Who feels lucky? What is at stake in all of this that should promote global settlement?

Plenty. I have settled a lot of cases over the years in Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Hampshire so I believe I'm qualified to make a few observations here. And seeing as this is the First Amendment, and could blow your heads clean off.....

A. PLAINTIFF DERRICK GILLENWATER
1. Free speech rights.
2. Compensation, refund on payment for substandard legal services.
3. Compensation for months spent incarcerated without Just Cause.
4. Vindication for months spent incarcerated without Just Cause.
5. Closure and the ability to move on with his life.

B. DEFENDANT JEFFREY DENNER
1. Ego.
2. Closure.
3. Reduction of public interest in his mistakes.
4. Slightly higher malpractice premiums.
5. Agreement that Plaintiff Gillenwater never discusses this case.

C. DEFENDANT KEVIN BARRON
1. Ego.
2. Closure.
3. Reduction of public interest in his mistakes.
4. Slightly higher malpractice premiums.
5. Agreement that Plaintiff Gillenwater never discusses this case.

Now you boys come together and play nice. Everyone knows a Good Settlement is one in which everybody feels just a little bit slighted. So Mr. Gillenwater, don't get "greedy" and Defendants Denner and Barron don't get on your high horses. You both know that this is no short money case, so tell your insurance carrier(s) to deal with it. In the alternative, there's no way that you'll get Summary Judgment from any responsible Jurist so you're left with defending your cases before a packed (and it will be packed) courtroom against a lone Plaintiff of sound mind, body and integrity -- or perhaps worse than that -- a Plaintiff with a new lawyer as this case takes hold in the public milieu.

Who feels lucky? Choose wisely.