Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, ANTITRUST—SDMiss: Medical Center Entitled to Additional Discovery in Suit Against County Hospital, Ambulance Service, (May 22, 2013)

By Jeffrey May, J.D.

Because the facts of the case were not fully developed, a Mississippi county hospital and an ambulance service were not entitled to summary judgment in their favor on antitrust and RICO claims asserted by a complaining medical center, the federal district court in Hattiesburg, Mississippi, has ruled. The court granted the medical center's request for additional discovery pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 56(d) (Wesley Health System, LLC v. Forrest County Board of Supervisors, May 21, 2013, Starrett, K.).

The medical center alleged that the county hospital and ambulance service conspired to divert patients away from it and to the county hospital. In October 2012, the court denied the ambulance service's motion to dismiss. It also denied the county hospital's motion to dismiss except to the extent that the complaining medical center sought damages for antitrust violations. Pursuant to the Local Government Antitrust Act, the complaining medical center could not recover any damages from the county hospital under the Sherman Act. However, the plaintiff could seek injunctive relief.

In seeking summary judgment, the defendants contended, as they did in their motion to dismiss, that they were incapable of conspiring. The complaining medical center had alleged that the leaders of the ambulance service conspired with the county hospital. The defendants responded by noting that the “leadership team” of the ambulance service was comprised solely of county hospital employees.

The question of whether there was a conspiracy could not be answered by a mere statement that the “leadership team” of the ambulance service was comprised of county hospital employees, the court explained. According to the court, because the plaintiff had not yet conducted 30(b)(6) depositions of the county hospital and ambulance service, “it would be unreasonable to require it to respond to Defendants’ intracorporate conspiracy arguments at this time.” The plaintiff also was entitled to discovery which might have bearing on the issue of whether the ambulance service committed any RICO predicate acts.

This is Case No. 2:12-cv-00059-KS-MTP.

Attorneys: Kathryn R. Gilchrist (Adams and Reese, LLP) for Wesley Health System, LLC. James K. Dukes for Forrest County Board of Supervisors.

Cases: Antitrust RICO MississippiNews