Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Medicine and Health Sciences
Dentistry And The Law: Why Dentists Must Pay Attend To Antitrust Law, Dan Schulte Jd
Dentistry And The Law: Why Dentists Must Pay Attend To Antitrust Law, Dan Schulte Jd
The Journal of the Michigan Dental Association
In this month’s Dentistry and the Law column, Dan Schulte, JD, MDA Legal Counsel, emphasizes the importance of understanding antitrust laws for dentists. He explains that agreements between competitors that restrain trade are illegal and highlights the risks of price-fixing and group boycotts. Dentists should avoid any activities that may be construed as anticompetitive. Enforcement of antitrust laws can lead to criminal or civil actions, making awareness crucial.
News You Need: Reminder: What You Must Know About Antitrust Law, Dan Schulte Jd
News You Need: Reminder: What You Must Know About Antitrust Law, Dan Schulte Jd
The Journal of the Michigan Dental Association
This reminder emphasizes the critical importance for dentists, particularly members of organizations like the Michigan Dental Association, to understand antitrust laws and their implications. The U.S. Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission actively pursue antitrust violations among physicians and dentists. The article outlines key aspects of the Sherman Antitrust Act, emphasizing that joint activities among independent dentists that restrain competition may lead to violations. The concept of joint action and the restraint on competition are explored, with a focus on potential pitfalls, such as price-fixing and group boycotts. Dentists are urged to stay informed to avoid legal consequences.
Actavis And Error Costs: A Reply To Critics, Aaron S. Edlin, C. Scott Hemphill, Herbert J. Hovenkamp, Carl Shapiro
Actavis And Error Costs: A Reply To Critics, Aaron S. Edlin, C. Scott Hemphill, Herbert J. Hovenkamp, Carl Shapiro
Aaron Edlin
The Supreme Court’s opinion in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc. provided fundamental guidance about how courts should handle antitrust challenges to reverse payment patent settlements. In our previous article, Activating Actavis, we identified and operationalized the essential features of the Court’s analysis. Our analysis has been challenged by four economists, who argue that our approach might condemn procompetitive settlements.As we explain in this reply, such settlements are feasible, however, only under special circumstances. Moreover, even where feasible, the parties would not actually choose such a settlement in equilibrium. These considerations, and others discussed in the reply, serve to confirm …
Actavis And Error Costs: A Reply To Critics, Aaron S. Edlin, C. Scott Hemphill, Herbert J. Hovenkamp, Carl Shapiro
Actavis And Error Costs: A Reply To Critics, Aaron S. Edlin, C. Scott Hemphill, Herbert J. Hovenkamp, Carl Shapiro
All Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court’s opinion in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc. provided fundamental guidance about how courts should handle antitrust challenges to reverse payment patent settlements. In our previous article, Activating Actavis, we identified and operationalized the essential features of the Court’s analysis. Our analysis has been challenged by four economists, who argue that our approach might condemn procompetitive settlements.
As we explain in this reply, such settlements are feasible, however, only under special circumstances. Moreover, even where feasible, the parties would not actually choose such a settlement in equilibrium. These considerations, and others discussed in the reply, serve to …