Just how did they make Dr. Gruber go away?

I often wondered the same thing, especially since Gruber was so gung-ho about wanting Galvin to try the case rather than settling out of court. However, Concannon also notes later in the film that the doctors in the case also wanted to go to court to clear their names. They didn't like the idea of settling out of court.

So, Galvin and Concannon start out both wanting to settle, while Towler wants to clear his name, and Gruber is clearly trying to maneuver Galvin into trying the case too.

Considering that both Towler and Gruber were noted anesthesiologists in the same city, there's a very strong chance that they know each other and that they could be friends. Is it possible that Towler put Gruber up to it? He could have told Gruber to suck Galvin in so much that he'll want to go to court, so that Towler could win and clear his name (as opposed to settling and leaving a black mark on his record). Since Towler and Gruber were in the same profession and vulnerable to these kinds of lawsuits, it makes sense that they would protect each other and sympathize with each other.

I don't think there's anything Concannon could have done to buy off Gruber, but Towler might have been able to reach him.

Wish there were more clues in the movie. Either Gruber was sincere in what he told Galvin or he wasn't.

If he wasn't sincere then most likely he was bait to get Galvin to go to trial to clear the OR Doctors. Thus it is the OR Doctors ploy. Not the Archdiocese, who had a check cut ready to settle, nor Concannon who would follow the Archdioceses lead.

If Gruber was sincere then either Concannon persuaded/threatened him to leave town or Gruber simply scheduled a vacation the time of the trial.

That Concannon persuaded/threatened Gruber is a pretty straight forward theory. Knowing he is going to trial Concannon is simply eliminating any credible witness Galvin could call. There are no clues as to what type of honey or vinegar Concannon uses on Gruber.

Finally we are left with a trial/vacation scheduling conflict. Not aware of the trial dates Gruber happens to schedule vacation during the trail. But then what about the deposition? When Galvin was tracking down Gruber in the movie, was that to take the deposition or to go over testimony? The deposition was set for a mutually agreed date and time, don't think Gruber would have let it slip his mind. Or maybe Gruber gives his deposition, no trial date is yet set, decides to take the vacation still intending to testify whenever the trial is set. Concannon learns of the vacation and persuades his buddy judge to schedule the trial during that period.


My thoughts are that the writers, to show that if anything could go wrong did go wrong, wrote in the disappearance of the key witness. Kinda of cliché but makes for a good story.

This is all pure speculation of course, but here's how I think it could plausibly have played out. Laura, the evil infiltrator, suckered the unsuspecting Frank into revealing details about his case. Once Concannon found out about Gruber, he had his army of lawyers pry into every nook and cranny of Gruber's life. Gruber portrayed himself as a virtuous man looking to do the right thing for his profession and for Galvin's client (probably in that order), but he struck me as an arrogant hotshot. Concannon probably found out something he had done that got buried, perhaps a nurse he got pregnant or sexually assaulted, and threatened that if he didn't leave town he'd expose Gruber's past improprieties to the press. This seems more likely than Gruber getting bought off with a vacation. Gruber was a doctor after all. He wore a fancy coat and drove a fancy sports car. I'm sure he'd have no trouble paying for such a vacation himself at a future date.

My guess is that Gruber was bribed to disappear. In that brief scene with Galvin, Gruber gave the impression of having righteous motivations, but also had the vibe of a smooth talking, somewhat sarcastic and cynical hustler who had fancy tastes. He was chomping on a cigar, wore an expensive coat, and motored off in what appeared to be a slick European sports car. He was a man in a hurry. He couldn't even be bothered to stand still and chat with Galvin about a matter that he supposedly considered a grave injustice. Gruber gave me the impression that he was a man who could be bought off. When Galvin asked him why he was willing to testify, he replied "To do the right thing. Isn't that why you're doing it?" In my opinion that comment was laced with cynicism and was a sly jab at Galvin, suggesting he was only doing it for the money. Gruber might have initially committed to testify to raise his profile as a righteous dude, what we'd today call virtue signaling.