Quantcast

Tag Archives: Antitrust

Antitrust suit can proceed (access required)

Medical examination

A nurse staffing company can move forward with an antitrust suit alleging that a network of South Carolina hospitals orchestrated a wage-fixing scheme. The case appears to mirror litigation in Arizona that resulted in a $22.5 million settlement. U.S. District ...

Read More »

Teeth whitening ruling weakens antitrust shield (access required)

teeth

A 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in a dispute over teeth whitening has exposed just about every occupational regulatory board in the Carolinas, including the N.C. State Bar, to federal antitrust attacks. The S.C. Bar may be less affected, however, as regulation of lawyers in the Palmetto State is handled by the Supreme Court, rather than by lawyers themselves.

Read More »

Antitrust – Attempted Monopolization Claim – Insufficient Allegations – Relevant Market – Dangerous Probability of Success – Home Builders (access required)

Downeast Builders & Realty, Inc. v. Essex Homes Southeast, Inc. In its attempted monopolization counterclaim, defendant fails to allege what “identified subclass or submarket of new houses” or what “particularized price point” plaintiff is attempting to monopolize. Furthermore, defendant fails to allege the geographic market it claims plaintiff is attempting to monopolize.

Read More »

Antitrust – Real Property – Multiple Listing Services – Anti-Competitive Bylaws – Putative Class Actions (access required)

Robertson v. Sea Pines Real Estate Companies Inc. The 4th Circuit says plaintiff buyers of real estate brokerage services in South Carolina have stated an antitrust claim under the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, with allegations that defendant brokerages that serve as board members of the local multiple listing service conspired to unfairly restrain market competition.

Read More »

Civil Practice – Federal Jurisdiction – Removal – Class Action Fairness Act – State as Plaintiff – Parens Patriae – Remand — Antitrust (access required)

South Carolina v. LG Display Co. The State of South Carolina filed this antitrust action seeking civil forfeitures and statutory penalties pursuant to its parens patriae power in addition to seeking restitution on behalf of a particular subset of S.C. citizens. As such, this case is not removable under the Class Action Fairness Act. The state’s motion to remand to state court is granted.

Read More »