Eaglemed LLC v. Cox’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[A] State ... may not enact or enforce a law, regulation, or other provision having the force and effect of law related to a price, route, or service of an air carrier that may provide air transportation under this subpart.”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Dirty Boyz Sanitation Serv., Inc. v. City of Rawlins · Air Evac Ems, Inc. v. Cheatham

2. “"There is certainly some persuasive force to the ... argument that federal preemption of state regulations in [the air ambulance] field is not serving the congressional purpose of 'further[ing] efficiency, innovation, and low prices' that was a motivating force behind the Airline Deregulation Act. Morales , 504 U.S. at 378 , 112 S.Ct. 2031 (internal quotation marks omitted). ( See also R. at 324 (citing a New York Times article which reported that the average Air Methods bill had increased from $17,262 in 2009 to more than $40,000 by 2014, while Air Methods' profits surged).) Due to the Airline Deregulation Act's broad preemption provision, states have been unable to 'prevent air ambulance service providers ... from imposing exorbitant fees on patients who wrongly assume their insurance will cover the charges and are not in a position to discover otherwise' or engaging in other unscrupulous pricing behaviors that would not be sustainable in a true free market but are easily perpetuated in the warped market of air-ambulance services. Valley Med Flight, Inc. v. Dwelle , 171 F.Supp.3d 930 , 942 (D.N.D. 2016).... "But when a statute contains an express preemption clause, 'we do not invoke any presumption against pre-emption but instead focus on the plain wording of the clause, which necessarily contains the best evidence of Congress' pre-emptive intent.' Puerto Rico v. Franklin Cal. Tax-Free , --- U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 1938 , 1946, 195 L. Ed. 2d 298 (2016) (internal quotation mark”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Scarlett v. Air Methods Corp. · EagleMed v. Travelers Insurance

3. “' not just 'the business of insurance companies,' which means it must involve something more than an insurance company's agreement with medical providers or pharmacies to fix prices.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. PHI Air Med., LLC v. Tex. Mut. Ins. Co. · Air Evac EMS, Inc. v. Sullivan