Part III Administrative Complaint
An administrative law judge upheld an administrative complaint that charged a group of affiliated intrastate movers with engaging in horizontal price-fixing by filing collective rates on behalf of its member motor common carriers for the intrastate transportation of property within the Commonwealth of Kentucky. The judge also ruled that the association’s conduct was not protected by the state action doctrine because the State of Kentucky did not supervise the rate-making practices of the group. On July 12, 2004, the Kentucky Household Goods Carriers Association, Inc. filed an appeal of the initial decision with the Commission. The oral argument was held January 24, 2005. On June 22, 2005, the Commission issued a unanimous opinion upholding the Initial Decision finding that the Kentucky Household Goods Carriers Association, Inc., consisting of competing firms, engaged in illegal price-fixing by jointly filing tariffs containing collective rates on behalf of its members, and that the state action doctrine does not immunize that activity from antitrust liability. On August 22, 2006, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the opinion of the Commission in Kentucky Household Goods Carriers Association, Inc., finding that the Association’s ratemaking activities constituted unlawful price fixing and were not exempt from the antitrust laws under the state action doctrine. The administrative complaint issued on July 8, 2003 by the Commission charged that the association composed of competing household goods movers filed collective rates for intrastate moving services in the state of Kentucky. According to the complaint, these activities were not protected under the state action doctrine and are not immune from federal antitrust scrutiny.