Blue Shield of Virginia v. McCready: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
Lost Student (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
457 U.S. 465 (1982) | {{Infobox Case Brief | ||
|court=U.S. Supreme Court | |||
{{ | |citation=457 U.S. 465 (1982) | ||
|date=June 21, 1982 | |||
|subject=Antitrust | |||
|appealed_from=U.S. Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit | |||
|case_treatment=No | |||
|overturned= | |||
|partially_overturned= | |||
|reaffirmed= | |||
|questioned= | |||
|criticized= | |||
|distinguished= | |||
|cited= | |||
|followed= | |||
|related= | |||
|facts=McCready received medical insurance coverage under a prepaid group health plan purchased by her employer from Blue Shield of Virginia. She received services from a psychologist,for which Blue Cross declined to reimburse her. | |||
|procedural_history=McCready sued, seeking damages under § 4 of the Clayton Act, which provides for recovery of such damages by "[a]ny person" injured "by reason of anything" prohibited in the antitrust laws. The District Court granted Blue Cross's motion to dismiss, holding that respondent had no standing under § 4 to maintain her suit. The Court of Appeals reversed. | |||
|issues=Does McCready have standing under § 4? | |||
|arguments= | |||
|holding=Yes, McCready has standing to maintain the action. | |||
|judgment=Affirmed. | |||
|reasons=Section 4 of the Clayton Act provides a remedy to "[a]ny person" injured "by reason of" anything prohibited in the antitrust laws." | |||
|rule= | |||
|comments= | |||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |||
|link=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/457/465/ | |||
|case_text_source=Justia | |||
}} | |||
|Court_opinion_parts={{Court opinion part | |||
|opinion_type=majority | |||
|written_by=William J. Brennan, Jr. | |||
|joined_by=White*Marshall*Blackmun*Powell | |||
}}{{Court opinion part | |||
|opinion_type=dissent | |||
|written_by=William Rehnquist | |||
|joined_by=Burger*Sandra Day O'Connor | |||
}}{{Court opinion part | |||
|opinion_type=dissent | |||
|written_by=John Paul Stevens | |||
|joined_by= | |||
}} | |||
}} | |||
Revision as of 00:53, September 17, 2020
| Blue Shield of Virginia v. McCready | |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
|---|---|
| Citation | 457 U.S. 465 (1982) |
| Date decided | June 21, 1982 |
| Appealed from | U.S. Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit |
| Case Opinions | |
| majority | written by William J. Brennan, Jr. joined by White, Marshall, Blackmun, Powell |
| dissent | written by William Rehnquist joined by Burger, Sandra Day O'Connor |
| dissent | written by John Paul Stevens |
Facts
McCready received medical insurance coverage under a prepaid group health plan purchased by her employer from Blue Shield of Virginia. She received services from a psychologist,for which Blue Cross declined to reimburse her.
Procedural History
McCready sued, seeking damages under § 4 of the Clayton Act, which provides for recovery of such damages by "[a]ny person" injured "by reason of anything" prohibited in the antitrust laws. The District Court granted Blue Cross's motion to dismiss, holding that respondent had no standing under § 4 to maintain her suit. The Court of Appeals reversed.
Issues
Does McCready have standing under § 4?
Holding
Yes, McCready has standing to maintain the action.
Judgment
Affirmed.
Reasons
Section 4 of the Clayton Act provides a remedy to "[a]ny person" injured "by reason of" anything prohibited in the antitrust laws."
