601 F. App'x 342
6th Cir.2015Background
- DMC seeks permission to appeal a district court order certifying a class action in a wage-fixation antitrust case involving eight Detroit-area hospitals; seven settled, DMC remains.
- Plaintiffs alleged two theories: a per se wage-fixing conspiracy and a rule-of-reason claim that information sharing softened competition.
- A plaintiffs' damages expert provided a single baseline damages figure and did not separate damages by theory of liability.
- The district court granted summary judgment on the per se theory but certified the class on the rule-of-reason theory; later, the court reconsidered and reinstated certification after applying Comcast Behrend.
- The court concluded Comcast did not require excluding damages because the two liability theories were mutually exclusive and the damages model could reflect the theory of liability pursued.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court abused its discretion in certifying the class under Rule 23 | DMC argues Comcast Behrend implies separate damages must map to each theory. | Plaintiffs' theories were mutually exclusive; damages may be tied to the conceded theory. | No abuse; class certification upheld |
| Whether Comcast Behrend requires damages to be tied to a single liability theory | Damages must reflect the theory of liability pursued for class treatment. | Damage model can cover the theory actually proved without improper aggregation. | Not controlling here; damages linked to softened competition |
| Whether the damages model satisfies the link required by Comcast Behrend | Baseline damages show causation from information sharing causing harm under ROA. | Sufficiency of causation and linkage to theory is uncertain. | Damages baseline supports causation to the ROA theory |
| Whether this interlocutory appeal should be permitted under Rule 23(f) | Appeal warranted due to potential abuse of discretion and Comcast issues. | Interlocutory review not warranted; factors not favoring review. | Petition denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Beattie v. CenturyTel, Inc., 511 F.3d 554 (6th Cir. 2007) (abuse-of-discretion standard for certifying class appeals)
- In re Delta Air Lines, 310 F.3d 953 (6th Cir. 2002) (interlocutory appeals from class-certification orders; deference to district court)
- Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 133 S. Ct. 1426 (Supreme Court, 2013) (damages must be tied to the liability theory for class certification when multiple theories exist)
- In re Whirlpool Corp. Front-Loading Washer Prods. Liab. Litig., 722 F.3d 838 (6th Cir. 2013) (damages must be tied to class-wide injury; model must reflect theory of liability)
- Butler v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 727 F.3d 796 (7th Cir. 2013) (Comcast holds damages must align with class-wide injury from liability theory)