Media Mentions
2012
“Back in Action”
Modern Healthcare, January 30, 2012
David Hanselman said it was surprising that a federal appeals court revived class-action litigation in a 12-year old Chicago-area hospital merger. Mr. Hanselman, who was not involved in the case, said that the Seventh Circuit “still held that a plaintiff seeking class certification needs to prove antitrust impact across the class. But it [also] held that the methodology employed by the plaintiffs’ expert was potentially capable of doing so.”
David L. Hanselman Jr., Antitrust & Competition
2011
“3rd Circ. Affirms Dismissal of Amgen Tying Suit”
Law360, June 14, 2011
Bobby Burchfield, Jon Dubrow, David Hanselman, Raymond Jacobsen, William Diaz and Lincoln Mayer are listed as McDermott co-counsel in defense of Amgen in a Third Circuit ruling that held a Pennsylvania hospital lacked standing to represent a class of drug purchasers in allegations of federal antitrust law violation against the company.
Bobby R. Burchfield, William Diaz, Jon B. Dubrow, David L. Hanselman Jr., Raymond A. Jacobsen Jr., Lincoln Mayer, Antitrust & Competition, Trial
“7th Circuit Hears Argument on Class Certification in Hospital Merger Suit”
Westlaw Journal, March 2011
David Hanselman analyzed the pending Messner et al. v. Northshore University HealthSystem appeal, saying a key issue is whether the consumer plaintiffs can prove class-wide antitrust injury. The district court denied plaintiff class certification, and Mr. Hanselman noted that “in the last few years, courts across the country have raised the bar for plaintiffs … This is particularly true in antitrust cases. Courts no longer give plaintiffs the benefit of the doubt.”
David L. Hanselman Jr., Antitrust & Competition
“Class Certification in Merger Lawsuit, Timing of Daubert Hearing Contested”
BNA Health Law Reporter, February 10, 2011
David Hanselman commented on a Seventh Circuit appeal of a case involving class certification for an antitrust lawsuit over a hospital merger. He said the decision will be important because “courts across the country have raised the bar for plaintiffs to obtain class certification, particularly in antitrust cases,” and because of a related “simmering debate … about how closely district courts must look at expert testimony on a motion for class certification.” Mr. Hanselman added, “It will be interesting to see how far the court gets into the merits of class certification and whether it articulates any standards for proving common impact in antitrust class actions.”
David L. Hanselman Jr., Antitrust & Competition, Class Action, Health Care Litigation
2010
David Hanselman spoke to the National Law Journal on February 22 regarding a settlement that Chicago area hospitals reached with a group of nurses who had alleged the hospitals conspired to depress their wages. A federal court had denied class certification to the plaintiffs last fall, and Mr. Hanselman, who represents one of the hospitals, stated that the case was “settled for a very small fraction of what it would have cost to defend the case going forward.” He explained that “the defendants felt we had a good chance of winning on summary judgment, but the amount that we settled for was far less than the amount it would cost to draft a summary judgment [motion].”
David L. Hanselman Jr., Class Action, Health Care Litigation
2009
David Hanselman was quoted in an October 5 Modern Healthcare story about a federal judge’s denial of class action status for a lawsuit by 19,000 Chicago area nurses who alleged that hospitals conspired to depress their wages. The judge held that granting class status based on an “average loss” theory would obscure the wide differences in pay and circumstances among individuals, leading Mr. Hanselman (who represented one of the hospital defendants) to comment: “District judges can no longer rubber-stamp the opinions of plaintiff’s experts at the class certification stage.” Click here to read the full article.
David L. Hanselman Jr., Antitrust & Competition, Class Action, Health Care Litigation, Trial
David Hanselman was quoted by Global Competition Review on October 2 concerning U.S. District Court Judge John Grady’s refusal to grant certification to a lawsuit by Chicago area nurses alleging that several hospitals conspired to suppress their pay. Mr. Hanselman identified the Judge’s rejection of averages to determine class-wide antitrust impact as the key to the decision. “In this case the [plaintiffs’] expert had used an econometric model that had used a single average percentage of wage suppression,” Mr. Hanselman stated. “The judge was highly critical of the use of averages because it does not show whether each class member had suffered an antitrust injury.” Click here to read the full article.
David L. Hanselman Jr., Antitrust & Competition, Class Action, Health Care Litigation, Trial
The National Law Journal quoted David Hanselman (October 1) concerning a Chicago federal court decision that denied class certification to a group of nurses who had alleged that hospitals had conspired to depress their wages. The Illinois plaintiffs sought over $1 billion in lost wage claims, but U.S. District Court Judge John Grady held that they did not demonstrate that common questions of law or fact predominated. Mr. Hanselman, who represented one of the hospitals, called the decision "a significant victory for the defendants because often in class actions the denial of class certification sounds the death knell of the litigation." He also represents defendants in several similar cases being heard in other federal courts, "We are hopeful that Judge Grady's well-reasoned opinion has persuasive impact on those courts."
David L. Hanselman Jr., Antitrust & Competition, Class Action, Health Care Litigation, Trial
David Hanselman was noted by West’s Andrews Litigation Reporter – Antitrust in October 2009 as counsel for one of several Chicago area hospitals in a federal antitrust case where the court denied class certification to a group of nurses that alleged a conspiracy by the hospitals to keep wages low. Mr. Hanselman said the ruling may provide guidance in nurse wage-fixing class actions pending in federal courts in New York, Michigan, Tennessee and Texas, adding that the ruling shows that courts beyond the Third Circuit are looking to the “rigorous analysis” standard of In re Hydrogen Peroxide Antitrust Litigation when making class certification rulings.
David L. Hanselman Jr., Antitrust & Competition, Class Action, Health Care Litigation, Trial
David Hanselman, Jr., spoke to Law360 on September 29 about a federal judge’s denial of class certification to a group of nurses who alleged that four Chicago area hospital systems violated antitrust law by colluding to suppress the nurses’ wages. The judge ruled that the plaintiffs did not have a viable method of showing classwide injury, which Mr. Hanselman, who represented one of the hospital systems, said “constitutes the death knell” for the litigation. “I can’t say that this effectively ends the case because plaintiffs’ lawyers can be creative,” he noted, “but it certainly is a significant blow to the plaintiffs’ case, and we’ll be anxious to see what they do from here.” Click here to read the full article.
David L. Hanselman Jr., Antitrust & Competition, Class Action, Health, Health Care Litigation, Trial
