Without limiting section 35-26 , every contract, combination, or conspiracy is unlawful when the same are for the purpose, or have the effect, of: (a) Fixing, controlling, or maintaining prices, rates, quotations, or fees in any part of trade or commerce; (b) fixing, controlling, maintaining, limiting, or discontinuing the production, manufacture, mining, sale, or supply of any part of trade or commerce; (c) allocating or dividing customers or markets, either functional or geographical, in any part of trade or commerce; or (d) refusing to deal, or coercing, persuading, or inducing third parties to refuse to deal with another person.
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 35-28
Acts unlawful when purpose or effect is restraint of trade or commerce
Known as the Connecticut Antitrust Act
The act spans §§ 35–35 (29 sections).
Applied in 4 court decisions — leading case 618 F. Supp. 632 - McKeown Distributors, Inc. v. Gyp-Crete Corp. (1985)
Most recently applied in MacDermid Printing Solutions LLC v. Cortron Corp. (August 2016)
(1971, P.A. 608, S. 5.)
How often courts cite this section
Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.
Official source: Connecticut General Assembly. Reproduced from public-domain Connecticut statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.