# North Carolina ex rel. Edmisten v. P.I.A. Asheville, Inc.

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · July 16, 1984 · 740 F.2d 274

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8923650

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ex rel. Rufus L. EDMISTEN, Attorney General v. P.I.A. ASHEVILLE, INC. First Washington Group, Inc. Consolidated Health Systems, Inc. Psychiatric Institutes of America, Inc., United States of America, /A Amicus Curiae
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** July 16, 1984
- **Citations:** 740 F.2d 274
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Widener
- **Judges:** Chapman, Ervin, Hall, Murnaghan, Phillips, Russell, Sprouse, Widener, Winter
- **Cited by:** 8 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8923650

## Opinion text

WIDENER, Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent for the reasons expressed at length in the panel opinion, North Carolina ex rel. Edmisten v. P.I.A. Asheville, Inc., 722 F.2d 59 (4th Cir.1983), and would not find it necessary to reach the applicability of Parker v. Brown, 317 U.S. 341 , 63 S.Ct. 307 , 87 L.Ed. 315 (1943). I add for emphasis that the only act immune from antitrust scrutiny considered here is the acquisition of the additional hospital facility. 722 F.2d at 68 n. 13. Any activities of the defendants subsequent to the state-approved acquisition which are in violation of the antitrust laws may be challenged as such under the panel opinion.
K.K. HALL and CHAPMAN, Circuit Judges, join in this opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8923650. Public record. Not legal advice.