Antitrust and Consumer Protection
Competition: Spring 2015, Vol. 24, No. 1
Content
- California Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law and Federal and State Procedural Law Developments
- Chair's Column
- Editor's Note
- How Viable Is the Prospect of Enforcement of Privacy Rights In the Age of Big Data? An Overview of Trends and Developments In Consumer Privacy Class Actions
- Keynote Address: a Conversation With the Honorable Kathryn Mickle Werdegar, Justice of the California Supreme Court
- Major League Baseball Is Exempt From the Antitrust Laws - Like It or Not: the "Unrealistic," "Inconsistent," and "Illogical" Antitrust Exemption For Baseball That Just Won't Go Away.
- Masthead
- Nowhere To Run, Nowhere To Hide: In the Age of Big Data Is Data Security Possible and Can the Enforcement Agencies and Private Litigation Ensure Your Online Information Remains Safe and Private? a Roundtable
- Restoring Balance In the Test For Exclusionary Conduct
- St. Alphonsus Medical Center-nampa and Ftc V St. Luke's Health System Ltd.: a Panel Discussion On This Big Stakes Trial
- The Baseball Exemption: An Anomaly Whose Time Has Run
- The Continuing Violations Doctrine: Limitation In Name Only, or a Resuscitation of the Clayton Act's Statute of Limitations?
- The Doctor Is In, But Your Medical Information Is Out Trends In California Privacy Cases Relating To Release of Medical Information
- The State of Data-breach Litigation and Enforcement: Before the 2013 Mega Breaches and Beyond
- The United States V. Bazaarvoice Merger Trial: a Panel Discussion Including Insights From Trial Counsel
- United States V. Bazaarvoice: the Role of Customer Testimony In Clayton Act Merger Challenges
- St. Alphonsus Medical Center - Nampa, Inc., Et Al. and Federal Trade Commission, Et Al. V St. Luke's Health System, Ltd., and Saltzer Medical Group, P.a.: a Physicians' Practice Group Merger's Journey Through Salutary Health-related Goals, Irreparable Harm, Self-inflicted Wounds, and the Remedy of Divestiture
ST. ALPHONSUS MEDICAL CENTER – NAMPA, INC., ET AL. AND FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, ET AL. V ST. LUKE’S HEALTH SYSTEM, LTD., AND SALTZER MEDICAL GROUP, P.A.: A PHYSICIANS’ PRACTICE GROUP MERGER’S JOURNEY THROUGH SALUTARY HEALTH-RELATED GOALS, IRREPARABLE HARM, SELF-INFLICTED WOUNDS, AND THE REMEDY OF DIVESTITURE
By Ari Y. Basser1
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
On January 24, 2014, following a bench trial in October 2013, Chief Judge B. Lynn Winmill of the United States District Court for the District of Idaho found that St. Luke’s Health System, Ltd.’s ("St. Luke’s") acquisition of the Saltzer Medical Group, P.A. ("Saltzer")2 violated Section 7 of the Clayton Act,3 and the Idaho Competition Act,4 because "the effect of such acquisition may be substantially to lessen competition."5 Upon such finding, the court entered a permanent injunction and ordered St. Luke’s to fully divest itself of Saltzer’s physicians and assets, and unwind the acquisition of Saltzer, which had been consummated at the end of 2012.
The court rejected the defendants’ request for a so-called "conduct-based remedy." The court instead elected, in its discretion and after a thorough review of the evidence presented at trial, the remedy of "divestiture" to restore the market to its pre-acquisition structure, despite having previously denied Saint Alphonsus Health System, Inc.’s ("St. Alphonsus") and Treasure Valley Hospital’s ("TVH") request for a preliminary injunction. The defendants subsequently appealed the decision and judgment to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals,6 where it was affirmed in favor of the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC"), the State of Idaho, St. Alphonsus, and TVH.7