Judge Richard P. Matsch granted summary judgment to Montrose County rejecting JetAway’s allegation that the county acted anticompetitively in awarding rival Jet Center Partners LLC a contract to operate the county’s small airport. The plaintiff alleged the count engaged in bid rigging by awarding the contract before issuing the RFP. But the court held that […]
Category Archives: US State Courts
DOJ Proseuction of Blue Cross of Michigan to Move Forward
June 30, 2011 – 1:41 pm
Update June 2011: Eastern District of Michigan Judge Denise Page Hood has denied a motion to dismiss the U.S. Department of Justice’s lawsuit against Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan. The antitrust suit alleges that the most-favored-nation clauses in the health insurance company’s contracts with hospitals have effectively immunized Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan from competition […]
E-bay Monopolization Case Dismissed
May 28, 2011 – 11:26 am
Update May 2011: The 9th Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision. Judge Jeremy Fogel, N.D. California, has granted summary judgment to E-bay in a case alleging that it monopolized the online auction market on the ground that the plaintiffs lacked antitrust injury. The court found that the plaintiffs had presented no evidence of either restricted output […]
California Drug Price Fixing Case Dismissed
May 11, 2011 – 5:16 pm
California Supreme Court Judge Stephen A. Brick dismissed a complaint filed by a group of pharmacies alleging that several drug manufacturers had conspired to increase drug prices. The case was initially dismissed on the ground that the pharmacies would have passed on any overcharge to their customers, but the California Supreme Court reversed that holding. […]
California Supreme Court refuses to grant review in predatory pricing Suit
January 17, 2011 – 12:12 am
The California Supreme Court refused to grant review, upholding a $21 million verdict against SF Weekly as a result of predatory pricing. Bay Guardian Co. Inc. had alleged that SF Weekly used profits from out-of-region papers to sell ad space below cost. The Defendants had appealed to the 1st Appellate District arguing that […]
Standard Setting Abuse Case to Move Forward
November 11, 2010 – 12:50 pm
Eastern District of Texas Judge Leonard Davis refused to dismiss Encore Wire Corp’s claim that competitor Southwire Inc. violated California state antitrust laws by lobbying for an industry standard without disclosing that it owned a patent that would be infringed by wire conforming to the standard. Southwire sought dismissal on the ground that the statute […]
New York Court Holds that State May Challenge Home Appraisal Conspiracy
August 19, 2010 – 1:52 pm
A New York state appellate court has held that the state may challenge on antitrust grounds alleged collusion between First America Corp. and Washington Mutual. The defendants had argued that the state challenge was preempted by federal regulation. The court held that the regulation does not extend to collusion relating to appraisals.
California Appeals Court Distinguishes Federal Law in Upholding Predatory Pricing Verdict
August 19, 2010 – 12:54 pm
In a predatory pricing case between rival newspapers, a California state appellate court affirmed most of the verdict favoring the plaintiff. It rejected the defendant’s argument that the plaintiff had failed to show that the defendant could recoup its losses. The court held that although federal antitrust law requires a recoupment standard, California state law […]
California Rejects Pass-on Defense
August 17, 2010 – 10:04 am
The California Supreme Court has followed federal law in rejecting the pass-on defense, i.e. the argument that a defendant is not liable to a direct purchasing plaintiff for anticompetitive overcharges because the plaintiff passed on the overcharge to indirect purchasers. The court recognized two exceptions: (1) for cost-plus contracts that essentially require the direct purchaser […]
Private Challenge to Nestle Acquisition Dismissed
July 26, 2010 – 3:36 pm
Judge Savador Casellas, District of Puerto Rico, dismissed a challenge to Nestle’s acquisition of an ice cream distributor in Puerto Rico on the ground that because ice cream sales increased while prices remanded stable the plaintiff could not demonstrate antitrust injury.