Mobile County Water, Sewer & Fire Protection Authority, Inc. v. Mobile Area Water & Sewer System, Inc. , 564 F.3d 1290 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                                                                       [PUBLISH]
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
    ________________________                   FILED
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    No. 08-14855                 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
    APRIL 8, 2009
    Non-Argument Calendar
    THOMAS K. KAHN
    ________________________
    CLERK
    D. C. Docket No. 07-00357-CV-WS
    MOBILE COUNTY WATER, SEWER
    AND FIRE PROTECTION AUTHORITY, INC.,
    Plaintiff-Appellant,
    versus
    MOBILE AREA WATER AND SEWER
    SYSTEM, INC.,
    Defendant-Appellee.
    ________________________
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Alabama
    _________________________
    (April 8, 2009)
    Before BLACK, MARCUS and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:
    Mobile County Water, Sewer and Fire Protection Authority, Inc. (MoCo)
    appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Mobile Area Water and
    Sewer System, Inc. (MAWSS). MoCo brought suit against MAWSS seeking
    injunctive relief under federal and Alabama state antitrust laws. MAWSS moved
    for summary judgment, arguing it was immune from liability under the doctrine of
    state action immunity. MoCo filed a cross-motion for summary judgment on its
    antitrust claims and contended MAWSS was not entitled to state action immunity.
    On July 23, 2008, the district court granted MAWSS’s motion for summary
    judgment and denied MoCo’s motion for summary judgment. The court
    concluded the principles of state action immunity barred MoCo’s antitrust claims
    against MAWSS because MAWSS’s challenged conduct followed a clearly
    articulated and affirmatively expressed state policy. Specifically, the court found
    MAWSS’s conduct was authorized by the Alabama legislature and its
    anticompetitive effect was a foreseeable result of this authorization. After
    reviewing the record and the parties’ briefs, we agree MAWSS is entitled to state
    action immunity and affirm for the reasons stated in the district court’s well-
    reasoned order, which is published at 
    567 F. Supp. 2d 1342
     (S.D. Ala. 2008).
    AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-14855

Citation Numbers: 564 F.3d 1290

Judges: Anderson, Black, Marcus, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 4/8/2009

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 8/2/2023