law homework 1455

1) Read the case study (“Contract Violates Antitrust Laws”) on pages 100-101 in the textbook and answer the two discussion questions. 2) Write a paper (1,000-1,500 words) that addresses the discussion questions. Include a detailed rationale for your answers. 3) Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required. 4) This assignment uses a grading rubric. Instructors will be using the rubric to grade the assignment; therefore, students should review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.   Citation: Oltz v. St. Peter’s Community Hosp.,       19 F.3d 1312 (9th Cir. 1994)       Facts       Oltz, a nurse anesthetist, brought an antitrust   action against physician anesthesiologists and St.   Peter’s   Community Hospital after he was terminated.   Oltz had a billing agreement with the hospital,   which provided 84% of the surgical services   in the rural community that it served. The anesthesiologists   did not like competing with the nurse   anesthetist’s lower fees and, as a result, entered   into an exclusive contract with the hospital on April   29, 1980, in order to squeeze the nurse anesthetist   out of the market. This resulted in cancellation of   the nurse anesthetist’s contract with the hospital.   Oltz filed a suit against the anesthesiologists and   hospital for violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act,   15 U.S.C. § 1. The anesthesiologists settled for   $462,500 before trial.   The case against the hospital proceeded to trial.   The jury found that the hospital conspired with   the anesthesiologists and awarded the plaintiff   $212,182 in lost income and $209,649 in future   damages. The trial judge considered the damage   award to be excessive   and ordered a new trial.   The hospital motioned the court to exclude all   damages after June 26, 1982, which was the date   that the hospital renegotiated its exclusive contract   with the anesthesiology group. The court decided   that Oltz failed to prove that the renegotiated contract   also violated antitrust laws, thus ruling that   Oltz was not entitled to damages after June 26,   1982. Because   Oltz conceded that he could not   prove damages greater than those offset by his   settlement   with the physicians, his claim for damages   against the hospital was disposed of by summary   judgment.   The judge who presided over Oltz’s request for   attorneys’ fees restricted the amount that he could   claim. Because Oltz had been denied damages   from the hospital, the judge refused to award attorneys’   fees or costs for work performed after the   1986 liability trial.     Issue       Was Oltz entitled to seek recovery for all damages   resulting from destruction of his business after   June 26, 1982?     Holding       The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit   held that Oltz was entitled to seek recovery for all   damages.     Reason       Oltz introduced evidence that the initial exclusive   contract violated antitrust laws and that such   violation destroyed his practice. “Because the initial   conspiracy destroyed his practice, Oltz is entitled   to seek recovery for all damages resulting from the   destruction of his business. . . . The legality of any   subsequent agreements between the conspirators   is irrelevant, because the April 29, 1980, contract   severed the lifeline to Oltz’s thriving practice. . .”   Discussion       1. What should parties to a contract be aware of   when negotiating exclusive contracts?   2. What remedies are available when one party   breaches a contract by refusing to perform an   agreed-upon service?