Claims Dismissed in Insurer Class Action
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 04.09.07
On April 9, 2007, Judge Garret E. Brown of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey dismissed bid-rigging claims brought against Marsh & McLennan Cos. Inc. and several other insurance brokers and providers in a long-running, multidistrict class action lawsuit. The judge dismissed all of the plaintiffs' claims without prejudice, finding that they had not submitted enough evidence to prove that the alleged conspiracies between insurance companies and brokers were illegal. The plaintiffs alleged the defendants participated in broker-centered conspiracies that aimed to allocate customers and reduce competition. The plaintiffs alleged that the conspiracies date back to the mid-1990’s, when insurance brokers consolidated their markets.
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 10.30.26
Recent sustain decisions by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) in Fluor Federal Solutions, LLC and Reliance Test & Technology send a clear message: when an agency tries to fix a Procurement Integrity Act (PIA) violation by committing a second one, the cure can be just as fatal as the disease. The cases involved the U.S. Air Force’s $1.8 billion procurement for O&M services at Elgin Air Force Base. During discussions, the Air Force inadvertently released a pricing overview slide with all offerors’ bottom-line evaluated costs to Reliance Test & Technology, which immediately notified the agency of the error. In response, the Air Force decided to level the playing field by providing the same information to all the other offerors in the procurement, stating, “[o]fferors may consider this disclosure in their [final proposal revision].”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.29.26
What University Licensors Should Learn From TexasLDPC v. Broadcom
Client Alert | 2 min read | 10.28.26
Debriefing to Dead Briefing: How to Avoid Dismissal by Identifying “Required” Debriefings
