Legal Library: Cases and Proceedings

After an administrative trial, the administrative law judge found that a group of affiliated intrastate movers had engaged 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. On June 22, 2005, the Commission issued a unanimous opinion finding that the Kentucky Household Goods Carriers Association, Inc. 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.

The complaint alleged that Scott R. Sacane, a Connecticut hedge fund manager, failed to comply with notification and waiting period requirements before making acquisitions of two companies through an investment fund that he controlled. Sacane eventually held more than 50 percent of the voting securities of Aksys Ltd. and more than $100 million of voting securities of Esperion Therapeutics, Inc., without complying with the HSR Act. Under the terms of a consent decree filed simultaneously with the suit, Sacane agreed to pay a civil penalty of $350,000 to settle the charges.

Cemex S.A. agreed to settle concerns stemming from its proposed $5.8 billion acquisition of RMC Group PLC. Under terms of the proposed consent order, Cemex will divest RMC's five ready-mix concrete plants in the Tucson, Arizona area, at no minimum price to a Commission- approved buyer.

The Commission settled charges with two small groups of orthopedic physicians in the Cincinnati area that had formed an independent practice association that jointly negotiated contracts regarding the rates its physician members would charge health plans and other payors for their services. In addition to the usual prohibitions on joint negotiations, the Commission’s order disbanded the IPA and prohibited future collective bargaining.

With an administrative complaint issued on July 8, 2003 the Commission charged a San Francisco, California physicians’ organization with engaging in an agreement under which its competing members agreed collectively on the price and other terms on which they would enter into contracts with health plans or other third party payers. The complaint also alleged that Brown and Toland directed its physicians to end their preexisting contracts with payers and required its physician members to charge specified prices in all Preferred Provider Organization contracts. A final consent order prohibits Brown and Toland from negotiating with payers on behalf of physicians, refusing to deal with payers, and setting terms for physicians to deal with payers, unless the physicians are clinically or financially integrated.