CAR_Public/061013.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Friday, October 13, 2006, Vol. 8, No. 204

                            Headlines

ARISTOCRAT LEISURE: Investors' Fraud Suit Continues in Australia
CALIFORNIA: Court Upholds Tuition Fee Law; Plaintiffs to Appeal
CANADA: Pinel Fails to Block Swiss Ethics Report in Abuse Suit
CHALLENGER MANAGED: Investors Sue Over Failed Penrith Purchase
C.H. ROBINSON: Faces Sexual Harassment Litigation in S.D. Ohio

CYBERSOURCE CORP: Ill. Judge to Hear Motion for Summary Judgment
DENMARK: Minister Presents Parliament with Class Action Bill
DIOCESE OF COVINGTON: Court Orders New Case for Attorneys' Fees
ENCYSIVE PHARMACEUTICALS: Faces Securities Fraud Lawsuit in Tex.
ILLINOIS: Ill. Judge Junks Claims in Dist. U46 Racial Bias Suit

INDIANA COMPANIES: Federal Suit Filed Over House-Flipping Scheme
MERCK & CO: Vioxx Users Refused Legal Standing in America
MICROSOFT CORP: Wants "Conlin" Out of Consumer Antitrust Suit
NEWS-PRESS: Ex-Reporter Files Labor Violations Suit in Calif.
NTL INC: Oct. 23 Fairness Hearing Set for N.Y. Stock Suit Deal

PAINCARE HOLDINGS: Continues to Face Securities Suits in Fla.
PHILIP SERVICES: Ga. Court Allows Lawyers to Contact Plaintiffs
QWEST COMMUNICATIONS: Court Awards $60M to Counsel in Stock Suit
QWEST COMMUNICATIONS: Retirees Oppose Dismissal of ERISA Lawsuit
SONY BMG: Quebec Court Approves XCP, MediaMax Lawsuit Settlement

TECO ENERGY: Fla. Court Partially Dismisses Stock Fraud Suit
TORCHMARK INC: Court Rules on Cancer Policies Suit Jurisdiction
UNITED STATES: MNG Reimbursement Suit Continues in Federal Court
WILLIAMS PRODUCTION: Faces Col. Lawsuit Over Unpaid Royalties
WORLDCOM INC: Third Party Claims Fund Termination Date Extended

* Schiffrin & Barroway Fortifies European Securities Practice


                         Asbestos Alert

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Claims v. Ameron International Drop to 149
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Conn. Court Upholds Wing Suit v. HB Fuller
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: H.B. Fuller Accrues $992T for Liabilities
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Pending Claims v. GenCorp Increase to 155
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Tex. Court Favors Armco Inc. in Brooks Suit

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: La. Court Favors Eaton Corp in Britton Suit
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: N.Y. Court Reverses Decision in Leeber Suit
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court Rejects Grace Appeal in $54M Cleanup
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Fla. City Okays Settlement in CARES Lawsuit
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ex-worker Fears Exposure in Trebor Factory

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: NSW Govt. Rejects Alternative Hardie Scheme
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Council Says 200 U.K. Schools Have Hazards
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: WCB Hits Snag in Quest for Ex-Grace Workers
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Armstrong World to Allocate $738M to Trust
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Suits v. RPM Int'l. Units Rise to 10,934

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: RPM Int'l. Records $58.5M Current Liability
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ind. Man's Kin Sues 96 Firms in Ill. Court
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Man Appeals for Payout Bid v. Bromley NHS
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 5-Year Freeze on U.K. Compensation Lifted
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Minn. Man Sues 77 Companies in Ill. Court

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: U.K. Man Gets T&N Payout for Wife's Death
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Eternit Creates CHF1.25M Fund for Employees
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: EPA Charges $49T Penalty to 5 Ariz. Schools
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Japan Govt Offers Medical Exams to Retirees
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Eli Lilly & Co. to Launch Alimta in India


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

LOUDEYE CORP: Howard G. Smith Announces Wash. Stock Suit Filing
LOUDEYE CORP: Scott + Scott Files Securities Fraud Suit in Wash.
TVIA INC: Faces Securities Fraud Violations Lawsuit in Calif.


                            *********


ARISTOCRAT LEISURE: Investors' Fraud Suit Continues in Australia
----------------------------------------------------------------
The respondents' defense in a class action against Australian
slot machine maker Aristocrat Leisure Ltd. has been received and
the lawyers are seeking further particulars in the case,
according to information posted in the Web site of deListed, a
division of BRG Pacific Pty Limited.

In 2003, Maurice Blackburn Cashman Lawyers and litigation
company IMF Australia, Ltd. confirmed it filed a class action
writ against Aristocrat Leisure alleging that the company's
market forecasts were false and misleading and that it failed to
disclose all material information in a timely manner.

The lawsuit alleges that the company misled shareholders by not
keeping them fully informed before announcing earnings
downgrades that wiped $1.5 billion (AU$2 billion) from the
company's value in 2003.  The lawsuit claims damages of $86.37
million (AU$115 million) for losses when shareholders sold their
stock.

The case was transferred to the Federal Court in Sydney.  Later,
the applicant applied to amend the class definition to delete
the requirement that a group member must retain Maurice
Blackburn Cashman to be a part of the class.

This application was successful and the class definition was
amended so that the case now applies to any person who acquired
shares in Aristocrat during the period Sept. 20, 2002 to May 26,
2003 and who suffered loss as a consequence of Aristocrat
alleged conduct.

The Statement of Claim has been amended to claim losses incurred
by shareholders who purchased shares between Feb. 19, 2002
(previously Sept. 20, 2002) and 26 May 2003.

Aristocrat Leisure: 71 Longueville Road, Lane Cove, NSW,
Australia, 2066, Phone: (02) 9413 6300, Fax: (02) 9420 1352.


CALIFORNIA: Court Upholds Tuition Fee Law; Plaintiffs to Appeal
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Yolo County Superior Court upheld a 2001 California law that
allows public colleges and universities to charge in-state fees
to undocumented immigrants, but plaintiffs' attorneys vow to
appeal that decision.

The law is the subject of a class action filed last December on
behalf of out-of-state students who claimed that giving certain
undocumented immigrants an in-state tuition break discriminated
against legal U.S. residents who are charged a higher tuition.

The class action was filed by former representative Brian
Bilbray and his two college-age children against California's
higher-education system.  Mr. Bilbray accuses the system of
discriminating students who were forced to pay out-of-state
tuition rates because undocumented immigrants who met residency
requirements were eligible for in-state tuition rates (Class
Action Reporter, May 26, 2006).

The suit alleges violation of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, which essentially
prohibits states from giving college benefits to illegal
immigrants unless U.S. citizens and legal immigrants are
eligible for such benefits, such as in-state tuition.

However, Judge Thomas Warriner concluded that there was no
indication Congress intended the Act or any other federal
statute cited by the plaintiffs to determine resident tuition
rates at state universities and community colleges.

Plaintiffs' attorneys said they would appeal the ruling.  Kris
Kobach, an attorney for the Immigration Reform Law Institute,
said the challenge will be filed within the next few weeks in
the 3rd District Court of Appeal in Sacramento.

For more details, contact Kris W. Kobach, Professor, University
of Missouri - Kansas City School of Law, 5100 Rockhill Road,
Kansas City, Missouri 64110, Phone: 816-235-1644, 816-235-5276.


CANADA: Pinel Fails to Block Swiss Ethics Report in Abuse Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
A judge refused to grant Philippe-Pinel Institute's request for
an injunction against a controversial Swiss report that
attorneys say is key to a case against the maximum-security
psychiatric hospital, CBC News reports.

The report, from a Swiss psychiatrist and ethics expert,
concludes that the psychiatric hospital broke basic ethical
guidelines and treated the former patients inhumanely when they
stayed at the institute.

Philippe-Pinel had wanted to bar the report, arguing it reflects
European standards that aren't binding in Quebec.  It also cited
that the report could be damaging to the institution's
reputation.

A former patient that was hospitalized at Philippe-Pinel in 2001
filed the lawsuit.  The case is now being pursued as a class
action on behalf of about hundreds of former patients at the
institute.

Ian-Kristian Ladouceur, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs,
said as many as 600 other former patients are claiming to have
been subjected to similar treatment during stays that spanned a
four-year period between 1999 and 2002.

When the patient who initiated the suit was released from
hospital, he consulted a mental health advocacy group.  The
Quebec court accepted the class action he filed in 2003, however
the claims have not been proven in a court of law.

Mr. Ladouceur explained that in the course of the case expert
opinions were sought and Montreal psychiatrists urged the legal
team to consult with the Swiss psychiatrist, who wrote a report
that characterized the patients' treatment as excessive and
unreasonably controlling.

Mr. Ladouceur said court proceedings are expected to start
within the year.

For more details, contact Ian-Kristian Ladouceur of Doyon,
Guertin, Montbriand & Plamondon, 6337 Rue Saint Denis, Montreal,
PQ H2S 2R8, Canada, Phone: (514) 277-4077.


CHALLENGER MANAGED: Investors Sue Over Failed Penrith Purchase
--------------------------------------------------------------
Maurice Blackburn Cashman filed on Sept. 13 a multi-million
dollar class action against Challenger Managed Investments Ltd.
in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Australia.

Challenger Managed Investments Ltd. is part of Challenger
Financial Services Group, a leading Australian financial
services company.

A group of investors have come forward to file the class action
to recover losses sustained after Challenger purchased the
Penrith Mega Homemaker Centre in Sydney's western suburbs, with
funds raised from the public.

The investors are alleging that Challenger misled them to invest
in the Centre by issuing a prospectus that did not warn them of
some very significant risks associated with the Centre.

There are at least another thousand people whose money was used
by Challenger to purchase the Centre and who probably don't yet
know about the action, a statement from Maurice Blackburn
states.  It is believed that 1600 people invested a total of
almost $32 million in the Trust that purchased the Centre, and
each investor lost about 60 cents in every dollar invested after
the Centre was recently sold at a loss of around $10 million.

Maurice Blackburn Cashman Principal, Rebecca Gilsenan, today
said:  "Thousands of family investors entrusted their retirement
savings to a reputable company like Challenger.  However,
Challenger failed investors by not providing critical
information in the prospectus about Council restrictions that
affected the economic viability of the centre.  Challenger did
not provide investors with the information that they needed to
make an informed decision about whether to invest their savings
in the scheme.

Anyone who invested in the Penrith Mega Homemaker Centre between
November 2002 and December 2003 should come forward and stand up
for their rights as investors."

Barbara O'Sullivan, a 70 year old widow who invested $145,000
and the lead plaintiff in the class action, said:  "I'm retired
and responsible with my savings, and it just makes me cranky to
think that this big investment company didn't tell me vital
information before I made the decision to invest my savings.
It's not only me who has been affected; my children and
grandchildren have lost their inheritance."

Ms. O'Sullivan suffered losses of at least $87,000.

Charlie Gollow, Litigation Manager with IMF (Australia), who is
funding the legal costs of the class action, said:  "It's hard
for small investors, who often have already lost their lifetime
savings, to come together to mount expensive legal cases.  IMF's
funding will provide access to justice for these investors.  The
start of this class action is another signal that many people
are willing to enforce their statutory rights and will no longer
put up with being victims of this type of corporate behavior."

Maurice Blackburn: http://www.mauriceblackburncashman.com.au


C.H. ROBINSON: Faces Sexual Harassment Litigation in S.D. Ohio
--------------------------------------------------------------
C.H. Robinson Worldwide was named as a defendant in a purported
sexual harassment class action filed in U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of Ohio, The Cincinnati Enquirer reports.

The suit is on of many that were filed by women who work for or
used to work for the Minneapolis-based transportation logistics
company.  These suits generally allege that the women were
subjected to a male-dominated work place where pornography, sex
jokes and sexually disparaging remarks were the norm.

The latest suit, filed by Denise Smith on Oct. 6, 2006, states
that she worked at Robinson's depot in Milford from June 2002
until the day she "felt compelled to resign" in May 2004.
Attorneys Bruce Elfvin of Cleveland and Kell Simon of
Washington, D.C., are Ms. Smith's legal representatives.

Ms. Smith's complaint alleges that she endured an environment
that she claims amounted to sexual harassment where male
employees gathered around computers to view Web sites with
images of naked women; and an assistant branch manager and
another employee repeatedly sang a phrase referring to oral sex.

Also, she claims, in the course of doing her job of calling
people to schedule freight loads, she was given fake names
descriptive of sexual acts.  Managers and male workers,
allegedly, regularly used derogatory words to describe women.

Thus, the suit seeks an unspecified amount of back pay, punitive
damages, lawyers' fees and reinstatement for Ms. Smith to her
job.

The company has vehemently denied the claims.  According to
company spokeswoman Angie Freeman they do not have a hostile
work environment.

The suit is "Smith v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide Inc., Case No.
1:06-cv-00672-HJW," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Ohio under Judge Herman J. Weber.

Representing the plaintiffs are Bruce B. Elfvin and Barbara Kay
Besser of Elfvin & Besser, 4070 Mayfield Road, Cleveland, OH
44121, Phone: 216-382-2500, Fax: 216-381-0250, E-mail:
bbe@elfvinbesser.com and babslaw@aol.com.


CYBERSOURCE CORP: Ill. Judge to Hear Motion for Summary Judgment
----------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Daniel Stack of the Madison County Circuit Court set an
Oct. 25 hearing on a request by Cybersource Corp. for summary
judgment in a purported class action filed against it by former
employee, The St. Clair Record reports.

In 2000, PaylinX agreed to merge into Cybersource, a public
company that helps businesses process payment transactions over
the Internet.  Under the merger, PaylinX share options would
turn into an option to buy shares of Cybersource.  Half the
Cybersource shares would accelerate or vest when the merger
closed.  It closed Sept. 18, 2000, with company stock at $10.75.
But, at the stock conversion in November, it had dwindled to
$1.85.

In 2002, John Hoffman of Korein Tillery filed a lawsuit on
behalf of Brian Wilgus, a test engineer for PaylinX, claiming
that a delay in converting stock prevented Mr. Wilgus and others
from immediately exercising their options.  Also, Mr. Hoffman
claims that the company failed to establish necessary E-trade
accounts.  The suit proposed a class action on behalf of about
75 former PaylinX employees at Cybersource.

Judge Phillip Kardis certified the suit in 2004.  He retired
last year and this year the case was assigned to Judge Stack.

Cybersource attorney Alan Goldstein of St. Louis moved on Aug.
31, 2006 for summary judgment.

Mr. Goldstein questions whether Mr. Wilgus did in fact exercises
his option, and if he did, he did not suffer from the share
price drop between Sept. 18 and Oct. 20, 2000 because a
"blackout" on that period to prevent illegal insider trading was
in place.

"Because of the blackout, no one at Cybersource who owned
company stock could sell shares, while the share price was
dropping from $10.75 to less than $6.50 between Sept. 18 and
Oct. 20, 2000," Mr. Goldstein wrote.

For more details, contact:

     (1) [Plaintiff] John Hoffman of Korein Tillery, LLC,
         Gateway on the Mall, 701 Market Street, Suite 300, St.
         Louis, MO 63101, Phone: (314) 241-4844, Fax: (314) 588-
         7036; and

     (2) [Defendant] Alan K. Goldstein of Goldstein and Price,
         L.C., One Memorial Drive, Suite 1000, St. Louis, MO
         63102-2449, Phone: (314) 421-0710, Fax: (314) 421-2832
         and (314) 421-6150.


DENMARK: Minister Presents Parliament with Class Action Bill
------------------------------------------------------------
Denmark's Minister of Justice Lene Espersen has presented a bill
to parliament that would allow filing of class actions in the
country, The Copenhagen Post reports.

Class actions, which permit people with identical claims to sue
collectively, will help consumers with complaints too small to
otherwise warrant an individual trial, according to Mr.
Espersen.  He adds that consumers should be able to find
strength in numbers when they feel cheated.

Despite business groups' concern over the introduction of this
type of litigation, Mr. Espersen believes that it would make it
possible for consumers to seek justice in cases that would
otherwise be too expensive to pursue on an individual basis.

Additionally, the justice minister pointed out that class
actions would be "a very effective tool to ensure that groups of
consumers with similar complaints can band together to take on a
company they believe has sold a product that doesn't work."

Still, companies led by the Confederation of Danish Industries,
worry that introducing such lawsuits will force them to
unnecessarily settle out of court in order to avoid drawn out
court battles.


DIOCESE OF COVINGTON: Court Orders New Case for Attorneys' Fees
---------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Robert McGinnis in Boone Circuit Court ordered plaintiff
attorneys for a sex abuse case against the Diocese of Covington
to file a new lawsuit separate from the diocesan suit to
determine awards for attorneys, The Cincinnati Post reports.

Judge McGinnis was assigned to the case in September after the
resignation of Senior Judge John Potter.

Lawyer Stan Chesley filed the class action in Boone County
Circuit Court in 2003, claiming 21 priests and some other
workers abused more than 150 victims in the Diocese of Covington
for decades while church officials did nothing to stop the
misconduct (Class Action Reporter, Feb. 18, 2003).

According to court filings, from about 1956, information on the
sexual abuse of minors by diocesan priests has been concealed
from the public, including parents of children in schools and
parishes where the alleged perpetrators were assigned, as well
as from family members of employees of the diocese.

In July 2005, the court initially approved a $85 million
settlement.  On Jan. 31, Judge Potter finally approved the
settlement with 361 victims.  The agreement calls for plaintiffs
to receive between $5,000 and $1 million based on the severity
and duration of the abuse they suffered.  The first monetary
awards were distributed to victims in September (Class Action
Reporter, Sept. 15, 2006).

The distribution of the settlement is being handled by special
masters William Burleigh, chairman of the board of the E.W.
Scripps Co., and Thomas D. Lambros of Ashtabula, former chief
federal judge in the Northern District of Ohio.

Judge Potter awarded plaintiff attorneys $18.5 million in fees
in May, but Mr. Chesley had refused to give another attorney,
Brenda Dahlenburg Bonar, a share.  Ms. Bonar argues that she is
entitled part of the fees for her efforts in the initiation,
prosecution and ultimate settlement of the case.  The initial
two plaintiffs in the case that eventually became a class action
were her clients, as well as 13 of the original class members.


ENCYSIVE PHARMACEUTICALS: Faces Securities Fraud Lawsuit in Tex.
----------------------------------------------------------------
A second purported class action complaint was filed in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Texas by the law
firm Hoeffner and Bilek LLP on behalf of Gustav R. Bastian and
all other similarly situated investors against Encysive
Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Named defendants in the suit are:

     -- Encysive Pharmaceuticals Inc.;
     -- Bruce D. Given, M.D., president and chief executive;
     -- Richard A.F. Dixon, senior vice president, research and
        chief scientific officer; and
     -- Stephen L. Mueller, former vice president, finance and
        administration, secretary and treasurer.

The complaint alleges violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Securities and Exchange
Commission Rule 10b-5, and focuses on statements that are
claimed to be false and misleading regarding the company's drug
sitaxsentan sodium.

The plaintiff seeks unspecified damages on behalf of a purported
class of purchasers of the company's securities during the
period from Feb. 19, 2004 through March 24, 2006.

On Sept. 26, 2006, a similar complaint against the same
defendants was filed by Massachusetts Laborers Annuity Fund.

In a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission,
the Houston-based firm said it is possible that additional
complaints may be filed in the future.  The company expects that
these individual lawsuits will be consolidated into a single
civil action.

The company believes that the allegations in these cases are
without merit and intends to defend all such litigation
vigorously.

The suit is "Bastian v. Encysive Pharmaceuticals Inc et al.,
Case No. 4:06-cv-03205," filed in the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of Texas under Judge Gray H. Miller.

Representing the plaintiffs is Thomas E. Bilek of Hoeffner and
Bilek LLP, 1000 Louisiana, Suite 1302, Houston, TX 77002, Phone:
713-227-7720, Fax: 713-227-9404, E-mail: tbilek@hb-legal.com.


ILLINOIS: Ill. Judge Junks Claims in Dist. U46 Racial Bias Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman partly granted on Oct. 6
Elgin School District U46's motion to dismiss plaintiffs' claims
in the bias lawsuit filed against it, The Courier News reports.

The court dismissed claims concerning the district's alternative
high school program, because sole plaintiff Ashley Ivy graduated
from the Gifford Street High School in the spring.

The remaining claims pertains to allegations that the district
is engaged in a long-standing practice of discriminating against
minorities through closing schools with substantial minority
populations, failing to improve some of those schools and
building news schools away from communities with concentrations
of minority students, among others, the report said.

A black family and a Hispanic family in Elgin filed the suit in
2005 to complain about the closure of Illinois Park Elementary
School in 2004.

The suit plans to seek relief for all Hispanic and black
students who claim they were discriminated against in
assignments, transportation, school closings and educational
programs.

In March Judge Gettleman refused to certify the lawsuit, saying
the complaint must be narrowed, or the plaintiff list must be
expanded to accommodate all of the issues listed to get class
certification.  Plaintiffs in the suit filed an amended
complaint on May 12.  In June, the district filed a request that
the lawsuit be dismissed.  In July, plaintiffs attorney
responded to that request and defended the suit's compliance
with court requirements.

The revised suit added two Hispanic families and an African-
American family alleging unfair treatment of their children by
the Elgin public schools (Class Action Reporter, May 17, 2006).
It is filed on the behalf of 18 students and their parents:
Tracy McFadden, Marielena Montoya, Griselda Burciaga, Beverly
Ivy and Irma Sifuentes.

The school district was ordered to answer the plaintiffs' second
amended complaint by Oct. 23.  A hearing for the matter will be
held at 9 a.m. Nov. 2.

The court has not yet made a decision to certify the suit as a
class action.

The suit is "McFadden et al. v. Board of Education for Illinois
School District U-46," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois under Judge Robert W. Gettleman.
Representing the plaintiffs is Carol Rose Ashley of Futterman &
Howard, Chtd., 122 South Michigan Ave., Suite 1850, Chicago, IL
60603, Phone: (312) 427-3600, E-mail:
cashley@futtermanhoward.com.

Representing the defendants is Patricia J. Whitten of Franczek
Sullivan, P.C., 300 South Wacker Drive, Suite 3400, Chicago, IL
60606-6785, Phone: (312) 986-0300, E-mail: pjw@franczek.com.


INDIANA COMPANIES: Federal Suit Filed Over House-Flipping Scheme
----------------------------------------------------------------
Two women filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Indiana over an alleged real estate fraud
scam, The Martinsville Bulletin reports.

The seven-count suit filed claims that two Henry County
residents recruited others into a house-flipping scheme.  It is
seeking to recover monetary damages and losses resulting from
the incident.

In addition, it also seeks to be considered as a class action,
which could then include all the people claiming to be victims
of the scam.

The two plaintiffs named in the suit are Amelia Watkins and
Linda K. Hairston of Virginia.  According to court documents,
the women filed the suit "on their own behalf and on behalf of
others" involved in the alleged scheme.

Named as defendants in the case are:

      -- Sharon Penn, Henry County resident;
      -- Buelah Penn, Henry County resident;
      -- Robert Penn (Buelah Penn's son);
      -- ACE Appraisal Services;
      -- Frederick Bauter;
      -- Brown Funding Inc.;
      -- Brian Carrington;
      -- EU Group, LLC;
      -- Griffin Group, LLC;
      -- Land Economics, LLC;
      -- People's Trust Mortgage, LLC (doing business as
         People's Choice Mortgage);
      -- Amy Pollard;
      -- Robert Pollard;
      -- Susan L. Ruhana;
      -- Tamara Scott-Penn (Robert Penn's wife);
      -- Showhomes Property Management, LLC;
      -- KTD Enterprises, Inc.;
      -- Excel Realty Group, LLC;
      -- Homevestors, LLC; Realty Options, LLC; and
      -- Jerry Jaquess.

In particular, the suit alleges that defendants defraud mortgage
lenders by recruiting people into what they thought was an
investment club.  The scheme involves enticing straw borrowers
to join the club with a promise that they could profitably buy
investment real estate in Indiana.  A straw borrower is when the
personal information of someone other than the borrower is used
to secure a loan.

Te real estate investment club was to secure the mortgages for
the properties on terms that would not require down payments or
cash contributions of any kind from members of the investment
club.  Mr. Penn and his associates were to rent the investment
properties and manage them at no cost to club members, and those
members were not actual owners of the properties or responsible
for mortgage payments.  The rental income would supposedly be
used to make those payments and club members would profit from
the investments, while their credit ratings would be "enhanced."

However, according to the suit, those representations were
false.  The mortgage loan applications containing
misrepresentations or material omissions were submitted to a
lender on behalf of members of the investment club.  The loan
applications, the suit claims, did not state that the properties
were worth much less than the values attributed to them in
fraudulent appraisals.  In the end, victims are stuck with
mortgages on properties that were worth far less than the loans
that were obtained to purchase them.

Russ Sipes of the Indianapolis-based law firm of George & Sipes,
LLP, said that the case could qualify as a class action.

The suit is "Watkins, et al. v. Penn, et al., Case No. 1:06-cv-
01473-JDT-TAB," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Indiana under Judge John Daniel Tinder with
referral under Judge Tim A. Baker.

Representing the plaintiffs are W. Russell Sipes of George &
Sipes, 156 East Market St., Suite 600, Indianapolis, IN 46204,
Phone: (317) 637-6071, Fax: (317) 685-6505, E-mail:
wrsipes@lgrslaw.com.


MERCK & CO: Vioxx Users Refused Legal Standing in America
---------------------------------------------------------
A U.S. court has refused a request by Vioxx users, including at
least four in North Staffordshire, to join a class action in
America, The Sentinel reports.

The court ruled that the patients must challenge the American
pharmaceutical company Merck & Co. in the U.K., the report said.

Vioxx, known generically as rofecoxib, belongs to a general
class of pain relievers known as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory
drugs.  On May 20, 1999, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
approved Vioxx for sale in the U.S.

On Sept. 30, 2004, Merck withdrew Vioxx from all markets
worldwide, when a clinical trial APPROVe indicated that the use
of Vioxx increased the risk of cardiovascular thrombosis such as
myocardial infarctions and ischemic strokes.

Merck & Co., Inc. -- http://www.merck.com-- is a global
research-driven pharmaceutical company dedicated to putting
patients first.  Established in 1891, Merck currently discovers,
develops, manufactures and markets vaccines and medicines to
address unmet medical needs.


MICROSOFT CORP: Wants "Conlin" Out of Consumer Antitrust Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
Microsoft Corp. lawyers are seeking for the removal of Des
Moines attorney Roxanne Conlin from a consumer antitrust class
actions filed against Microsoft Corp., KCCI reports.

Microsoft has accused her of unethical conduct.

Plaintiffs claim Microsoft violated Iowa's antitrust laws by
monopolizing and unreasonably restraining trade in the markets
for Intel-compatible:

     (i) personal computer operating system software, and

    (ii) applications software, including word processing,
         spreadsheet and office-suite software.

The plaintiffs claim that Microsoft harmed Class Members by:

      -- illegally overcharging for its software;

      -- denying class members free choice in software products
         and the benefits of software innovation; and

      -- making computers increasingly susceptible to security
         breaches.

Plaintiffs also allege that Microsoft engaged in anticompetitive
conduct in new and specialized purported software markets for
server operating systems.

Class members in the case include all those who bought Microsoft
Windows, MS-DOS, Word, Excel, or Office software, or a personal
computer on which this software was already installed in Iowa
from May 18, 1994, through June 30, 2006.

However, Microsoft denies the claims and maintains that it
developed and sold high quality software products at fair and
reasonable prices.

Specifically, Microsoft contends that it did not overcharge for
its software and that consumers benefited from being able to
purchase high quality software products.

Microsoft also contends that consumers benefited from being able
to purchase high quality products that were continually improved
and enhanced through Microsoft's research and development
efforts.

Further, Microsoft contends that it developed products that
responded to consumer desires and that were more attractive to
consumers than the products offered by its competitors.

According Ms. Conlin, her experts have estimated that
individuals and businesses were overcharged as much as $453
million for Microsoft products in the past 12 years, since a
lack of competition has inflated the cost of the company's
products (Class Action Reporter, Sept. 18, 2006).

In Iowa, about 5.1 million licenses for Microsoft Windows have
been issued, 1.8 million for Office, 446,373 for Word and about
21,349 for Excel.

Ms. Conlin pointed out that the average consumer overcharges
ranges from $10.50 for buyers of Word to $56.99 to those who
purchased Excel.  She also pointed out that many customers might
have purchased more than one version in 12 years, thus they
could be eligible for multiples of those amounts.

Microsoft attorney David Tulchin accused Ms. Conlin of lying to
the company and the court and "soliciting and obtaining stolen
property that belonged to Microsoft."

Ms. Conlin's lawyer, Mark Tripp, said she did nothing wrong and
accused Microsoft of engaging in an "ethical witch hunt."

A trial is scheduled to begin on or after Nov. 13, 2006.

Iowa Software Suit on the Net: http://www.iowasoftwaresuit.com

The counsels representing the Class Members are:

     (1) Roxanne Conlin & Associates, P.C., 319 Seventh Street,
         Suite 600, Des Moines, Iowa 50309, Phone: (515) 283-
         1111, Fax: (515) 282-0477, E-mail:
         rconlin@roxanneconlinlaw.com, Web site:
         http://www.roxanneconlinlaw.com/;and

     (2) Zelle, Hofmann, Voelbel, Mason & Gette LLP, 500
         Washington Avenue South, Suite 4000, Minneapolis, MN
         55415, Phone: 800-899-5291, Fax: 612-336-9100, Email:
         mfeinber@zelle.com, Website: http://www.zelle.com.

Representing Microsoft is David B. Tulchin of Sullivan &
Cromwell, 125 Broad Street, New York, New York 10004-2498,
Phone: +1-212-558-3749, Fax: +1-212-558-3588, E-mail:
tulchind@sullcrom.com.


NEWS-PRESS: Ex-Reporter Files Labor Violations Suit in Calif.
-------------------------------------------------------------
A former reporter for the Santa Barbara News-Press filed a
lawsuit against the newspaper, alleging that it failed to keep
accurate time records and withheld employees' overtime pay, The
Associated Press reports.

Filed in Santa Barbara Superior Court in California, the suit
seeks class-action status for as many as 200 past and present
employees.

Generally, the suit claims that the newspaper failed to pay
overtime to employees who worked more than eight hours a day or
more than 40 hours a week.  It also claims that the News-Press
didn't provide its employees with meal and rest periods required
by California law.

The News-Press is a 41,000-circulation daily.  It has about 50
newsroom employees among a 206-person work force.

For more details, contact plaintiff's lawyer Bruce N. Anticouni
of Anticouni & Associates, 23 East De La Guerra Street, Santa
Barbara, CA 93101, Phone: (805) 962-0467 and (800) 551-9018,
Fax: (805) 962-7501, Web site: http://www.anticouni.com.


NTL INC: Oct. 23 Fairness Hearing Set for N.Y. Stock Suit Deal
--------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for Southern District of New York will
hold a fairness hearing on Oct. 23, 2006 at 2:00 p.m. for the
proposed $9,000,000 settlement in the matter, "In Re NTL, Inc.
Securities Litigation, Case No. 02-CV-3013 (LAK)(AJP)."

The court will hold the hearing at the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of New York, 500 Pearl Street, New York,
New York 10007.

Deadline for submission of a claim form and any exclusion from
the settlement was Sept. 22, 2006.  Objections to the settlement
was due Sept. 29, 2006.

The case covers all persons or entities that purchased or
otherwise acquired the publicly traded securities of NTL, Inc.
on the open market during the period between Aug. 10, 2000 and
Nov. 29, 2001.

During the class period, NTL was a New York based corporation
providing telephone, cable television, Internet, and broadband
communications services in the United Kingdom, Ireland, and
parts of continental Europe.

Commencing in April of 2002, several securities class actions
were instituted on behalf of purchasers of NTL securities during
the period from Aug. 3, 2000 and continuing through and
including Nov. 29, 2001, alleging violations of the U.S. federal
securities laws.  These lawsuits were consolidated for all
purposes by a Court Order on July 31, 2002.

By order of the court dated July 31, 2002, Cheyne Fund LP and
Fleck T.I.M.E. Fund L.P. were designated Lead Plaintiffs and
Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (formerly known as Milberg
Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP) and Bernstein Liebhard &
Lifshitz, LLP were appointed as Co-Lead Counsel for the Class.

The Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint dated Oct. 30,
2002 filed in the action alleges, among other things, that NTL
and the individual defendants, who were officers and/or
directors of NTL, made materially false and misleading
statements and omissions in NTL's public reports and statements
disseminated to the investing public thereby artificially
inflating the price of the securities of NTL and damaging
members of the class.

In particular, the complaint alleges, inter alia, that during
the class period, one or more defendants materially
misrepresented the company's ability to integrate acquired
businesses, the size of its subscriber base and its ability to
service its debts in public reports and statements disseminated
to the investing public.

The company's financial and other public statements are alleged
to have made been in violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder.

The complaint further alleges that, as a result of defendants'
materially false and misleading statements, the price of NTL
securities was artificially inflated during the class period,
thereby causing damage to members of the class who purchased or
otherwise acquired NTL securities during that period.

NTL filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on May 8, 2002.
On Sept. 5, 2002, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court permitted the Action
to proceed post-reorganization against the parties other than
the corporate debtor and against the corporate debtor to the
extent of its available insurance coverage.  NTL Europe, Inc.
replaced the corporate entity in the Action.

Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on Dec. 6,
2002.  By Memorandum and Order dated Dec. 12, 2004, the
court granted in part and denied in part defendants' motion to
dismiss the complaint.

On Jan. 28, 2005, defendants answered the Complaint, denying
that they violated any laws or did anything wrong.  They believe
that their actions were proper under the federal securities
laws, and they assert several affirmative defenses.

On Sept. 7, 2005, Lead Plaintiffs made a motion to certify the
class.  By Order dated Mar. 9, 2006, the Court certified the
Class as described above and Cheyne Fund LP and Fleck T.I.M.E.
Fund L.P. as Class Representatives.

The lawsuit seeks money damages against the Defendants for
violations of the federal securities laws.  The defendants deny
all allegations of misconduct contained in the complaint, and
deny having engaged in any wrongdoing whatsoever.

For more details, contact:

     (1) Jeffrey M. Haber, Esq., Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz,
         LLP, 10 East 40th Street, New York, New York 10016,
         Phone: (212) 779-1414, Fax: (212)-779-3218, E-mail:
         haber@bernlieb.com;

     (2) George A. Bauer III, Esq., Milberg Weiss Bershad &
         Schulman LLP, One Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, New
         York 10119-0165, Phone (212) 594-5300 and 212-946-9310,
         Fax: 212-868-1229, E-mail: gbauer@milberg.com; and

     (3) The Claims Administrator, In re NTL, Inc. Securities
         Litigation, c/o The Garden City Group, Inc., Claims
         Administrator, P.O. Box 9000 #6456, Merrick, NY 11566-
         9000, Phone: 1-888-366-5350, Web site:
         http://www.gardencitygroup.com/cases/index.html.


PAINCARE HOLDINGS: Continues to Face Securities Suits in Fla.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Paincare Holdings, Inc. remains a defendant in multiple
securities class actions filed in the U.S. District Court for
the Middle District of Florida.

On March 21, 2006, Roy Thomas Mould filed a complaint under
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of
1934 against the company, as well as the company's chief
executive officer and chief financial officer (Class Action
Reporter, June 6, 2006).

The complaint is "Mould v. PainCare Holdings, Inc., et al., Case
No. 06-CV-00362-JA-DAB."  It alleged that the Orlando-based firm
violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market during the class period that
artificially inflated the price of PainCare securities.

Plaintiff seeks unspecified damages and purports to represent a
class of shareholders who purchased the company's common stock
from Aug. 27, 2002 to March 15, 2006.

Additional complaints were filed shortly afterward before the
same court, which recite similar allegations.

The suit is "Mould v. Paincare Holdings, Inc. et al., Case No.
6:06-cv-00362-JA-DAB," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Middle District of Florida under Judge John Antoon II with
referral to Judge David A. Baker.

Representing the plaintiffs is Kenneth J. Vianale of Vianale &
Vianale, LLP, 2499 Glades Road, Suite 112, Boca Raton, FL 33431,
Phone: 561/392-4750, ext. 107, Fax: 561/392-4775, E-mail:
e-file@vianalelaw.com.

Representing the company is Bruce J. Berman of McDermott, Will &
Emery, 201 S. Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2200, Miami, FL 33131-4336,
Phone: 305/358-3500, Fax: 305/347-6500, E-mail: bberman@mwe.com.


PHILIP SERVICES: Ga. Court Allows Lawyers to Contact Plaintiffs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Charles A. Pannell of the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Georgia gave attorneys from both sides in
the proposed class action over an odor coming from an industrial
waste plant owned by the Philip Services Corp., the ability to
discuss aspects of the case with putative, or supposed, class
members, The Fayette Citizen reports.

"In light of (prior litigation including) Jackson, Gulf Oil and
the fact that the defendants have not presented any factual
evidence showing that imminent and irreparable injury of the
type complained of in their brief is likely to occur absent an
order limiting communications, the court will allow the parties
and their counsel to speak freely about this lawsuit with any
potential class member who initiates contact with them.

"The court will also allow the parties and their counsel to
initiate contact with putative class members as long as the
contact is not widespread and is not made for the purpose of
encouraging or discouraging this lawsuit," Judge Pannell said in
an Oct. 4 ruling.

The court ruled that neither party may initiate any mass
communication with potential class members.  The court, however,
allowed defendants to set up a toll-free number to answer
questions about the facts relating to the incident and the
ensuing investigation.

Additionally, the court did not limit in any manner the parties'
right to speak with the media on the substance of the lawsuit as
long as no attempts are made to overtly solicit participation or
non-participation by potential class members.

                          Case Background

About 75 people filed a lawsuit seeking class-action status in
Fulton County Superior Court in Georgia over a nauseating odor
coming from an industrial waste plant owned by the Philip
Services Corp. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 1, 2006).

Named defendants in the suit are Philip Services Corp. also
known as PSC Recovery Systems and Georgia Recovery Systems, and
AMVAC Chemical Corp.

Residents, represented by attorney Scott Zahler, claimed in the
suit that they have suffered migraine headaches, nosebleeds,
rashes, nausea, sore throats, diarrhea, eye irritation,
dizziness and respiratory problems over the odor.

Initially sought for problems arising from exposure to the
chemical odorant propyl mercaptan, the amended suit adds the
organophosphate pesticide MOCAP (Ethoprop) to the action.

                    Amended Complaint Filed

Atlanta attorneys Goetz, Allen & Zahler, Fayette and south
Fulton residents, filed an amended complaint recently (Class
Action Reporter, Oct. 12, 2006).

The amended suit includes a broadened definition of the harm
done to residents and their property.  It now claims eight
counts, including continuing trespass, continuing nuisance,
negligence, negligence per se, injunctive relief, declaratory
judgment, punitive damages and attorney's fees, costs and
expenses.

The amended suit also broadens the reported time frame for which
the chemicals were introduced into the communities surrounding
the PSC plant. Residents' attorneys maintain that shipments of
MOCAP water wash were brought into the community in May and June
and were released into the air, water and soil surrounding the
plant and in outlying areas.

The suit charges that those releases resulted from mishandling
and mistreatment of the shipments.  It was during the same time
frame that area residents began manifesting symptoms of the
various symptoms of acute overexposure and chronic overexposure
to MOCAP, the suit said.

According to The Fayette Citizen, timelines for the case show
the fact-finding or discovery phase to be concluded by Jan. 31,
2007.  The class certification for the lawsuit is expected to be
filed on or before March 31, 2007.

The suit is "McLendon et al. v. Philip Services Corp. et al.,
Case No. 1:06-cv-01770-CAP," filed in the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia under Judge Charles A.
Pannell.

Representing defendants are Cari K. Dawson, Richard Thomas
Fulton, James Alan Langlais and Robert Douglas Mowrey all of
Alston & Bird LLP, 1201 West Peachtree Street, One Atlantic
Center, Atlanta, GA 30309-3424, Phone: 404-881-7000 or 404-881-
7490, E-mail: cari.dawson@alston.com or sfulton@alston.com or
jlanglais@alston.com or bmowrey@alston.com.

Representing the plaintiffs are:

     (1) Kurt D. Ebersbach, Donald D. J. Stack and Kimberly Ann
         Sturm all of Stack & Associates, 260 Peachtree
         Street, Suite 1200, Atlanta, GA 30303, Phone: 404-525-
         9205, Fax: 404-522-0275, E-mail:
         kebersbach@stack-envirolaw.com or
         dstack@stack-envirolaw.com or
         ksturm@stack-envirolaw.com;

     (2) Jacob Stanford Eby of Devlin & Robinson, 127 Peachtree
         Street, N.E., Suite 300, Atlanta, GA 30303, Phone: 404-
         222-8411, E-mail: jeby@dandrpc.com;

     (3) Charles M. Goetz, Jr., Samuel P. Pierce, Jr. and Scott
         Mitchell Zahler all of Goetz Allen & Zahler, 2859 Paces
         Ferry Road, Overlook III Suite 1740, Atlanta, GA 30339,
         Phone: 770-431-1000 or 770-431-1108, E-mail:
         cmgoetz@goetz-zahler.com or spierce@goetz-zahler.com or
         smzahler@goetz-zahler.com; and

     (4) Michael P. Pryor of Sams Larkin & Huff, 376 Powder
         Springs Street, Suite 100, Marietta, GA 30064, Phone:
         770-422-7016, E-mail: mpryor@samslarkinhuff.com.


QWEST COMMUNICATIONS: Court Awards $60M to Counsel in Stock Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. District Judge Robert E. Blackburn issued a ruling on Sept.
28 regarding the lead counsel's motion for award of attorneys'
fees and reimbursement of expenses in the Qwest Communications
International, Inc. Securities litigation.

            Party                            Award
            -----                            -----

Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller        up to $60 million in
Rudman & Robbins LLP                attorneys' fees and
lead counsel for the plaintiff      $2 million in costs

The New England Health Care         $13,215.56 in costs and
Employees' Pension Fund             expenses

Lead Plaintiff Sat Pal Singh        $7,650.00 in costs and
                                    expenses

Lead Plaintiff Tejinder Singh       $8,431.41 in costs and
                                    expenses

Lead Plaintiff Clifford Mosher      $11,280.00 in costs and
                                    expenses

In an order issued concurrently with this order, the court had
approved a class action settlement agreed to by the lead
plaintiffs and all but two of the defendants.

The terms of the settlement contained in the parties'
Stipulation of Partial Settlement, filed Nov. 23, 2005, requires
Settling Defendants in the suit to pay $400 million into a
Settlement Fund for the benefit of the plaintiff class.

In addition, the parties have agreed to persuade the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission to permit $250 million held
by the SEC to be added to the Settlement Fund.  Defendant Qwest
paid $250 million to the SEC under the terms of a judgment
entered against Qwest and in favor of the SEC in a separate
civil suit.

In January, the court granted preliminary approval to the
settlement.

The class in the suit is defined as all persons who purchased or
otherwise acquired Qwest publicly traded securities (including
common stock, bonds, and options) from May 24, 1999 through July
28, 2002.

The suit is "In re Qwest Communications International, Inc.
Securities Litigation, Civil Case No. 01cv01451REBCBS," filed in
the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado.

The lead counsel for the plaintiff is Lerach Coughlin Stoia
Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP, Keith F. Park, 655 West Broadway,
Suite 1900, San Diego, CA 92101-3301.  Qwest Claims
Administrator: c/o Gilardi & Co. LLC, P.O. Box 5100, Larkspur,
California 94977-5100.


QWEST COMMUNICATIONS: Retirees Oppose Dismissal of ERISA Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Qwest retirees filed on Oct. 3 a legal brief in opposition to
the company's motion for summary judgment dismissal in the
pension death benefit litigation, "Kerber et al. v. Qwest."

The suit was filed by Edward J. Kerber, Nelson B. Phelps, Joanne
West, Nancy A. Meister, Thomas J. Ingemann, Jr. individually,
and as representative of plan participants and plan
beneficiaries of the Qwest Pension Plan, against:

     -- Qwest Pension Plan,
     -- Qwest Employees Benefit Committee,
     -- Qwest Pension Plan Design Committee, and
     -- Qwest Communications International, Inc.,

The case was brought under the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act by the plaintiffs.  A second amended complaint
charges that Qwest Defendants have wrongfully re-classified the
Pension Death Benefit as a "welfare" or mere take-a-way benefit
and wrongfully amended the Qwest Pension Plan so as to cease
paying Pension Death Benefits to the beneficiaries of plan
participants who retired after Jan. 1, 2004.  Qwest defendants
have threatened to take-a-way the Pension Death Benefit from all
other pre-Jan. 1, 2004 retirees currently receiving monthly
service pension annuities.

In August, Qwest Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment
dismissal.

In September, plaintiffs moved the court to certify the suit as
class action against the Qwest defendants on behalf of a class
of all Qwest Pension Plan participants (and beneficiaries
thereof) who retired and are receiving either a service pension
annuity or disability pension annuity, and all those persons
(and beneficiaries thereof) who retired on or after Jan. 1, 2004
and received a lump sum distribution of their service pension
annuity, minus the lump sum present value of the Pension Death
Benefit.

The plaintiffs also asked for the appointment of Curtis L.
Kennedy as class counsel.

The class certification motion is available for free at:

            http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?1359

The suit is Civil Action No. 05-cv-00478-BNB-PAC filed in the
U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado.

The QWest defendants are represented by:

     (1) Elizabeth I. Kiovsky, Esq. and Beth Doherty Quinn, Esq.
         at Baird & Kiovsky, LLC, 2036 E. 17th Ave. Denver, CO
         80206-1106, Phone: 303-813-4500, Fax: 303-813-4501,
         E-mail: BethK@bairdkiovsky.com or BDQ@bairdkiovsky.com;
         and

     (2) Sherwin S. Kaplan, Esq. of The Len Reid & Priest LLP,
         701 Eighth Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20001, Phone:
         202.508.4218, Fax: 202.654.1845, E-mail:
         skaplan@thelenreid.com.

Representing the plaintiffs is Curtis L. Kennedy, 8405 East
Princeton Avenue, Denver, CO 80237-1741, Phone: 303-770-0440,
Fax: 303-843-0360, E-mail: CurtisLKennedy@aol.com.


SONY BMG: Quebec Court Approves XCP, MediaMax Lawsuit Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Quebec Superior Court approved the settlement of a class
action over Sony music CDs that installed software on computers
without authorization, The CBC News reports.

The settlement is in connection with music CDs sold by Sony BMG
(Canada) Inc. that included anti-copying software that would be
secretly installed on a computer when it was inserted in a CD
drive.

According to the case, that software made it possible for a
computer to be hijacked by an attacker or susceptible to a
computer virus.  The software was added to Sony music CDs made
or sold in Canada over the last three years.

Sony BMG faced class actions filed in Ontario, British Columbia,
and Quebec in late 2005 and early 2006 on behalf of a certain
class of persons in Canada, who purchased a music CD SONY BMG
that carried XCP or MediaMax software.  The suit also named as
defendants SunnComm International Inc., and First 4 Internet,
Ltd.

These actions allege that the Media Max and XCP software fails
to disclose limits on use of the CDs, violates the privacy
rights of users, creates security vulnerabilities, and is
difficult to uninstall.

The Ontario class proceeding includes the claims of all
settlement class members who reside outside the provinces of
British Columbia and Quebec.  The Quebec and British Columbia
class proceeding includes all of the class members who reside in
the province of Quebec and British Columbia respectively.

The proposed class includes: "all natural persons in Canada who
purchased, received, came into possession of or otherwise used
one or more MediaMax CDs and/or XCP CDs from Aug. 1, 2003
through Aug. 10, 2006 excluding the employees of Released
Parties, SONY BMG resellers or distributors of the XCP CDs and
MediaMax CDs, and any persons or entities that have previously
executed releases discharging SONY BMG from liability concerning
or encompassing any or all claims" against the product.

Sony has reached a settlement in the class action (Class Action
Reporter, Sept. 8, 2006).  Under an agreement:

     -- all XCP class members who return their CD to SONY BMG or
        provide SONY BMG with a receipt indicating the return or
        exchange of their CD to its place of purchase will
        receive a replacement hard copy CD of the same title
        without the software, and will be able to download from
        the SONY BMG website free MP3 digital music files of the
        same album.  XCP class members can then choose either of
        two additional compensation  options:

        * a cheque for $8.40 and a promotional code exchangeable
          for one free album download from among a list of
          approximately 200 available albums, or

        * a promotional code exchangeable for three of the
          free album downloads;

     -- MediaMax 3.0 class members who provide proof of purchase
        will be able to download free MP3 digital files of the
        tracks on the MediaMax CD;

     -- MediaMax 5.0 class members who provide proof of purchase
        will be able to download free MP3 digital files of the
        tracks on the MediaMax CD, and will receive a
        promotional code for one free album download.

Remedial undertakings by SONY BMG include:

     -- an agreement not to manufacture audio CDs with XCP or
        MediaMax Software in Canada, or to distribute CDs with
        XCP Software in Canada;

     -- an agreement to advise the courts if and when it uses
        Content Protection Software on CDs sold in Canada that
        has not been reviewed under the U.S. Settlement
        Agreement;

     -- an affirmation, which an independent auditor has
        confirmed, that it has not collected any personally
        identifiable information from consumers without consent,
        and it will agree to take commercially reasonable steps
        to destroy, at least every 10 business days, all IP
        addresses logged from hits made to its servers; and

     -- waive of certain provisions of the EULA associated with
        the XCP and MediaMax CDs.

SONY BMG denies any wrongdoing or liability associated with the
XCP and MediaMax Software.

Class counsel's fees and disbursements, and taxes thereon in an
amount to be fixed by the court, will be paid by SONY BMG in
addition to the other settlement terms.

In September, the Supreme Court in Ontario, Canada approved the
settlement in a class action filed against Sony BMG Music
(Canada) Inc.

Compensation will be paid to the class until Dec. 31, 2006:

                  Contact Information


Quebec class members          KUGLER, KANDESTIN
                              (Attention; Pierre Boivin)
                              1 Place Ville-Marie, Suite 2101,
                              Montreal Quebec H3B 2C6
                              Phone: 514-878-2861
                              Fax: 514-875-8424
                              Email: info@kugler-kandestin.com


Other provinces, territories  SUTTS, STROSBERG
                              600-251 Goyeau Street,
                              Windsor, Ontario N9A 6V4
                              Phone: 1-519-561-6248
                              Fax: 519-561-6203

                              MERCHANT LAW GROUP
                              340-251 3rd Avenue S. W.
                              203-895 Belville Street
                              Calgary, Alberta T2P 3T3
                              Victoria, B.C.  V8V 1W9
                              Phone: 866-225-7777
                              Fax: 403-237-9775

                              HOTZ LAWYERS
                              203-100 Upper Madison Avenue,
                              Toronto, Ontario M2N 6M4
                              Phone: 416-590-7823
                              Fax: 647-430-8269

On the Net: http://cdtechsettlement.sonybmg.ca.


TECO ENERGY: Fla. Court Partially Dismisses Stock Fraud Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
Judge James D. Whittemore of the U.S. District Court for the
Middle District of Florida granted a "dismissal in part" to a
further amended complaint in a consolidated securities class
action filed against TECO Energy, Inc. and certain of its
current and former officers, The Tampa Tribune reports.

Purchasers of company securities filed a number of securities
class actions in August, September and October 2004.  These
suits, which were filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Middle District of Florida, allege disclosure violations under
the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

On Feb. 1, 2005, the court entered its order appointing the
"TECO Lead Plaintiff Group," comprised of:

     -- NECA-IBEW Pension Fund (The Decatur Plan),
     -- Monroe County Employees Retirement System,
     -- John Marder and Charles Korpak,

as the lead plaintiff for the class and the law firm of Lerach
Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP as lead counsel.

The plaintiffs filed their Consolidated Class Action Complaint
for securities fraud on May 3, 2005.  The consolidated complaint
maintains the same class period, Oct. 30, 2001 to Feb. 4, 2003,
and the same parties as those contained in the original
complaint.  The nature of the claims, which relate to the
adequacy of the company's disclosures and financial reporting,
also remains the same.

The defendants filed their motion to dismiss on July 25, 2005.
The plaintiffs have been granted an extension to file their
response through Dec. 31, 2005, since the parties have agreed to
mediate the claims in mid-December 2005, in order to eliminate
uncertainty and ongoing expense associated with the litigation.

In March 2006, the court partially dismissed the consolidated
case.  According to Judge James Whittemore's ruling, the
plaintiffs relied on analysts' reports that they alleged
revealed the company's fraud.  However those reports, while
pessimistic about the company's future, did not identify any
improprieties, the judge wrote.

In addition, the judge pointed out that the plaintiffs did not
sufficiently establish a connection between the specific
fraudulent activity alleged and a drop in stock prices.

Thus in dismissing part of the plaintiff's complaint and the
request for class action, Judge Whittemore wrote, "In sum,
plaintiffs have not sufficiently alleged that defendant's fraud,
as opposed to poor market conditions, was the proximate cause of
TECO's stock price decline."

The judge, however, did not grant the company's motion to
dismiss the entire case.  His reason for not granting that
motion was because he found that the plaintiffs did set forth
allegations of deception and manipulation that were sufficient
to support a fraud claim.

After the consolidated Class Action Complaint brought by the
"TECO Lead Plaintiff Group" was dismissed without prejudice on
Mar. 31, 2006, the plaintiffs filed their further amended
complaint to which the company and the defendants filed their
motion to dismiss on Jul. 7, 2006, based on failure to plead
loss causation as raised in the prior motion.

Plaintiffs filed their response to the motion to dismiss on July
21, 2006.

The suit is "In Re: TECO Energy, Inc. Securities Litigation,
Case No. 8:04-cv-01948-JDW-EAJ," filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Middle District of Florida under Judge James D.
Whittemore.

Representing the plaintiffs are David A. Rosenfeld, Samuel H.
Rudman, William S. Lerach, Darren J. Robbins, Stephen Richard
Astley, David D. George and Jack Reise of Lerach Coughlin Stoia
Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP, Phone: 561/750-3077, 619/231-1058
and 631/367-7100, Fax: 561/750-3364 and 631/367-1173, E-mail:
sastley@lerachlaw.com, dgeorge@lerachlaw.com,
jreise@lerachlaw.com, and drosenfeld@lerachlaw.com

Representing the company are:

     (1) Diane Knox, Richard A. Rosen of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind,
         Wharton & Garrison LLP, 1285 Avenue of the Americas,
         New York, NY 10019-6064, Phone: 212/373-3000;

     (2) Tracy A. Nichols, Holland & Knight LLP, 701 Brickell
         Ave., Suite 3000, P.O. Box 015441, Miami, FL 33131-
         5441, Phone: 305/374-8500, Fax: 305/789-7799, E-mail:
         tracy.nichols@hklaw.com; and

     (3) Steven B. Rosenfeld, 1285 Avenue of the Americas, New
         York, NY 10019-6064, Phone: 212/373-3000, Fax: 212-757-
         3990.


TORCHMARK INC: Court Rules on Cancer Policies Suit Jurisdiction
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Alabama Supreme Court has ruled that a trial court lacked
jurisdiction over a class action against Torchmark, Inc. and its
subsidiary Liberty National Life Insurance Co., which involves
how claims were paid on cancer policies, Bestwire reports.

Known as the Roberts case, the suit was filed in the Circuit
Court of Barbour County and settled in 2004.  It allegations
were:

      -- breach of contract in the implementation of premium
         rate increases;

      -- misrepresentation regarding premium rate increases; and

      -- unjust enrichment.

In it's ruling, which was handed down on Sept. 29, 2006, the
high court didn't address the terms of the settlement or
criticize it, according to company vice president of investor
relations, Joyce Lane.

Asked on how much the companies settled for, Ms. Lane responded
there was "no stated amount."  She only added that the
settlement required changes to the amount of premiums charged
and how claims are paid.

The Roberts case was a subclass of another class action against
the companies, known as the Robertson case, according to the
company's filing.

The Robertson case, from the early 1990s, "has been closed for
some time," Ms. Lane explained.   That case involved some of the
same people in the most recent Roberts case and also involved
how claims were being paid on some cancer policies, according to
her.

McKinney, Texas-based Torchmark, Inc., (NYSE: TMK) --
http://www.torchmarkcorp.com-- is holding company whose
subsidiaries specialize in life and supplemental health
insurance marketed through several distribution channels to
middle-income people.


UNITED STATES: MNG Reimbursement Suit Continues in Federal Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
The purported class action filed by four Massachusetts National
Guardsmen against the government will be making its way through
federal court.

The four soldiers, who filed the suit in the U.S. District Court
for the District of Massachusetts, are claiming that they were
denied reimbursement for meals, travel and lodging while
guarding potential targets after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist
attacks.

The National Guard has acknowledged that it failed to reimburse
some soldiers, however, it will still argue for the dismissal of
the lawsuit.

In the meantime, as the case is going through the legal system,
attorneys lawyers for the guardsmen are trying to have the case
certified as a class action, which would entitle hundreds of
soldiers to compensation.

In the past, Judge Richard G. Stearns has expressed his doubt
that the case belonged in his court.  He said it would appear to
belong in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, in Washington, D.C.,
which handles disputes where people say they are owed money by
the federal government (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 14, 2006).

The suit names the Department of Defense and the state National
Guard as defendants.  Judge Stearns said the names of individual
government officials, including Secretary of Defense Donald
Rumsfeld and Gov. Mitt Romney, would be dropped because the
action was against government agencies.

It seeks $73 million in compensation and argues there could be
as many as 1,000 Massachusetts National Guard soldiers who
deserve reimbursements.

                        Case Background

The suit named as plaintiffs all U.S., Massachusetts, Army and
Massachusetts National Guard officials; and as defendants,
leaders at the MNG Command Center who denied the reimbursements
(Class Action Reporter, Jan. 20, 2006).

Specific plaintiffs named are Wayne R. Gutierrez, of New
Bedford, Mass., Sgt. Steven M. Littlefield, and Joseph P.
Murphy, a specialist at Camp Edwards.

The four guardsmen were among many MNG soldiers activated for
temporary duty in early December 2001.  In the post Sept. 11
anti-terror environment, their assignments included security
patrols, lock-downs and construction projects at bases across
the state.

The lead plaintiff in the case, Sgt. Louis Tortorella, of New
Hampshire, died in March 2006 of heart attack.

The suit is "Tortorella et al. v. U.S. of America et al., Case
No. 1:06-cv-10054-RGS," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Massachusetts under Judge Richard G. Stearns.
Representing the plaintiffs are:

     (1) John R. Shek of Weston, Patrick, Willard & Redding, PA,
         84 State Street, 11th Floor, Boston, MA 02109-2299,
         Phone: 617-742-9310, Fax: 617-742-5734, E-mail:
         jrs@wpwr.com; and

     (2) Constance A. Driscoll of Stevens Law Office, 127
         Mountain Road, P.O. Box 1200, Stowe, VT 05672, US,
         Phone: 802-253-8547, Fax: 802-253-9945, E-mail:
         constance.driscoll@stowelawyers.com.

Representing the defendants are:

     (i) Mark T. Quinlivan, United States Attorney's Office, 1
         Courthouse Way, Boston, MA 02210, Phone: 617-748-3606,
         Fax: 617-748-3969, E-mail: mark.quinlivan@usdoj.gov;
         and

    (ii) Brian M. Donovan, Office of the Attorney General, Room
         1813, One Ashburton Place, Boston, MA 02108, Phone:
         617-727-2200, Fax: 617-727-3076, E-mail:
         brian.donovan@ago.state.ma.us.


WILLIAMS PRODUCTION: Faces Col. Lawsuit Over Unpaid Royalties
-------------------------------------------------------------
Grand Junction attorney Nate Keever filed a class action in
Garfield County District Court against Williams Production, in
an attempt to recover unpaid royalties from the company, The
Daily Sentinel reports.

Named plaintiffs in the suit -- Sid Lindauer, his wife, Ruth,
and his brother, Ivo -- said they decided to act after two other
Garfield County mineral owners, the late Bill Clough and Joan
Savage, won millions of dollars from Williams over underpaid
royalties.

Mr. Lindauer said they resisted leasing to Williams for some
time, but when faced with the prospect of the company "pooling"
the family mineral rights with others and getting their gas from
adjacent property, they relented.

"We think there could be thousands of mineral owners statewide
that were paid improperly," he said. "In Garfield County,
there's at least several hundred."

According to Mr. Keever, the suit could help split-estate
owners, those who own the surface but not the minerals, because
they have a hard time getting the gas companies to pay their
fair share because they can't afford their own attorneys.

Williams Production spokeswoman Susan Alvillar said the company
was evaluating the claims in the lawsuit.

Plaintiffs' attorney is Nate Keever of Dufford Waldeck Milburn &
Krohn LLP, 744 Horizon Court, Suite 300, Grand Junction,
Colorado 81506, Phone: (970) 241-5500, Fax: (970) 243-7738.


WORLDCOM INC: Third Party Claims Fund Termination Date Extended
---------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Dennis Cote ruled on Oct. 10 that the termination
date of Third Party Claims Fund in the Stipulation of Settlement
with former Worldcom Inc. president and chief executive Bernard
J. Ebbers on July 6, 2005 is extended until the date of
termination of the agreement entered into among:

     -- the class,
     -- MCI, LLC (successor by merger to MCI, Inc.), and
     -- the liquidating agent for the purpose of liquidating
        certain assets as designated in the Ebbers Stipulation,

as such date may be extended pursuant to the terms of the Trust
Agreement.

The court issued the order after considering the declaration of
Alan P. Lebowitz, General Counsel to the Comptroller of the
state of New York, in Support of Extension of the Termination
Date of Third Party Claims Fund Established Pursuant to the
class's settlement with Mr. Ebbers.

The settlement of a suit filed against Mr. Ebbers by investors
who lost money when WorldCom collapsed in 2002, calls for him to
pay $5 million up front and to place the remainder of his assets
in a trust that is expected to be sold for an estimated $25
million to $40 million.  All monies from the sale of Mr. Ebber's
property are to be deposited in a fiduciary fund for
disbursement to plaintiffs in the class action.

The trustee in the settlement with Mr. Ebbers' is Development
Specialists, Inc.  the Trustee's counsel, Burr & Forman LLP, and
the Trustee's representatives:

     Development Specialists, Inc.
     Attn: Brian C. Weepie
     70 West Madison Street, Suite 2300
     Chicago, IL 60602
     Tel: (312) 263-4141
     Fax: (312) 263-1180

         -- and --

     Development Specialists, Inc.
     Attn: Joseph J.Luzinski
     200 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 1818
     Miami, FL 33131
     Tel: (305) 374-2717
     Fax: (305) 374-2717

The suit "In re Worldcom, Inc. Securities Litigation, 02 Civ.
3288 (DLC)," -- http://www.worldcomlitigation.com-- is a
consolidated, certified class action pending in the Southern
District of New York before District Court Judge Denise L. Cote.
It is being prosecuted on behalf of a court-certified class of
all individuals or entities who purchased or acquired publicly
traded securities of WorldCom, Inc. from April 29, 1999 through
and including June 25, 2002, and who were injured thereby.

                         Lead Plaintiff

On Aug. 15, 2002, Judge Cote appointed the Comptroller of the
State of New York, the sole Trustee of the New York State Common
Retirement Fund, which is the nation's second-largest public
pension fund, to serve as lead plaintiff in the WorldCom
Securities Litigation and approved lead plaintiff's selection of
Barrack, Rodos & Bacine and Bernstein Litowitz Berger &
Grossmann LLP as co-lead counsel for the class.  Fresno County
Employees Retirement Association, the County of Fresno,
California and HGK Asset Management are additional named
plaintiffs and class representatives.

The consolidated complaint of the lead plaintiff was filed in
the fall of 2002, and updated in August 2003 and in December
2003.

On Nov. 7, 2002, Judge Cote ordered the parties to participate
in settlement negotiations under the supervision of Magistrate
Judge Michael H. Dolinger.  In the fall of 2003, the court
invited the Honorable Robert W. Sweet, U.S. District Court
Judge, to assist in oversight of the settlement discussions.

Judge Cote certified the lawsuit as a class action on Oct. 24,
2003.

WorldCom, Inc. was not a defendant because on July 21, 2002, it
filed for bankruptcy protection.  The bankruptcy court in the
Southern District of New York confirmed WorldCom's Plan on Oct.
31, 2003, and on Apr. 20, 2004, the company formally emerged
from U.S. Chapter 11 protection as MCI, Inc.


* Schiffrin & Barroway Fortifies European Securities Practice
-------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, entered into a formal
alliance with German firm Winheller Attorneys at Law in an
attempt to protect European investments in U.S. securities,
according to The Lawyer.

The purpose of the alliance between the U.S.-based securities
class action firm and Winheller is to support the rising number
of European institutional investors bringing securities class
actions or derivative litigation as a result of breaches in U.S.
securities law.

Stefan Winheller, a partner at the Frankfurt-based firm told The
Lawyer, that European investors, including non-profit
organizations, lose millions of dollars each year because they
simply don't know that they can recover their losses as a result
of violations of U.S. securities law.

With the alliance will Schiffrin & Barroway be able to roll out
its "securities tracker" advice service.  That service aims to
identify potential claims for damages as a result of corporate
malfeasance, to clients in Germany, Austria and Switzerland.

Asked for comment regarding the pact, Darren Check, a partner at
Schiffrin & Barroway told The Lawyer that the firm believes that
it can help in Germany.  He also explains that they chose
Winheller, since it has familiarity on both sides of the
Atlantic.

Philadelphia-headquartered Schiffrin & Barroway focuses on
advising on shareholder litigation and is currently advising
investors in lawsuits against Delphi Corp and Viacom.  On the
other hand Winheller, specializes in business law and advising
non-profit organizations.

For more details, contact Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, 280 King of
Prussia Road, Radnor, PA 19087, Phone: 610-667-7706, Fax: 610-
667-7056, E-mail: (U.S) info@sbclasslaw.com or (Outside U.S.)
infosb@sbclasslaw.com, Web site: http://www.sbclasslaw.com/.


                         Asbestos Alert


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Claims v. Ameron International Drop to 149
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ameron International Corp., as of Sept. 3, 2006, was faced with
asbestos-related cases involving 149 claimants, according to the
Company's quarterly report, on Form 10-Q for the period ended
Sept. 3, 2006, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.

As of June 4, 2006, the Company recorded asbestos-related cases
involving 924 claimants, compared with 2,642 claimants as of
March 5, 2006. (Class Action Reporter, July 21, 2006)

For the quarter ended Sept. 3, 2006, the Company recorded six
new claimants, dismissals and settlements involving 781
claimants, and no judgments.

The multi-defendant personal injury lawsuits against the Company
seek unspecified damages for asbestos-related diseases based on
alleged exposure to products made by the Company and others.

At this time, the Company is generally not aware of the extent
of injuries allegedly suffered by the individuals or the facts
supporting the claim that injuries were caused by the Company's
products.

During the quarter ended Sept. 3, 2006, the Company incurred
less than US$100,000 in asbestos-related net costs and expenses.

Based in Pasadena, Calif., Ameron International Corp. makes
steel pipe, fiberglass-composite pipe, and reinforced concrete
pipe for a variety of industrial uses, including chemical and
petrochemical processing, water transmission, and sewage
collection.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Conn. Court Upholds Wing Suit v. HB Fuller
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Superior Court of Connecticut denied H.B. Fuller Co.'s
motion for summary judgment in the asbestos-related lawsuit
filed by Patricia Wing.

Judge David W. Skolnick handed down the decision of Case
CV054010122S, which was filed on April 28, 2006.

The instant motion was before the Court on H.B. Fuller's claim
that Ms. Wing "has failed to identify any exposure to asbestos
and asbestos containing products manufactured, distributed or
sold by H.B. Fuller Co."

On Sept. 27, 2005, H.B. Fuller took Ms. Wing's deposition. She
testified further that, while she did not help with work, she
was "around" while work was going on.

According to Ms. Wing's memorandum in opposition, H.B. Fuller
has "admitted in sworn answers to interrogatories" that from
about 1969 to spring 1978, H.B. Fuller's Building Products
Division made and sold products with asbestos.

These products included "thin set products" with asbestos and
H.B. Fuller explained that these products were also known as
"TEC dry adhesives" whose asbestos content ranged from 0.68
percent to eight percent.

The evidence in the Court's opinion presented a genuine issue of
material fact for the trier of fact's consideration.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: H.B. Fuller Accrues $992T for Liabilities
--------------------------------------------------------------
H.B. Fuller Co., as of Sept. 2, 2006, had accrued US$992,000 for
probable asbestos-related liabilities and US$504,000 for
insurance recoveries related to asbestos claims.

As of June 3, 2006, the Company accrued US$1.053 million for
probable asbestos-related liabilities and US$527,000 for
insurance-related recoveries for asbestos claims. (Class Action
Reporter, July 14, 2006)

The Company and its subsidiaries have been named co-defendants
in lawsuits in which plaintiffs have alleged injury due to
asbestos-containing products made by the Company more than 20
years ago.

In many of these cases, the plaintiffs are unable to demonstrate
that they have suffered any compensable injuries or that the
injuries suffered were from exposure to products made by the
Company or its units. The Company is typically dismissed as a
defendant in these cases without payment.

A significant portion of the Company's asbestos-related defense
costs and settlements continues to be paid by third parties,
including indemnification under the provisions of a 1976
agreement under which the Company acquired a business from a
third party.

Moreover, the Company has insurance policies that generally
provide coverage for asbestos liabilities, including defense
costs. Historically, insurers have paid a significant portion of
the defense costs and settlements in asbestos-related litigation
involving the Company.

In 2005, the Company and a number of its insurers entered into a
cost-sharing agreement that provides for the allocation of
defense costs, settlements and judgments among these insurers
and the Company in certain asbestos-related suits.

In 2004, the Company and a group of other defendants, including
the third party obligated to indemnify the Company against
certain asbestos-related claims, entered into negotiations with
a group of plaintiffs to settle certain asbestos-related suits.

As previously reported and accounted for during the 2004-3rd
quarter, the Company agreed to contribute about US$3,522,000
towards the settlement to be paid in these cases in exchange for
a full release of claims by the plaintiffs. Of this amount, the
Company's insurers have agreed to pay about US$1,236,000.

The Company and its insurers have transferred the required
amounts into a trust established to disburse payments related to
settlements. On Dec. 1, 2005, US$3,085,000 was paid out of the
trust under the settlement.

As of Sept. 2, 2006, the amount the Company and its insurers
have remaining to pay out of the trust is up to US$437,000.

During the first nine months of 2006, the Company accrued a
total of US$605,000 for settlements of asbestos-related suits.
The Company's insurers have paid or are expected to pay
US$321,000 of this amount.

Based in St. Paul, Minn., H.B. Fuller Co. makes adhesives,
sealants, and powder coatings for metals and liquid paints. The
Company's industrial and performance adhesives customers include
firms in the packaging, graphic arts, automotive, footwear,
woodworking, and non-woven textiles industries.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Pending Claims v. GenCorp Increase to 155
--------------------------------------------------------------
GenCorp Inc., for the nine months ended Aug. 31, 2006, recorded
155 pending asbestos-related cases, compared with 152 cases for
the year ended Nov. 30, 2005.

The Company has from time to time been named as a defendant in
lawsuits alleging personal injury or death due to exposure to
asbestos in building materials, products or in manufacturing
operations. Most of the suits have been filed in Madison County,
Ill. and San Francisco, Calif.

Since 1998, more than 200 of these asbestos suits have been
resolved with the majority being dismissed. There were 155
asbestos cases pending as of Aug. 31, 2006.

As of May 31, 2006, the Company faced about 150 pending
asbestos-related cases. (Class Action Reporter, July 14, 2006)

For the nine months ended Aug. 31, 2006, the Company recorded 48
claims filed, 40 claims dismissed, and five claims settled. The
aggregate at settlement costs were US$67,000 and the average
settlement costs were US$13,000.

For the year ended Nov. 30, 2005, the Company recorded 149
claims filed, 65 claims dismissed, and two claims settled. The
aggregate at settlement costs were US$52,000 and the average
settlement costs were US$25,000.

For the first nine months of fiscal 2006, the Company paid
US$500,000 legal and administrative fees for asbestos cases. For
fiscal 2005, legal and administrative fees for the asbestos
cases were US$500,000, compared with US$1 million for fiscal
2004.

Based in Rancho Cordova, Calif., GenCorp Inc., through its main
subsidiary Aerojet-General, makes missile propulsion
technologies for defense and space systems. Lockheed Martin
accounts for about 40 percent of the Company's sales.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Tex. Court Favors Armco Inc. in Brooks Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Court of Appeals of Texas, Texarkana, affirmed judgment in
favor of Armco Inc. in an asbestos-related lawsuit filed by
Gercie Brooks on behalf of John B. Brooks, Jr.

The Panel, comprised of Chief Justice Josh R. Morriss III,
Justices William J. Cornelius and Donald R. Ross, handed down
the decision of Case No. 06-04-00111-CV on May 17, 2006.

Mrs. Brooks appealed from a take-nothing judgment rendered by
the 62nd Judicial District Lamar County, Texas Trial Court
against her.

Mrs. Brooks alleged that Mr. Brooks, who worked for Armco for 22
years, died from mesothelioma caused by his exposure to
asbestos-laden products while working at Armco's plant in
Pasadena, Tex.

Mrs. Brooks produced evidence that Mr. Brooks died from
mesothelioma, but Armco produced medical evidence that Mr.
Brooks died from adenocarcinoma, unrelated to asbestos exposure.

The case was tried to a jury, which found against Mrs. Brooks on
all issues.

On appeal, Mrs. Brooks contended that she is entitled to a new
trial because the Trial Court erred in:

(1) Failing to strike three prospective jurors for cause;

(2) Improperly restricting the hearing on her Batson-Edmonson
challenges; and

(3) Allowing Armco an extra peremptory challenge to replace the
strike it used to remove a prospective juror on the basis of
race.

The Appeals Court overruled all of these contentions and
affirmed the Trial Court's judgment.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: La. Court Favors Eaton Corp in Britton Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit, affirmed a
Louisiana Trial Court's decision, which granted a motion filed
by Eaton Corporation, in an asbestos-related lawsuit involving
James R. Britton, who died on March 19, 2006.

The Panel, comprised of Judges James E. Stewart, J. Jay Caraway,
and D. Milton Moore III, handed down the decision of Case No.
41,028-CA on May 17, 2006.

Walter Rodgers Britton and Cynthia Britton Francis sought
reversal of the First Judicial District Court for the Parish of
Caddo, La.'s judgment sustaining an exception of no cause of
action filed by Eaton, and dismissing their claims with
prejudice.

On July 6, 1999, Mr. Britton and Mrs. Francis were named as
plaintiffs in an ongoing asbestos-related lawsuit. They asserted
wrongful death and survival actions for damages from the alleged
long-term exposure to asbestos endured by their father, the
elder Mr. Britton.

A defendant in the suit, Eaton filed an exception of no cause of
action on the grounds that the wrongful death action was barred
by workers' compensation and that the survival action had
expired by a peremptive period prior to being filed. At the
hearing, the parties stipulated that the wrongful death claim
was barred.

However, Mr. Britton and Mrs. Francis' counsel said the elder
Mr. Britton had filed a suit in Texas before his death and that
the Texas suit against defendants, who would be liable for his
damages, interrupted the running of prescription on the survival
action. The Trial Court rejected counsel's argument and granted
Eaton's exception.

Mr. Britton and Mrs. Francis appealed.

Review of the petition showed that the survival action was
instituted on July 6, 1999, over three years from the date of
Mr. Britton's death, March 19, 1996, and over the one-year
peremptive time period allowed. The Appeals Court found the
exception properly granted.

The Appeals Court affirmed the Trial Court's judgment with costs
assessed to Mr. Britton and Mrs. Francis.

Jody E. Anderman and Jeffrey R. Nicholson of LeBlanc and
Waddell, and Sherri A. Saucer of Baron & Budd represented Walter
R. Britton and Cynthia B. Francis.

H. Alston Johnson III, Jane H. Barney, and Annette N. Peltier of
Phelps Dunbar represented Libbey Owens Ford Co., Eaton Corp.,
Aeroquip-Vickers Inc., and Trinova Corp.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: N.Y. Court Reverses Decision in Leeber Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Dept.,
reversed the decision of the Workers' Compensation Board, which
denied compensation to Frederick Leeber, in an asbestos-related
payout case filed against Long Island Lighting Co.

The Panel, comprised of Justices Thomas E. Mercure, D. Bruce
Crew III, Karen K. Peters, Carl J. Mugglin, and Anthony T. Kane,
handed down the decision of the case on May 18, 2006.

Mr. Leeber was exposed to asbestos while he worked as a
maintenance supervisor for Long Island Lighting Co. and its
successor.

A Workers' Compensation Law Judge found that Mr. Leeber suffered
from occupational asbestosis and asbestosis-related pleural
disease. The date of disablement was Nov. 30, 1998, the date
when Mr. Leeber retired at the age of 55.

While Mr. Leeber accepted an incentive package to retire, there
was evidence that his retirement decision was related to his
occupational disease. He has not sought work since retiring.

The Judge found that Mr. Leeber has a permanent partial
disability, that his decision to retire was based in part on his
disability, and that he did not voluntarily withdraw from the
labor market.

Upon LILCO's administrative appeal, the Board affirmed the
Judge's decision but held that Mr. Leeber would not be entitled
to awards of compensation subsequent to the date on which he
first testified that he had not sought any work after his
retirement.

Mr. Leeber appealed.

The Supreme Court ruled that the Board erred in disallowing
awards to Mr. Leeber on the ground that he had not sought
employment within his physical limitations postretirement.

The Supreme Court reversed the decision, with costs, and the
matter was remitted to the Board for further proceedings.

Frank Gulino of Brecher, Fishman, Pasternack, Popish, Heller,
Reiff & Walsh, of New York City, N.Y., represented Frederick
Leeber.

David E. Faber of Cherry, Edson & Kelly, of Hempstead, N.Y.,
represented Long Island Lighting Co. and another respondent.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court Rejects Grace Appeal in $54M Cleanup
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Supreme Court rejected W.R. Grace & Co.'s appeal to get out
from under a US$54 million bill to clean up asbestos in the
mining town of Libby, Mont., The Associated Press reports.

Case No. 05-1363 is styled W.R. Grace & Co., et al, v. U.S.

Justices rejected Grace's appeal of lower court rulings that
said the Company was responsible for the entire cost of removing
asbestos-contaminated soil in Libby.

The case pits Grace against the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, which oversees the federal Superfund program for the
nation's worst hazardous waste sites.

Grace argued that the U.S. EPA had no authority to hand the
Company the entire bill, as well as responsibility for future
costs, for the cleanup.

The 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals and a federal district
judge sided with the U.S. EPA, which sued Grace in 2001 to
recover cleanup costs.

Grace said other appeals courts have ruled that companies cannot
be forced to pay the entire cost of cleaning a polluted site
without being allowed to challenge whether the cleanup was
necessary to contain or remove contamination.

EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson estimated in 2005 that it
would take another five to six years to finish cleaning
contaminated sites in Libby.

Based in Columbia, Md., W.R. Grace & Co. was restructured from
six product groups into two major units. Grace's Davison
Chemicals unit makes silica-based products, chemical catalysts,
and refining catalysts that help produce refined products from
crude oil. Its Performance Chemicals unit makes concrete and
cement additives, packaging sealants, and fireproofing
chemicals.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Fla. City Okays Settlement in CARES Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Marco Island City Council in Florida approved the settlement
in an asbestos-related lawsuit filed by the Citizens Advocating
Responsible Environmental Solutions (CARES) against Quality
Enterprises USA, Naples Daily News reports.

The Council unanimously granted the settlement with an anti-
sewer political action committee.

CARES sued the City and Quality Enterprises, alleging that
illegal levels of asbestos had been released into the city due
to a contractor's work on the city's highly contested sewer
project.

The suit also named City Manager Bill Moss and Public Works
Director Rony Joel.

Quality Enterprises is scheduled to pay US$32,500 to cover CARES
attorney Samuel C. Gold's fees, but the City will have to cover
its own attorney fees.

Through the settlement, the City agreed to the creation of a
Veterans Park Development Board. CARES will nominate up to four
people to sit on board and the City will give US$100,000 from
its five-year budget for master planning.

The agreement lays the responsibility of recovering any
asbestos-related remediation expenses on the City's shoulders.

CARES released the City and Quality Enterprises from all the
claims that had been made due to the suit or from any potential
legal action relating to the Collier Boulevard Program.

The political-action committee would issue a letter of support
for the asbestos work plans submitted by the City and Quality
Enterprises to the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection and the Environmental Protection Agency.

Doug Enman, CARES chairman, said, "It's not everything it could
have been, but it's certainly good for the environment and for
the taxpayers of Marco Island."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ex-worker Fears Exposure in Trebor Factory
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ann Howe, a 62-year old former employee of Trebor Bassett,
feared that volunteering to sweep the Company's Hillsborough,
U.K. factory might have caused her asbestos-related illness,
Yorkshire Post Today reports.

Trebor Bassett is a U.K. confectionery company associated with
confectionery including liquorice allsorts, jelly babies, and
dolly mixture. The Company is a subsidiary of Cadbury Schweppes.

For 30 years, Mrs. Howe worked in various capacities from a
general factory worker to a machine operator to serving tea in
the canteen. To earn extra money, she often volunteered to sweep
and clean the factory during shutdowns and at weekends.

However, when Mrs. Howe became affected by breathlessness, a
chest X-ray at Sheffield's Northern General Hospital, showed she
was suffering from diffuse pleural thickening, an asbestos-
related lung condition.

Personal injury lawyer Dominic Collingwood, an asbestos disease
specialist at Corries Solicitors in York, works with Mrs. Howe
to uncover further evidence as to whether asbestos at the
Company may have released dust, which she inhaled when the
factory was cleaned.

Mr. Collingwood now appeals for anyone who worked at the Company
during Mrs. Howe's time, who may have evidence about the
presence of asbestos dust, to come forward.

Mr. Collingwood said, "It is a frightening thought that, by
volunteering to do overtime by cleaning the factory, Ann Howe
may unwittingly have been ingesting fibers which have led to her
present, highly-unpleasant illness but the timing fits and we
know that asbestos was present on site."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: NSW Govt. Rejects Alternative Hardie Scheme
----------------------------------------------------------------
The New South Wales Government has rejected Signature Pacific's
plan, which proposes to manage James Hardie Industries NV's
asbestos illness-related liabilities, The Sydney Morning Herald
reports.

Signature Pacific is an unlisted company under deed of company
arrangement and carrying AUD1.7 billion in tax losses.

The Signature Pacific proposal was put forward by accounting
firm Horwath and lobbied for by a former Federal Liberal Party
leader, John Hewson. Kevin Shirlaw of Horwath is its
administrator.

Under the plan, Signature Pacific would assume James Hardie's
liabilities and indemnify James Hardie against the liabilities
up to a certain amount.

Signature Pacific estimated that the plan would save James
Hardie up to 30 percent on its AUD3.5 billion in nominal current
and future claims.

A James Hardie spokesman said, "James Hardie is committed to
finding a long-term compensation arrangement for the asbestos
issue. We remain hopeful of resolving the remaining taxation
issues by continuing to work with the Federal Government's
agencies and the NSW Govt. and other stakeholders."

The deadline for finalizing the Special Purpose Fund was
extended until the end of October 2006 amid continuing
negotiations with the NSW Govt. over amendments to the
agreement.

The Special Purpose Fund has been in a holding pattern since the
Australian Taxation Office refused to endorse the fund as a tax-
exempt charity in June 2006.

In 2001, James Hardie has established the Medical Research and
Compensation Foundation to provide for the current and future
claims, and acquired two former James Hardie subsidiaries, Amaca
Pty Ltd. and Amaba Pty Ltd. Losses in these companies are
estimated at AUD250 million.

Based in Sydney, Australia, James Hardie Industries NV uses
cellulose-reinforced fiber cement to create products for
residential and commercial construction, including siding,
external cladding, walls, fencing, and roofing. The Company
makes fiber-reinforced concrete pipe through its Hardie Pipe
business and roofing through Artisan Roofing.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Council Says 200 U.K. Schools Have Hazards
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Cumbria County Council in the United Kingdom has confirmed
that almost 200 schools in Cumbria contain asbestos, News & Star
reports.

Surveys carried out over the last three years on schools run by
the local education authority confirmed a small number are
asbestos free.

Kym Allan, the Cumbria County Council's manager of health and
safety in schools, has said there is no danger to children,
parents and staff in any of the schools adding that asbestos
becomes dangerous once it is damaged.

Details have emerged after Trinity School, the largest school of
Cumbria's administrative center Carlisle, sealed off asbestos-
lagged heating ducts in two of its oldest buildings, Creighton
and Margaret Sewell, both of which are used by pupils aged 11-16
years and for adult education classes.

Trinity, which has 1,884 pupils, had a detailed survey carried
out in the first two weeks of August 2006 to identify where
asbestos was located.

Three classroom doors with asbestos fibers were replaced and
there is restricted access to a boiler room. Asbestos in the
boiler room will be removed during the October half-term owing
to a GBP15,000 grant.

Plastic manhole-like covers have sealed off the original 1930s
and now unused heating ducts in Creighton and Margaret Sewell
corridors.

Trinity has been working closely with Cumbria County Council's
health and safety unit to ensure they adhere to all safety
requirements.

The World Health Organization said that on average each person
inhales more than 7,000 asbestos fibers each year.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: WCB Hits Snag in Quest for Ex-Grace Workers
----------------------------------------------------------------
Investigators for Manitoba's Workers Compensation Board have
reached a dead end in their search for former workers of W.R.
Grace & Co., who may have been exposed to asbestos-containing
vermiculite decades ago, CBC News reports.

Grace produced the Zonolite brand of asbestos at two Winnipeg,
Manitoba processing plants between the 1940s and the 1980s.
Heating vermiculite, from Grace's Libby, Mont. mine makes
Zonolite.

Hundreds of former Grace employees in the U.S. have fallen ill
or died from asbestos-related cancers and other illnesses. In
Manitoba, provincial officials had known of one former worker
who had died from these causes.

Early in 2006, a special investigations unit at the WCB was
enlisted to search for former employees of the Winnipeg
processing plants who may have become sick from asbestos
exposure on the job years ago.

The investigators were given 124 names of former Winnipeg
employees dating back to 1972. They found 19 of those workers
and started a number of asbestos-related claims.

However, WCB spokesman Warren Preece said they have not found a
single person since then. The remaining 105 workers could not be
found.

The WCB has informed all Manitoba physicians alerting them to
the signs of asbestos-related illnesses and advising them to
contact the WCB if they learn any of their patients ever worked
at Grace.

Mr. Preece added that because asbestos-related illnesses take
decades to develop, people who worked for Grace in the 1960s or
1970s would likely be getting sick now.

Based in Columbia, Md., W.R. Grace & Co. was restructured from
six product groups into two major units. Grace's Davison
Chemicals unit makes silica-based products, chemical catalysts,
and refining catalysts that help produce refined products from
crude oil. Its Performance Chemicals unit makes concrete and
cement additives, packaging sealants, and fireproofing
chemicals.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Armstrong World to Allocate $738M to Trust
---------------------------------------------------------------
Armstrong World Industries Inc., by Oct. 17, 2006, will
distribute to the Asbestos Personal Injury Settlement Trust
about US$738 million, according to a Company press release dated
Oct. 10, 2006.

On Oct. 2, 2006, in discharge of all of its present and future
asbestos-related personal injury claims, the Company issued
under its Fourth Amended Plan of Reorganization 36,981,480
Common Shares to the Trust.

All present and future asbestos-related personal injury claims
must be asserted against, and will be resolved by, the Trust,
and those claims may not be asserted against the Company.

On Oct. 2, 2006, the Company's Plan, dated Feb. 21, 2006, became
effective and made way for the Company to emerge from
proceedings under Ch. 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. (Class
Action Reporter, Oct. 6, 2006)

Based in Lancaster, Pa., Armstrong World Industries Inc.'s Floor
Products unit produces vinyl sheet and tile, linoleum, specialty
carpet, and hardwood flooring. Its Building Products unit
produces acoustical ceilings and suspension systems, and its
Cabinet Products makes hardwood, kitchen, and bathroom cabinets.
The Company is a subsidiary of Armstrong Holdings Inc.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Suits v. RPM Int'l. Units Rise to 10,934
-------------------------------------------------------------
Subsidiaries of RPM International Inc., as of Aug. 31, 2006,
recorded a total of 10,934 active asbestos-related cases,
compared with a total of 9,093 cases as of Aug. 31, 2005.

As of May 31, 2006, the Company's subsidiaries had a total of
10,580 active asbestos cases, compared with 8,646 cases as of
May 31, 2005. (Class Action Reporter, Sept. 8, 2006)

Certain of the Company's wholly owned subsidiaries, mainly
Bondex International Inc., face asbestos-related bodily injury
lawsuits filed in various state courts with most of the current
claims pending in five states, Illinois, Ohio, Mississippi,
Texas and Florida.

These cases seek unspecified damages for asbestos-related
diseases based on alleged exposures to asbestos-containing
products made by the Company's subsidiaries. In many cases, the
plaintiffs are unable to demonstrate that any injuries they have
incurred, in fact, resulted from exposure to one of the
subsidiaries' products. In those cases, the units are generally
dismissed without payment.

For the quarter ended Aug. 31, 2006, the Company's subsidiaries
secured dismissals and settlements of 232 claims and made total
payments of US$16.4 million, which included defense costs paid
during the current quarter of US$6.6 million.

For the quarter ended Aug. 31, 2005, dismissals and settlements
covered 392 claims and total payments were US$16.5 million,
which included defense costs paid during the quarter of US$4.5
million.

At the quarter ended Aug. 31, 2006, claim filings in
Mississippi, Ohio, Texas, Florida, and Illinois comprise about
75 percent of the total aggregate claims filed against Bondex.

Three of these states, Mississippi, Ohio, and Texas, provide for
liability to be determined on a "proportional cause" basis, and
limiting Bondex's responsibility to its share of the alleged
asbestos exposure. Mississippi and Ohio have passed more
legislation impacting medical criteria and product
identification in asbestos-related litigation.

Based in Medina, Ohio, RPM International Inc. makes home repair
products. The Company is divided into two units: industrial
products (waterproofing, corrosion resistance, floor
maintenance, and wall finishing) and consumer products (caulks
and sealants, rust-preventative and general-purpose paints,
patch and repair products, and hobby paints).


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: RPM Int'l. Records $58.5M Current Liability
----------------------------------------------------------------
RPM International Inc., for the quarter ended Aug. 31, 2006,
recorded US$58,575,000 current asbestos-related liabilities,
compared with US$58,925,000 for the year ended May 31, 2006.

For the quarter ended Aug. 31, 2006, the Company recorded
US$346,268,000 long-term asbestos-related liabilities, compared
with US$362,260,000 for the year ended May 31, 2006.

For the three months ended Aug. 31, 2006, the Company recorded
US$10,523,000 change in asbestos-related liabilities, net of
tax, compared with US$1,115,000 for the three months ended Aug.
31, 2005.

At the end of fiscal 2006, the Company increased its reserve for
asbestos claims by about US$335 million, while paying out
US$12.9 million for dismissals and settlements resulting in its
reserve moving from US$99.2 million at Feb. 28, 2006 to US$421.3
million at May 31, 2006.

As of Aug. 31, 2006, the Company recorded about US$404.8 million
asbestos-related reserves.

For the three months ended Aug. 31, 2006, the Company recorded
US$404,843,000 as the movement of current and long-term
asbestos-related liabilities, compared with US$421,285,000 for
the year ended May 31, 2006.

The Company recorded a pre-tax asbestos charge during the 2005-
1st quarter of $15 million, and a total of US$380 million for
the fiscal year ended May 31, 2006. During the 1st fiscal
quarter ended Aug. 31, 2006, the Company did not record or incur
any asbestos-related charge.

Based in Medina, Ohio, RPM International Inc. makes home repair
products. The Company is divided into two units: industrial
products (waterproofing, corrosion resistance, floor
maintenance, and wall finishing) and consumer products (caulks
and sealants, rust-preventative and general-purpose paints,
patch and repair products, and hobby paints).


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ind. Man's Kin Sues 96 Firms in Ill. Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
The estate of Claude Cassada, represented by daughter Valerie
Anichini, filed an asbestos suit against 96 defendant firms in
Madison County Circuit Court on Oct. 4, 2006, The Madison St.
Clair Record reports.

Mrs. Anichini seeks damages in excess of US$200,000, plus
punitive damages in an amount to punish the defendants for their
alleged misconduct.

According to the complaint, on Dec. 22, 2005, Mr. Cassada died
from mesothelioma. The suit alleged that he was from Indiana.
The suit claimed Mr. Cassada was exposed to asbestos while
employed as a laborer, factory worker and auto body repairman
from 1960 to 2005.

Mr. Cassada worked in Illinois at a point in his career, but the
suit did not specify when or where. The suit further alleged
that his exposure to asbestos was completely foreseeable and
could or should have been anticipated by the defendants.

Mrs. Anichini claimed the defendants included asbestos in their
products when they knew asbestos fibers would have a harmful
effect on the health of people absorbing them. She claimed the
defendants included asbestos in their products when adequate
substitutes were available, failed to provide warnings to people
working with or around asbestos, and failed to conduct tests on
asbestos-containing products in order to determine the hazards
to workers.

Nicholas Angelides, John Barnerd, and Perry Browder of
SimmonsCooper in East Alton, Ill. represent Mrs. Anichini.

The case has been assigned to Circuit Judge Daniel Stack.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Man Appeals for Payout Bid v. Bromley NHS
--------------------------------------------------------------
John Sachs, of Maidstone in the United Kingdom, appeals for his
former colleagues at the old Farnborough Hospital to come
forward to help him win compensation for his wife, Bromley Times
reports.

Mr. Sachs, 64 years old, claimed he was exposed to asbestos
while working at the hospital in the early 1960s. He worked at
the hospital, then located near Bromley South, between 1961 and
1962 when he was about 19.

Mr. Sachs claimed that during this time asbestos materials were
used in roofing and panels in the walls in the lower parts of
the hospital.

After being diagnosed with mesothelioma in July 2006, Mr. Sachs
planned to sue Bromley NHS Trust but needs witnesses to help his
case.

Mr. Sachs' solicitor, Daniel Easton of Leigh Day and Co., said
that they are keen to talk to former employees, particularly
maintenance staff, engineers or cleaners who may have come into
contact with asbestos.

Mr. Easton said, "This case by its nature is difficult because
of the amount of time that has passed but in saying that I would
be reluctant to take on a case unless I thought it would win."

Mr. Sachs would likely get benefits from the U.K. Government's
Pneumoconiosis Workers Compensation fund but this would be
minimal in comparison to remuneration from a civil claim.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 5-Year Freeze on U.K. Compensation Lifted
--------------------------------------------------------------
A five-year freeze on asbestos-related compensation claims
throughout the United Kingdom has been lifted on Oct. 11, 2006,
according to a Thompsons Solicitors press release dated Oct. 11,
2006.

Turner & Newall Ltd.'s former workers will now be able to
restart their claims for exposure to asbestos.

Branches of Thompsons Solicitors throughout the U.K. are now
working to ensure that hundreds of claimants who worked for T&N,
a Federal-Mogul Corporation subsidiary, will receive their
compensation.

The workers, some of whom now suffer from mesothelioma, were
exposed to asbestos every day during their working life at
factories and plants throughout the United Kingdom.

Over 100 former T&N and Newalls Insulation employees have died
while waiting more than five years for their cash.

The claims were frozen in 2001 after Federal-Mogul went into
administration. Since then claimants and their families have
been waiting for administrators to battle out an agreement with
Federal-Mogul's insurers.

In September 2006, claimants voted in favor of a compensation
settlement by Federal-Mogul's administrators.

Part of that deal, which will see claimants who worked for T&N
after 1969 share a cash pot of GBP36 million, was approved by
the High Court of Justice on Oct. 6, 2006.

Employees and their families who worked for T&N before 1969 will
share compensation worth GBP33 million.

Both schemes are now ready to start receiving claims from
victims' lawyers.

Ian McFall, National Head of Asbestos Litigation at Thompsons
Solicitors, said, "This is the final hurdle in what has been a
five year battle to gain compensation for asbestos victims. We
will be working hard to ensure claimants receive their
compensation as soon as possible."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Minn. Man Sues 77 Companies in Ill. Court
--------------------------------------------------------------
Alden Scheer from Minnesota sued 77 defendant firms in an
asbestos-related lawsuit filed on Oct. 3, 2006 in Madison County
Circuit Court, The Madison St. Clair Record reports.

Mr. Scheer seeks at least US$250,000 in damages for negligence,
willful and wanton acts, conspiracy, and negligent spoliation of
evidence among other allegations.

Mr. Scheer alleged that he was exposed to asbestos while working
from the 1940s to 1992 as a construction worker, press operator,
cement laborer and cement finisher at various locations.

Mr. Scheer claimed that during the course of his employment and
during home and automotive repairs he was exposed to and
inhaled, ingested or otherwise absorbed asbestos fibers from
certain products he was working with and around.

According to the complaint, Mr. Scheer was diagnosed with
mesothelioma on Feb. 7, 2006. He claimed the defendants knew or
should have known that the fibers contained in their products
had a toxic, poisonous and harmful effect upon people's health.

Mr. Scheer alleged that the defendants included asbestos in
their products even when adequate substitutes were available and
failed to provide any or adequate instructions concerning the
safe methods of working with and around asbestos. He also
claimed that the defendants failed to require and advise
employees of hygiene practices designed to reduce or prevent
carrying asbestos fibers home.

The complaint said that Mr. Scheer suffers "great physical pain
and mental anguish, and also will be hindered and prevented from
pursuing his normal course of employment, thereby losing large
sums of money."

Nicholas Angelides, John Barnerd, and Perry Browder of
SimmonsCooper in East Alton, Ill., represent Mr. Scheer.

The case has been assigned to Circuit Court Judge Daniel Stack.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: U.K. Man Gets T&N Payout for Wife's Death
--------------------------------------------------------------
Terry Tobin, a 76-year-old widower has been awarded an
undisclosed amount after his wife, Dorothy, died from
mesothelioma, Legal & Medical reports.

As a young woman, Mrs. Tobin washed her father and brother's
work clothes without realizing she was inhaling asbestos fibers.

The two men worked at the Turner & Newall Ltd.'s asbestos
factory in Cardiff and were also unaware that they were coming
into contact with poisonous materials.

In 1969, Mrs. Tobin's father, Jim Pottinger, died after
developing an asbestos related disease and in 1999 her brother
Jack died from mesothelioma.

Mrs. Tobin's sister, Beryl, also came into contact with asbestos
on the elder Mr. Pottinger's clothing and passed away from an
associated disease.

Mr. Tobin became one of the first to successfully make an
asbestos claim against T&N, in which his claim could lead the
way for other asbestosis and mesothelioma sufferers to claim
personal injury compensation.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Eternit Creates CHF1.25M Fund for Employees
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cement company Eternit has established a CHF1.25million (US$1
million) fund to help Swiss former employees suffering from
asbestos-related illnesses, SwissInfo reports.

The Company, based in Niederurnen, Glarus canton, was a Swiss
and European producer of asbestos but had pulled out of the
business between 1980 and 1990.

The foundation would compensate affected people who work, or
have worked, at Eternit's Swiss plants at Niederurnen and
Payerne.

The Company said that the foundation would also compensate
surviving relatives, or people suffering from asbestos-related
illnesses, who can prove a link between their condition and the
two Swiss factories.

The Asbestos Victims' Association, which represents the
employees and their relatives, has welcomed the news.

Anders Holte, president of Eternit and chairman of the newly
established foundation, said, "Switzerland has a highly
developed social security system. Suva, the Swiss national
accident insurer, also recognizes work-related illnesses caused
by asbestos."

Mr. Holte said that to date 70 of the Company's former employees
have died from asbestos-related illnesses, but claimed that in
recent decades the Company "has acted correctly, on the basis of
the facts known at the time."

A number of suits against the Company or some of its principal
former managers are going through the courts in Italy, France
and Switzerland.

The Company is alleged to have done little or nothing to protect
its employees and the population from the dangers of asbestos,
and of having failed to inform its workers of the risks.

In Italy, the Turin-based public prosecutor Raffaele Guariniello
is due to conclude a major investigation into asbestos (2,000
claims for damages) by the end of 2006. In Switzerland, there
are cases pending in the Glarus cantonal courts, and the
pressure on the Company is starting to mount.

Suva expects between 50 and 70 more deaths from asbestos-related
illnesses in the years ahead. Some experts have gone so far as
to predict 3,000 deaths in the next 15 years.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: EPA Charges $49T Penalty to 5 Ariz. Schools
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has issued a total of
US$49,200 in penalties to five charter schools in Arizona for
asbestos violations, according to a U.S. EPA press release dated
Oct. 5, 2006.

Summit High School, GateWay Early College High School, Friendly
House Academia Del Pueblo Elementary Charter School, Arizona
School for the Arts, and Vicki A. Romero High School failed to
conduct inspections to determine if asbestos-containing material
was present in school buildings and failed to have an asbestos
management plan.

Enrique Manzanilla, the U.S. EPA's Communities and Ecosystems
Division director for the Pacific Southwest region said,
"Asbestos in schools has the potential for endangering the
health of students, teachers, and others, including maintenance
workers. The EPA takes these violations seriously, and applauds
the schools for their rapid inspection and development of
management plans."

The following schools failed to inspect for asbestos-containing
materials, failed to have a management plan, and were each fined
US$11,700. Accredited inspectors later found asbestos in the
schools:

Summit High School: During an inspection in November, the
inspector discovered asbestos materials in eight different
locations on the campus, including friable asbestos in a rooftop
maintenance area. The school has implemented a management plan
and removed the friable asbestos from the area.

GateWay Early College High School: In April 2005, the
inspector found asbestos-containing materials in four locations.
The Maricopa County Community College District opted to inspect
the entire 125,000 square-foot building area, including sections
of the building that the school does not occupy. The school has
since submitted its management plan and cleared the entire
building of the asbestos materials.

Friendly House Academia Del Pueblo Elementary Charter School
and Arizona School for the Arts: Separate inspections found
asbestos in the two schools. Both schools now have management
plans that include the location of asbestos and how the schools
will properly manage asbestos to reduce the risk of exposure.

Vicki A. Romero High School was the only school found not to
contain asbestos in its buildings. Before beginning operations
in its building, the school was required to have a signed
statement from the architect that the building does not contain
asbestos materials. However, the school did not have a signed
statement from the architect at the beginning of operations or
conduct an inspection. The school also failed to maintain an
asbestos management plan and was fined US$2,400.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Japan Govt Offers Medical Exams to Retirees
----------------------------------------------------------------
Officials of Japan's Health, Labor, and Welfare Ministry said
that in November 2006, the Ministry would offer free medical
examinations for retirees who handled asbestos in the course of
their work and whose companies went bankrupt, The Yomiuri
Shimbun reports.

The free examinations will be given at 198 hospitals and medical
institutions nationwide. The Ministry estimates nearly 30,000
will undergo the checkups.

Workers of asbestos-handling firms and most workers who have
retired from those firms undergo regular medical examinations
provided by the firms. However, retirees whose firms have closed
down or gone bankrupt have not received the same right.

Workers who may have inhaled asbestos undergo periodical health
examination at their firms under the Industrial Safety and
Health Law.

Retirees who have developed symptoms caused by asbestos,
including shadows on their chest revealed by X-rays, are issued
with a health care handbook and offered free medical
examinations twice a year. However, retirees who have no
symptoms of asbestos-related diseases on retirement are not
covered by the public medical examination service system.

The Ministry advised the firms dealing in asbestos to provide
retirees with health examinations in July 2005 through the labor
bureaus and trade associations around the country.

The Ministry found that several small and medium-sized
enterprises that had closed down or gone bankrupt were reluctant
to pay fees for medical checkups for their former employees.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Eli Lilly & Co. to Launch Alimta in India
--------------------------------------------------------------
Eli Lilly & Co. India announced the launch of Alimta, for use in
combination with cisplatin, for the treatment of patients with
malignant pleural mesothelioma, Express Pharma reports.

Alimta, pemetrexed disodium, has also been approved as second
line treatment for non-small cell lung cancer.

Sandeep Gupta, CMD, Eli Lilly India said, "We are delighted to
launch Alimta, the world's first approved treatment for
malignant pleural mesothelioma, which reinforces our strong
commitment to introduce innovative solutions from Lilly for
benefit of patients in India."

Dr. S.H. Advani, Chief of Medical Oncology, Jaslok Hospital in
Mumbai, said, "This disease is difficult to treat since it is
highly malignant and is often diagnosed at an advanced stage.
Therapies like Alimta will offer some hope in such patients."

Dr. Purvish Parikh, Professor and Head of Medical Oncology at
Tata Memorial Hospital in Mumbai, said, "Approximately 10,000 to
15,000 people worldwide are diagnosed annually with malignant
pleural mesothelioma. Most people do not learn that they have
MPM until the disease has progressed to an advanced stage when
treatment with surgery or radiation is no longer an option."

In 2004, Alimta was approved in the United States. Since then,
it has been approved in more than 70 countries and regions
including the E.U., Australia, and Canada.


                   New Securities Fraud Cases


LOUDEYE CORP: Howard G. Smith Announces Wash. Stock Suit Filing
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Howard G. Smith announces that a securities
class action has been filed on behalf of shareholders who
purchased securities of Loudeye Corp. between May 19, 2003 and
Nov. 9, 2005.  The class action was filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Western District of Washington.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated federal
securities laws by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market during the class period
concerning the company's operations and financial performance,
thereby artificially inflating the price of Loudeye securities.

No class has yet been certified in the above action.  Interested
parties have until Dec. 4, 2006, in which to move for lead
plaintiff status.

For more details, contact Howard G. Smith, Esquire, of Law
Offices of Howard G. Smith, 3070 Bristol Pike, Suite 112,
Bensalem, Pennsylvania 19020, Phone: (215) 638-4847 and (888)
638-4847, E-mail: howardsmithlaw@hotmail.com, Web site:
http://www.howardsmithlaw.com.


LOUDEYE CORP: Scott + Scott Files Securities Fraud Suit in Wash.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Scott + Scott, LLC, filed a class action against Loudeye Corp.
and certain officers and directors on Oct. 10, 2006, in the U.S.
District Court for the Western District of Washington.

The action is on behalf of Loudeye securities purchasers during
the period from May 19, 2003 through Nov. 9, 2005, for
securities law violations.

The complaint alleges that defendants made false and misleading
statements and material omissions regarding the company's
operations.  As a result, the price of the company's securities
was inflated during the Class Period, thereby harming investors.

The complaint also alleges that Loudeye made false and
misleading statements that deceived the investing public
regarding its business, operations, management and the intrinsic
value of Loudeye common stock.

Meanwhile, the company raised almost $60 million through the
sale of stock and warrants to private equity investors, while
materially misrepresenting its business prospects.

The complaint further alleges that Loudeye insiders have
negotiated a merger with Nokia Corp. mainly for the purpose of
insulating themselves from liability for their prior illicit and
improper conduct.

Contrary to the representations made by the company during the
class period, the complaint states that Loudeye actually was
operating well below guidance, was not successfully integrating
its acquisitions and was suffering from severe financial and
operational control deficiencies.

Following each of these disclosures the company's share price
declined precipitously -- falling from a class period high of
almost $30.00 per share in late 2004 (adjusted to reflect May
2006 1:10 split), to less than $2.00 per share by the time that
defendants announced that the remaining assets of the company
would be sold to Nokia Corp.

Interested parties have until Dec. 4, 2006, in which to move for
lead plaintiff status.

For more details, contact Scott + Scott, LLC, Phone: (800) 404-
7770 and (860) 537-5537, E-mail: scottlaw@scott-scott.com, Web
site: http://www.scott-scott.com.


TVIA INC: Faces Securities Fraud Violations Lawsuit in Calif.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Tvia, Inc. and certain of its officers are facing a shareholder
class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California.

The lawsuit alleges violations of the federal securities laws
and purports to seek damages on behalf of a class of
shareholders who purchased common stock of Tvia during the
period between Aug. 8, 2006 and Sept. 27, 2006.

Tvia believes the lawsuit is without merit and intends to seek a
dismissal of all charges.

The suit is "Richardson v. TVIA, Inc. et al., Case No. 5:06-cv-
06304-RMW," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California under Judge Ronald M. Whyte, with
referral to Judge Patricia V. Trumbull.

Representing the plaintiffs are Lionel Z. Glancy of Glancy &
Binkow LLP, 1801 Avenue of The Stars, Suite 311, Los Angeles, CA
90067, Phone: 310-201-9150, Fax: 310-201-9160, E-mail:
info@glancylaw.com; and Phillip Kim and Laurence M. Rosen both
of The Rosen Law Firm, P.A., 350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5508, New
York, NY 10118, Phone: 212-686-1060, Fax: 212-686-1060 or 212-
202-3827, E-mail: lrosen@rosenlegal.com.


                            *********


A list of Meetings, Conferences and Seminars appears in each
Wednesday's edition of the Class Action Reporter. Submissions
via e-mail to carconf@beard.com are encouraged.

Each Friday's edition of the CAR includes a section featuring
news on asbestos-related litigation and profiles of target
asbestos defendants that, according to independent researches,
collectively face billions of dollars in asbestos-related
liabilities.

                            *********


S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Frederick, Maryland
USA.   Glenn Ruel Senorin, Maria Cristina Canson, and Janice
Mendoza, Editors.

Copyright 2006.  All rights reserved.  ISSN 1525-2272.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without
prior written permission of the publishers.

Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed
to be reliable, but is not guaranteed.

The CAR subscription rate is $575 for six months delivered via
e-mail.  Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof
are $25 each.  For subscription information, contact Christopher
Beard at 240/629-3300.

                  * * *  End of Transmission  * * *