These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
323 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10276712)
1. Court: activity must affect Interstate Commerce to invoke Sherman Act. Carlson DR Health Law Vigil; 1986 Jun; 9(12):7-9. PubMed ID: 10276712 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Antitrust laws should help NPs. Klein CA Nurse Pract; 1987 Nov; 12(11):39-40, 45, 48-9. PubMed ID: 3320826 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. District court denies summary judgment on physician's antitrust claim. Urbanski MF Health Law Vigil; 1988 Oct; 11(21):5-6. PubMed ID: 10288891 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. The antitrust laws: implications for physician staff privileges. Peters ME J Health Hum Resour Adm; 1987; 10(2):206-18. PubMed ID: 10286042 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Denying hospital privileges to non-physicians: does quality of care justify a potential restraint of trade? Reindl G Spec Law Dig Health Care (Mon); 1988 May; 9(11):7-39. PubMed ID: 10286963 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Antitrust and hospital peer review. Blumstein JF; Sloan FA Law Contemp Probl; 1988; 51(2):7-92. PubMed ID: 10295966 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Patient care not enough as defense for provider conduct. Hammaker MK Provider; 1987 Dec; 13(12):30-1, 40. PubMed ID: 10285093 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Hospital law: the spiraling cost of litigation. Hollowell EE South Hosp; 1984; 52(5):66-7. PubMed ID: 10268456 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Seventh Circuit will deem future antitrust challenges frivolous. Rothschild IS Health Law Vigil; 1986 Oct; 9(20):5-7. PubMed ID: 10278589 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. 3rd Circuit finds evidence insufficient for antitrust summary judgment. Carlson DR Health Law Vigil; 1988 Jun; 11(12):4-5. PubMed ID: 10287416 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Courts more likely to dismiss doctors' antitrust suits filed against hospitals. Horty J Mod Healthc; 1987 Jul; 17(14):144. PubMed ID: 10282785 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Eleventh Circuit allows state action defense in medical staff antitrust case. Miller RD Hosp Law Newsl; 1989 Jan; 6(3):1-5. PubMed ID: 10292016 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Antitrust. Is quality review in jeopardy? Pollner F Med World News; 1988 Jun; 29(12):34-6, 38, 43-7. PubMed ID: 10287973 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Perspectives. The Patrick case: implications for peer review. Mcgraw Hills Med Health; 1988 May; 42(22):suppl 4 p.. PubMed ID: 10287491 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Hospital attempts to stifle admissions to competing facilities: Potters decision. Miles JJ Health Law Vigil; 1987 Mar; 10(7):3-6. PubMed ID: 10281336 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Anti-trust law and exclusive services contracts. Davis CD Tex Hosp; 1984 Jun; 40(1):47-8. PubMed ID: 10278254 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Medical staff antitrust decisions examine defenses available to defendants. Hosp Law Newsl; 1990 Jun; 7(8):1-6. PubMed ID: 10104849 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A tale of four cases: Patrick, Bolt, Mitchell, and Oltz. Chenen AR Med Staff Couns; 1989; 3(2):51-4. PubMed ID: 10292421 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]