Legal Opinion

In re Blue Cross Blue Shield Antitrust Litigation

District Court, N.D. Alabama

Decided February 23, 2017No. Master File No.: 2:18-CV-20000-RDP (MDL No.: 2406)Published

1Opinion of the Court

*1316MEMORANDUM OPINION

R. DAVID PROCTOR, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

• This matter is before the court on the following cross motions for partial summary judgment: (1) Defendants’ Amended and Restated Motion Based on the Filed Rate Doctrine for Summary Judgment on the Alabama Subscribers’ Damages Claims (Doc. # 733); and (2) Alabama Subscriber Plaintiffs’‘ Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the Filed-Rate Doctrine (Doc. # 770). The motions have been fully briefed. (Docs. # 734, 805, 835, 838, 839, 903, and 904).

I. Introduction

The Filed Rate Doctrine1 is judicially created and finds its…

2Cases cited41 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Fitzpatrick v. City of AtlantaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1993
  4. Keogh v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922
  5. Maislin Industries, U. S., Inc. v. Primary Steel, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990

36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API