United States v. Delta Dental
United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island
943 F. Supp. 172 (1996)
- Written by John Reeves, JD
Facts
The United States (plaintiff) brought a lawsuit against Delta Dental (defendant), alleging antitrust violations under the Sherman Act. According to the United States, Delta Dental—which provided dental insurance—used most-favored-nation (MFN) clauses in multiple agreements with multiple healthcare providers in such a way that it prevented other competing insurance providers from charging lower prices. The United States alleged that Delta Dental used MFN clauses to exclude alternative, lower-fee plans from the dental-insurance market, and that this had resulted in sustained or increased premiums. Furthermore, the United States alleged that no competitive benefits resulted from using these MFN clauses. The United States did not, however, allege that the MFN clauses resulted in predatory pricing or pricing below incremental cost. Delta Dental moved to dismiss the lawsuit for failure to state a claim, arguing that in the absence of any predatory pricing or pricing below incremental cost, MFN clauses were automatically valid.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Pettine, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.