See case page: UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health After much delay due to the pandemic induced hiatus, the preliminary approval hearing for the proposed settlement agreement in the Sutter Health antitrust case resumed on August 12 at the Superior Court of San Francisco. At the hearing, plaintiff attorneys on behalf of both class members UEBT and the Attorney General addressed in turn questions with respect to specific proposed terms raised in a tentative ruling by Judge Anne-Christine Massullo.[1] One key issue the court rested on was the selection …

See case page: UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health At a July 9 hearing at the Superior Court of San Francisco, Judge Anne-Christine Massullo denied Sutter Health’s motion to delay the approval hearing of the preliminary settlement agreement due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This is an encouraging ruling as there was much speculation and concern that Sutter’s request is a thinly veiled attempt to walk back the historic settlement reached last December amidst the chaos of COVID-19. In a California Healthline quote last month, The Source Executive Editor …

After much anticipation and a round of public comments on the draft guidelines released in January, the Department of Justice (DOJ), along with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), officially issued the final Vertical Merger Review Guidelines, replacing the Non-Horizontal Merger Guidelines originally issued in 1984. The updated guidelines govern how federal antitrust agencies evaluate vertical, as well as other non-horizontal mergers. The guidelines outline three main sources of evidence for potential adverse competitive effects from vertical mergers: 1) Foreclosure and Raising Rivals’ Costs, 2) Access to Competitively Sensitive Information, and …

See case page: UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health When Sutter Health reached a preliminary settlement agreement with California Attorney General Xavier Becerra restricting its anticompetitive practices, antitrust experts breathed a collective sigh of relief on clinching a favorable outcome. Then came COVID-19. As with all other aspects of business and life, the pandemic has turned existing order upside down. Will it throw a wrench in the all but finalized case that would’ve served as strong guidance to other health systems in the country? The terms of the …

The coronavirus pandemic has highlighted the urgent need for healthcare coverage for all Americans, once again putting the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in the national spotlight. The law, however, has long been immersed in various types of litigation, involving both state governments and private insurers, a few of which have reached the Supreme Court after many years in the making. This month, we take a look at the latest Supreme Court action in two recent lawsuits involving the ever-controversial law and its legacy.   Insurers Win $12 Billion Lawsuit for …

As society changes in unexpected ways due to the coronavirus outbreak, litigation and enforcement issues have come into the spotlight and become more important than ever. In this Litigation and Enforcement issue, we take a look at how COVID-19 is impacting healthcare markets and law and enforcement.   Uncertainty From Outbreak Impacts Court Cases and Law Enforcement As the COVID-19 pandemic rages on globally, both essential and nonessential industries have been affected in unprecedented ways. Across the country, legislatures and courthouses have postponed or indefinitely suspended activities due to the …

As part of The Source’s ongoing collaborative research series to present evidence-based analyses on strategies to address consolidating healthcare markets, we are excited to unveil a new legal resource table detailing major cases in federal and state antitrust enforcement of healthcare provider and insurer consolidation. This interactive table, now available on the Market Consolidation interactive key issue page, provides a short case summary of each case, and allows searching and sorting by keyword and criteria including year, jurisdiction, enforcement agency, and outcome of the cases. With support from Arnold Ventures and …

Early in January, the Department of Justice (DOJ), along with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), released a new draft guideline for vertical merger review and sought public comments. On February 24, The Source Executor Editor Jaime King, along with health economists and policy experts including Source Advisory members Tim Greaney and Richard Scheffler, jointly released “Comments on the Draft Vertical Merger Guidelines with Special Consideration to Health Care”. The comments raise concerns and urge that special attention be paid to the effects of vertical mergers in the health care sector, …

The Source has been closely following legal challenges to state legislation that seek to promote competition and contain costs in healthcare services. In this month’s Litigation and Enforcement Highlights, we roundup the latest developments in some of the pending cases as well as new lawsuits that have been filed to derail state efforts to address rising prescription drug costs.   Arkansas: Supreme Court Grants Review of PBM Law In November 2019, the Source Blog covered the long litigious history of lawsuits filed against various pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) laws from …

See UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health case page.   The high-profile antitrust case against Sutter Health settled on the eve of trial in October 2019, when the Northern California hospital giant reached a preliminary settlement agreement with the California Attorney General’s office and class action plaintiffs after five years of litigation. The terms of the settlement were released late December, which include both monetary compensation for the private plaintiffs and injunctions against Sutter’s conduct that will restore competition and promote transparency in the provider market. In this …