News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Market Participants

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Merrick Garland on Efficiencies

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP on

Judge Merrick Garland, if he is confirmed, may become one of the Supreme Court’s foremost authorities in antitrust law. He taught antitrust law at Harvard, and he has published on the subject, so it’s fair to expect him to...more

Snell & Wilmer

No Federal Antitrust Immunity for Actions by State Regulatory Boards Controlled by Market Participants without Active State...

Snell & Wilmer on

The United States has a strong tradition of professional self-regulation, particularly in the learned professions. States frequently delegate regulatory authority to state boards largely comprised of professionals actively...more

McDermott Will & Emery

LegalZoom and the North Carolina Bar Settle Antitrust Dispute

McDermott Will & Emery on

In the latest development from a number of antitrust lawsuits filed against state regulatory boards, LegalZoom.com Inc. signed a consent agreement with the North Carolina State Bar (State Bar) to settle a $10.5 million...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

FTC Provides Guidance on State Regulatory Board Antitrust Liability Following Supreme Court Decision

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP on

Earlier this year, we covered the Supreme Court’s decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC, which held that a state regulatory board composed of “active market participants” was not immune to federal...more

Mintz

FTC Answers the Call for Guidance Regarding Antitrust Compliance for State Regulatory Boards Controlled by Market Participants

Mintz on

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

Mintz - Health Care Viewpoints

FTC Provides Guidance Regarding Antitrust Compliance for State Regulatory Boards

Mintz - Health Care Viewpoints on

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

Holland & Knight LLP

Supreme Court Limits Protectionism by State Healthcare Licensing Boards - Boards Comprised of Active Medical Providers Are Not...

Holland & Knight LLP on

The United States Supreme Court’s recent decision in N.C. State Bd. of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, No. 13-534, 2015 WL 773331 (S.Ct. February 25, 2015) makes clear that the anticompetitive actions of state...more

McGuireWoods LLP

Supreme Court Denies Antitrust Shield for NC Dental Board

McGuireWoods LLP on

On Wednesday, February 25, 2015, the Supreme Court released a 6-3 decision in North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, a case with potentially broad implications for regulation by dental and...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Supreme Court: State Agencies Controlled by Active Market Participants Must Have Active State Supervision to Qualify for Antitrust...

McDermott Will & Emery on

In a 6–3 decision issued February 25, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States held in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission that if active market participants control an entity—even a...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Holds That to Invoke Antitrust Immunity, State Agencies Controlled by Market Participants Must Prove Active...

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP on

On Feb. 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a 6-3 decision that a state board with a controlling number of decision-makers who are active market participants in the occupation the board regulates does not enjoy state...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Supreme Court Finds that Regulatory Boards Composed of “Active Market Participants” are Subject to Antitrust Laws if Not Actively...

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP on

Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC, finding that North Carolina’s state board of dental examiners was subject to antitrust scrutiny under the Sherman Act...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Denies Antitrust Protection for State Professional Boards

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on

In a 6-3 decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, the United States Supreme Court ruled today that state professional boards comprised of active professionals in the occupation...more

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP

The Fate of Demand Response Hangs in the Balance

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP on

The Justices of the United States Supreme Court are not strangers to the retail versus wholesale distinction that often plagues FERC’s regulations. Indeed, on January 12, 2015 they heard arguments in Oneok v. Learjet...more

Maynard Nexsen

Supreme Court Reviews Agency Comprised of Dental Professionals in State Action Case: Health Care Antitrust Cases to Watch in 2015

Maynard Nexsen on

Federal and state courts are expected to rule on several nationally watched antitrust health care cases during the first half of 2015. As we enter into the first week of the New Year, Nexsen Pruet associate Rachel...more

Baker Donelson

State Action Doctrine Tested by Supreme Court for Second Time in Two Years

Baker Donelson on

After nearly two decades of silence on the state action doctrine, on October 14, 2014, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in the Court’s second case on the subject in two years: The North Carolina Board of...more

15 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide