteroffer Analysis

Copy# Update JSON with counteroffer, recalculate ZOPA
python settlement_analyzer.py case_data_with_counter.json --output counter_analysis.md

3. Negotiation Strategy Development

Copy# Generate concession strategy based on ZOPA
python settlement_analyzer.py case_data.json --json | jq '.concession_strategy'

4. Board Approval Package

Copy# Comprehensive report for executive decision
python settlement_analyzer.py case_data.json --output board_memo.md

Integration with Other Skills

Combines with:

• expropriation-compensation-entitlement-analysis: Legal entitlement framework for hearing scenarios
• injurious-affection-assessment: Quantify damages for hearing cost estimates
• agricultural-easement-negotiation-frameworks: Farm-specific negotiation strategies
• negotiation-expert: Evidence-based persuasion and calibrated questions

Key Terms

• BATNA: Best Alternative to Negotiated Agreement (hearing outcome)
• ZOPA: Zone of Possible Agreement (overlap between buyer max and seller min)
• Holdout Risk: Probability owner refuses settlement and forces hearing
• Litigation Probability: Likelihood of proceeding to expropriation hearing
• Net Benefit: Settlement savings vs. hearing (positive = settle, negative = hearing better)
• Expected Award: Probability-weighted hearing compensation
• Optimal Settlement Range: Opening offer, target, and walkaway points
• Concession Strategy: Diminishing increments from opening to target
• Risk-Adjusted Benefit: Net benefit minus uncertainty premium

Expert Guidance

When Settlement Makes Sense

1. Certainty Value: Settlement eliminates hearing uncertainty
2. Cost Savings: Avoid legal fees, expert fees, time delays
3. Relationship Preservation: Maintain goodwill for future dealings
4. Timeline Advantage: Faster resolution enables project progress
5. Risk Mitigation: Avoid worst-case hearing outcomes

When Hearing Makes Sense

1. Insufficient Offer: Settlement offer materially below expected hearing award
2. Precedent Setting: Need hearing decision for future similar cases
3. Owner Unreasonable: Counteroffer far exceeds fair value
4. Strong Case: High confidence in favorable hearing outcome
5. ZOPA Absent: No overlap between buyer max and seller min

Negotiation Best Practices

1. Start with BATNA: Know your walkaway point before negotiating
2. Calculate ZOPA: Identify settlement range where both parties benefit
3. Use Diminishing Concessions: Signal approaching limit
4. Anchor High/Low: Buyer starts low, seller starts high, meet in middle
5. Justify Movements: Each concession tied to new information or reciprocity
6. Monitor Owner Risk: Adjust strategy based on holdout probability
7. Document Everything: Create audit trail for decision rationale

References

Ontario Expropriations Act:

• s.13: Market value determination
• s.14: Basis of compensation
• s.18: Disturbance damages
• s.20: Interest on compensation

Negotiation Theory:

• Fisher & Ury, "Getting to Yes" (BATNA/ZOPA framework)
• Kahneman & Tversky, Prospect Theory (risk aversion, loss aversion)
• Raiffa, "The Art and Science of Negotiation" (optimal settlement ranges)

Real Estate Valuation:

• USPAP Standard 1: Real Property Appraisal (hearing award estimation)
• CUSPAP: Canadian Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice