Antitrust

Guide to: Arizona v. Maricopa County Medical Soc., 457 U.S. 332 (1982)

What is the question presented to the court?

What did the appeals court rule?

What did the state sue them for?

What did the state ask the District Court for?

What did the District Court do that resulted in this appeal?

What reasons did the DC give for not granting the summary judgment as to the per se violations?

Why did the defendants raise the McCarran-Fergerson act as a defense?

Did the Court of Appeals affirm or deny the DC's order?

Who is the respondent?

What does the Supreme Court assume about any contested facts?

Who belongs to the Maricopa Foundation for Medical Care (MFMC)?

What % of the practitioners does it represent?

Is there other information you would like to have about its membership to fully assess its power?

What does the MFMC do?

How is it classifed by the Department of Insurance?

What are the docs' investment interests?

Why do you think they used a maximum fee limit system?

What is the relative value scale in the case?

Did they continue to use the relative value scale?

What was the impact of the fee schedule?

What did the State claim MFMC was using the fee schedule to do?

Why is the increasing level of insurance premiums an important issue in the State's case?

What was the MFMC's defense?

What does the court have to assume?

Why does the defendant claim this fee schedule is not a per se violation? (4 reasons)

Why cann't the Sherman Act really mean what it says?

How does the court get around this?

What does the rule of reason require the court to do?

What did Brandeis say was the "true test?"

Why is it hard for judges to use the rule of reason? (ignore the glich in your case)

How does a per se rule reduce the burden on the judge?

How does a per se rule make business planning easier?

Which case established that price-fixing agreements are per se violations?

What is the "The aim and result of every price-fixing agreement?"

Does market power matter?

What did Kiefer-Stewart Co. v. Joseph E. Seagram say about maximum price agreements?

What about agreements to fix credit terms?

What did the court say was one of the anticompetitive effects in this case?

Why did the court reject claims by defendants that since they were doctors they should get a break?

What did the court say about the defense that it should not apply per se rules because it does not know about health care?

How about the defense that the per se rule must be rejustified for each industry?

Will the defendant be allowed to argue that the price-fixing agreement has pro-competitive benefits?

How is this case different from the blanket license in Broadcast music?

Why isn't the MFMC like a partnership, which is not subject to antitrust rules on price fixing?