The fights are often more expensive than the settlements, and these settlements have gone from a rare black mark to being a cost of doing business.[1]

Similar discussions are common in the criminal law, and it is well-known that a large number of people plead guilty to crimes they did not commit; people do this because the costs to themselves and to their families are much higher if they fight the charges than if they just plead guilty.

[1] http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/802ae15c-9b50-11e3-946b-00144feab7...

In the criminal law there is a big difference between accepting a plea bargain, which generally involves the accused allocuting in open court and admitting to wrongdoing, and pleading no contest which is specifically not an admission of guilt, but a pragmatic decision that the costs borne fighting the charge outweigh the benefits.

Quoting littletimmy above: You mean to say JP Morgan is appointed a lowly paid public defender and intimidated into a plea deal?

lawyers fees dont cost billions (yet)

You'd be surprised: http://www.thewire.com/business/2014/04/heres-how-much-ameri...

Those numbers include settlements.

> This quarter, some banks paid out so much in litigation fees — including billable hours, court costs, and settlement payouts

It probably doesn't apply to this case, but surely you have heard of people settling rather than face an expensive and focus draining fight?