Law Commons^™

A Sight For Sore Eyes: The Seventh Circuit Correctly Interprets Section 12 Of The Clayton Act, Ryan Moore

Seventh Circuit Review

In order to hail a defendant into federal court, a plaintiff must establish personal jurisdiction and venue. Under general principles of federal law, personal jurisdiction is proper whenever the defendant would be amenable to suit under the laws of the state in which the federal court sits. And venue is proper in any district where the defendant "resides" (i.e., is subject to personal jurisdiction). Section 12 of the Clayton Act, however, supplements these general principles. It has a liberal service-of-process provision that allows personal jurisdiction in any federal district court in the nation. But venue is proper only in the …

The Ftaia In Its Proper Place: Merits, Jurisdiction, And Statutory Interpretation In Minn-Chem, Inc. V. Agrium Inc., Donald R. Caplan

Seventh Circuit Review

The Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act (FTAIA) excludes anticompetitive conduct occurring in purely foreign commerce from the reach of U.S. antitrust laws. However, the act permits the application of U.S. antitrust laws to both import commerce and foreign commerce that has a “direct, substantial, and reasonably foreseeable” effect on U.S. commerce. Controversy over the act centers on whether the act proscribes a federal court's subject-matter jurisdiction. In his 1993 dissent in Hartford v. California, Justice Scalia argued that the act does not affect a court's adjudicative authority. However, ten years later the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held the …

Messner'S Effect On Hospital Consolidation And Anticompetitive Behavior, Jaclyn Bacallao

Seventh Circuit Review

By 2021, healthcare spending is expected to reach a whopping twenty percent of gross domestic product. One of the less-publicized causes of the rapid growth in healthcare costs is hospital consolidation, which has allowed hospitals to use their market power to raise prices for private payors.

Attempts to limit abuses of market power in this sector have been insufficient. From the 1980s until the early 1990s, the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice blocked every anticompetitive merger. However, the tides changed in the mid-1990s when the regulators lost five successive cases that challenged hospital mergers. Economists were astounded …

Relaxing The Noose Around Tying Arrangements: Reifert V. South Central Wisconsin Mls Corp. Exposes Problems With The Per Se Analysis, Paul C. Mallon Jr.

Seventh Circuit Review

The U.S. Supreme Court has employed the per se standard for illegality of tying arrangements under antitrust laws for some sixty years. The tying arrangement, once reviled by the House of Representatives as "one of the greatest agencies and instrumentalities of monopoly ever devised by man," is now understood by many to have potentially redeeming, as well as condemning, qualities. As a result, scholars and judges alike have decried the per se standard as ineffective and called for its abandonment. However, the Supreme Court continues to endorse the per se standard when assessing tying arrangements. The Seventh Circuit, like other …

Cross Jurisdictional Tolling Of The Statute Of Limitations In Antitrust Claims: Plaintiffs Lose Their Day In Federal Court, John J. Koltse

Seventh Circuit Review

How great is the divide between federal and state courts when state law mirrors federal law? Can federal courts improve judicial efficiency by extending the statute of limitations for federal antitrust claims based on concurrent state antitrust class actions? The Seventh Circuit's recent attempt at docket control in In re Copper Antitrust Litigation refused to accept this counter intuitive approach. This article addresses the effect of the Seventh Circuit's decision, which actually decreased judicial efficiency by encouraging state antitrust class action members to file duplicative claims in federal court despite identical state and federal antitrust statutory schemes.