UPMC- WPAHS lawsuit on hold
Share with others:
A lawsuit accusing UPMC of stifling competition is on hold until suggestions that the judge is biased against West Penn Allegheny Health System are resolved through an appeal.
So ruled U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Schwab Tuesday in an order in which he wrote that his rulings in the closely watched case have been "well-researched, fair, and consistent with applicable law, and do not demonstrate 'any possible appearance of bias.' "
He was responding to a motion filed by West Penn Allegheny on Friday in which lawyers for the region's second-largest hospital system asked the judge to stop what they called "a worrisome practice of misstating and mischaracterizing" their positions.
The stay appears to be another in a series of setbacks in the case since late November 2010, when the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated a case that Judge Schwab had dismissed 13 months earlier.
The case filed by West Penn Allegheny in 2009 had accused UPMC and Highmark of conspiring to stifle competitors.
Last year, Highmark made massive investments in West Penn Allegheny and proposed a takeover that awaits federal and state approval.
West Penn Allegheny has dropped Highmark from the lawsuit and seeks to amend its case to focus solely on UPMC.
Its request to amend, though, has prompted a counteroffensive by UPMC's lawyers, which led to Tuesday's stay order.
West Penn Allegheny's Friday motion asked the judge to reconsider an earlier ruling that allowed UPMC to demand documents related to its rival's pending merger with Highmark. UPMC has said it needs to learn more about the merger to make sure that West Penn Allegheny is suing in good faith.
West Penn Allegheny's lawyers wrote that Judge Schwab had mischaracterized their position in opposition to the release of their Affiliation Agreement with Highmark -- a document that the judge ordered to be filed publicly with only very limited redactions.
West Penn Allegheny's attorneys also cited other writings by Judge Schwab and said their client "respectfully urges the Court to correct its misstatements to avoid any possible appearance of bias."
Judge Schwab wrote that West Penn Allegheny is effectively saying that if he rules against the plaintiff, he will be accused of bias.
The court cannot "properly function under such a threat," he wrote, adding that he is being asked to correct his past writings "by some undisclosed legal procedure."
To end the stay, West Penn Allegheny can appeal to the 3rd Circuit again, he wrote.
First Published February 15, 2012 12:00 am
