Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
In an antitrust action, district court's grant of judgment on the pleadings and dismissal on grounds that state action immunity applied to all defendants is vacated and remanded where: 1) defendant Westchester County Health Care Corporation is entitled to the same status as a municipality for purposes of the state action immunity analysis, and the behavior by WCHCC was a foreseeable consequence of the authorizations in WCHCC's enabling statute; and 2) a private party is not exempted from the active supervision prong of the Midcal test simply by virtue of purporting to act pursuant to a contract with a governmental entity that itself would be entitled to state action immunity, and on remand the private defendants-doctors must therefore show that they were actively supervised by WCHCC in order to share in its immunity.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Argued March 16, 2009
Filed: July 1, 2009
Before: CALABRESI and WESLEY, Circuit Judges, and DRONEY, District Judge.
Opinion by DRONEY, District Judge.