Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Royal Mile Co., Inc. v. UPMC

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

August 21, 2014

ROYAL MILE COMPANY, INC., PAMELA LANG and COLE'S WEXFORD HOTEL, INC., on their own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
UPMC and HIGHMARK, INC., Defendants

Page 553

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 554

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 555

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 556

For Richard A. Levie, Special Master: Richard A. Levie, LEAD ATTORNEY, JAMS, Washington , DC USA.

For Robert J. Town, Special Master: Robert Town, LEAD ATTORNEY, Philadelphia , PA USA.

For Royal Mile Company, Inc., Pamela Lang, Coles Wexford Hotel, Inc., on their own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs: Andrew M. Stone, LEAD ATTORNEY, Stone Law Firm, LLC, Pittsburgh, PA USA; Kathleen S. Kiernan, LEAD ATTORNEY, PRO HAC VICE, Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP, Washington , DC USA; Scott Michael Hare, LEAD ATTORNEY, Pittsburgh, PA USA; Arthur H. Stroyd , Jr., Stephen J. Del Sole, Del Sole Cavanaugh Stroyd LLC, Pittsburgh, PA USA; David B. Harrison, Jason C. Spiro, PRO HAC VICE, Stone & Magnanini LLP, Short Hills , N.J. USA; David S. Stone, PRO HAC VICE, Stone and Magnanini, Short Hills , N.J. USA; Evan E. North, Hamish Hume, Melissa Felder Zappala, PRO HAC VICE, Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP, Washington, DC USA; Patrick K. Cavanaugh, Del Sole Cavanaugh, Pittsburgh, PA USA.

For Upmc, and, Defendant: Keith E. Whitson, LEAD ATTORNEY, Emily M. Ayoub, George E. McGrann, Paul H. Titus, Schnader, Harrison, Segal & Lewis, Pittsburgh, PA USA; Paul M. Pohl, LEAD ATTORNEY, Leon F. DeJulius , Rebekah B. Kcehowski, Jones Day, Pittsburgh , PA, USA; Joe Sims, Kathryn M. Fenton, PRO HAC VICE, Leon F. DeJulius, Jones Day, Washington, DC USA; John K. Gisleson, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Pittsburgh, PA USA.

For Highmark, Inc., Defendant: Alexander W. Saksen, John G. Ebken, LEAD ATTORNEYS, Gordon & Rees, Pittsburgh, PA USA; Alfred C. Pfeiffer, PRO HAC VICE, Latham & Watkins LLP, San Francisco, CA USA; Jennifer L. Giordano, Margaret M. Zwisler, PRO HAC VICE, Latham & Watkins LLP, Washington, DC USA.

For Pg Publishing Co., Intervenor: Frederick N. Frank, LEAD ATTORNEY, Ellis W. Kunka, Frank, Gale, Bails, Murcko, & Pocrass, P.C., Pittsburgh, PA USA; John M. Schaffranek, Pittsburgh, PA USA.

Page 557

OPINION

Joy Flowers Conti, Chief United States District Judge.

I. Introduction

Pending before the court in this antitrust action is a motion for leave to file a third amended complaint (ECF No. 249) filed by plaintiffs Royal Mile Company, Inc. (" Royal Mile" ), Pamela Lang (" Lang" ) and Cole's Wexford Hotel, Inc. (" Cole's Wexford" and collectively with Lang and Royal Mile, " plaintiffs" ). Defendants UPMC and Highmark, Inc. (" Highmark" ) oppose plaintiffs' motion for leave arguing that permitting amendment based upon the allegations set forth in the proposed third amended complaint, which was attached to plaintiffs' motion for leave, would be futile, and the class action allegations contained within the proposed third amended complaint are insufficient as a matter of law. (ECF Nos. 253, 254, 256, 266, 269, 271, 273, 277, 278, 283.)

Based upon the court's review of the parties' voluminous submissions and the hearing held with respect to those submissions on April 7, 2014, plaintiffs' motion for leave will be granted in part and denied in part for the reasons set forth herein.

II. Procedural History

On December 2, 2010, plaintiffs initiated this case by filing a complaint alleging (1) UPMC and Highmark engaged in anticompetitive conduct in violation of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § § 1, 2, and (2) UPMC tortuously interfered with plaintiffs' existing and prospective business relations in violation of Pennsylvania common law. (ECF No. 1.) On August 16, 2012, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint against UPMC and Highmark. (ECF No. 77.) On September 17, 2012, UPMC and Highmark each filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint and a brief in support of their motions alleging plaintiffs failed to state a claim for relief. (ECF Nos. 77, 78, 80, 81.)

On October 4, 2012, plaintiffs filed a motion seeking preliminary approval of a settlement with Highmark, certification of class, and appointment of class counsel (the " motion for preliminary ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.