How to run Settlement Allocator in DocketMath for California

7 min read

Published June 4, 2026 • By DocketMath Team

Partially verified

older_than_packet

Open the live calculator View on primary source

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws change frequently — verify all citations with current official sources.

Step-by-step

This guide walks you through running Settlement Allocator in DocketMath for California (US-CA) using the platform’s jurisdiction-aware rules. The calculator is designed to apply the general/default allocation period and associated allocation methodology referenced in California’s procedural framework.

Note: California’s rules can reference multiple periods in specific contexts. For this run, the only period rule used is the general/default period under the provided jurisdiction data: Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 382 and Cal. Rules of Court Rules 3.760–3.771.
No claim-type-specific sub-rule was found in the provided jurisdiction data, so treat this as the default unless you add additional jurisdiction logic in your workflow.

1) Open Settlement Allocator

Go to the calculator: /tools/settlement-allocator
Confirm you’ve selected California (US-CA) inside the tool’s jurisdiction selector (or ensure your workspace defaults to US-CA).

2) Gather the inputs the tool needs (and what they affect)

Before running the calculator, collect the numeric inputs you plan to enter. Settlement allocation is driven by two buckets:

Case-level figures (e.g., settlement amount and claim totals)
Allocation drivers (e.g., eligible period and weights)

Use this checklist:

Settlement amount (the total settlement to be allocated)
Net / common fund logic (if your workflow uses net vs. gross amounts, enter what the tool expects)
Class / group totals or sum of claim values (depending on your allocation approach)
Eligibility period settings (California default framework)
Per-claim or per-participant fields the tool requests (e.g., damages, contribution, or weights)
Attorney fees / costs treatment (enter them in the tool’s structure if it includes them; otherwise, keep them separate in downstream handling)

Jurisdiction driver: allocation period framework

For California, your eligible allocation period should align with the general default framework cited in the jurisdiction data:

Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 382 — governs class actions generally, including procedural structure for class treatment and allocation through court processes
Cal. Rules of Court Rules 3.760–3.771 — procedure-focused rules for class actions, including settlement-related handling

In DocketMath, that period drives which portion of each claim is treated as eligible for allocation.

3) Set the default period selection correctly

Inside the tool:

Find the period/eligibility setting.
Choose the option that corresponds to the general/default period for the California run.
Do not select claim-type-specific alternatives unless your workflow explicitly includes a jurisdiction mapping for them.

Pitfall: Selecting a “claim-type-specific period” without a defined mapping can produce allocations that don’t reflect the jurisdiction assumptions you intend. Here, the provided jurisdiction data supports only the general/default period tied to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 382 and Cal. Rules of Court Rules 3.760–3.771.

4) Enter claim-level values (if the tool is claim-driven)

If your run is claim-based (typical for settlement allocators), add the per-claim fields the tool expects. DocketMath will scale each claim according to the eligibility logic you selected.

Common patterns:

If the tool takes pre-eligible values, it will apply the eligibility period to determine an eligible portion.
If the tool takes eligible-period values already computed, it will allocate based on relative weights among those eligible amounts.

5) Run the calculation

Once all required fields are filled:

Click Calculate (or the tool’s equivalent action).
Review outputs in three layers:
- Per-claim allocation results (individual shares)
- Totals reconciliation (does the sum match the settlement amount / net-to-allocate?)
- Eligibility-period impact (did the period setting reduce eligible amounts?)

6) Validate the results using a quick reconciliation table

Before exporting or using allocations downstream, do a sanity check. You can do this directly in your notes or spreadsheet.

Check	What to look for	Typical “pass” signal
Total allocated	Sum of all shares vs. settlement/net	Minor rounding differences only
Eligibility effect	Claims near period boundaries	Reduced eligible portion where applicable
Relative scaling	Bigger inputs get bigger outputs	Output order matches claim input order

Warning: If totals do not reconcile (for example, allocated sum exceeds the settlement amount by more than rounding), pause. Re-check:

your period setting
whether you entered gross vs. net-to-allocate in the field the tool uses as the allocation total

7) Export or copy the allocation results

When the results look consistent:

Use the tool’s output options (CSV/PDF depending on your DocketMath environment), or
Copy the allocation table into your workflow document for review.

Common pitfalls

Settlement allocator runs usually fail for predictable reasons. Here are the ones to watch most closely for California runs using US-CA rules.

Using a claim-type-specific period without a rule mapping
- The provided jurisdiction data supports only the general/default period.
- If the tool offers more granular period modes, confirm they match your approved assumptions before you run.
Mixing gross and net settlement amounts
- Many workflows distinguish between gross settlement and net-to-allocate after deductions.
- Ensure the number you enter matches the tool’s “total to allocate” field.
Double-applying eligibility/period logic
- If your claim values already incorporate an eligibility calculation you did elsewhere, but you also apply the eligibility period in DocketMath, allocations can be reduced twice.
Boundary claims treated inconsistently
- Claims near the eligibility boundaries are sensitive to date inputs and period-length assumptions.
- If the tool asks for dates, use the exact start/end dates you intend to measure against the default eligibility period.
Not reconciling totals after changes
- Adjusting a single weight or claim value can shift allocation proportions.
- Re-check the “sum of shares” behavior after each meaningful change.

Try it

If you want the fastest path to a correct first run:

Start at /tools/settlement-allocator
Select California (US-CA).
Choose the general/default period option (because no claim-type-specific sub-rule is defined in the provided jurisdiction data).
Enter:
- the total settlement (or net-to-allocate, matching the tool’s expected field),
- your claim values/weights, and
- any per-participant fields the tool requests.
Click Calculate, then immediately perform a totals reconciliation check.

For reference, the California jurisdiction data used here is grounded in:

Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 382
Source: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection?lawCode=CCP&sectionNum=382
Cal. Rules of Court Rules 3.760–3.771

Pitfall: Even if per-claim outputs look reasonable, they can be wrong if the period selection or the totals-to-allocate field doesn’t match your settlement basis. Always validate totals before relying on the allocation table.

When you’re ready for a second iteration, change one variable at a time (period selection first, then gross/net field choice, then weights) so you can clearly see how each input changes the outputs.

Gentle reminder: This is practical guidance on using DocketMath; it isn’t legal advice. If you’re making legal judgments about eligibility periods or allocation methodology, consider confirming your assumptions with qualified counsel or a knowledgeable reviewer.