Anthem, Cigna Pay $3M in Legal Fees to States That Sued to Block Merger
The plaintiff states will divide the settlement funds. California, Connecticut, New York, Georgia and the District of Columbia were among the states that challenged the proposed $54 billion tie-up.
April 06, 2018 at 01:41 PM
4 minute read
Eleven states and the District of Columbia will receive nearly $3 million in legal fees as part of an agreement following antitrust litigation that successfully blocked the proposed $54 billion merger of Anthem Inc. and Cigna Corp.
California, Connecticut, New York, Georgia and the District of Columbia were among the states that challenged the proposed tie-up in Washington federal district court. The settlement agreement says the $2.975 million payment for fees and costs will be paid to the state of Maryland, which “will be responsible for disbursing the funds to the other plaintiff states as they may agree among themselves.”
Messages left with Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh's office were not immediately returned Friday.
Lawyers for the plaintiff states filed a proposed order in Washington federal district court on Thursday announcing the fee settlement. The amount of the fees did not appear in the proposed order “at the request of Anthem and Cigna,” lawyers for the plaintiff states said in the court filing.
Charles Rule at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, a lawyer for Cigna, was not immediately reached for comment. Anthem's lead trial attorney, Christopher Curran of White & Case, also was not immediately reached.
Thomas Zielinski, the general counsel to Indianapolis-based Anthem, signed the settlement with Nicole Jones, general counsel to Bloomfield, Connecticut-based Cigna. The companies agreed to split the payment equally.
The state plaintiffs in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Justice sued in July 2016 in Washington federal district court to block the deal. The proposed merger would have created the largest health insurance company in the country. The plaintiffs argued at trial that competition creates innovation.
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the District of Columbia blocked the merger in February 2017. The insurance giants quickly appealed the ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and then petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court. When the high court denied the petition in June 2017, Aetna and Cigna abandoned their merger plans.
George Jepsen, the Connecticut attorney general, said in 2016 that his office had spent a year working with law enforcement counterparts to review the proposed merger. Rachel Davis, an assistant attorney general, was a lead trial lawyer for Connecticut in the case.
That work, Jepsen said, included “conducting numerous stakeholder interviews, joining in multiple depositions of party representatives, reviewing thousands of documents and participating in meetings with both parties.” Jepsen said in a statement then: “This merger would substantially lessen competition for the provision of health care insurance services.”
Then-California Attorney General Kamala Harris said in a statement at the time the lawsuit was filed: “We must not allow insurance companies to grow their profits at the expense of consumers. By joining this lawsuit, I urge the court to block this proposed merger.”
A message to California Deputy Attorney General Paula Gibson, a signatory on the agreement with other lawyers for the state plaintiffs, was also not returned.
Mike Scarcella contributed reporting from Washington.
The settlement agreement is posted below:
Read more:
Anthem Loses DC Circuit Bid to Revive $54B Cigna Merger
Blocking Anthem-Cigna Merger, Judge Says Internal Discord Didn't Help Deal
Responding to 'Merger Wave,' Feds and States Sue to Block Health Tie-Ups
Judge Refuses Fee Award to State AGs in Staples – Office Depot Antitrust Case
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Something Else Is Coming': DOGE Established, but With Limited Scope
Supreme Court Considers Reviving Lawsuit Over Fatal Traffic Stop Shooting
US DOJ Threatens to Prosecute Local Officials Who Don't Aid Immigration Enforcement
3 minute readUS Judge Cannon Blocks DOJ From Releasing Final Report in Trump Documents Probe
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Chief Judge Joins Panel Exploring Causes for Public's Eroding Faith in NY Legal System
- 2Pogo Stick Maker Wants Financing Company to Pay $20M After Bailing Out Client
- 3Goldman Sachs Secures Dismissal of Celebrity Manager's Lawsuit Over Failed Deal
- 4Trump Moves to Withdraw Applications to Halt Now-Completed Sentencing
- 5Trump's RTO Mandate May Have Some Gov't Lawyers Polishing Their Resumes
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250