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 …

Case page: UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health Executive Editor Jaime King was quoted in the 6/17/2020 California Healthline article Citing COVID, Sutter Pushes To Revisit Landmark Antitrust Settlement: In its filing, Sutter does not specifically object to the $575 million settlement amount. But Jaime King, an associate dean at UC Hastings College of the Law who has followed the case, said the request for a delay could be a tactical strategy to support such a move. “The longer they can delay, the more they can show they have …

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 …

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 …

See UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health case page.   Today, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra announced the settlement terms for the landmark antitrust case, UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health. Sutter Health was alleged to engage in anticompetitive behavior by requiring “all or nothing” contracts, preventing insurance companies from providing tiered health plans, setting extremely high out-of-network rates, and restricting price transparency of provider cost information and rates. As Source Executive Editor Jaime King explains in a Tradeoffs episode, The Train Has Left the Station, …

See UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health case page.   As the healthcare industry grapples with the recent settlement of the antitrust case against Sutter Health, The Source Executive Editor Jaime King discusses the possible motivations and implications of this development in Tradeoffs, a healthcare podcast. In Episode 2 of the podcast, The Train Has Left the Station, Professor King points out that because Sutter is a model for many other health systems around the country, the lawsuit against Sutter’s contracting practices, including all or nothing provisions, had …

See UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health case page.   The historic court case against Sutter Health alleging anticompetitive contract practices took an unexpected turn today when Judge Anne-Christine Massullo of the Superior Court of San Francisco dismissed the jury, announcing that Sutter has reached a preliminary settlement with the California AG and class action plaintiffs. Opening arguments in the case were set for October 21, after it was delayed from October 10 due to an insufficient number of jurors. The trial was estimated to last about 12 weeks and …

See UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health case page.   Updated 10/11/19: Start of Trial further delayed to Monday, October 21 per 10/11 hearing regarding jury selection. By: Alex Montague, Graduate Research Fellow Opening arguments for the antitrust case against Sutter Health, set to begin Oct 10 at 10:15am in the Superior Court of San Francisco, were postponed today after the court expressed concern that there was an insufficient number of jurors available to move forward for the trial. Several jurors were absent for today’s trial due to medical conditions …

See UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health case page.   The landmark antitrust case against Sutter Health, the largest provider of general acute hospital services in Northern California, is set to begin jury trial in the Superior Court of San Francisco on October 10 and is expected to last 12 weeks. The trial will begin at 10:15am with opening arguments from both parties. The Source has been closely tracking this case leading up to the trial. Executive Editor Jaime King was quoted in multiple news outlets, including the New York …

See UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health case page.   As part of the Case Watch series for the landmark antitrust suit against Sutter Health, this post takes a look back at the Superior Court of San Francisco’s orders from March and June 2019, denying Sutter’s motions for summary judgment, which set the stage for the jury trial, set to begin on Thursday, October 10, 2019. As a preview of the legal arguments we will see at trial, we dissect each of the four causes of action brought against Sutter …