4 Key Takeaways | Trade Secret Update 2024 Legal Developments and Trends
Employment Law Now VIII-150 - The FTC Noncompete Rule is Dead: What Now?
Navigating Emerging Privacy Issues in Financial Services — The Consumer Finance Podcast
Navigating the Labyrinth of Private Equity Investments in Health Care – Diagnosing Health Care
California Employment News: Court Ruling Halts FTC’s Non-Compete Ban – Implications for Employers
(Podcast) California Employment News: Court Ruling Halts FTC’s Non-Compete Ban – Implications for Employers
#WorkforceWednesday®: What the FTC Non-Compete Ban Block Means for Employers - Employment Law This Week®
FTC CFPB Enforcement Report — Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Employment Law Edition: The Latest on Non-Competes and Independent Contractors
Balch’s Decision Dive: Texas Trial Court Struck Down the FTC’s Noncompete Rule
Employment Law Now VIII-146 - Latest Update on FTC Non-Compete Ban Plus 3 Summer Reminders for Employers
Urgent Action on Restrictive Covenants: Employers Must Prepare for FTC Rules
California Employment News: Understanding the FTC Non-Compete Ban Key Insights for Employers
California Employment News: Understanding the FTC Non-Compete Ban Key Insights for Employers (Podcast)
#WorkforceWednesday: What Is the Future of Non-Compete Agreements for Employers? - Spilling Secrets Podcast
The FTC and Connecticut Join Forces for Action Against Nissan Dealer
#WorkforceWednesday: Can FTC’s Non-Compete Ban Survive Without Chevron Deference? - Spilling Secrets Podcast
The FTC’s Proposed Rule Banning Deceptive Reviews and Testimonials
Managing Social Media Risk
The CARS Rule — Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast
Antitrust practitioners, enforcers and industry professionals came together in Washington, D.C. for the 64th installment of the ABA Section of Antitrust Law's annual Spring Meeting. The Spring Meeting provides a look at the...more
In North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC, 135 S. Ct. 1101 (2015), the Supreme Court held that the North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners (“Board”), a state agency, was not exempt from federal antitrust laws...more
The Supreme Court has a renewed interest in the state action doctrine. After declining to clarify what types of state action are exempt from federal antitrust scrutiny for years, the Supreme Court agreed to hear its second...more
After running the table in the Supreme Court with a unanimous decision, which we covered, and then convincing a district court judge in Georgia to halt further consolidation of Phoebe Putney Health System (“Phoebe Putney”)...more
In this Issue: - Focus On The Federal Trade Commission - Supreme Court Decision in FTC v. Actavis Provides Guidance on Pay-for-Delay - DOJ Prevails on Liability in eBooks Antitrust Case in the Southern District...more
Last week a unanimous Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated opinion in FTC v. Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc., addressing the "State action" exemption from application of the federal antitrust laws for the first time...more
The U.S. Supreme Court on February 19th scaled back the "state action immunity" doctrine, siding with the Federal Trade Commission on an issue that had divided the lower courts and holding that a county Hospital Authority's...more
On February 19, 2013, the Supreme Court unanimously held that the effective acquisition of Palmyra Medical Center (“Palmyra”) by Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc. (“PPHS") in Southwestern Georgia was not immune from antitrust...more
In This Issue: Implementation of the Affordable Care Act; Other HHS and Federal Regulatory Initiatives; Other Congressional and State Initiatives; Other Health Care News; and Hearings and Mark-Ups Scheduled. Excerpt...more
On February 19, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, found that a merger of two Georgia hospitals was not immune from federal antitrust laws under the "state-action" exemption, reversing a decision of the...more
On Tuesday, the United States Supreme Court reined in the state action immunity doctrine, which exempts municipalities from scrutiny under the federal antitrust laws when they act pursuant to a “clearly articulated state...more
In a unanimous opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court this week tightened the standard for state action immunity under federal antitrust laws in a case involving a hospital merger. This decision arguably tightens the reins on the...more
Recent major regulatory and technological developments have brought forth historic changes to the health care market. Health care providers have responded to these developments in several ways. One such mechanism, hospital...more
Holding in Phoebe Putney case narrowly construes state-action exemption to antitrust laws. On February 19, in Federal Trade Commission v. Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously reversed a...more
On February 19, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that state-action immunity does not protect a state-created hospital authority from antitrust scrutiny over a proposed hospital merger where the anticompetitive...more
In a unanimous decision issued on February 19, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the state-action doctrine did not immunize Phoebe Putney Health System’s acquisition of Palmyra Park Hospital in Albany, Georgia.1 The...more
In one of the most closely watched healthcare antitrust cases in years, the Supreme Court issued its decision in the FTC merger challenge to a Georgia hospital merger, Phoebe Putney Health System’s acquisition of Palmyra...more
The Supreme Court decision in FTC v. Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc., makes clear that state action immunity from federal antitrust laws is disfavored, and local governmental, quasi-public and private entities can only...more
On February 19, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a local hospital authority’s acquisition of a hospital in Georgia was not immunized from the antitrust laws under the state action doctrine. In doing so, the...more