Connecticut, Illinois & New York v. St. Paul Travelers

Plaintiff states charged St. Paul Travelers with illegal business steering, customer allocation, and bid rigging in the market for small business. The states alleged, and St. Paul Travelers did not deny, that millions of dollars in “contingent commissions” were paid to a number of brokers who “steered” business to St. Paul Travelers. Under the customer allocation scheme, Travelers was one of the insurers (with The Hartford and CNA) who secretly agreed with a broker to divide up the brokers small business customers in exchange for paying greater undisclosed contingent commissions to the broker.

Read More →

In re Connecticut Toyota Dealers Association

The Attorney General challenged participation by competing automobile dealers in a concerted plan to offer or grant a limited rebate or discount, was resolved via entry of a voluntary assurance of discontinuance

Read More →

Connecticut v. The Pontiac Dealers Advertising Association

Association of automobile dealers agreed to refrain from fixing, maintaining or stabilizing prices at which automobiles will be advertised.

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 →

In the Matter of ACE Ltd. and ACE Group Holdings, Inc.

ACE Ltd., an insurance broker, allegedly participated in bid-rigging schemes with Marsh McLennan and other borkers in which they provided sham bids tocustomers. ACE agreed to pay $80 milion in restitution and penalties, and to adopt a series of significant reforms of its business practices

Read More →

In the Matter of Big Y Foods, No. 03-1983-E (Super. Ct. of Mass, Suffolk Cty. April 25, 2003)

State expressed concern about sale of supermarkets in Western Massachusetts to major competitor. Big Y agreed to use same pricing for new stores as it did for all stores in the area, agreed to use its best efforts to sell the supermarket sites for use as supermrkets.

Read More →

In the Matter of Baycare Health Partners, Inc., No. 94-5653 (Superior Court of Mass., Suffolk Cty., Oct. 4, 1994)

State was concerned about contractual provisions in proposed Phyisician Hospital Organization (PHO) which would require participating physicians to bring new contract opportunities with health plans to the PHO first.

Read More →

In the Matter of Harvard Communicty Health Plan, Inc. and Pilgrim Health Care, Inc., No. 95-0331 (Mass. Super. Ct., Suffolk Cty., Jan. 18, 1995)

State had concerned about proposed merger of two large HMOs in eastern Massachusetts

Read More →

In the Matter of Tri-County Hospital and Wadena Med. Center, No. C4-94-11900 (Ramsey Cty. Cr. Minn., Nov. 30, 1994)

State alleged hospital and large clinic sought to allocate the markets for x-ray equipment and colposcopy equipment.

Read More →

Utah v. Wool Cabin, (Case No. 2005-002-0365 (settlement agreement)

State investigated allegations that Cascade Yarns, Inc. was restricting trade by refusing to sell to a retailer accused by competing retailers of undercutting market prices.

Read More →