West Virginia ex rel. McGraw v. Abbott Labs and Geneva Pharmaceuticals, Inc., No. 05-C-180 (Cir. Ct. Wyoming Cty. 2005)
The brand name maker of the prescription drug Hytrin, Abbott, entered into an agreement with Geneva to keep Geneva’s generic version of Hytrin off the market. Geneva was paid a substantial amount of money by Abbott while Abbott continued to collect monopoly profits on its name brand drug. Because of federal laws, Geneva effectively blocked the entry of other generic drug makers from entering the market. The matter settled in conjunction with MDL litigation.
Washington v. BP Oil Company, No. 92-civ-00489 (W.D. Wash. Mar. 30, 1992)
BP Oil purchased all of Exxon?s retail gas stations in King, Pierce and Snohomish counties. Under the settlement, BP was required to sell certain stations to reduce market share.
Wisconsin v. The Wisconsin Chiropractic Ass’n , Case No. 01CV3568, Circuit Court Dane County (December 2001)
Complaint alleged that WCA and Leonard orchestrated a conspiracy among WCA members to increase prices for chiropractic services and to boycott third-party payers.
Wisconsin v. Kenosha Hospital and Medical Center and St. Catherine’s Hospital, 1996 WL 784584 (E.D. Wis.), 1997-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) P 71,669
Wisconsin entered into a consent decree permitting merger conditioned on injunctive relief protecting competition
Washington v. Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc., No. C91-39 (W.D. Wash. 1991)
Texaco purchased all of Shell’s retail gasoline stations in King, Pierce and Snohomish counties. Texaco agreed to sell stations with a combined volume of 12 million gallons per year in the relevant market.
Washington v. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Company of Walla Walla, et. al, No. 90-3032 (E.D. Wash 1990)
The State alleged that defendants engaged in a conspiracy to fix prices, rotate bids, allocate locations of vending machines and eliminate discounts.
New York v. Willis Group Holdings Ltd., Willis North America Inc., Willis of New York, Inc., Assurance of Discontinuance
State of New York sought damages and conduct relief, alleging that Defendant Willis engaged in fraudulent and anti-competitive practices.
New York v. Aon Corporation
States sought damages and injunctive relief, alleging that defendants unlawfully deceived clients by steering clients’ insurance business, promising increased retail business to insurers in return for their commitments to use Aon’s reinsurance services, suggesting that an insurer raise its quotes for two of Aon’s clients, entering into undisclosed “producer funding agreements” whereby insurers directly funded the hiring of Aon brokers, entering into secret “pay-to-play” arrangements with insurers whereby Aon obtained undisclosed compensation, agreeing with preferred insurers to “freeze out” a competing insurer, and providing preferred insurers with first looks, last looks, and exclusive looks on preferred business.
New York v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., Marsh Inc. and their subsidiaries and affiliates
State of New York sought damages and injunctive relief, alleging that Defendant Marsh unlawfully deceived its clients by steering clients’ insurance business and soliciting fictitious bids.
Washington v. Washington State Tire Dealers Ass’n, No. 99-2-22692-5SEA, (King Cty Super. Ct. 1999)
Defendant tire dealers association facilitated agreement among members to refuse to sell less than four studded snow tires at a time. Defendants also promoted sales by publishing or displaying information concerning the relative safety of tire installation without reasonable substantiation for their claims at the time they were made.
