Legal Opinion
In Re Cardizem CD Antitrust Litigation
District Court, E.D. Michigan
Decided October 15, 1999No. 99-md-1278, MDL No. 1278PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTIONS FOR REMAND
EDMUNDS, District Judge.
Plaintiffs in these consolidated cases brought class-action suits in state court against Defendants Hoechst Aktiengesells-chaft, Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc. (“Hoechst”), and Andrx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Andrx”) alleging that Defendants have violated various state antitrust and related laws, have conspired and entered into arrangements that' have effectively prevented any lower-cost generic version of a prescription heart medication, known as Cardizem CD, from entering the…
2Cases cited50 opinions
- City of Chicago v. International College of SurgeonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Thompson Ex Rel. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Dugan v. RankSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- In Re Ford Motor Company Citibank South Dakota)Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- McCauley v. Ford Motor Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- Tom Everett v. Verizon Wireless, Inc., Dobson Cellular Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2006
- In re Cardizem CD Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2003
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.