Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 220.127.116.11. If your access is via an institutional subscription, please contact your librarian to request reinstatement. If you are using a personal subscription, please contact the Duke University Press using the Contact Us form.
A. Everette James, Frank Sloan, James Blumstein, Alan C. Winfield, Henry P. Pendergrass; Certificate-of-Need in an Antitrust Context. J Health Polit Policy Law 1 April 1983; 8 (2): 314–319. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-8-2-314
Recent cases such as National Gerimedical Hospital and Gerontology Center v. Blue Cross of Kansas City have found that certificate-of-need (CON) legislation did not intend to remove antitrust considerations. This note discusses the exemptions from antitrust provided by the state action doctrine of Parker v. Brown as well as the Noerr-Pennington doctrine, both of which appear to protect provider input into the CON process. Providing information that assists decision-making must be carefully distinguished from providing data that serve the interests of physicians and hospitals.