The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit rules that hypothetical monopolist test remains "best approach" for geographic market analysis in healthcare context (Vasquez / Indiana University Health)

Vasquez v. Indiana Univ. Health, Inc., et al. [1] is a resurrected antitrust suit brought by a local vascular surgeon against Indiana University Health (“IU Health”) and its subsidiary, Bloomington Hospital. The Seventh Circuit reversed and remanded, concluding that the district court had erred in dismissing the surgeon’s alleged geographic market. Finding that the surgeon’s alleged market was plausible, the Seventh Circuit expounded in its ruling that even if the panel had agreed with the district court that the Complaint contained contradictions, contradictory pleadings are permissible pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(d)(3). The relevant facts are as follows: Dr. Ricardo Vasquez, a vascular surgeon practicing in Bloomington, Indiana, alleges that since he began his practice in 2006, IU

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

Quotation

Brittany Nieves, The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit rules that hypothetical monopolist test remains "best approach" for geographic market analysis in healthcare context (Vasquez / Indiana University Health), 24 August 2022, e-Competitions September 2022, Art. N° 108431

Visites 700

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues