In an antitrust action alleging a conspiracy to monopolize the market for cardiology services for privately insured patients, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where the complaint erroneously defined the product market by how consumers paid for cardiology services. In addition, a grant of plaintiff’s motion to tax costs is affirmed where the district court did not err in declining to tax discovery related copying expenses.
Read Little Rock Cardiology Clinic PA v. Baptist Health, No. 08-3158
Appellate Information
Submitted: September 21, 2009
Filed: December 29, 2009
Judges
Opinion by Judge Melloy
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
