Treasure hunters, he said, often become so invested in their quest — emotionally, financially, and in sheer time — that they find it almost impossible to walk away, even when reason would suggest otherwise. Each sunk dollar, each passing month, tightens the grip of commitment. They press on, not necessarily because the odds improve, but because the weight of what they’ve already poured in makes quitting feel like losing. In the end, many face financial ruin, not because they started with bad intentions, but because they couldn’t let go of the chase.

This struck a familiar chord.

In my own profession — the practice of law — I’ve seen something similar, particularly in litigation. Clients sometimes find themselves caught in a kind of psychological trap. They have spent so much already — in legal fees, in lost time, in emotional energy — that when a settlement offer appears, even one that might bring a practical and reasonable conclusion, their first reaction is often resistance. “Why should I accept this now, after everything I’ve spent to get here?” they ask.

It’s a fair question. But it’s not always the right one.

Litigation is expensive. It is often slow. And while we lawyers do our best to advocate fiercely and effectively, there is always an element of uncertainty in the outcome. Settlements, while imperfect, offer one powerful thing that trials cannot: certainty. They close the chapter. They bring resolution. They allow clients to redirect their time, money, and energy toward the future instead of dwelling in the past.

I never tell clients to settle lightly. But I do remind them of the “treasure hunter’s trap.” Sometimes the smartest decision is not to keep digging in search of something better, but to recognize that the investment made has already served its purpose — to bring them to the point where resolution is possible.

Because sometimes, the best result isn’t the perfect result. It’s the practical one.