active  supervision.Antitrust.  Under  the  test  for  determining  whether  a  private  entity  may

claim a state-action exemption from the antitrust laws, the right of the state to review the entity’s

anticompetitive  acts  and  to  disap-prove  those  acts  that  do  not  promote  state  policy.  See

STATE-ACTION   DOCTRINE;   MIDCAL   TEST.   [Cases:   Monopolies      12(15.5).   C.J.S.

Monopolies §§ 136, 138–143.]

“The active supervision requirement stems from the recognition that where a private party is

engaging in the anticompetitive activity, there is a real danger that he is acting to further his own

interests,  rather  than  the  go-vernmental  interests  of  the  State.  The  requirement  is  designed  to

ensure that the state-action doctrine will shelter only the particular anticompetitive acts that, in the

judgment  of  the  State,  actually  further  state  regulatory  policies. To  accomplish  this purpose,  the

active  supervision  requirement  mandates  that  the  State  exercise  ultimate  control  over  the

challenged  anticompetitive  conduct.”  Patrick  v.  Burget,  486  U.S.  94,  100–01,  108  S.Ct.  1658,

1663 (1988). [Blacks Law 8th]