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 →

Vermont and New Hampshire v. Suiza Foods Corp., No. 2:01-CV-194 (D.Vt. 2002)

Plaintiff States sought to enjoin Suiza Food Corporation (Suiza) and Stop & Shop Supermarket Company (Stop & Shop) from consummating their merger, arguing that the merger would significantly impair competition in New England for the processing and sale of fluid milk.

Read More →

U.S. et al. v. EchoStar Communications, Corp., et al. No. 1:02CV02138 (D.D.C.)

Federal and State action to enjoin merger of two direct broadcast satellite (DBS) companies. The merging parties abandoned their merger agreement

Read More →

In the Matter of Chittenden and Vermont National Bank

Merger of two largest banks in Vermont approved after divestitures.

Read More →

In the Matter of: Proposed Acquisition by MTH Holdings, Inc. of Grand Union Acquisition Corp. No. 5-369-89 (Super. Ct. of Vermont, Washington Ct. Julyl 7, 1989)

Investigation of proposed acquisition that could constitute an unfair method of competition in commerce under Vermont law.

Read More →

In re: Casella Waste Systems, Inc. No. 296-5-02 (Superior Court of Vermont, Washington Cty, May 22, 2002)

Investigation into Casella Waste Systems potential monopolization. In 2011, Casella paid $1 million fine for violations of the settlement

Read More →