We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 795

Sidley Austin LLP global pricing newsletter - volume three 2014
  • Sidley Austin LLP
  • Brazil, Canada, China, European Union, France, Germany, India, United Kingdom, USA
  • April 15 2014

On October 21, 2013, Brazil’s National Agency of Supplemental Health enacted Normative Resolution 388, which mandated that all private healthcare


DOJ contends health insurer's use of most favored nation clauses is anticompetitive
  • Williams Mullen
  • USA
  • October 29 2010

On October 18, Assistant Attorney General Christine Varney, who heads the Department of Justice Antitrust Division, announced the filing of an antitrust action against Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan ("BCBSM"


State AGs in the news
  • Dickstein Shapiro LLP
  • USA
  • August 28 2014

Following multiple state and federal investigations, the U.S. Department of Justice and the AGs ofCalifornia, Delaware, Illinois, Kentucky, Maryland


Department of Justice reaches settlement in first traditional Section 2 case since 1999
  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • USA
  • March 2 2011

On February 25, 2011, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that it settled an antitrust enforcement action against United Regional Health Care System of Wichita Falls, Texas (United Regional) in which the agency alleged that United Regional had monopolized one or more markets for hospital services by entering into agreements with health insurers not to do business with United Regional's competitors


US Department of Justice challenges use by Blue Cross of most favored nation contracts
  • Mayer Brown LLP
  • USA
  • October 28 2010

The Antitrust Division of the US Department of Justice ("DOJ") has challenged the use of "most favored nation" clauses by an alleged dominant health insurer, contending that contracts guaranteeing a buyer the lowest price may exclude competition


State AGs in the news
  • Dickstein Shapiro LLP
  • USA
  • September 4 2014

The AGs of Illinois, Iowa, and Missouri and the U.S. Department of Justice simultaneously filed acomplaint and proposed final judgment in the U.S


Blue Cross-Michigan abandons merger plans in face of US Department of Justice antitrust challenge
  • Mayer Brown LLP
  • USA
  • March 10 2010

During the 2008 presidential campaign, then-candidate Barack Obama singled out health insurance mergers as an area his administration would target for increased antitrust enforcement


Recent lawsuits allege anticompetitive market allocation conspiracy by Blue Cross and Blue Shield
  • King & Spalding LLP
  • USA
  • April 24 2012

Two recent lawsuits allege that Blue Cross and Blue Shield entities in North Carolina and Alabama have violated federal and state antitrust laws by engaging in concerted action with other Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) plans nationwide to divide geographic markets among them, which has allegedly resulted in reduced competition and higher rates charged to end customers for healthcare services


District Court dismisses follow-on suit challenging Blue Cross's "MFN-Plus' contracts under both per se and rule of reason standards
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • April 11 2012

The District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan recently dismissed antitrust claims brought by the City of Pontiac against Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan's practice of requiring hospitals to enter into "MFN-Plus" contracts, which was alleged to have significantly raised prices to Blue Cross's competitors


When does the payment of low reimbursement rates or other conduct by an insurer violate the antitrust laws?
  • Duane Morris LLP
  • USA
  • December 6 2010

Healthcare providers and insurers should be aware of a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third CircuitWest Penn Allegheny Health System, Inc. v. UPMCin which the court reinstated an antitrust challenge brought by a hospital system against another hospital system and the area's largest insurer