Meyers v. Bayer AG, Bayer Corp.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1DissentPatience Drake Roggensack, J.
¶ 70. 0dissenting). The majority opinion concludes that the second amended complaint (the complaint) of the plaintiffs sufficiently alleges a violation of Wisconsin's antitrust law, Wis. Stat. § 133.03 (2005-06),1 to withstand a motion to dismiss. Majority op., ¶ 4. It does so based on the complaint's allegations that an agreement concerning ciprofloxacin hydrochloride between Bayer AG and Barr Laboratories, Inc. (the Bayer-Barr agreement)2 is a "price-fixing scheme" for ciprofloxacin hydrochloride that controlled the price for the drug "at any time since January 6, 1995." Id. The majority…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Illinois Brick Co. v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Precision Instrument Manufacturing Co. v. Automotive Maintenance MacHinery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Walker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food MacHinery & Chemical Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1965
- United States v. General Electric Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Bement v. National Harrow Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1902
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.