The facts, which gave rise to the case, are fairly easy to understand. A doctor was performing medical procedures that were not covered by many of his patients' insurance policies. The physician and 2 anesthesiologists who assisted him submitted false invoices, operative reports, and other records as if they had performed covered medical procedures. One of the anesthesiologists cooperated with the government and pled guilty. The other anesthesiologist entered into negotiations with the government to try to arrange a deal but ultimately went to trial.
Settlement is attractive because the parties have some control over the outcome.
Settlement avoids the very considerable cost of trial, especially in an area such as anesthesia, where expert witnesses must be paid to investigate the facts of the case and be prepared to testify. Settlement also eliminates uncertainty, such as a jury that makes an emotional decision. Criminal trials can be just as expensive as civil trials and the pressure for settlement just as great. Criminal defendants are encouraged to settle not only because of considerations of guilt or innocence, but also because their adversary is the government, an entity with substantially more resources than any individual defendant. Even prosecutors feel the need to settle.