Shah, Agarwal and Purdy — who face up to 30 years each when they’re sentenced in October and November — have asked U.S. District Judge Thomas Durkin to overturn their convictions or grant them new trials for lack of evidence and failing to prove the charges.
Such motions, which are separate from traditional appeals, are long shots, as prosecutors noted, citing a 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion that reads: “Overturning a guilty verdict for lack of evidence is serious business; we are essentially asked to take the case out of the jury’s hands, something we will do only if the record contains no evidence, regardless of how it is weighed, from which the jury could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Prosecutors scoffed at the requests by Shah, Agarwal and Purdy to have their verdicts summarily dumped after trial and before sentencing. “Outcome was rotten at its core," the government wrote in response. "The big lie at Outcome was this: Outcome sold something it did not have, billed clients as if it delivered in full and concealed its fraud using various deceptive means.”
Keep up with one the industry’s fastest growing sectors. Sign up for Digital Health Intelligence.
Prosecutors did not address another issue raised by Shah and Agarwal in which they argue the charges should be dismissed or they should be granted a new trial because they couldn’t afford to hire their first choices of attorneys because the government improperly froze nearly $5 million more in assets before trial than it should have.
This story first appeared in Crain's Chicago Business.
