State v. MaineHealth, 2011 ME 115

State of Maine filed an antitrust enforcement action on March 22, 2011 against the MaineHealth entities over MaineHealth’s proposed merger with two Portland cardiology practices.
Central Maine Medical Center (CMMC) moved to intervene in April 2011 on grounds of competitive injury in cardiovascular surgery and angioplasty markets.
The district court denied intervention, ruling CMMC lacked an adverse effect on its interests and that permissive intervention was unlikely to be allowed in government antitrust actions.
The court offered third-party participation via written comments and an oral, non-testimonial argument due to public interest in the case.
CMMC appealed, resulting in a stay of proceedings in the Superior Court and expedited review by the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether CMMC has right to intervene in the state antitrust action	CMMC has a protectable competitive interest.	Maine statute grants only the Attorney General injunctive relief; private intervention not allowed.	Intervention of right denied.
Whether the court abused/discretion in denying permissive intervention	CMMC occupies an exceptional competitive position meriting intervention.	Joining private claims would unduly burden proceedings; alternative participation available.	Permissive intervention denied; alternative participation affirmed.

Sam Fox Publ'g Co. v. United States, 366 U.S. 683 (1961) (private and public actions are cumulative; private parties may proceed separately)
United States v. Associated Milk Producers, Inc., 534 F.2d 113 (8th Cir. 1976) (private intervention in government antitrust actions generally limited)
United States v. G. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc., 563 F. Supp. 642 (D. Del. 1983) (limits on private intervention in government actions)
United States v. Intl. Tel. & Tel. Corp., 349 F. Supp. 22 (D. Conn. 1972) (factors governing intervention in antitrust matters)