Judge favors physicians in Hawaii antitrust case

The state's physician and consumer organizations didn't engage in illegal collective bargaining, a federal judge says. But the case is likely to be appealed.

By Tanya Albert, AMNews staff. Oct. 1, 2001.

Medical associations, at least for now, can continue reviewing and commenting on agreements that HMOs are asking physicians to sign without fear of violating federal antitrust law.

A federal judge for the U.S. District Court, District of Hawaii, in September dismissed a lawsuit that accused the Hawaii Medical Assn., a Hawaii consumer group and others of breaking federal and state antitrust laws that prohibit independent physicians from banding together to negotiate contracts.

If the insurance companies had been successful, it would have been difficult for physician organizations and consumer groups to give members opinions on what contracts may or may not be good for the profession or for patients.

"It was a huge weight lifted from us," said Rafael G. del Castillo, attorney for the Hawaii Coalition for Health, one of the case's defendants.

Judge Helen Gillmor said the HMA and other organizations were advising members when they commented on the concerns they had with contracts proposed by HMOs trying to break into the market. And that is a role professional and consumer organizations are allowed to take, she said.

The groups argued that they never told physicians whether they should sign the contracts.

"We undercut their arguments by saying we did these things, it just wasn't done for anticompetitive motives," said HMA Counsel Robert F. Miller. "It was done in the interest of doctors and patients."

Gillmor agreed, saying the groups' comments on health care contracts didn't qualify as anti-competitive conduct. She said it didn't appear as if the organizations tried to fix prices or create a group boycott. [...]