X hits on this document

73 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

17 / 23

1-09-2163

N.E.2d 725 (2008). The bulk of the U-Haul entities’ argument before the circuit court centered

around the perceived unfairness that the U-Haul entities would face if Buffalo Grove’s settlement

agreement were approved, by noting that the U-Haul entities could be found liable at trial for a

disproportionate amount of damages. The U-Haul entities pointed to no evidence of bad faith. Their

argument was fundamentally based upon the assertion that Buffalo Grove’s $1 million settlement

was disproportionately low in comparison to the anticipated $10 to $20 million in damages which

would be sought from the jury against the U-Haul entities and Lewis, in favor of Cellini.

The record shows that in granting the motion for a good-faith finding, the circuit court had

before it multiple pleadings; a “full and final release and satisfaction agreement” between Buffalo

Grove and Cellini; and an affidavit by a law enforcement consultant, Ronald Janota, opining that

Buffalo Grove violated “accepted standards and practices within the field of law enforcement” by

failing to disengage from its pursuit of Lewis. The circuit court also heard oral arguments regarding

the issue, and was fully aware of the various tort immunity defenses made by Buffalo Grove in its

answer to Cellini’s third amended complaint. Further, the consolidated cases had been pending

before the circuit court for three years by the time of the hearing and ruling on the motion for a good-

faith finding. We are convinced that the circuit court was well-versed in the facts, arguments,

pleadings and motions of each party. Thus, under the totality of the circumstances, we cannot say

that the circuit court abused its discretion in finding that “there’s simply no basis in the record for

anythingother than a good faith finding,” and further in determining that Buffalo Grove’s settlement

agreement with Cellini for $1 million was reasonable and fair.

The U-Haul entities cite to a number of cases in support of their argument that Buffalo

17

Document info
Document views73
Page views76
Page last viewedFri Dec 02 18:52:45 UTC 2016
Pages23
Paragraphs495
Words6888

Comments