Connecticut v. Nilsson et al., No. CV-205507 HAS (Conn. Super. Ct. Hartford Dist.1978)
Defendants enjoined and restrained from enforcing or attempting to enforce a covenant contained in the real estate sales agreement wherein: “Buyers further agree that they will not deal with John Miller and Associates at any time regarding this subdivision.”
Connecticut v. Susan Bristol, Inc. (Ct. Super. Ct., Hartford, 1980)
Defendant manufacturer/wholesale distributor of apparel was permanently enjoined and restrained from fixing or controlling the price at which any of its dealers may advertise, promote or offer for sale any product at retail.
In re Connecticut Toyota Dealers Association
The Attorney General challenged participation by competing automobile dealers in a concerted plan to offer or grant a limited rebate or discount, was resolved via entry of a voluntary assurance of discontinuance
Connecticut v. Journeymen Barbers Hairdressers and Cosmetologists International
Action claiming illegality of defendants’ pricing practices via use of a minimum fee schedule.
Connecticut v. The Pontiac Dealers Advertising Association
Association of automobile dealers agreed to refrain from fixing, maintaining or stabilizing prices at which automobiles will be advertised.
Connecticut v. Viking Sewing Machine Co., Inc., No. CV-79-0240205 (Ct. Super. Ct., Hartford 1979)
Manufacturer of sewing machines was prohibited by a consent decree from agreeing with dealers on resale prices or advertised resale prices in Connecticut for a three-year period.
Massachusetts v. First Group, PLC
Eleven states alleged that the merger would substantially lessen competition in numerous markets for the procurement of School Bus Services within the Plaintiff States. Settlement required divestitures of routes and depots, provision o fmaintenance services, no non-compete agreements, notice to the states of future acquisitions, and no coercion to include certain bid specifications plus $1.1 million in attorneys fees.
New York v. UBS Financial Services
Suit charged UBS with violations of state anti-fraud laws, as well as common law fraud and breaches of fiduciary duty by falsely promoting InsightOne as providing personalized advice and other financial planning services and pushing unsuited customers into InsightOne.
Connecticut v. HealthDrive Corporation
Provider of allied healthcare professional services (dental, optometric, audiological, podiatric) to long-term care facilities and their residents settled Attorney General’s claims of unlawful tying (of podiatric services to dental services) via entry of an Assurance of Voluntary Compliance, which eliminated the tying practice.
In re Prudential Settlement
Prudential agreed to eliminate the payment of contingent commissions to brokers on group insurance products and provide full disclosure of broker compensation to employers who seek to purchase insurance for their employees through Prudential. Prudential will also provide restitution of $16.5 million to policyholders and pay civil penalties totaling $2.5 million.
