Florida v. Stuyvesant Dredging, Co. , No. 88-4036-CA-01 (1st Jud. Cir. for Escambia Cty. Fla. 1989)
Florida sought an injunction and civil penalties, alleging that the defendant dredging companies conspired to rig bids and allocate contracts for various dredging projects throughout the state.
Florida v. Hendry Corporation and Aaron Hendry, No. CL88-7708-AH (15th Jud. Cir. for Palm Beach Cty. Fla. 1989)
Florida sought an injunction and civil penalties, alleging that the defendant dredging companies conspired to rig bids and allocate contracts for various dredging projects throughout the state.
Florida v. Bean Dredging Corporation, No. 88-11226-CA-N (18th Jud. Cir.for Brevard County, Fla., 1989)
Florida sought an injunction and civil penalties, alleging that the defendant dredging companies conspired to rig bids and allocate contracts for various dredging projects throughout the state.
In re Carbon Dioxide Industry Antitrust Litigation (M.D. Fla. 1996) M.D.L. 940
The State of Florida sought treble damages, civil penalties, and injunctive relief against defendant carbon dioxide companies, alleging that since 1968, the companies engaged in a conspiracy to restrain trade and commerce by allocating customer contracts and/or rigging bids for the supply of carbon dioxide to governmental entities and other purchasers in Florida.
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
In the Matter of Zurich Holding Co. of America, Inc. and Zurich American Insurance Co.
Zurich agreed to an Assurance of Discontinuance to resolve claims of bid-rigging and sham bidding. Under the AOD, Zurich paid $88 million to policy holders, $39 million to New York and $13 million each to Connecticut and Illinois.
Texas v. Zurich American Insurance Company (In re Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Lit. (D.C. No. 04-cv-05184, D.N.J.)
Zurich settled claims involving payment of contingent commissions and submission of false bids for insurance coverage.
People of the State of California v Conti, BC 348077 (Ca. Super. Ct. 2006)
State alleged that defendants participated in a bid-rigging conspiracy designed to allocate bids for advertising on Internet search-engine Yahoo.
New York v. Niagara Milk Cooperative, Inc. 95 Civ. 6290 (W.D.N.Y.
Niagra Milk Cooperative participated in a bid-rigging conspiracy, allocating government and private contracts among the members of the Cooperative and other co-conspirators.
Maine v. Coutts Bros., No. CV-00-088, Kennebec Superior Court, June 28, 2001)
State alleged bid-rigging on utility construction contracts. After trial, defendants were enjoined from further violations and paid $30,000 civil penalty plus costs.
