Connecticut v. Reiner, Reiner & Bendett
Plaintiff state alleged that Reiner, a law firm, which also sells title insurance, used sham service, rental and other agreements to
conceal $142,200 in kickbacks and unlawful inducements between 2002 and 2005. In exchange, Absolute and Access allegedly steered title insurance business to the law firm. Connecticut law prohibits title insurance agents from paying for referrals.
District of Columbia v. ACE Holdings, Inc.
Consent decrees filed by states in state court required $4.5 million payment and conduct relief to remedy alleged bid-rigging and false insurance quotes, as well as payment of secret “contingent commissions” to brokers.
Texas v. ACE Holdings, Inc.
Consent decrees filed by states in state court required $4.5 million payment and conduct relief to remedy alleged bid-rigging and false insurance quotes, as well as payment of secret “contingent commissions” to brokers.
Florida v. ACE Holdings, Inc.
Consent decrees filed by states in state court required $4.5 million payment and conduct relief to remedy alleged bid-rigging and false insurance quotes, as well as payment of secret “contingent commissions” to brokers.
State of Ohio v. American International Group, et al,, No. 07-633857 (Oh. Ct. of Comm. Pleas, Cuyahoga Cty. 2007)
Plaintiff state alleged bid-rigging and fictitious quotes in suit against insurance brokers and major commercial insurers. Settled on behalf of 26 public entities for $9 million (AIG) plus $4.75 million (Marsh). Other cases pending
Maine v. Pike Industries, Inc.
Plaintiff state challenged merger of two aggregate and hot mix asphaltcompanies which would allegedly reduce competition for paving projects in southern Maine. Pke, the acquiring company, agreed to 1. Sell stone mined from its Westbrook Quarry in sizes appropriate for use in specified Maine governemtn projects to any firm intending to use the stone to produce hot mix for use in those projects for the next four years and at a price not to exceed the price it charged in 2006, adjusted annually; 2. Enter into an agreement (subject to AG involvement) permitting any firm performing a State of Maine Department of Transportation project to locate a portable hot mix plant into Pike’s Westbrook Facility also for the next four years;
3. Provide written notice to the Attorney General at least sixty (60) days prior to acquiring an ownership or controling interst in aggregate resources or hot mix asphalt
plants located in the State of Maine from firms engaged in the building and maintenance of roads; and pay $20,000 in investigative costs.
Connecticut v. Guy Carpenter & Co., No. HHD-CV-07-40433778 (Conn. Super. Ct. Hartford Dist. 2007)
Plaintiff state alleged a series of conspiracies within the reinsurance industry, principally led by broker Guy Carpenter & Company, LLC, to fix prices and terms on reinsurance contracts purchased in Connecticut and throughout the United States and to mislead primary insurance company clients regarding Guy Carpenter?s role as an agent and underwriter for numerous reinsurance companies. Complaint alleges that Guy Carpenter conspired with numerous reinsurers to fix prices and output, foreclose competitors from access, allocate markets and eliminate competition in the reinsurance market.
People ex rel. Madigan v. Carle Clinic Association, P.C., No. 07h115 (Champaign Cty. 6th Jud. Dist. 2007)
State alleged two clinics conspired to boycott Medicaid patients by adopting identical policies through which they refused to accept Medicaid patients: (1) who were not already registered with the clinic or (2) who had not seen a clinic physician for at least three
years. They allegedly sought to increase the Medicaid reimbursement rates and to accelerate reimbursement payments from the State of Illinois. Settlement reached in which Carle will increase Medicaid patient load and pay local health centers who had to treat more patients because of the policies. In April 2009, Christie Clinic settled with the state, agreeing to increase the number of Medicaid patients it will accept for primary health care services to 8,500 over the next
three years; will not deny Medicaid patients primary care services because of existing medical debt incurred from March 2003 through September 2007 – the period during which these patients were turned away as qualified Medicaid patients and were charged for health care services; and wil pay, over three years, $120,000 to Frances Nelson Health Center to help fund its primary care services for low-income patients
and $34,000 to the Champaign Urbana Public Health District to help pay for its dental program for low-income children. Both Christie and Carle Clinics are committed to accept more than 17,000 Medicaid patients in the intial year, growing to 20,000 over the next three years.
Arizona v. Arizona Hospital and Healthcrae Association
Arizona and USDOJ alleged that hospital trade association fixed the price of nursing services from temporary nursing agencies as participaitng hospitals, which comprised 80 percent of hospital beds in Phoenix and Tucson. Inunctive relief prohibiting conduct and implementing compliance program.
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.
