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).

Read More →

California, Oregon, Washington v. BP Amoco p.l.c. and Atlantic Richfield Company

Plaintiff States, along with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) sought to enjoin the merger between BP Amoco p.l.c. (BP) and Atlantic Richfield Co. (ARCO), alleging that the merger would give BP monopoly-like control over Alaska North Slope crude oil production and sales to West Coast refineries.

Read More →

Washington v. Texaco, Inc., No. C97-1980 (W.D. Wash. 1997)

Plaintiff States sought to enjoin Texaco, Inc. (Texaco) and Shell Oil Company (Shell) from entering into a joint venture, arguing that such an agreement would substantially impair competition for gasoline in Washington, Oregon, and the States in general.

Read More →

Utah v. Phillips Petroleum Co. and Conoco, Inc., No. 2 02 CV-0982 (D. Utah 2002)

Plaintiff States sought to enjoin Phillips Petroleum Co. (Phillips Petroleum) and Conoco, Inc. (Conoco) from entering into a merger agreement, arguing that the merger would substantially impair competition for refining bulk supply and sale of gasoline.

Read More →

Texas v. Zeneca, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13153 (N.D. Tex. 1997); 1997-2 Trade Cas. (CCH) � 71,888 (N.D. Tex. 1997)

States sought an injunction and monetary damages from Zeneca, Inc. (Zeneca), alleging that the company conspired with distributors of its crop protection chemicals to maintain the resale price of the chemicals.

Read More →

Oregon et al. v. Valero Energy Corp., No. 01-1830 K1 (D. OR. Dec. 18, 2001)

States sought to enjoin the proposed merger between Valero Energy Corporation (Valero) and Ultramar Diamond Shamrock Corporation (Ultramar), arguing that the merger would substantially lessen competition in the bulk supply and wholesale marketing of gasoline.

Read More →

In re Coordinated Pretrial Proceedings in Petroleum Products Antitrust Litigation, MDL-150; 1992-2 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 69,925 (C.D. Cal. 1992)

In 1973, The States of Florida and Connecticut sued several named petroleum companies in each individual state’s federal court. The States alleged that the companies conspired to raise or stabilize prices for refined oil products and they continually engaged in the mutual exchange of pricing and price-related information. Further, the States alleged that the Defendants conspired to create an artificial scarcity of crude and refined oil and that the oil companies conspired not to compete in bidding on plaintiffs annual bulk sale petroleum supply contracts. California, Arizona, Washington and Oregon also sued

Read More →

Missouri v. American Cyanamid Co.; 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4722,.1997-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) 71,712 (W.D. MO. 1997)

The Plaintiff States alleged that between 1989 and 1995, American Cyanamid Company (American Cyanamid) entered into contracts for Crop Protection Chemicals (CPC), with its dealers in which they agreed formally and in writing to a rebate program that held floor prices at levels equal to Defendant’s wholesale prices for affected CPC.

Read More →