Hospital Corporation of America v. Federal Trade Commission

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that \[a]ll that is necessary\ to prove a section 7 case \is that the merger create an appreciable danger of [higher prices] in the future\
• stating that \[a]ll that is necessary\ to prove a section 7 case \is that the merger create an appreciable danger of [higher prices] in the future\
• noting that Section 7 requires “an_appreciable danger” of anticompetitive consequences and concluding in same paragraph that Commission had adequately demonstrated that the “challenged acquisitions are likely to foster collusive practices harmful to consumers”
• determining that FTC’s finding that transaction was unlawful was supported by substantial evidence where defendant's market share was raised from 14% to 26% and the market share of the four largest firms from 79% to 91%
• determining that FTC’s finding that transaction was unlawful was supported by substantial evidence where defendant's market share was raised from 14% to 26% and the market share of the four largest firms from 79% to 91%
• expressing concern that a history of cooperation among hospitals could lead to collusion when a merger caused the market to become' more concentrated

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).