How to run Offer Of Judgment Analyzer in DocketMath for Virginia

Step-by-step

This guide walks you through running Offer Of Judgment Analyzer in DocketMath for Virginia (US-VA), using jurisdiction-aware settings consistent with how Virginia treats “offers of judgment.” Virginia’s approach is limited, so the analyzer’s configuration and the inputs you choose matter.

This is a practical walkthrough of how to run the calculator. It’s not legal advice.

1) Open the tool in DocketMath

1. Go to the primary CTA: /tools/offer-of-judgment-analyzer
2. Confirm your jurisdiction selector is set to Virginia (US-VA) (or select it if the tool prompts you).

2) Choose the Virginia-specific rule framework inside the tool

Before you enter numbers, make sure the analyzer is using Virginia (US-VA) logic tied to Va. Sup. Ct. Rule 1:14 (Offer of Judgment), which is noted as limited.

Because the tool is jurisdiction-aware, you should avoid swapping to a different framework (such as a federal model) while you’re attempting to produce Virginia-specific results. In other words: run Virginia settings with Virginia inputs rather than comparing outputs from different regimes in the same run.

Virginia lacks a general offer-of-judgment regime in the way some other jurisdictions do, so treat the calculator as a structured effects computation within the Virginia framework, not as an automatic “always applies” offer-of-judgment outcome across all cases.

3) Confirm the Virginia interest inputs the analyzer should use

The verified Virginia configuration used by the analyzer includes these interest-related assumptions:

• Interest rate: 6% per annum, simple (used by the analyzer’s judgment interest modeling)
• comparisonBasis.includeInterest: false
• costShifting.costMultiplier: 1
• costShifting.interest: false
• sub_rules.2.interest_rate: 6

In the DocketMath UI, you may see toggles or fields related to:

• whether interest is included in a comparison basis,
• whether cost-shifting includes interest,
• and the interest rate used for the relevant calculation.

Keep the verified settings aligned for Virginia:

• Turn “include interest” off where the tool refers to the comparison basis.
• Keep cost-shifting interest disabled.

If you’re asked for an interest rate anywhere and the tool doesn’t already default correctly for Virginia, use 6% per annum, simple as reflected in the verified configuration.

4) Enter the core amounts: offer vs. final judgment

Now input the two core comparison amounts:

• Offer amount (the amount contained in the offer you want to analyze)
• Final judgment amount (the amount you’re comparing against—typically the court-entered total, or the total figure you expect to be entered)

The analyzer uses the relative position between offer and judgment to compute the effect of your inputs under the Virginia modeling assumptions.

Practical checklist for clean inputs

• Offer amount matches the document figure (avoid “almost the right number”).
• Final judgment amount is the total the tool expects (not a partial component).
• If your case involves multiple figures or components, use the consolidated amount consistent with what the calculator asks for.

5) Run the calculation and interpret results as “modeled effects”

After you run the analyzer:

• Look for an outcome comparison showing whether the judgment is favorable relative to the offer (as the tool defines it).
• Review any computed components tied to interest and any cost-shifting logic the tool includes.

Because Virginia’s offer framework is limited, treat outputs as:

• a calculation based on the inputs and verified configuration, and
• a way to understand how the modeled effects change when you change the offer or judgment amounts.

6) Save/export and document the scenario

If DocketMath lets you save or export results:

• Save the output for your case workflow.
• If you run multiple scenarios, label them clearly (for example, different offer amounts or different judgment amounts).

A practical approach:

• Run Scenario A using the actual offer and your best estimate of judgment.
• Run Scenario B with a revised offer amount.
• Compare which changes move the result the most—this helps you understand sensitivity without “guessing” after the fact.

Common pitfalls

Pitfall: Not actually running Virginia (US-VA) settings

Even if you enter correct numbers, using the wrong jurisdiction setting can change how the analyzer models outcomes. Always confirm Virginia (US-VA) is selected before you calculate.

Pitfall: Interest toggles drifting away from the verified Virginia settings

For the verified Virginia configuration, these settings matter:

• comparisonBasis.includeInterest = false
• costShifting.interest = false
• interest rate modeling uses 6% per annum, simple

If the UI gives you toggles and you turn them on/off inconsistently, you can end up with outputs that no longer reflect the Virginia-specific modeling intended for this guide.

Pitfall: Using partially-entered or mismatched totals

A very common source of confusion is entering:

• an offer component instead of the full offer amount, or
• a judgment component instead of the total judgment figure.

If the tool requests “offer amount” and “final judgment amount,” use the figures that correspond to those labels—avoid mixing components and totals.

Pitfall: Expecting the result to be “automatic legal certainty”

Because Va. Sup. Ct. Rule 1:14 (Offer of Judgment) is limited, the calculator’s output should be treated as:

• an effects model based on the tool’s logic and your inputs,
• not a prediction that the rule will apply in the exact way you assume to the exact facts of your case.

Try it

Here’s a fast way to sanity-check your inputs and ensure the calculator is reacting as expected.

1) Run a controlled baseline scenario

• Enter an offer amount
• Enter a final judgment amount
• Keep Virginia interest/toggles aligned with the verified settings (notably:

  • comparison basis interest off
  • cost-shifting interest off)

2) Record what changes after you rerun

Now adjust one variable at a time:

• Keep the offer the same; change only the final judgment amount.
• Then keep the final judgment the same; change only the offer amount.

You should see the output fields tied to the comparison shift as expected.

3) Run two opposite scenarios for directionality

Try:

• Scenario A: offer is lower than the judgment
• Scenario B: offer is higher than the judgment

This helps confirm that the calculator responds to the relative offer-vs-judgment position in the way you expect from the Virginia-limited model.

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