In the latest development of the case, a US District Judge has approved of the plaintiffs’ request to withdraw their acceptance of a settlement offered by hospital system UPMC and insurer Highmark Inc., accused of conspiring to bar competing insurers out of the region. According to reports, the defendants had originally offered a settlement of up to $4.5 million for the attorneys. While the plaintiffs, which include a hotel company and a property management conglomerate of Western Pennsylvania, first accepted the offer, they moved to withdrawal the acceptance, arguing the settlement was not sufficient to premium payers. The plaintiffs argued that the alleged collusion between the defendants allowed Highmark to charge excessive premium rates.
Featured News
New York Puts Businesses on Notice for Algorithmic Pricing
Mar 19, 2026 by
CPI
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer Expands US Antitrust Team with New Partner Hire
Mar 19, 2026 by
CPI
Mexico Antitrust Authority Fines Oxygen Suppliers Over Exclusive Contracts
Mar 19, 2026 by
CPI
EU Cloud Group Pushes for Halt to Broadcom VMware Changes
Mar 19, 2026 by
CPI
Sen. Blackburn Releases Discussion Draft of Bill to Set Federal ‘Framework’ for AI Policy
Mar 19, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Data-Driven Competition
Mar 19, 2026 by
CPI
Data-Driven Competition: Implications For Enforcement and Merger Control
Mar 19, 2026 by
Alexandre de Corniere & Greg Taylor
From Tipping to Trustees: Why Data-Driven Markets Require Institutional Design, Not Optimization
Mar 19, 2026 by
Jens Prüfer & Paul de Bijl
Data Barriers to Entry: What We’ve Learned About Spotting Them and What We Still Don’t Know About Solutions
Mar 19, 2026 by
Bruno Carballa-Smichowski
When the Perfect Is the Enemy of the Good: Price Discrimination, Affordability, Precarity and Market Dynamism
Mar 19, 2026 by
Dan Ciuriak