State of Colorado et al v. Warner Chilcott, 1:05-cv-02182 (D.D.C.2005)

34 states filed suit alleging that Warner Chilcott entered into an illegal agreement with Barr Pharmaceuticals to raise the prices of Ovcon, an oral contraceptive. The lawsuit alleged that after Barr Pharmaceuticals publicly announced that it planned to have a generic version of Ovcon on the market by the end of the year, Warner Chilcott paid Barr Pharmaceuticals $1 million for an agreement designed to prevent Barr’s generic product from coming to market. Under the terms of the alleged agreement, once Barr received FDA approval to market generic Ovcon, Warner Chilcott had 90 days to pay Barr $19 million, after which Barr would refuse to bring the cheaper generic version to the market. The lawsuit alleged that as a result of the agreement, Warner Chilcott paid Barr a total of $20 million to keep it from marketing its generic version of Ovcon. In additon to a payment of $5.5 million, the settlement prohibits Warner Chilcott, for ten years, from entering into any agreement that would have the effect of limiting the research, development, manufacture, or sale of a generic alternative to one of its drugs. Furthermore, Warner Chilcott must provide the states notice of certain agreements it has entered into with generic manufacturers, and must continue to make its records available to the states for inspection to determine whether the company is complying with the terms of the agreement.

Read More →

Maryland v. Rite-Aid Corp.

Rite Aid sought to acquire the assets of Canadian company Jean Coutu, which owned the Eckerd and Brooks retail pharmacy chains. Parties agreed to divest 26 stores in seven states.

Read More →

Connecticut, et al. v. BL Makepeace, Inc., et al., No. 79-642 (D.Conn.)

Retail vendors of architectural, engineering and drafting supplies, equipment and blueprint services settled Attorney General?s claims of price fixing and unlawful market allocation via entry of a consent decree which prohibited such conduct and payment of a monetary forfeiture.

Read More →

Maine v. Cooke Aquaculture, Inc. and Horton’s of Maine, Inc.

Complaint charged that tthe acquisition of a number of salmon aquaculture lease sites in Washington and Hancock Counties by Cooke Aquaculture Inc.from Stolt Sea Farms, Inc. would have placed Cooke in a virtual monopoly position, controlling most of the lease sites in the State suitable for raising salmon. The relevant market is highly concentrated Consent Decree requires Cooke to surrender its leasehold interest in four specified aquaculture sites to the Department of Marine Resources, as a means of bringing the company into compliance with a statutory acreage limit as well as antitrust laws. In addition, Cooke is required to divest or sell its interest in two significant salmon aquaculture sites in Cobscook Bay, known as Prince Cove and Rodger?s Island, within six months.

Read More →

Maine v. Dead River Co. and Irving Oil Company

Complaint under state merger law resolved by Consent Decree. Parties permitted to consummate sale/acquisition of certain wholesale and retail propane assets in northern Maine, subject to conditions, specifically, first defendant required to enter throughput arrangements with new entrants at its bulk storage facility, second Defendant required to divest a portable bulk storage tank, $7,500 costs.

Read More →

Maine v. Getchell Bros., Inc. 1989 WL 265292 (Me.Super.), 1989-2 Trade Cases P 68,758

Complaint charges market allocation in the sale of packaged or bulk ice. Consent Decree imposes injunctive relief, $35,000 civil penalties against each Defendant and costs.

Read More →

Maine v. Bumble Bee Seafoods, LLC, No. CV-00-63 (Kennebec Super. Ct. 20000)

Challenge to merger of sardine processors resolved by consent Decree.

Read More →

Maine v. Flagship Cinemas Management, Inc., No. CV-03-087 (Kennebec Super. Ct. December 2003)

Complaint filed against owner of 12-screen suburban film complex, alleging defendant’s purchase of a downtown theater as well violated Maine’s antitrust law. The state sought divestiture of the downtown movie theater.

Read More →

In re August Lumber Company, Jan. 1989 Assurance of Discontinuance, Kennebec Super. Ct.

Complaint charges unfair competition in joint advertising of sales and hours of operation (e.g. all closed on certain holidays) by four area lumber companies. Assurance of Discontinuance under 5 M.R.S.A. § 207.

Read More →

Maine v. Maine Health Alliance, No. CV-03-135 (Kennebec Super Ct. 2003)

Complaint, parallel to FTC action against same Defendants, charges that PHO engaged in price-fixing and concerted refusals to deal in contracting with managed care payors.

Read More →