U.S. and Minnesota v. Alltel Corp. et al.06-3631 (RHK/AJB) (D. Minn. 2007)
Alltel Corp. paid $1.3 million to the United States and Minnesota to settle allegations that it violated conditions of its acquisition of Midwest Wireless. Alltel had agreed to maintain the Midwest Wireless assets while it finished the acquisition, so it could divest its service in several rural Minnesota counties because of antitrust concerns. Minnesota and US DOJ accused Alltel of failing to maintain those assets as agreed. The state got $745,000 from the settlement, and the Justice Department got $580,000,
Connecticut v. Assoc. Buy Liquor Rite Merchants of Conn., Inc., No. CV-82-278210 (Conn. Super Ct. 1983)
Association of retail liquor dealers were enjoined from jointly advertising various featured items at a uniform price.
Connecticut v. Koppers Co., Inc., et al, No. N-79-284 (D.Conn. 1978)
Liquid bituminous material (road tar) sealing companies resolved Attorney General?s claims of price fixing and unlawful market allocation via entry of consent decree enjoining such conduct and payment of a monetary forfeiture.
Connecticut v. Levi Strauss & Co., No. 221357 (Conn. Super. Ct. Hartford Dist. 1978)
Defendant clothing manufacturer settled Attorney General’s claims of resale price maintenance via consent decree enjoining such conduct and payment of monetary forfeiture.
Connecticut v. Noank Shipyard, Inc., No. CV-81-0065040 S (Conn. Super Ct. New London Dist. 1981)
Marina settled Attorney General’s tying claims (requiring boat owners to have work done by or through defendant marina, purchase materials, services, or supplies from it, and pay a premium for a summer slip for boats not stored there for the winter) via consent decree enjoining such conduct.
Connecticut v. Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc., et al. (In re: Electrical Wiring Devices Antitrust Litigation)No. H-79-64 (D. Conn. 1978)
Various manufacturers of electrical wiring devices settled Attorney General’s claims of price fixing via entry of consent decree prohibiting such conduct and payment of monetary forfeiture. Parallel USDOJ criminal case
Connecticut, et al. v. BL Makepeace, Inc., et al., No. 79-642 (D.Conn.)
Retail vendors of architectural, engineering and drafting supplies, equipment and blueprint services settled Attorney General?s claims of price fixing and unlawful market allocation via entry of a consent decree which prohibited such conduct and payment of a monetary forfeiture.
Connecticut v. Randall Television, et al., No. CV-81-025636S (Conn. Super Ct. Hartford Dist. 1981)
Television retailers settled Attorney General’s claim that they fixed the prices of specific brand television sets and agreed to cooperatively advertise them at the fixed price, via entry of a consent decree that enjoined such conduct and payment of a civil penalty.
Connecticut v. Candlewood Shores Estates, Inc, No. CV-78-170142 (Conn. Super. Ct. Danbury 1981)
A Connecticut real estate brokerage and land development firm was barred by a final consent judgment from using restrictive covenants to condition the sale and lease of real estate in a residential development on the use of the firm as the exclusive broker. The firm also was required to release all exclusive brokerage covenants and send notice of the release to all home-owners in the development.
Connecticut v. Michael Kabot d/b/a Cabot’s Viking Sewing Machine Ctr, No. CV-79-0240205 (Conn. Super Ct. Hartford Dist. 1979)
Retail sewing machine dealer settled Attorney General’s claim price fixing and resale price maintenance via entry of a consent decree enjoining such conduct and payment of a civil penalty
