"Ain't Wastin' Time No More"* — Doctors, Vets, and Lawyers in the Antitrust Crosshairs

B
BakerHostetler

Contributor

BakerHostetler logo
Recognized as one of the top firms for client service, BakerHostetler is a leading national law firm that helps clients around the world address their most complex and critical business and regulatory issues. With five core national practice groups — Business, Labor and Employment, Intellectual Property, Litigation, and Tax — the firm has more than 970 lawyers located in 14 offices coast to coast. BakerHostetler is widely regarded as having one of the country’s top 10 tax practices, a nationally recognized litigation practice, an award-winning data privacy practice and an industry-leading business practice. The firm is also recognized internationally for its groundbreaking work recovering more than $13 billion in the Madoff Recovery Initiative, representing the SIPA Trustee for the liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC. Visit bakerlaw.com
Supreme Court Decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission Prompts Legal Challenges to State Professional Boards.
United States Food, Drugs, Healthcare, Life Sciences
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

Supreme Court Decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission Prompts Legal Challenges to State Professional Boards

Earlier this month a Texas federal district court judge granted a motion by Teladoc, Inc. (Teladoc) for a preliminary injunction enjoining the Texas Medical Board (TMB) "from taking any action to implement, enact, and enforce" a TMB rule requiring doctors to conduct an in-person exam prior to telephonic diagnosis and treatment of patients, regardless of whether the exam is medically necessary. (Background on this and other disputes involving Teladoc and TMB is available here and here.

Despite the much-anticipated ruling in Teladoc, the court did not review the TMB rule under the Supreme Court's decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, which provides that professional boards, when comprised primarily of active market participants, are exempt from antitrust claims only if they are actively supervised by the state government.

Why, you may ask? Well, the court found itself in an atypical situation because "TMB declined to assert any immunity defenses" in defense of the challenged rule.

So where does that leave us? Waiting for this and other cases challenging state professional boards in the aftermath of the Dental Examiners decision to play out in the courts.

A rundown of recent litigation, for those of you keeping score, include:

  • Ouch! The Mississippi State Board of Medical Licensure is facing an antitrust challenge to its regulations that preclude nonphysicians from owning pain management medical practices.
  • Chihuahuas, Terriers, and Spaniels, Oh My! A veterinarian accused of giving small dogs half the recommended rabies dosage is suing the Connecticut Board of Veterinary Medicine and five of its members for "enforcing labeling directions that prohibit the vet's vaccination protocol to shield themselves from competition."
  • LegalZoom(ed)! The "premier online legal destination for small businesses and consumers" is suing the North Carolina State Bar for allegedly excluding LegalZoom from offering its prepaid legal services plans in North Carolina.

These plaintiffs "ain't wastin' time no more" sitting on the antitrust sidelines. More antitrust lawsuits surely will follow.

*By Greg Allman, performed by The Allman Brothers Band

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More