Arizona v. Maricopa County Medical Society, et al., 457 U.S. 332 (1982)
State petitioned for Summary Judgment, alleging that Defendant members of the Maricopa County Medical Society (Maricopa) made agreements with competing member physicians to set maximum fees that member physicians could claim in full payment of health services provided to policyholders.
West Virginia ex rel. McGraw v. GlaxoSmithKline, PLC et al., No. 04-C-254M (Cir. Ct. Marshall Cty. 2004)
Plaintiff state filed a lawsuit and consent order to settle the lawsuit against GlaxoSmithKline, PLC, and SmithKline Beechham Corporation, the manufacturers of the prescription drugs, Paxil, Augmentin, and Relafen. Paxil is commonly prescribed for anxiety and depression, Augmentin is an antibiotic, and Relafen is a non-steroidal pain reliever. The State alleged that the defendants had unlawfully attempted to extend their patent protection for the three prescription drugs. After an investigation, the State reached an agreement with the defendants to settle the manner. Under the terms of the settlement, the State received $500,000.00.
Archer v. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd., Roche Vitamins Inc., Aventis Animal Nutrition S.A.; Daiichi Pharmaceutical Co., LTD.; Eisai Co., Ltd; Takeda Chemical Industries, LTD., and Basf Corporation
State intervened in private class action suit following guilty pleas by vitamin manufacturers.
West Virginia ex rel. McGraw v. Kimberly-Clark Corporation, et al., No. 99-C-2349 (Cir. Ct. Kanawha Cty. 2000)
Suit alleged price-fixing in the commercial tissue paper market. After dismissal from federal court, state refiled in state court and parties reached a settlement.
West Virginia ex rel. Tompkins v. Northwestern Disposal Co. et al., No. 90-C-130 (Cir. Ct. Wood Cty. 1990).
Case alleged monopolization by owner of only landfill within geographic area.
West Virginia ex rel. McGraw v. Microsoft Corp., No. 01-C-197 (Cir. Ct. Boone Cty. 2004)
The State filed a lawsuit against Microsoft Corporation seeking damages caused to the State and its consumers because of Microsoft’s unlawful monopolization in the computer operating system market. In June of 2003, the State reached a settlement with Microsoft Corporation along with a separate class of private plaintiffs.
West Virginia ex rel. McGraw v. Meadow Gold Dairies and Valley Rich Dairy, No. 93-0915-R (W.D. Va. 1995)
Meadow Gold and Valley Rich were accused of bid-rigging, market allocation and price fixing fluid milk sold to public schools in Southeastern West Virginia and Virginia. Valley Rich settled the case and Meadow Gold was dismissed. The case against Meadow Gold was refiled in West Virginia State Court. This action followed a guilty plea by Borden, Inc. to federal antitrust charges on rigging bids for school milk programs.
West Virginia ex rel. McGraw v. Abbott Labs and Geneva Pharmaceuticals, Inc., No. 05-C-180 (Cir. Ct. Wyoming Cty. 2005)
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 laws, Geneva effectively blocked the entry of other generic drug makers from entering the market. The matter settled in conjunction with MDL litigation.
Washington v. Daicel Chemical Industries, Ltd., et al, No. 05-2-05779-3 (King Cty. Super. Ct. 2005)
Sorbates antitrust litigaiton.
U.S. and Texas v. Kimberly-Clark Corporation and Scott Paper Company – No. 3-95CV3055-P (N.D. Tex. 1995)
Merger review by U.S. and Texas of Kimberly -Clark Corporation merger with Scott Paper Company
