| | ''Gabaldoni v. Washington County. Hospital Ass'n'', 250 F.3d 255 (4th Cir. 2001) (affirming summary judgment by the district court in a lawsuit challenging a termination of a physician's clinical privileges and denied his application for reappointment to the medical staff, in a lawsuit contract and tort claims against hospital entities; there were no [[antitrust]] or [[Sherman Act]] claims in this case). | | ''Gabaldoni v. Washington County. Hospital Ass'n'', 250 F.3d 255 (4th Cir. 2001) (affirming summary judgment by the district court in a lawsuit challenging a termination of a physician's clinical privileges and denied his application for reappointment to the medical staff, in a lawsuit contract and tort claims against hospital entities; there were no [[antitrust]] or [[Sherman Act]] claims in this case). |
| − | ''Hein-Muniz v. Aiken Regional Med. Ctrs.'', 532 Fed. App’x 342 (4th Cir. 2013) (affirming summary judgment against a physician who challenged a hospital's termination of his privileges, but no mention of [[antitrust]] or the [[Sherman Act]] in this appeal or in district court. Instead the claims were for: breach of contract, breach of contract accompanied by a fraudulent act, violations of the South Carolina and the United States Constitutions and HCQIA, illegality, conspiracy, unfair trade practices, breach of fiduciary duty, and interference with prospective contract. Relief sought included declaratory judgment, actual and compensatory damages, punitive damages, special damages, injunction, and attorney's fees.). | + | ''Hein-Muniz v. Aiken Regional Med. Ctrs.'', 532 Fed. App’x 342 (4th Cir. 2013) (affirming summary judgment against a physician who challenged a hospital's termination of his privileges, but no mention of [[antitrust]] or the [[Sherman Act]] in this appeal or in district court. Instead the claims were for: breach of contract, breach of contract accompanied by a fraudulent act, violations of the South Carolina and the United States Constitutions and HCQIA, illegality, conspiracy, unfair trade practices, breach of fiduciary duty, and interference with prospective contract. Relief sought included declaratory judgment, actual and compensatory damages, punitive damages, special damages, injunction, and attorney's fees.).nder |
| − | Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Serv. Corp., 465 U.S. 752 (1984) | + | ''Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Serv. Corp.'', 465 U.S. 752 (1984) (affirming a jury verdict in a price-fixing case under [[Sherman_Antitrust_Act#Section_One|Section 1]] of the [[Sherman Act]]). |