Opinion
No. 81-4198.
Argued and Submitted March 11, 1982.
Decided May 10, 1982. Rehearing Denied June 21, 1982.
Jane E. Lovell, San Francisco, Cal., argued, for plaintiff-appellant; Richard J. Archer, Archer, Rosenak Hanson, San Francisco, Cal., on brief.
John Hurley, Robert A. Lewis, Craig McAtee, McCutchen, Doyle, Brown Enersen, San Francisco, Cal., Jeffrey P. Smith, Los Angeles, Cal., argued, for defendants-appellees; Martin J. Schnitzer, Memel, Jacobs, Pierno Gersh, Los Angeles, Cal., Richard J. Kilmartin, Knight, Boland Riordan, San Francisco, Cal., John J. Swenson, Gibson, Dunn Crutcher, Los Angeles, Cal., Robert Charles Friese, Shartsis, Friese Ginsburg, San Francisco, Cal., John H. Brinsley, Kathryn A. Young, Adams, Duque Hazeltine, Los Angeles, Cal., Rochelle Alpert, Morrison Forester, San Francisco, Cal., Patricia J. Doran, Hassard, Bonnington, Rogers Huber, San Francisco, Cal., on brief.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
In the district court, summary judgment went against Sausalito and other pharmacies complaining of prepaid prescription plans of health care insurers and administrators. The defendants had entered into contractual arrangements with participating pharmacies under which each participating pharmacy would provide prescription drugs at stipulated prices, which were alleged to be generally less than current charges of the pharmacies to uninsured customers. The claim was that such plans violated § 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1, and the corresponding provision of the California Cartwright Act.
We agree with the district court that no viable antitrust claim was stated and affirm the judgment of the district court for the reasons stated in its opinion. Sausalito Pharmacy Inc. v. Blue Shield of California, 1981-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 63,885 (N.D.Cal., March 16, 1981). See also Medical Arts Pharmacy of Stamford, Inc. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Connecticut, 518 F. Supp. 1100 (D.Conn. 1981), aff'd, 675 F.2d 502 (2d Cir. 1982).