Maine v. Aloupis, Benoit, Harris, Lebowitz, Solomon, CV-93-73 (Kennebec Superior Court, 1993)
Five ob-gyns allocated operating room time at local hospital.
People v. John L. Sullivan Investments et al., No. 02AS07559 (Sacramento Superior Court 2003)
California Attorney General and Sacramento District Attorney challenged an alleged 1998 agreement among the four major Toyota dealers in Sacramento to cease advertising prices of new cars. Settlements including approx. $200,000 in civil penalties were concluded individually during 2003, with the fourth and final settlement filed November 12, 2003.
Oregon, et al. v. Mulkey; 3:97-cv-00234-MA
Horizontal price-fixing among commercial crab fishermen.
In Re: Insurance Antitrust Litigation, 938 F.2d 919, 1991-1 Trade Cases (CCH) & 69,460
Plaintiff States sought damages and injunctive relief, alleging that Defendant reinsurers, brokers and trade organizations conspired to reduce the availability to public entities of commercial general liability insurance during the mid-1980s.
In Re: Toys ‘R’ Us Antitrust Litigation, 191 F.R.D. 347 (E.D.N.Y. 2000); M.D.L. 1211
Plaintiff States alleged that Toys R Us entered into vertical and horizontal agreements with numerous toy manufacturers to limit the supply of certain popular toys to warehouse clubs.
Ohio, et al, v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., et al.(D.D.C. 2002); see also In re Buspirone Antitrust Litigation,Case No. 01 CV 11401, MDL 1410, MDL 1413 (S .D.N.Y.)
Plaintiff States sought damages and injunctive relief, alleging that the drug company, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Co. (BMS) wrongfully maintained a monopoly on Taxol, a drug for which the Plaintiff States alleged Defendant fraudulently filed a patent. BMS’s alleged wrongful action delayed entry into the market by generic competitors of the drug, resulting in higher prices for Taxol. In 2008, plaintiff states sued BMS for failing to report accurately to the states, pursuant to the settlemen, a patent arrangement involving the drug Plavix. The company pleaded guilty to lying to the FTC and the states recovered $1.1 million in fines.
Minnesota v. Mid-Minnesota Associated Physicians, 1991-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) 69,531 (Minn. Dist. Ct. 1991)
State sought damages and injunctive relief, alleging that Defendant, Mid-Minnesota Associated Physicians, negotiated contracts on behalf of their physician members having the effect of collectively refusing to deal with third-party payors unless the payors formed an integrated joint venture.
Iowa v. Iowa Optometric Association, 1983-2 Trade Cas. (CCH) 65,483 (Iowa Dist. Ct. 1983)
State sought an injunction, alleging that Defendant, Iowa Optometric Association participated in agreements, understandings, plans or courses of conduct with the foreseeable affect that optometrists could jointly refuse to provide optometric services to Medicaid recipients or refuse to participate in the Medicaid program.
Arizona v. Arizona Podiatry Association, 1985-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) 66,487
State sought damages and injunctive relief, alleging that Defendant, Arizona Podiatry Association maintained a code of ethics provision restricting members form of advertising and solicitation of patients
Arizona v. Arizona Radiological Society; 1979-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) 62,683
State sought injunctive relief, alleging that Defendant, Arizona Radiological Society established bylaw and policy statements requiring members to work only on a fee-for-service basis.
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next »
