Litigation & Investigations

Last week a Delaware federal district court unsealed its earlier opinion blocking the merger of two radioactive waste disposal companies. 

A New Jersey district court recently denied a motion to dismiss in an antitrust class action alleging that a physician association illegally tied board certification to association membership in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. Talone, et. al. v. The American Osteopathic Association, Case No. 1:16-cv-04644 (D. N.J. Jun. 12, 2017).

A federal district court denied summary judgment motions brought by both sides in the government’s antitrust suit against a Michigan hospital alleging an agreement not to compete in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. U.S. v. Hillsdale Community Health Center, 5:15-cv-12311 (E.D. Mich. May 31, 2017).

Even with a reduced lineup of only two commissioners — the Republican Acting Chair and one Democratic Commissioner — the Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC” or “Commission”) filed an administrative complaint this week against the Louisiana Real Estate Appraisers Board (the “Louisiana Board”) alleging that the Louisiana Board unreasonably restrains competition in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act by limiting the freedom of individual appraisers and their customers to engage in negotiations to set fees for real estate appraisals.

On March 30, 2017, in a closely watched case, a federal district court denied the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings filed by Carolinas Healthcare against the DOJ Antitrust Division and State of North Carolina’s Complaint alleging that Carolinas Healthcare insisted on contract provisions with payors that limited or prohibited steering to lower-cost providers. US v. The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority, No. 3:16-cv-00311 (W.D. N.C., Mar. 30, 2017).

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) and the State of Illinois successfully concluded their challenge to the proposed merger of Advocate Health Care and NorthShore University Health System earlier this month, when the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction enjoining the health systems from consummating their proposed merger.

We are currently serving as co-counsel with the ACLU of Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office, and others in a lawsuit against the president’s executive order curbing immigration by refugees and others traveling from seven majority Muslim countries.

The federal antitrust agencies have opened the New Year with vigorous enforcement of the Hart Scott Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (“HSR Act”) by imposing several fines totaling $1.5 million. On January 17, 2017, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) settled allegations in two separate matters.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced on January 19, 2017 increased jurisdictional thresholds for premerger notification filings under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, as amended (the HSR Act).

Recently, the Supreme Court of Canada had the opportunity to decide a specific issue with potentially large ramifications.  In Endean v. British Columbia (Endean), the Court considered whether judges of the Canadian Superior Courts have jurisdiction to hear motions in a different province. 

On November 4, 2016, Judge Keith Ellison of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas granted preliminary approval of a $175 million settlement in the federal securities class action In re: BP p.l.c. Securities Litigation between BP and Lead Plaintiffs for the “post-explosion” class.

Drafting an arbitration clause for your agreement is a straightforward matter most of the time. Sometimes it can be as simple as incorporating by reference an arbitration provision in another document or agreement. Easy peasy. Or is it?

Policyholders often seek to challenge an insurer’s denial of coverage on the grounds that the insurer waived a defense relied upon to deny coverage.

On September 27, 2016, the Second Circuit ruled against a value investor in an opt-out action brought in the continuing Vivendi litigation. The recently issued opinion, however, does have positive implications for institutional investor class participants.

The Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC” or “Commission”) has made its preference known for structural, rather than conduct, remedies when attempting to craft consent solutions in reviewing antitrust provocative mergers.

As detailed repeatedly in this space, the Canadian court system has issued a number of decisions which have altered the practice of bringing – or defending against – a securities class action for secondary market misrepresentation.

On September 23, 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit concluded that, “for now, at least, the long war over Long Wharf is at an end.”

Last week, in In re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (“Second Circuit”) vacated a $147 million jury award against Chinese vitamin C sellers Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. and North China Pharmaceutical Group Corp. (“Defendants”) for price fixing and supply manipulation, ordinarily violations of US antitrust laws.

The Massachusetts Appeals Court issued an opinion on August 29, 2016, that has significant ramifications for developers seeking Comprehensive Permits for affordable housing projects under chapter 40B of the Massachusetts General Laws (“Chapter 40B”).

As stakeholders and watchers of the expansive field of regenerative medicine likely are aware, earlier this year a study published in the peer-reviewed journal Cell Stem Cell reported on the growth of so-called stem cell clinics operating in the U.S.