ScholarLens Back to search
2013•e-Competitions BulletinRequires access

The US Supreme Court decides that states which don't clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed a policy allowing hospitals authorities to make acquisitions wont be under the state-action immunity (FTC / Pheobe Putney)

Luke Hasskamp, Aaron Gott

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

This article briefly explores the applicability of federal antitrust laws to actions taken by municipalities or other state subdivisions and, specifically, whether they have acted pursuant to a…

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This article briefly explores the applicability of federal antitrust laws to actions taken by municipalities or other state subdivisions and, specifically, whether they have acted pursuant to a…

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This article briefly explores the applicability of federal antitrust laws to actions taken by municipalities or other state subdivisions and, specifically, whether they have acted pursuant to a…

Key concepts: Supreme court, Action (physics), State (computer science), Law, Political science, State action, Qualified immunity, Law and economics

Related papers

Related paper 1Related paper 2Related paper 3
Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The US Supreme Court decides that states which don't clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed a policy allowing hospitals authorities to make acquisitions wont be under the state-action immunity (FTC / Pheobe Putney) — Research Paper | ScholarLens