W. Va. Code » §47-18-1. Short title.
West Virginia Code

W. Va. Code § 47-18-1 (2026)

Short title

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WV-LEGwvlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
ARTICLE 18. ANTITRUST ACT; RESTRAINT OF TRADE.

§47-18-1. Short title.

This article shall be known and may be cited as the "West Virginia Antitrust Act."

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1981–2024 · leading case: Sheet Metal Workers Local 441 Health & Welfare Plan v. Glaxosmithkline, PLC, 737 F. Supp. 2d 380 (E.D. Pa. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Sheet Metal Workers Local 441 Health & Welfare Plan v. Glaxosmithkline, PLC, 737 F. Supp. 2d 380 (E.D. Pa. 2010). “West Virginia Plaintiff the UA Plan asserts a cause of action under the West Virginia Antitrust Act (WVAA), codified at W. Va. Code § 47-18-1 , et seq. GSK argues this claim *401 must be dismissed because the statute only-covers anti-competitive conduct producing substantial…”
In re Warfarin Sodium Antitrust Litig., 212 F.R.D. 231 (D. Del. 2002). “; West Virginia Code, W. Va.Code §§ 47-18-1, et seq.; Wisconsin Stat.”
Kessel v. Monongalia Cnty. Gen. Hosp. Co., 648 S.E.2d 366 (W. Va. 2007). · cites it 2× “§ 47-18-1, et seq., (hereinafter the "WVATA").”
Princeton Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Erie Ins., 690 S.E.2d 587 (W. Va. 2009). · cites it 2× “See W.Va.Code §§ 47-18-1 to-23 (2006). 12 . The Fourth Circuit states the elements necessary to prove a section 1 violation as: "(1) a contract, combination or conspiracy; (2) that imposed an unreasonable restraint of trade.”
Pocahontas Supreme Coal Co. v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 828 F.2d 211 (4th Cir. 1987). · cites it 2× “, as well as West Virginia Antitrust Law, W.Va. Code §§ 47-18-1 et seq. Finally the complaint charged this general pattern of conduct as a civil claim under RICO, 18 U.”
Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Mylan Labs., Inc., 62 F. Supp. 2d 25 (D.D.C. 1999). “W. Va.Code §§ 47-18-1 et seq. (1998). Because neither the Act nor state case law expressly authorizes such relief, it is not available for the reasons discussed above.”
West Virginia Ex Rel. Mcgraw v. Comcast Corp., 705 F. Supp. 2d 441 (E.D. Pa. 2010). “The Complaint alleges that cable boxes with equivalent capabilities exist in the open market and that Comcast’s purported requirement that premium subscribers rent the boxes only from Comcast constitutes impermissible tying behavior in violation of the West Virginia Antitrust…”
Env't Prods. Co. v. Duncan, 285 S.E.2d 889 (W. Va. 1981). “His contract, therefore, did not alter any benefits, conditions or terms of employment; it only imposed limitations.”
In Re Warfarin Sodium Antitrust Litig., 391 F.3d 516 (3d Cir. 2004). “; W. Va.Code § 47-18-1, et seq.; Wis. Stat.”
In re Processed Egg Prods. Antitrust Litig., 931 F. Supp. 2d 654 (E.D. Pa. 2013). “December 2, 2004 for violations of the West Virginia Antitrust Act (W. Va.Code § 47-18-1 et seq.); 30. December 2, 2002 for violations of the Wisconsin Deceptive Trade Practices Act (Wis Stat.”
Anziulewicz v. Bluefield Cmty. Hosp., Inc., 531 F. Supp. 49 (S.D.W. Va 1981). “Code § 47-18-1 et seq., alleging that the defendants have conspired to restrain trade within the State of West Virginia by restricting the provision of the service of radiology at the defendant hospital.”
West Virginia ex rel. Morrisey v. Pfizer, Inc., 969 F. Supp. 2d 476 (S.D.W. Va 2013). · cites it 2× “The complaint alleges violations of the West Virginia Antitrust Act (‘WVAA”), W. Va.Code § 47-18-1 et seq., and the West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protection Act (“WVCCPA”), W.”
Show all 17 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.