שטוטאקוי, אתר מאמרים אישי

1. In re Guardianship of Babb, 162 ill.2d 153, 168, 642 N.E.2d 1195 (1994), 740 Ill.Comp.Stat.Ann. 100/2 (West, 2006). Performance of a loan-to-obtain agreement would be contrary to Illinois` public policy to protect the financial interests of the non-heir defendant. However, the agreements are still in place because they bring mutual benefits. Juries are notoriously unpredictable. If they leave the courtroom to begin deliberations, neither party can predict with certainty the verdict or accurately estimate the award amounts set by the jury. By entering into a high-cost agreement, both parties essentially insure each other against their most pessimistic scenario: no payment for the applicant and personal liability for premiums beyond insurance coverage for the doctor. High-level agreements mix jury decisions with aspects of out-of-court settlements.

They set higher and lower comparative amounts that depend on the decision of the jury. At the same time, they decide whether a payment is made outside the jury`s control. High-price agreements can be reached at any time from the beginning of a trial to the minute before the jury verdict expires. Their existence is usually not revealed before a jury or judge and is often not a public matter. Keeping the agreement secret until the verdict is rendered is not subversive. On the contrary, it preserves the purity of the process and the integrity of the agreement. Although the chances of winning the trial strongly favour the accused doctors,2 the cost of loss can be so high that the accused end up with high-risk agreements. Certain situations create the conditions for their use. In the present case, the Court found that the plain language of the agreement on the issue of R.4:58 expenditures had remained silent.