Legal Opinion
Kartell v. Blue Shield of Massachusetts, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Decided November 28, 1984No. Nos. 84-1241, 84-1290 and 84-1303PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BREYER, Circuit Judge.
Blue Shield pays doctors for treating patients who are Blue Shield health insurance subscribers, but only if each doctor promises not to make any additional charge to the subscriber. The basic issue in this case is whether this Blue Shield practice — called a “ban on balance billing” — violates either Sherman Act § 1 forbidding agreements “in restraint of trade,” 15 U.S.C. § 1, or Sherman Act § 2 forbidding “monopolization” and “attempts to monopolize,” id. § 2. The district court, 582 F.Supp. 734 (D.Mass.1984) held that the practice constituted an unreasonable restraint…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of CarpentersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, Appts. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Service Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Ball Memorial Hospital, Inc. v. Mutual Hospital InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
- Dr. Donald J. Barry and Dr. Bert Hassler v. Blue Cross of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- The Tennessean Truckstop, Inc. v. Nts, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1989
- Dr. James R. Brillhart v. Mutual Medical Insurance, Inc., D/B/A Blue Shield of Indiana, DefendantCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- Robert R. Zinser v. Melvin C. RoseCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1989
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.