Highmark settlement hearing delayed until January |
Business Briefs

Highmark settlement hearing delayed until January

A pending settlement between a Whitehall property management company and health insurer Highmark Inc. was delayed on Monday in federal court in Pittsburgh.

U.S. District Court Judge Joy Flowers Conti continued a hearing on the settlement until Jan. 18 and asked attorneys for Highmark and Royal Mile Co. to file supplemental briefs by Jan. 11.

Royal Mile Co. sued Highmark and UPMC in 2010 alleging that the two health care giants had conspired to drive up health insurance premiums.

In October, Royal Mile reached an agreement with Highmark to settle the case. Under the pending deal, Highmark would pay $4.5 million plus attorney fees and agree to refrain from anti-competitive practices until Dec. 31, 2014.

If the settlement is approved by Conti, UPMC would be left as the lone defendant in the lawsuit.

Alex Nixon is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7928 or [email protected].

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.