Connecticut v. Liberty Mutual (Conn. Super. Ct. Hartford Div. 2006)
State alleged that from 2001 through 2004, Liberty Mutual conspired with Marsh, AIG, ACE, Zurich and other insurers to leverage Marsh’s significant market share in the excess casualty insurance market in particular to rig bids and raise premium prices on insurance contracts. Liberty Mutual settled in 2010 for $2 million.
Connecticut v. Carabetta Enterprises, Inc.No. CV-83-0284039 (Conn. Super. Ct. Hartford 1983)
Owner of residential apartment complexes was enjoined from conditioning the rental of an apartment unit of the lessee?s agreement to purchase moving services or remodeling services from the lessor.
In re UnitedHealth Group Incorporated and Sierra Health Services, Inc., No. 2:08-CV-00233 (D. Nev. 2008)
Coordinated US DOJ and Nevada Attorney General investigations of health insurance merger, results in separate settlements filed in separate courts. Both settlements require divestiture of business division, yet Nevada Attorney General provides additional relief.
Texas v. American International Group Inc., No. D-1-6v-08-000197 (98th Dist. 2007)
Ten states resolved claims that AIG, an insurer, had participated in a bid-rigging scheme run by Marsh McLennan, an insurance broker.
Connecticut v. New Canaan Chevron, Inc. et al., No. CV-83-0064654 (Conn. Super Ct. Norwalk Dist. 1983)
Retail gasoline dealers in Fairfield County, Connecticut were enjoined from agreeing on a uniform level of profit margin, and were further enjoined from refusing to deal with competitors that failed or refused to adhere to such pricing plan.
Connecticut v. Girard Motor Sales, Inc. et. al., No. CV-82-282822 (Conn. Super. Ct., Hartford Dist. 1983)
Automobile dealership charged with various unfair trade practices and an antitrust violation was enjoined from, among other things, conditioning the purchase of a motor vehicle on the buyer?s agreement to purchase automotive towing services.
U.S. and Minnesota v. Alltel Corp. et al.06-3631 (RHK/AJB) (D. Minn. 2007)
Alltel Corp. paid $1.3 million to the United States and Minnesota to settle allegations that it violated conditions of its acquisition of Midwest Wireless. Alltel had agreed to maintain the Midwest Wireless assets while it finished the acquisition, so it could divest its service in several rural Minnesota counties because of antitrust concerns. Minnesota and US DOJ accused Alltel of failing to maintain those assets as agreed. The state got $745,000 from the settlement, and the Justice Department got $580,000,
Connecticut v. Assoc. Buy Liquor Rite Merchants of Conn., Inc., No. CV-82-278210 (Conn. Super Ct. 1983)
Association of retail liquor dealers were enjoined from jointly advertising various featured items at a uniform price.
Connecticut v. Koppers Co., Inc., et al, No. N-79-284 (D.Conn. 1978)
Liquid bituminous material (road tar) sealing companies resolved Attorney General?s claims of price fixing and unlawful market allocation via entry of consent decree enjoining such conduct and payment of a monetary forfeiture.
Connecticut v. Noank Shipyard, Inc., No. CV-81-0065040 S (Conn. Super Ct. New London Dist. 1981)
Marina settled Attorney General’s tying claims (requiring boat owners to have work done by or through defendant marina, purchase materials, services, or supplies from it, and pay a premium for a summer slip for boats not stored there for the winter) via consent decree enjoining such conduct.
