Based on your understanding of the legal basis for each judgment, consider the hypothetical problem "Fast Stop Clinics" on page 985 of the Clark text.

State your legal conclusion(s) at the outset of your legal opinion. You must incorporate the law that you've gleaned from the above-mentioned three cases and apply same to the hypothetical fact pattern of the problem. There is no absolute correct answer. The point of this exercise is to identify the legal issue(s) and then apply the law to the facts in order to render a legal opinion.

if you decide that there may be two legal positions, argue both and then state which position makes the stronger argument.

dividuals involved in minations in certain circumstances. PROBLEM: FAST STOP CLINICS Drug World, a pharmacy chain operating a large number of retail pharmacies in the upper Midwest, has announced plans to open 24-Hour "Fast Stop Clinics" at all of its locations. The clinics will be staffed by RNs and PAs depending on state licensure and scope of practice laws. These providers will perform routine exams, take cultures, and prescribe medications within the scope of practice permitted under state law. Each clinic will enter into referral agreements with one or more local hospitals to assure direct access to physicians when the need presents. Good Samaritan Hospital (GSH) has entered into such an arrangement with a local Fast Stop Clinic. Under their partnership agreement, all doctors providing back up to Fast Stop RNs will have admitting privileges at GSH, and the clinics will be able to "streamline" a patient's journey to a specialist or through the emergency room at GSH, when medically appropriate. A number of doctors holding staff privileges at GSH became quite upset when they got wind of this agreement. The group, though small (fewer than 5% of all doctors with privileges at the hospital), includes both primary care physicians who are concerned about losing current patients to the doctors to whom the clinic refers and several prominent specialists who feel they will lose established lines of referrals from primary care physicians. Some doctors believe that patients will come to them in worse shape, with missed diagnoses, and inadequate follow up. They have posted a notice at the hospital calling for an emergency meeting to discuss options to counter GSH's plan. The doctors propose three possible courses of action, asking colleagues to: Agree that no doctors will serve as a collaborating or supervisory physician to Fast Stop Clinic RNs or PAs or accept referrals from the Clinic; Sign a letter to GSH administrators insisting that all patients receiving services from the clinic be advised that they should contactANTITRUST CH. 15 986 their primary care physician regarding any additional referrals or services needed; or Send a letter to all GSH physicians supplying academic studies and historical evidence of potential risks to patients who receive care from nonphysicians under arrangements such as those proposed. The CEO of GSH has approached you for advice on the legality of each action contemplated by the staff physicians. She says she wants to fight them vigorously and that she is willing to consider filing an antitrust lawsuit, complaining to the Department of Justice, terminating the staff privileges of the ringleaders of the group, or undertaking any other steps you recommend