How to run Offer Of Judgment Analyzer in DocketMath for Kentucky

Step-by-step

This guide walks you through running Offer Of Judgment Analyzer in DocketMath for Kentucky (US-KY) using jurisdiction-aware rules based on Ky. R. Civ. P. 68. The goal is to help you generate an offer/judgment analysis workflow—not to provide legal advice.

1) Open the tool

1. Go to the primary CTA: /tools/offer-of-judgment-analyzer
2. If DocketMath prompts for jurisdiction, select Kentucky (US-KY).
3. Confirm the calculator mode indicates an offer/judgment analysis aligned with Ky. R. Civ. P. 68.

2) Enter the core case inputs

DocketMath’s calculator typically needs the monetary figures and key dates used to model cost-shifting consequences. Gather these numbers first (rounding is fine as long as you stay consistent throughout a scenario).

Use this checklist for inputs:

• Offer amount (the amount you offered “to allow judgment to be taken”)
• Final judgment amount (what the court ultimately awards)
• Date trial begins (use the trial start date, not a pretrial hearing date)
• Date offer was served (service date controls the 10-day windows)
• Costs then accrued (costs accrued up to the relevant cutoff, if the tool asks)
• Whether the offer is accepted within the rule window (some interfaces capture this as a yes/no, others capture a “response/acceptance date”)

If your offer is for something other than a straightforward money amount (e.g., “to the effect specified”), the tool may still require numeric inputs. In that case, enter the closest numeric equivalent that matches the effect you’re analyzing (for example, a dollarized approximation of the judgment effect).

3) Set Kentucky timing parameters (the 10-day rule)

Ky. R. Civ. P. 68 includes two critical timing checkpoints you’ll want the calculator to reflect:

• When the offer can be served:
  “At any time more than 10 days before the trial begins…”
• When the response window runs:
  “If within 10 days after the service…”

In other words, the tool (or your date math) should check:

1. Timeliness of service (before trial):
   Offer served date must be ≤ (trial start date minus 10 days), since the rule says more than 10 days before trial begins.
2. Timeliness of acceptance/response (after service):
   The relevant acceptance or response must occur within 10 days after service.

DocketMath may compute these automatically once you enter dates. If it doesn’t, you can still use the tool’s date fields as a way to verify that your modeled timeline matches the language of Ky. R. Civ. P. 68.

4) Add costs assumptions

Ky. R. Civ. P. 68 references “costs then accrued.” In practice, whether costs are included (and how they’re included) can meaningfully change outcomes, because the modeled “exposure” may include costs that accrued before the relevant timing cutoff.

In DocketMath:

• If you see a field for costs accrued to date / costs then accrued, enter the amount you want the scenario to assume.
• If the interface instead asks for total exposure or requires costs to be rolled into a broader number, follow the field instructions so you don’t accidentally exclude costs or double-count them.

5) Run the analyzer

1. Click Calculate / Analyze (use whichever label appears in the UI).
2. Review outputs that commonly include:

   • Whether the offer appears timely served under the “more than 10 days before trial begins” requirement
   • Whether the acceptance/response falls within 10 days after service
   • A comparison between offer amount and final judgment amount
   • Any modeled cost-effect implications based on DocketMath’s logic and your inputs

6) Interpret the results (what changes when you change inputs)

A good way to use DocketMath is to treat outputs as a reflection of your assumptions. Link what you change to what you observe:

7) Save or document your scenario

If DocketMath allows saving:

• Save your scenario with a label like: KY RCP 68 — offer served [date]
• Add a brief note capturing key assumptions (especially costs then accrued and the acceptance/response date you used)

This makes it easier to compare multiple “what if” runs later.

Common pitfalls

Below are common issues that can cause offer-of-judgment calculations to drift from what you intended—usually due to timing interpretation or incorrect input mapping.

Timing mistakes

• Offer served too late: Ky. R. Civ. P. 68 requires service more than 10 days before trial begins.
• Misunderstanding the 10-day response window: The rule looks at what happens within 10 days after service. If you feed the tool the wrong “action date,” the acceptance/response result can flip.
• Service date confusion: If a case has multiple relevant dates (mailing, filing, receipt), confirm which date DocketMath treats as service. The tool can only model what you enter.

Missing or mismatched financial figures

• Offer amount vs “effect specified”: Ky. R. Civ. P. 68 allows offers for “money or property or to the effect specified.” If your offer is non-monetary or unusual, you may need a defensible numeric proxy so the tool can analyze it.
• Costs then accrued not included (or double-counted): Since the rule references “costs then accrued,” leaving costs out can understate exposure, while double-counting can overstate it.

Scope assumptions

• Assuming claim-type-specific deadlines exist: Based on the provided excerpt, Kentucky’s rule is captured as a general/default period: serve more than 10 days before trial begins, then evaluate within 10 days after service. Don’t apply alternate sub-deadlines unless you have a Kentucky authority identifying a distinct timing framework.

Interpreting the output correctly

• Treating “timely” output as a legal conclusion: DocketMath helps with deadline math and scenario modeling, but it can’t replace case-specific legal judgment.

Try it

Use this quick test drive to validate your Kentucky setup in DocketMath.

1. Open /tools/offer-of-judgment-analyzer
2. Select Kentucky (US-KY)
3. Enter these values (example scenario):

• Offer amount: $25,000
• Final judgment: $18,000
• Trial begins: 2026-07-15
• Offer served: 2026-06-30 (15 days before trial begins → should satisfy more than 10 days)
• Costs then accrued: $2,500
• Response/acceptance date: enter a date that is within 10 days after service (for example, 2026-07-08 if the tool uses a date field)

1. Click Analyze

Now change one variable at a time to see whether the outputs behave as expected:

• Lower the offer amount to $10,000 (keep all dates and costs the same).
  The offer-vs-judgment comparison should update accordingly.
• Next, change only the offer served date to approach the threshold:
  Move it from 2026-06-30 toward the 10-day boundary—e.g., try 2026-07-05 (you can use the tool’s date checks to confirm how it classifies the timeliness under Ky. R. Civ. P. 68).

The fastest validation is watching how the timing checks respond when you push the dates near (and across) the 10-day boundary.

Related reading

• How to calculate Offer Of Judgment Analyzer in Philippines — Full how-to guide with jurisdiction-specific rules
• Worked example: Offer Of Judgment Analyzer in Philippines — Worked example with real statute citations
• Inputs you need for Offer Of Judgment Analyzer in Philippines — Input checklist with sourcing guidance