California v. Sutter Health, et al. No. 3:99-cv-03803-MMC(N.D. Cal., 1999)
State sought preliminary injunction to block merger of two hsopitals in East Bay area. Injunction denied.
People of the State of California v. Econolite Control Products, Inc. (Ca. Super Ct. Los Angeles 2004)
Plaintiff state alleged tying of non-proprietary traffic signal equipment to proprietary signal controllers. After trial, final judgment for the state was entered in 2007.
People v. J.A. Momaney Services, Inc., No. 03426723 (San Francisco Superior Court 2003)
Challenge to tie-in sales of certain traffic signal equipment in bids to California public entities.
People v. John L. Sullivan Investments et al., No. 02AS07559 (Sacramento Superior Court 2003)
California Attorney General and Sacramento District Attorney challenged an alleged 1998 agreement among the four major Toyota dealers in Sacramento to cease advertising prices of new cars. Settlements including approx. $200,000 in civil penalties were concluded individually during 2003, with the fourth and final settlement filed November 12, 2003.
Oregon, et al. v. Mulkey; 3:97-cv-00234-MA
Horizontal price-fixing among commercial crab fishermen.
California v. Acme Rotary Broom, No. 05CECL06793 (Cal. Super. Ct. Sept. 2005)
Street sweeping brush manufacturers allegedly set up a territorial allocation scheme and engaged in bid-rigging and solicitation to engage in bid-rigging.
Natural Gas Antitrust Cases I-IV, JCCP No. 4221, et al. (Sup. Ct. of Cal., San Diego 2000)
California, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington investigated El Paso Corporation and other defendants for conspiring to fix the prices of natural gas. In 2003, a $1.5 billion settlement was reached between El Paso Corporation and California, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, other California entities, and various class actions.
In re Antibiotic Antitrust Actions, 410 F. Supp. 669, 1974 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9407 (D. Minn. 1974)
Plaintiff States sought damages and injunctive relief, alleging that Defendant companies conspired to monopolize and restrain the trade for the manufacture, sale and distribution of broad spectrum antibiotics (BSA).
In re NASDAQ Market-Makers Antitrust Investigation Litigation, 94 CIV 3996; M.D.L. No. 1023 (S.D.N.Y. 1997); 169 F.R.D. 493 (S.D.N.Y. 1996)
Although suit was never filed, the Plaintiff States informally participated in a federal private class action seeking treble damages, reimbursement of costs, attorneys fees and injunctive relief, alleging that the defendant financial investment companies conspired to increase and fix the ?spreads? paid for sales of class securities. The Plaintiff States? focus was to ensure that individual investors and public pension funds were fairly represented in the litigation and settlement.
New York v. Microsoft Corp., 97 F. Supp. 2d 59 (D.D.C. 2000)
U.S. Department of Justice and the Plaintiff States alleged that the Defendant, Microsoft Corporation violated State and Federal law by maintaining a monopoly in the market for Intel-compatible personal computer operating systems and by illegally tying its Windows operating system to its Internet Explorer browser.
