Antitrust Counterclaim Dismissed in Interventional Cardiology Dust Up
The United States District Court for the Western District of Texas dismissed a counterclaim brought by an interventional cardiologist and his practice against a hospital and physician group for attempted monopolization. The cardiologist claimed that the hospital and physician group’s antitrust suit against him and others contained intentional misrepresentations and that the suit was part of “a broader effort to control the practice of cardiology in Laredo.” However, the court dismissed the cardiologist’s counterclaim finding that he failed to adequately address antitrust injury. Drs. Hosp. of Laredo v. Cigarroa
Antitrust Suit Dismissed in Neurosurgery Conflict
The United States District Court for the District of Idaho dismissed a suit alleging anticompetitive conduct brought by two physicians and their neurosurgery group against a hospital and others. According to the physicians’ complaint, the hospital instituted a policy that required them to provide continuous call coverage even though another neurosurgery group that had a professional services agreement with the hospital was also providing call coverage at the same time. According to the physicians, this policy “requiring uncompensated 24/7/365 call coverage” adversely impacted their group’s ability to compete in the market because it could not recruit and hire new neurosurgeons and because the policy resulted in the group’s members resigning their clinical privileges. In dismissing the complaint, the court concluded, among other things, that the physicians only alleged injury to themselves and not to competition in general. Because “the antitrust laws were enacted for the protection of competition, not competitors,” the court found that the physicians failed to assert antitrust injury. Hajjar v. St. Luke’s Health Sys., LTD.