Fill This Form To Receive Instant Help

Help in Homework
trustpilot ratings
google ratings

Homework answers / question archive / Max Points: 70 Details: 1) Read the case study ("Contract Violates Antitrust Laws") on pages 100-101 in the textbook and answer the two discussion questions

Max Points: 70 Details: 1) Read the case study ("Contract Violates Antitrust Laws") on pages 100-101 in the textbook and answer the two discussion questions


Max Points: 70


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

Week 5 Objectives

the elements of the Stark Laws and their impacts on physicians.

the requirements of the EMTALA law and the effects it can have on emergency departments and physicians taking ED calls.

the pros and cons of the Certificate of Need (CON) regulations in states that use CON.






Citation: Oltz v. St. Peter’s Community Hosp.,

19 F.3d 1312 (9th Cir. 1994)


Oltz, a nurse anesthetist, brought an antitrust

action against physician anesthesiologists and St.


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


with the physicians, his claim for damages

against the hospital was disposed of by summary


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.


Was Oltz entitled to seek recovery for all damages

resulting from destruction of his business after

June 26, 1982?


The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

held that Oltz was entitled to seek recovery for all



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. . .”

[Id. at 1314].


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?





Otiz v. St. Peter's Case Study



Less Than Satisfactory




70.0 %Content


40.0 % Read the case study on antitrust law violation and answer the two discussion questions, with rationale for the answers.

Does not demonstrate understanding of the legal issues surrounding the contracts that violate anti-trust laws, including the implications. Does not demonstrate critical thinking and analysis of the situation, and does not develop effective answers to the questions, with rationale.

Demonstrates only minimal understanding of the legal issues surrounding the contracts that violate anti-trust laws. Demonstrates only minimal abilities for critical thinking and analysis of the case study, and develops weak answers to the questions, with minimal rationale

Demonstrates knowledge of the legal issues surrounding the contracts that violate anti-trust laws, but has some slight misunderstanding of the implications. Provides a basic idea of critical thinking and analysis for the questions, answers, and rationale. Does not include examples or descriptions.

Demonstrates acceptable knowledge of the legal issues surrounding the contracts that violate anti-trust laws (in your own words). Develops an acceptable response and rationale for it. Utilizes some examples.

Demonstrates thorough knowledge of the legal issues surrounding the contracts that violate anti-trust laws and their implications. Clearly answers the questions and develops a very strong rationale. Introduces appropriate examples.


30.0 % Integrates information from outside resources into the body of paper.

Does not use references, examples, or explanations.

Provides some supporting examples, but minimal explanations and no published references.

Supports main points with examples and explanations, but fails to include published references to support claims and ideas.

Supports main points with references, explanations, and examples. Analysis and description is direct, competent, and appropriate of the criteria.

Supports main points with references, examples, and full explanations of how they apply. Thoughtfully, analyzes, evaluates, and describes major points of the criteria.


20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness


7.0 % Assignment Development and Purpose

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.

Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.


8.0 % Argument Logic and Construction

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.


5.0 % Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.


10.0 %Format


5.0 % Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.

Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

All format elements are correct.


5.0 % Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style)

No reference page is included. No citations are used.

Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.

Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present

Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.

In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.


100 % Total Weightage




Option 1

Low Cost Option
Download this past answer in few clicks

12.98 USD


Already member?

Option 2

Custom new solution created by our subject matter experts