Chalifoux v. Dallas/Fort Worth Med. Ctr.-Grand Prairie,
No. 4:00-CV-1866-A (N.D. Tex. Dec. 21, 2001)

A neurosurgeon whose clinical privileges were suspended and then terminated sued the hospital and certain medical staff leaders in federal court, alleging violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act. The hospital moved for summary judgment, arguing that the physician failed to provide any evidence to support his antitrust claims, that they were unable to conspire as a matter of law and that they were immune from liability under the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986. The United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas agreed with all of the defendants' arguments and granted summary judgment in their favor. The court refused to award attorneys' fees as the defendants requested, finding nothing in the record to indicate that the plaintiff's conduct during the litigation had been frivolous, unreasonable, without foundation, or in bad faith.