Utah v. Hitachi Sales Corp. of America, No. 880026602 (1st Dist. Cr. Cache Cty Utah 1988)
State alleged Hitachi and its distributors had coerced certain dealers into raising their prices by means of a concerted refusal to deal.
Utah v. Evans Broadcasting, 963 P.2d 177 (Utah 1998); 1998-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) 72, 192, No. 980800622 (8th Jud. Dist. Ct., Uintah Cty. 1998)
State alleged that radio stations owned by family members were conspiring to monopolize radio advertising in the Uintah Basin of Utah.
Michigan v. C.R. Equipment Sales, Inc. (W.D. Mich. Nov. 1994)
State filed suit against school bus distributors after guilty pleas in federal investigaiton. Distributors settled for $1.3 million damages and injunctive relief.
FTC and Puerto Rico v. College of Physician-Surgeons of Puerto Rico, No. 971 0011(D.P.R. Oct. 2. 1997)
Puerto Rico College of Physician surgeons sought to act on behalf of all Puerto Rico doctors to raise prices paid by the state for indigent care, and called for a strike which resulted in increaed hospital costs for consumers.
Connecticut v. Mylan Laboratories, Inc. (In re Lorazepam & Clorazepate Antitrust Litigation), MDL No. 1290 (D.D.C. June 15, 2000) 205 F.R.D. 369 (D.D.C. 2002); No. 98 CV 3115 (D.D.C. 2000) – complaint
Plaintiff States alleged that Mylan Laboratories, Inc.(Mylan) and other drug companies entered into illegal agreements to monopolize the market for certain generic anti-anxiety drugs.
Maine v. Omsberg, Kennebec Superior Court, May 27,1995
State alleged that neurosurgeon solicited another neurosurgeon to refuse to deal with managed care plans
Colorado v. Rocky Mountain Paint & Body et al.
Plaintiff state reached settlement with auto body shops in Longmont Colorado to resolve allegations that they agreed to set prices for auto body work.
U.S. and Arizona v. Delta Dental Plan of Arizona
Joint US/Arizona settlement with statewide dantal plan to eliminate most favored nation clause from contract with participating dentists
Missouri ex rel. Nixon v. Ware-Klump Oil Co. of Missouri, Inc.; 1994-2 Trade Cases ¶ 70,717
Action brought under Motor Fuel Marketing Act and Missouri Antitrust Act against seller of motor fuel and motor fuel jobber alleging sale of motor fuel below cost causing the unlawful effects described by the Motor Fuel Marketing Act. Consent injunction enjoined future violations and ordered reimbursement for costs of investigation.
Utah v. University of Utah, Civ No. 940901730M (Utah D. Ct., 3rd Dist., Salt Lake Cnty. filed 3/16/94).
State settled allegations against state university, which had been involved in a conspiracy by eight Utah hospitals to fix wages of registered nurses and fix physician prices.
