California ex rel. Bonta v. KYB Copr.

As part of a large class action, plaintiff state filed suit against manufacturers of automotive shock absorbers, alleging that the defendants, from the mid-1990s through at least 2012, conspired to rig bids for, and to fix stabilize and maintain the price of shock absorbers installed in autos purchased by the plaintiff state. Defendant pled guilty…

Read More →

United States and Plaintiff States v. Google, No. 1:20-cv-03010 (D.D.C. Oct. 20, 2020)

Eleven states and the U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit to prevent Google from unlawfully maintaining monopolies through anticompetitive and exclusionary practices in the search and search advertising markets. According to the complaint, Google accounted for almost 90 percent of all search queries in the United States. Google has entered into a series of…

Read More →

California v. Denso, No. 2:19-cv-13566 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 3, 2019)

As part of its ongoing participation in the ongoing Automotive Parts multidistrict litigation, California reached a settlement with Denso to resolve claims that as part of a conspiracy with dozens of auto parts manufactures, competition in the automotive parts market was suppressed and eliminated by illegal bid rigging. The state’s complaint alleged that Denso had…

Read More →

Washington v. Starkist Company, No. 20-2-09491-9 (Wash. Super. Ct. King Cty. June 2, 2020)

Plaintiff state filed a civil lawsuit against Starkist, one of the world’s largest canned tuna manufacturers and the former CEO of Bumble Bee Foods, another large tuna manufacturer, over a price-fixing conspiracy that drove up the cost of packaged tuna for more than a decade. The suit alleged that StarKist Co., its parent company Dongwon,…

Read More →

Attorney General v. Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, LLC (Fl. Cir. Ct., Leon Cty., Apr. 30, 2020)

Florida reached a multimillion-dollar agreement with one of the largest oncology medical practices in Florida to resolve state antitrust and consumer protection concerns. The proposed consent decree with Florida Cancer Specialists & Research Institute, LLC follows a civil antitrust investigation into whether the health care provider entered into illegal agreements with competitors that allocated geographic…

Read More →

Maryland Coastal Insulation, Inc., C.I. 290235009 (Cir. Ct. for Baltimore City 1990)

Defendant agreed with others to submit rigged bids on asbestos abatement jobs.

Read More →

Maryland v. Hayes, C.I. 19012019 (Cir. Ct. for Baltimore City 1990).

Defendant agreed with others to submit rigged bids on asbestos abatement jobs.

Read More →

Maryland v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., et al. No. 24-C-99-004904 (Cir. Ct. for the City of Baltimore 1999).

Related to Florida’s Sanitary Paper case – price-fixing among manufacturers of sanitary paper products (tissue, napkins, etc. used in commercial or institutional context).

Read More →

People v. DeBrun, No. 98 CH 12 (Ill. Cir. Ct. 1998); 614 Trade Reg. Rep. (CCH) (Jan. 26, 2000)

The Illinois Attorney General filed a bid-rigging case against two contractors who allegedly conspired and rigged bids on contracts for spreading oil on roads. One defendant settled, and the other was found liable at trial and was assessed civil penalties.

Read More →

Florida v. Abbott Laboratories and Geneva Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

The brand name maker of the prescription drug Hytrin, Abbott, entered into an agreement with Geneva to keep Geneva’s generic version of Hytrin off the market. Geneva was paid a substantial amount of money by Abbott while Abbott continued to collect monopoly profits on its name brand drug. Because of federal regulatory system for new generic entry, Geneva effectively blocked the entry of other generic drug makers. The matter settled in conjunction with MDL litigation.

Read More →