Ilinois v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company
The state of Illinois alleged that Liberty Mutual particiated in scheme led by Marsh McLennan to rig bids on insurance policies and distribute policies to particpating insurers, who would submit high bids when directed to do so. The State also alleged that Liberty Mutual paid undisclosed contingent commissions (payments on top of regular commissions)to insurance brokers and agents to induce them to steer business to Liberty Mutual.
California v. Infineon Technologies, No. 3:06-cv-04333 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2007)
33 Plaintiff States generally alleged a horizontal price-fixing conspiracy in the U.S.
market for dynamic random access memory (“DRAM”), carried out by numerous manufacturer defendants. Samsung an
another company, Winbond, reached settlement for $113 million in 2007.. States and private parties settled with the remaining defendants for $173 million and injunctive relief.
New York ex rel. Spitzer v. Hartford Financial Services Group
Agreement between CT, NY and Hartford in which Hartford agreed to pay $20 million in restitution and fines, and implement reforms designed to bring fair play and transparency to the marketing of retirement products. Agreement resolved charges that insurance companies were making secret payments to insurance brokers to recommend group annuities to pension plans.
In re B.P. Properties, Inc. (formerly known as Synergy Properties) and Research
State alleged bid-rigging in auctions of foreclosed real estate in four North Carolina counties.
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.
