Print Page   |   Contact Us   |   Report Abuse   |   Sign In   |   Become a CBA Member
Community Search
Sign In


Forgot your password?

Become a CBA Member

Latest News
Calendar

12/5/2016
Estates and Probate Section Executive Committee Meeting (SEP161205)

12/6/2016
Insurance Law Executive Committee Meeting (SIL161206)

12/7/2016
Media and the Law Section Meeting (SML161207)

SAT160519 Administrative, Antitrust, Consumer, Fed Practice, Health Law, Prof Discipline Sections
View Registrations Tell a Friend About This EventTell a Friend
 

Antitrust and Trade Regulations Meeting at the Hartford Club on Thursday, May 19, 2016.

5/19/2016
When: Thursday, May 19, 2016
12:00 p.m. - 2:00 p.m.
Where: The Hartford Club
46 Prospect Street
Hartford, Connecticut 
United States
Contact: Member Service Center
(860)223-4400


Online registration is closed.
« Go to Upcoming Event List  

Program
“Teeth Whitening And Antitrust Immunity: Are State Licensing Boards Exposed?”

A round table discussion, led by Attorney David P. Atkins of Pullman & Comley, LLC.

In North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission (2015), the U.S. Supreme Court held that members of a state professional licensing board or tribunal who are "active participants" in the same “market” as the professionals they regulate do not automatically enjoy state-action immunity from antitrust damages actions. Instead, immunity for licensing boards and their members will now attach only if the body in question both: (1) acts pursuant to, and in conformance with, a clearly articulated state policy; and (2) is "actively supervised" by the state.

Please join us for a round table discussion of the implications of Supreme Court’s holding. Will it lead to a fundamental change in our state’s historic regulation of health care professionals through licensing boards made up of volunteer members of a profession?   Will such volunteers now be reluctant to serve on regulatory boards? Will it encourage more antitrust lawsuits by practitioners facing regulatory scrutiny who claim a licensing board’s enforcement or disciplinary action amounts to an actionable restraint of trade against a competitor?