Jill M. Manning

Manning, a partner at the litigation boutique Steyer Lowenthal Boodrookas Alvarez & Smith LLP, represents clients and consumers in cases brought under federal and state antitrust and consumer protection statutes.

She lives in west Marin County, where she worked remotely even before the coronavirus threat temporarily shut many businesses down.

"A class action process makes it possible to work from home," she said. "Now, of course, even depositions and court hearings are taking place virtually. That is leading people to realize you don't really need to go to Rotterdam, say, for a four-hour deposition or to New York City for a short meeting."

Manning and colleagues at other firms are currently pursuing class action claims for anticompetitive conduct against Sutter Health, a major Northern California hospital network.

The claims are based on the network's market power, which it allegedly used to tie inpatient services at inflated prices to other services in its contracts with health insurance plans. Sidibe v. Sutter Health, 12-CV04854 (N.D. Cal., filed Sept. 17, 2012).

"It's an interesting case because it has to do with the critically important health industry," Manning said, noting that the litigation has proceeded through the upheavals caused by the Affordable Care Act and the COVID-19 pandemic. "Here we have a company engaging in anticompetitive conduct that causes prices to rise during difficult times."

The case has taken several twists. U.S. Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler of San Francisco dismissed it, only to be reversed by a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel in 2016.

Returned to Beeler's court, the plaintiffs' arguments got a boost when, in January, state Attorney General Xavier Becerra investigated similar claims and settled with Sutter for $575 million and extensive injunctive relief.

Unlike most government antitrust cases, this one came into view well after the private plaintiffs filed their claims. Becerra lodged his suit in San Francisco County Superior Court, citing the state's antitrust law, the Cartwright Act. UFCE & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health, CGC-14-538451 (S.F. Super. Ct., filed April 7, 2014).

Last fall, Beeler certified an injunctive and declarative relief class in Sidibe but denied certification of the damages class. In January, Manning and colleagues renewed their motion for damages class certification. That motion remains under submission.

"We got held up for a year and a half at the 9th Circuit," Manning said. "We're back on track now. When the government gets involved, it piques the interest of judges."

-- John Roemer