CAR_Public/070706.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Friday, July 6, 2007, Vol. 9, No. 133

                            Headlines


99c ONLY: Faces Labor-Related Lawsuits in California Courts
ALABAMA: County Workers Want Refund of Repealed Occupational Tax
ALLIANCE SEMICONDUCTOR: Still Faces Several SRAM Antitrust Suits
AMERICAN HONDA: Faces Lawsuit in Calif. Over Navigation Systems
AUSTRALIA: Trial in Lead Poisoning Suit Expected Next Year

BALLY TOTAL: Ill. Court Suspends Briefing in Securities Suit
BAYADA NURSES: Faces Penna. Suit Alleging Labor Code Violations
BECTON, DICKINSON: N.J. Judge Allows Three Antitrust Lawsuits
BELKIN CORP: Dec. 10 Hearing Set for Consumer Lawsuit Settlement
BURLINGTON NORTHERN: Accused of Age Discrimination in Okla. Suit

CANADA: Appeals Court Reverses CAD$4.6B Award for War Veterans
COLORADO: ACLU Asks Info on Garfield County Jail Suicide Victim
DANIELS LAW: Faces Suit Over Alleged Violation of Fair Debt Law
DONALD CARCIERI: RI Gov. Faces Suit Aiming to Protect Children
DUANE READE: Continues to Face "Chowdhury" Labor Lawsuit in N.Y.

DUANE READE: Still Faces "Damassia" Labor Litigation in N.Y.
DUANE READE: Still Faces Del., N.Y. Suits Over Oak Hill Purchase
FAIRFIELD RESORTS: Immigrant Workers Favored in Default Judgment
FIRST AMERICAN: Accused of Violating Real Estate Laws in Calif.
FOX BROADCASTING: Cal. Suit Alleges Violation of Gambling Laws

GRAND TRAVERSE: Spa Workers File Suit over Illegal Deductions
HEALTH NET: N.J. Court Orders Mailing of Notices in ERISA Suit
IMAGE ENTERTAINMENT: Faces Suit in Calif. Over BTP Transaction
INDONESIA: Suit Against City Over February Flood Still in Court
INFANTINO LLC: Recalls Toys with Parts Posing Choking Hazard

ISRAEL: Lands Registry Sued Over “Improper” Registration Fees
JA CAMBECE: Faces Suit Over Alleged Violation of Fair Debt Law
JACKSON HEWITT: Discovery Begins for "Hunter" Lawsuit in W.Va.
JACKSON HEWITT: Allows “Wooley” Suit Plaintiff to Amend Claims
JERRY RYCE: Ill. Lawsuit Alleges Misclassification of Employees

KFC CORP: Faces Lawsuit in Ga. Alleging Labor Code violations
NEW MEXICO: Lottery Faces Suit for Prematurely Stopping Games
MANTRA FILMS: Sued for Sexual Harassment, Overtime Non-payment
MICHIGAN: Strip Clubs File Suit over Dancers’ Pricey ID Cards
MID-STATES EXPRESS: Sued Over Delayed Medical Bills Payment

OKLAHOMA: SC Returns Suit over High Traffic Fines to Dist. Court
PIZZA HUT: Faces Calif. Suit Over Alleged Labor Code Violations
RANDOM HOUSE: Nov. 2 Fairness Hearing Set in Suit Over Memoirs
NORTHERN LEASING: Accused of Fraudulent Business Practice
ROBERT’S AMERICAN: Expands Recall of Snacks Posing Health Risks
STOCKERYALE INC: Settles N.H. Securities Fraud Lawsuit for $3.4M


                        Asbestos Alert

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: GenCorp Inc. Has 152 Pending Lawsuits at 2Q
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court Reverses Board Ruling in Barscz Suit
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court Junks Remand Motion in Ballenger Suit
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court Orders New Trial in Favor of Garlock
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: OSHA Issues $750 Penalty to Postal Service

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: OSHA Probes Worker Exposure at Mo. Hospital
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: UKAS & ARCA Warn v. Unqualified Surveyors
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Demolition of N.Y. Endicott Plant Delayed
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Alstom Transportation Probes Work Exposure
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Replacement of Pipes in Tenn. Prioritized

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Shop Fitter’s Widow Gets GBP330,000 Payout
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Council Probes Queensland Site for Hazards
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Congress Slams EPA for Katrina Cleanup Risk
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Researcher Says Grace May Owe Victims $6.2B
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: More Tests Urged to Verify Worker’s Death

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazard Linked to U.K. Store Worker’s Death
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Firms Move to Junk Non-Madison County Cases
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court Issues Split Ruling in DiCenzo Action
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ASARCO LLC Urges Extension of Plan Filing
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Delays Renovation of Mass. School

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: U.K. Museum Asbestos Find Leads to Transfer
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Aussie Shipyard Worker Files Lawsuit v. BHP
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Removal at Sheraton Hotel to Cost $500,000
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Locals at Risk from Nikenbah Station Hazard
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ashland to Record $16M Adjustment in 2Q07

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Cladding to be Removed from School
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Sen. Murray Pushes for Bill to Ban Asbestos
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: BECTU Supports Thompsons’ Compensation Bid
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Heffron to be Checked for Airborne Hazards
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Illegal Dumping Prompts Aussie Site Cleanup
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court OKs Commission Ruling in Gainey Case


                            *********


99c ONLY: Faces Labor-Related Lawsuits in California Courts
-----------------------------------------------------------
Two purported labor-related class actions filed against 99c Only Stores have
been coordinated.

The two suits are:

      -- "Vargas v. 99c Only Stores," filed in the Ventura
         County Superior Court in California, and

      -- "Washington v. 99c Only Stores,” which was filed in the  
         Los Angeles County Superior Court in California.

“Vargas” was filed on June 19, 2006.  Joanna Vargas filed the suit was as a
putative class action against the company and is seeking to represent its
California retail non-exempt employees.

The lawsuit alleges non-payment of wages, non-payment of overtime wages,
failure to provide or pay for meal or rest breaks, and associated claims.

It seeks compensatory, special and punitive damages in unspecified amounts,
as well as injunctive relief.

"Washington" was filed on Oct. 31, 2006.  The plaintiff, Chantelle
Washington, filed the putative class action against the company seeking to
represent its California retail non-exempt cashier employees.

The lawsuit alleges the failure to provide or pay for meal or rest breaks and
associated claims.  It seeks compensatory damages and/or penalties in
unspecified amounts, as well as equitable relief, attorney fees and interest.

Both cases have has been coordinated with one another, according to the
company's June 29, 2007 Form 10-K filing with the Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2007.

99 Cents Only Stores -- http://www.99only.com/-- is a deep-discount retailer  
of consumable general merchandise.


ALABAMA: County Workers Want Refund of Repealed Occupational Tax
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jefferson County workers who paid the county’s allegedly unlawful
occupational tax for seven years filed a suit seeking class-action status
before the Jefferson County Circuit Court, according to Eric Velasco of The
Birmingham News.

The suit contends the occupational tax was repealed in a 1999 law that took
effect on April 1, 2000.  It further argues that the county has been
unlawfully collecting the tax since 2000.

If the lawsuit becomes a class action, everyone who has paid the occupational
tax since 2000 will be represented.  Thus, if a judge rules the tax illegal
and orders a refund, all those similarly situated will be eligible for a
refund.

Attorneys for both parties said no one has to sign up in this case.

Sam Hill, representing plaintiffs Jessica Edwards and Janet Judge, said the
only action required is if people want to opt out.  Both plaintiffs work in
Jefferson County.

State’s Chief Justice Sue Bell Cobb will have to find a judge for the case in
the meantime.  The county’s Circuit Court judges excused themselves saying
that there’s a conflict of interest, because they pay the tax too.

Attorney Bill Slaughter has until July 9 to file the county’s response to the
lawsuit.

The plaintiffs’ counsel is:

          Samuel M. Hill, Esq.
          Gardner, Middlebrooks, Gibbons, Kittrell & Olsen, P.C.
          2013 First Avenue, North Suite 400
          Birmingham, AL 35203-4140

The county’s counsel is:

          William M. Slaughter, Esq.
          Haskell Slaughter Young & Rediker, LLC
          1400 Park Place Tower, 2001 Park Place North
          Birmingham, Alabama 35203
          Phone: 205-251-1000
          Fax: 205-324-1133


ALLIANCE SEMICONDUCTOR: Still Faces Several SRAM Antitrust Suits
----------------------------------------------------------------
Alliance Semiconductor Corp. continues face several federal antitrust class
actions in relation to static random access memory (SRAM), according to the
company's June 29, 2007 Form 10-K filing with the Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2007.

In October and November 2006, the company and other companies in the
semiconductor industry were named as defendants in a number of purported
antitrust class actions filed in federal district courts in California and
other states.  The company has been served in some but not all of these
actions.

The lawsuits purport to state claims on behalf of direct and indirect
purchasers of SRAM products of a conspiracy between manufacturers of SRAM
chips to fix or control the price of SRAM during the period Jan. 1, 1998
through Dec. 31, 2005.

Alliance Semiconductor Corp. -- http://www.alsc.com-- is a provider of  
analog and mixed-signal products, high-performance memory products and
connectivity and networking solutions for the communications computing,
embedded, industrial and consumer markets.  It operated in two segments:
Memory and Non-Memory.


AMERICAN HONDA: Faces Lawsuit in Calif. Over Navigation Systems
---------------------------------------------------------------
American Honda Motor Co., dba Acura Automobile Division, is facing a
diversity-motor vehicle product liability class-action complaint filed in the
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, the CourtHouse
News Service reports.

Named plaintiff Charlotte M. Fischer accuses American Honda, along with
OnStar Corp., of selling cars with analog OnStar navigation systems that will
become obsolete on Jan. 1, 2008, when the system converts to digital.

The suit is “Charlotte M Fischer v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc. et al.,
Case No. 2:07-cv-04303-ODW-CW,” filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California, under Judge Otis D. Wright, II, with referral
to Judge Carla Woehrle.

Representing plaintiffs are:

          Eric H. Gibbs, Esq.
          Dylan Hughes, Esq.
          Daniel T. LeBel, Esq.
          Girard Gibbs
          601 California Street, 14th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94108
          Phone: 415-981-4800
          E-mail: ehg@girardgibbs.com or dsh@girardgibbs.com or  
                  dtl@girardgibbs.com


AUSTRALIA: Trial in Lead Poisoning Suit Expected Next Year
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action filed against the state of New South Wales and the town of
Broken Hill Council over lead poisoning is expected to be heard next year, it
emerged in a report by Tracy Ong of The Australian.

The lead plaintiff in the suit is 20 year-old Johnathon Brennan who grew up
in the outback NSW town where several companies have mined since the late
1890s.  When he turned 12 and could still not read or write, a literacy
centre told his mother petrol-sniffing was to blame for his learning
difficulties, according to the report.  

Mr. Brennan has an IQ of less than 40.  He was diagnosed with chronic lead
exposure, with blood-lead levels of up to five times safe levels recommended
by the National Health and Medical Research Council in regular tests from the
age of five.

Lawyers seek to hold mining companies accountable for the ill effects of
their operations.  But they need to track down the companies who leased the
place.


BALLY TOTAL: Ill. Court Suspends Briefing in Securities Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted
plaintiff’s unopposed motion to suspend briefing in the consolidated
securities fraud class action filed against Bally Total Fitness Holding Corp.
and certain of its officers.

The briefing was suspend pending a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court regarding
the Seventh Circuit’s standard for pleading scienter in “Makor Issues &
Rights v. Tellabs.”

Between May and July 2004, 10 putative securities class actions, now
consolidated and designated, "In re Bally Total Fitness Securities
Litigation," were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of Illinois against the company and certain of its former and current
officers and directors.

Each of these substantially similar lawsuits alleged that the defendants
violated Sections 10(b) and/or 20(a) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, as well as the associated Rule 10b-5, in connection with
the company's proposed restatement.  

On March 15, 2005, the court appointed a lead plaintiff and on  
May 23, 2005 the court appointed lead plaintiff's counsel.  By stipulation of
the parties, the consolidated lawsuit was stayed pending restatement of the
company's financial statements in  
November 2005.  

On Dec. 30, 2005, plaintiffs filed an amended consolidated complaint,
asserting claims on behalf of a putative class of persons who purchased Bally
stock between Aug. 3, 1999 and April 28, 2004.  

On July 12, 2006, the Court granted defendants’ motions to dismiss the
amended consolidated complaint and dismissed the complaint in its entirety,
without prejudice to plaintiffs filing an amended complaint on or before Aug.
14, 2006.

An amended complaint was filed on Aug. 14, 2006.  Defendants filed motions to
dismiss the amended complaint on Sept. 28, 2006.

On Feb. 20, 2007 the Court issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order dismissing
claims against all defendants with prejudice. Plaintiffs filed a Notice of
Appeal on March 23, 2007.

On April 18, 2007, the Court granted Plaintiff’s unopposed Motion to Suspend
Briefing, suspending briefing pending a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court
regarding the Seventh Circuit’s standard for pleading scienter in “Makor
Issues & Rights v. Tellabs,” and directing the parties to file position
statements within 14 days of the issuance of the Supreme Court’s decision.

The Supreme Court’s decision was issued on June 21, 2007.  It is not yet
possible to determine the ultimate outcome of this action.

The suit is "In re Bally Total Fitness Securities Litigation,  
Case No. 1:04-cv-03530," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois under Judge John F. Grady.

Representing the plaintiffs are:   

         Fay Clayton, Esq.
         Robinson, Curley & Clayton, P.C.
         300 South Wacker Drive, Suite 1700
         Chicago, IL 60606,   
         Phone: (312) 663-3100
         E-mail: fclayton@robinsoncurley.com

              - and -

         Carol V. Gilden, Esq.
         Much, Shelist, Freed, Denenberg, Ament & Rubenstein, PC
         191 North Wacker Drive, Suite 1800
         Chicago, IL 60605-1615
         Phone: (312) 521-2403
         Fax: (312) 521-2100
         E-mail: cgilden@muchshelist.com

Representing the defendants are:  

         Janet Malloy Link, Esq.
         Latham & Watkins, LLP
         233 South Wacker Drive, 5800 Sears Tower
         Chicago, IL 60606
         Phone: (312) 876-7700
         E-mail: janet.link@lw.com

              - and -

         Gregory A. Markel, Esq.
         Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, LLP
         One World Financial Center
         New York, NY 10281
         Phone: (212) 504-6000


BAYADA NURSES: Faces Penna. Suit Alleging Labor Code Violations
---------------------------------------------------------------
Bayada Nurses, Inc. is facing a class-action complaint filed July 2 in the
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the CourtHouse
News Service reports.

Named plaintiff Jeanne Gallagher alleges denial of overtime compensation, a
violation of the Labor Code.

The suit is “Gallagher v. BAyada Nurses, Inc., Case No. 2:07-cv-02739-GP,”
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania,
under Judge Gene E.K. Pratter.

Representing plaintiffs is:

          Peter D. Winebrake
          The Winebrake Law Firm LLC
          Twining Office Center, Suite 114
          715 Twining Road
          Dresher, PA 19025
          Phone: 215-884-2491
          Fax: 215-884-2492
          E-mail: pwinebrake@winebrakelaw.com


BECTON, DICKINSON: N.J. Judge Allows Three Antitrust Lawsuits
-------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. District Judge Jose Linares of the District of New Jersey denied a
request by Becton, Dickinson and Co., the world's largest maker of hypodermic
syringes, to dismiss three antitrust class actions filed against it by health
care providers, Erik Larson of Bloomberg News reports.

According to the report, the suits include nine consolidated cases accusing
Becton, Dickinson of stifling competition for disposable syringes.
                        Case Background

Five purported class actions were brought against Becton Dickinson on behalf
of direct purchasers of Becton Dickinson's products, such as distributors,
alleging that Becton Dickinson violated federal antitrust laws, resulting in
the charging of higher prices for Becton Dickinson's products to the
plaintiff and other purported class members.

The cases filed are:

     -- "Louisiana Wholesale Drug Co., Inc., et al. v.
        Becton Dickinson and Co." (Civil Action No. 05-1602,
        U.S. District Court, Newark, New Jersey), filed on March
        25, 2005;

     -- "SAJ Distributors, Inc. et al. v. Becton Dickinson &
        Co." (Case 2:05-CV-04763-JD, U.S. District Court,
        Eastern District of Pennsylvania), filed on Sept. 6,
        2005;

     -- "Dik Drug Co., et al. v. Becton, Dickinson and Co."
        (Case No. 2:05-CV-04465, U.S. District Court, Newark,
        New Jersey), filed on Sept. 12, 2005;

     -- "American Sales Co., Inc. et al. v. Becton, Dickinson &
        Co." (Case No. 2:05-CV-05212-CRM, U.S. District Court,
        Eastern District of Pennsylvania), filed on Oct. 3,
        2005; and

     -- "Park Surgical Co. Inc. et al. v. Becton, Dickinson and
        Co." (Case 2:05-CV-05678-CMR, U.S. District Court,
        Eastern District of Pennsylvania), filed on Oct. 26,
        2005.

The actions brought by Louisiana Wholesale Drug Co. and Dik Drug
Co. in New Jersey have been consolidated under the caption, "In re Hypodermic
Products Antitrust Litigation."

Two additional purported federal class actions that accuse the company of
using its size to suppress competition and overcharge its products were
subsequently filed.

The suits are:

      -- “The Hebrew Home for the Aged at Riverdale v. Becton
         Dickinson and Company was filed on March 28, 2007 in
         U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New
         York (Case No. 07-CV-2544);” and

      -- “International Multiple Sclerosis Management Practice
         v. Becton Dickinson & Company was filed on April 5,
         2007 in U.S. District Court for the District of New
         Jersey (Case No. 2:07-cv-10602).

These purported class actions have been brought on behalf of alleged indirect
purchasers of the Company’s products.  In each case, the plaintiff seeks
treble damages, attorney’s fees and injunctive relief.

Including the above actions, direct and indirect purchasers of the Company’s
products have brought 10 purported antitrust class action lawsuits against
the company.

As directed by the court, the direct and indirect purchaser plaintiffs in the
Multi-District Litigation have filed consolidated complaints with the court.  

Becton, Dickinson and Co. -- http://www.bd.com-- is a medical technology  
company engaged principally in the manufacture and sale of a range of medical
supplies, devices, laboratory equipment and diagnostic products used by
healthcare institutions, life science researchers, clinical laboratories,
industry and the general public.  

BELKIN CORP: Dec. 10 Hearing Set for Consumer Lawsuit Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California will hold a
fairness hearing on Dec. 10, 2007 at 1:30 p.m. for the proposed settlement in
the matter, “Shannahoff v. Belkin Corporation, Case No. 2:06-cv-01474-GPS-
PJW.”

The fairness hearing will be held at 312 N. Spring St., Los Angeles,
California 90012, in Courtroom 7 on the Second Floor of the U.S District
Court for the Central District of California.

Deadline to file for exclusions and objections is on Oct. 31, 2007.  

                       Case Background

In general, the suit claims that Belkin Corp. made and sold select models of
its Wireless Products (Covered Products) that do not achieve the advertised
Mbps (megabit per second) data throughput or transmission rates and
advertised connectivity range(s) under alleged “real-world” operating
conditions.

It claimed that consumers who purchased these Wireless Products suffered
injury because they did not receive the advertised speed and transmission
rates or connectivity range(s).

The Covered Belkin Wireless Products in this settlement are the following
Belkin Wireless Product Model Numbers (SKU numbers), the packaging for which,
at the time of retail purchase by the original purchaser, did not state that
the actual data throughput rates and/or connectivity ranges would be lower
than the rate and/or range, identified on the product:

      -- B5D036,
      -- F1UP0001,
      -- F5D6000,
      -- F5D6001,
      -- F5D6020,
      -- F5D6050,
      -- F5D6050-APL,
      -- F5D6051,
      -- F5D6060,
      -- F5D6130,
      -- F5D6230-3,
      -- F5D6230-4,
      -- F5D6231-4,
      -- F5D6231-4-APL,
      -- F5D7000,
      -- F5D7001,
      -- F5D7010,
      -- F5D7010-APL,
      -- F5D7011,
      -- F5D7050,
      -- F5D7130,
      -- F5D7230-4,
      -- F5D72314,
      -- F5D7231-4P,
      -- F5D7233,
      -- F5D7330,
      -- F5D8000,
      -- F5D8010,
      -- F5D8230-4,
      -- F5D9009,
      -- F5D9010,
      -- F5D9013,
      -- F5D9050,
      -- F5D9230-4,
      -- F6D3000,
      -- F6D3010, and
      -- F6D3230-4.

Covered Belkin Wireless Products do not include products that were installed
in or sold with other devices, items or equipment by the original equipment
manufacturers of such other devices, items or equipment.

                       Settlement Terms

Basically, the settlement provides up to two full refunds or up to three 50%
promotional discounts towards the purchase of new Belkin Wireless networking
products from Belkin’s online store.

The settlement will provide up to two full refunds for those who purchased
one or more of the Covered Belkin Wireless Products, submit an online claim
form, and submit a valid sales receipt (original or legible copy).

If an individual is unable to provide a sales receipt, he or she may still be
eligible for a 50% promotional discount toward the online purchase of up to
three new Belkin Wireless Products priced at up to $300.00 each.

To qualify to receive anything, an individual must have been a resident of
the United States at the time he or she purchased the Covered Belkin Wireless
Product, and he or she must have purchased the product from an entity that
regularly sold such devices or items, during the period of Oct. 13, 2002
until Feb. 5, 2007.

For more details, visit:

       http://www.belkin.com/class_notice/settlement.asp

The suit is “Shannahoff v. Belkin Corp., Case No. 2:06-cv-01474-GPS-PJW,”
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California under
Judge George P. Schiavelli with referral to Judge Patrick J. Walsh.

Representing the plaintiffs is:

         David Mills Arbogast, Esq.
         Spiro Moss Barness
         11377 West Olympic Boulevard, 5th Floor
         Los Angeles, CA 90064
         Phone: 310-235-2468
         E-mail: david@spiromoss.com


BURLINGTON NORTHERN: Accused of Age Discrimination in Okla. Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Co. is facing a class-action complaint
filed July 2 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma
over alleged employee age discrimination.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on behalf of Jimmy rider, brings
this action under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as
amended, to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of age and to
provide appropriate relief to all individuals who were refused employment
because of age, over the age of 40.

EEOC requests that the court:

     -- grant a permanent injunction enjoining defendant, its
        officers, successors, assigns and all persons in active
        concert or participation with it, from refusing to hire
        applicants because of age, and any other employment
        practice which discriminates on the basis of age against
        individuals 40 years of age and older;

     -- order defendant to institute and carry out policies,
        practices and programs which provide equal employment
        opportunities for individuals 40 years of age and older,
        and which eradicate the effects of its past and present
        unlawful employment practices;

     -- grant a judgment requiring defendant to pay appropriate
        back wages in an amount to be determined at trial, an
        equal sum as liquidated damages, and prejudgment
        interest to Jimmy Rider and the class of aggrieved
        individuals whose wages are being unlawfully withheld as
        a result of the acts complained;

     -- order defendant to make whole all individuals adversely
        affected by the unlawful practices described, by
        providing affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the
        effects of its unlawful practices, including but not
        limited to rightful-place hiring of Mr. Rider and the
        aggrieved individuals or front pay in lieu of hiring;

     -- grant such further relief as the court deems necessary
        and proper in the public interest; and

     -- award the Commission its costs of this action.

The suit is “Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Burlington Northern
Santa Fe Railway Company, Case No. 5:07-cv-00734-T,” filed in the U.S.
District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, under Judge Ralph G.
Thompson.

Representing plaintiffs is:

          Michelle M Robertson
          EEOC-OKC
          Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
          215 Dean A McGee, Suite 524
          Oklahoma City, OK 73102
          Phone: 405-231-4363
          Fax: 405-231-45816
          E-mail: michelle.robertson@eeoc.gov


CANADA: Appeals Court Reverses CAD$4.6B Award for War Veterans
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Ontario Court of Appeal overturned on July 4, 2007 a $4.6 billion damage
award which would have compensated disabled war veterans or their estates.  
The Federal Government, in opposing the decision of the Superior Court judge,
argued that most of the money would not have gone to former military, many of
whom have died, but would have been paid instead to "thousands of distant
relatives and perhaps even creditors."

The National Council of Veteran Associations had written to the Minister of
Veterans Affairs on May 25, 2005, suggesting that, regardless of decisions of
the courts, the Government was obligated to establish a review procedure to
authorize payments in lieu of interest on administered funds. The payment
would be limited to veterans or their widows.

Chairman Cliff Chadderton stated that NCVA believes the establishment of an
ad hoc committee to be an essential step, to bring justice where warranted,
to veterans still alive or to their widows.  NCVA, an 'umbrella group,'
speaks for 56 war veteran and military organizations, and has publicly
opposed the class action. The organization does, however, strongly support
the proposal for a review committee.

The proposal for such committee was first put to the Minister of Veterans
Affairs on May 25, 2005. A response was received from the then-Deputy
Minister, Mr. Jack Stagg, stating that the matter was being forwarded to the
Department of Justice which was handling the appeal.

                        Case Background

Lawyers for the government are asking the Ontario Court of
Appeal to overturn a CAD4.6 billion award of damages to mentally
disabled war veterans in relation a lawsuit over the management
of retirement funds, The Toronto Star reports (Class Action Reporter, April
24, 2007).

A class action was brought against Ottawa in 1999 for failing to
invest veteran's money.  The lead plaintiff was Joseph
Authorson, a WWII veteran who developed schizophrenia and died
in 2002.  The suit seeks interest on the money.

In 2003, the Supreme Court ruled that the government was within
its rights when it passed a law in 1990 that blocked claims for
unpaid interest.

Justice John Brockenshire in Windsor, however, accepted
argument's by veterans' lawyers that while the high court had
barred any claims for interest, they could seek damages for the
failure to invest the veterans' money.  Two years ago, he
ordered the government to pay damages for its failure to invest
or pay interest on pensions and treatment allowances it managed
on behalf of veterans from the end of WWI to 1990.

In arguments before the appeals court in April, federal lawyers
accused Judge Brockenshire of ignoring the Supreme Court's
ruling.  They also said Judge Brockenshire computed the CAD4.6
billion by relying on investment techniques that weren't in use
in Canada at the time.

Lawyer William Knights of Toronto argued for the government.

                                    
COLORADO: ACLU Asks Info on Garfield County Jail Suicide Victim
----------------------------------------------------------------
The American Civil Liberties Union asked for the mental health records of a
Garfield County Jail inmate who committed suicide in the jail as part of a
class action over treatment of prisoners at the county jail.

In July 2006, ACLU filed the original class action complaint in U.S.  
District Court for the District of Colorado (Class Action Reporter, July 21,
2006).  It brought the suit on behalf of prisoners in the Garfield County
Jail who were subjected to widespread excessive force by deputies' misuse and
abuse of pepperball guns, restraint chairs, Tasers, pepper spray, and
electroshock belts.  

Defendants in the suit are Garfield County Sheriff Lou Vallario and Jail
Commander Scott Dawson.   

Plaintiffs representing the class of current and future prisoners are
Clarence Vandehey, William Langley, Samuel Lincoln, and Jared Hogue.
  
The ACLU suit alleges that the jail's use of the devices violates widely
accepted standards of law enforcement and corrections professionals, as well
as the manufacturers' and vendors' training and recommendations for safe and
appropriate use.  

It claims that prisoners shot with pepperballs or drenched with pepper spray
are regularly strapped into the restraint chair-sometimes for hours-without
being provided any opportunity to decontaminate.  
  
Two of the four named plaintiffs have serious mental health problems, but the
jail has allegedly denied their repeated requests for mental health care.   

ACLU amended its suit on Aug. 1 to include allegations that the sheriff
denies mental health care to indigent county jail prisoners and imposes harsh
discipline without due process.

In June, ACLU asked for the mental health records of a Garfield County Jail
inmate who committed suicide in the jail as part of the lawsuit, The Daily
Sentinel reported.  The inmate was Timothy Schilz Jr., who had held for
allegedly sex offender restrictions and other charges, and who was found
hanging in his cell during a regularly scheduled security check on June 11.

ACLU Legal Director Mark Silverstein said depositions in the case will begin
soon, but no court hearing has been scheduled yet, according to the report.

The original complaint is available at:

             http://researcharchives.com/t/s?e1b    
   
The suit is "Vandehey, et al. v. Vallario, et al., Case No.  
1:06-cv-01405-PSF," filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of
Colorado under Judge Phillip S. Figa.

Representing the plaintiffs are Taylor Scott Pendergrass and  
Mark Silverstein of American Civil Liberties Union - Colorado,  
400 Corona Street, Denver, CO 80218, U.S.A, Phone: 303-777-5482,  
Fax: 303-777-1773, E-mail: tpendergrass@aclu-co.org and  
msilver2@att.net.  


DANIELS LAW: Faces Suit Over Alleged Violation of Fair Debt Law
----------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyer Kenneth Quat of Concord, Mass.-based Quat Law Offices filed a
potential class action against Boston-based Daniels Law Offices for allegedly
violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, it emerged in a report by
Sheri Qualters of The National Law Journal.

Daniels Law is accused of adding a percentage based on attorney fees to
pending collectibles and adding the fee to the principal, instead of
calculating "reasonable fees" based on the lawyer's time.

The suit is “Socheata Som v. Daniels Law Offices P.C., No. 07-40143.  It was
filed in federal court in Massachusetts in May.

For more information, contact:

          Kenneth Quat, Esq.
          Quat Law Offices
          Web site: http://www.quatlaw.com/ken_quat.html
          E-mail: kquat@quatlaw.com


DONALD CARCIERI: RI Gov. Faces Suit Aiming to Protect Children
--------------------------------------------------------------
Rhode Island Gov. Donald Carcieri is facing a class-action complaint filed
June 28 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island, seeking
an injunction to protect children.

Named plaintiffs:

          -- Sam M.
          -- Tony M.
          -- Caesar S.
          -- David T.
          -- Briana H.
          -- Alexis H.
          -- Clare H.
          -- Deanna H.
          -- Danny B.
          -- Michael B.

seek declaratory and injunctive relief to compel Defendants --the Governor of
the State of Rhode Island, the Secretary of the Executive Office of Health
and Human Services, and the Director of the Department of Children, Youth and
Families -- to meet their legal obligations to care for and protect Rhode
Island's abused and neglected children in state custody by reforming the
State's dysfunctional child welfare system.

The suit is brought on behalf of all children who are or will be in the legal
custody of the Rhode Island Department of Children, Youth and Families due to
a report or suspicion of abuse or neglect.

The plaintiffs raise the questions of:

     -- Whether Defendants fail to provide Plaintiff Children
        with safe, appropriate, and stable foster care
        placements, causing significant harm to their health and
        well-being;

     -- Whether Defendants fail to prevent the abuse or neglect
        of Plaintiff Children while in Defendants' custody,
        causing significant harm to their health and well-being;

     -- Whether Defendants fail to place Plaintiff Children in
        the least restrictive and most family-like settings
        suited to their needs, including by unnecessarily
        institutionalizing them, causing significant harm to
        their health and well-being;

     -- Whether Defendants fail to provide Plaintiff Children
        with legally required services necessary to keep them
        safe and properly cared for, and to prevent them from
        deteriorating physically, psychologically, or otherwise
        while in custody, as required by law and reasonable
        professional judgment, causing significant harm to their
        health and well-being;

     -- Whether Defendants unsafely return Plaintiff Children to
        caretakers who abuse or neglect them again, causing
        significant harm to their health and well-being;

     -- Whether Defendants unnecessarily move Plaintiff Children
        from placement to placement, causing significant harm to
        their health and well-being;

     -- Whether Defendants fail to provide Plaintiff Children
        and their families with reasonable decision-making as
        well as timely services necessary to ensure the safe and
        successful reunification of children with their families
        when appropriate, causing significant harm to their
        health and well-being;

     -- Whether Defendants fail to provide Plaintiff Children
        with timely and reasonable decision-making as well as
        services necessary to ensure that when Plaintiff
        Children cannot be reunited with their families safely,
        they are promptly filed for adoption and placed in
        permanent homes, causing significant harm to their
        health and well-being; and

     -- Whether Defendants fail to provide Plaintiff Children
        with the supports necessary to maintain family
        relationships where appropriate, including placing
        siblings together as well as providing parent and
        sibling visits, causing significant harm to their health
        and well-being.

As of January 2007, approximately 3,000 children were in the legal custody of
DCYF for foster care services due to reported or substantiated allegations of
abuse or neglect.

The suit is “M. et al v. Carcieri et al., Case No. 1:07-cv-00241-L-LDA,”
filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island, under
Judge Ronald R. Lagueux, with referral to Judge Lincoln D. Almond.

Representing plaintiffs:

          Jametta O. Alston
          Office of the Child Advocate
          272 West Exchange St., Suite 301
          Providence, RI 02903
          Phone: 222-6650
          Fax: 222-6652
          E-mail: jalston@doa.state.ri.us

          - and -

          John William Dineen
          305 South Main Street
          Providence, RI 02903
          Phone: 223-2397
          Fax: 223-2399
          E-mail: jwdineen1@yahoo.com


DUANE READE: Continues to Face "Chowdhury" Labor Lawsuit in N.Y.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Duane Reade, Inc. continues to face a purported class action,
captioned, "Enamul Chowdhury v. Duane Reade Inc. and Duane Reade Holdings,
Inc.," which is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of New York.

The suit was filed on March 24, 2006.  The company was served with the
purported class action complaint on April 2006.  

The suit alleges that from a period beginning March 2000, the company
incorrectly classified certain employees in an attempt to avoid paying
overtime to such employees, thereby violating the Fair Labor Standards Act
and New York law.  It seeks an unspecified amount of damages.

The company reported no development in the case at its June 29, 2007 Form 10-
K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 30, 2006.

The suit is "Chowdhury v. Duane Reade, Inc., et al., Case No.
1:06-cv-02295-MGC," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York under Judge Miriam Goldman
Cedarbaum.

Representing the plaintiffs is:

         Seth Richard Lesser, Esq.
         Locks Law Firm, PLLC
         110 East 55th Street
         New York, NY 10022
         Phone: 212-838-3333
         Fax: 212-838-3735
         E-mail: slesser@lockslawny.com

Representing the defendants is:

         Gerald Thomas Hathaway, Esq.
         Frances Mollie Nicastro, Esq.
         Littler Mendelson, P.C.
         885 Third Avenue 16th Floor
         New York, NY 10022
         Phone: 212-583-2684 and (212) 583-2688
         Fax: 212-832-2719
         E-mail: ghathaway@littler.com
                 fnicastro@littler.com


DUANE READE: Still Faces "Damassia" Labor Litigation in N.Y.
------------------------------------------------------------
Duane Reade, Inc. remains a defendant in the purported class
action, "Damassia v. Duane Reade, Inc.," which is pending in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The complaint alleges that from the period beginning November 1998, the
company incorrectly gave some employees the title, "assistant manager," in an
attempt to avoid paying these employees overtime, in contravention of the
Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Law.  It seeks an award equal to
twice an unspecified amount of unpaid wages.

The company reported no development in the case at its June 29, 2007 Form 10-
K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 30, 2006.

The suit is "Damassia v. Duane Reade, Inc., Case No. 1:04-cv- 08819-GEL,"
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York under
Judge Gerard E. Lynch.  

Representing the plaintiffs are:

      -- Tarik Fouad Ajami, Esq.
         Adam T. Klein, Esq.
         Justin Mitchell Swartz, Esq.
         Outten & Golden, LLP
         3 Park Avenue, 29th Floor
         New York, NY 10016
         Phone: (212) 245-1000
         Fax: (212) 977-4005
         E-mail: tfa@outtengolden.com
                 atk@outtengolden.com
                 jms@outtengolden.com

Representing the defendants are:

         Gerald Thomas Hathaway, Esq.
         Lisa A. Schreter, Esq.
         Littler Mendelson, P.C.
         Phone: 212.583.2684 and (404) 233-0330
         Fax: 212.832.2719 and (404) 233-2361
         E-mail: ghathaway@littler.com


DUANE READE: Still Faces Del., N.Y. Suits Over Oak Hill Purchase
----------------------------------------------------------------
Duane Reade Holdings, Inc. remains a defendant in several purported class
actions in state courts in Delaware and New York, challenging its acquisition
by a group of investors, including Oak Hill Capital Partners, L.P., and
members of the company's management team.

On Jul. 30, 2004, the acquisition of the company was completed by a group of
investors.  As part of the acquisition, Duane Reade Acquisition Corp., the
company wholly owned subsidiary, merged with and into Duane Reade Inc., with
Duane Reade Inc. remaining as the surviving corporation.

Initially the company was slapped with six purported class action complaints
challenging the Acquisition consummated by the it and Duane Reade
Acquisition, which were all filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of
Delaware, referred to as the "Delaware Complaints," as well as three
purported class action complaints that were filed in the Supreme Court of the
State of  
New York.   

Two of the New York complaints have been dismissed without prejudice.  The
other New York complaint is pending, but has not been served on the company.  

The Delaware complaints name the company's former chairman and certain other
members of its board of directors and executive officers as well as Duane
Reade as defendants.  Four of the Delaware complaints name Oak Hill as a
defendant.   

The New York Complaint names the company's former chairman and certain other
members of the company's board of directors and executive officers as well as
Duane Reade as defendants.  One of the dismissed New York complaints named
Oak Hill as a defendant.

The Delaware Complaints were consolidated on Jan. 28, 2004, and on Apr. 8,
2004 the plaintiffs in the Delaware actions filed a consolidated class action
complaint.   

The plaintiffs in this litigation have been inactive for over three years.

The company reported no development in the case at its June 29, 2007 Form 10-
K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 30, 2006.

Duane Reade Holdings, Inc. -– http://www.duanereade.com-- is a drugstore  
chain operating 136 of 251 stores in Manhattan's business and residential
districts, 82 stores in New York's outer boroughs and 33 stores in the
surrounding New York and New Jersey suburbs, including the Hudson River
communities of northeastern New Jersey.  Duane Reade Holdings provides a
selection of competitively priced, branded and private label drugstore
products available in the New York greater metropolitan area.  The Company's
pharmacy business is central to its customer identity and provides a critical
link to its health and wellness business and sales in over-the-counter front-
end products.  Duane Reade Holdings also has an interactive Website, which
customers may use to access company information, refill prescriptions and
purchase over-the-counter medications as well as health and beauty care
products and other non-pharmacy items.


FAIRFIELD RESORTS: Immigrant Workers Favored in Default Judgment
----------------------------------------------------------------
A federal judge has ruled against a few of the defendants in a legal battle
centered on immigrant workers at Fairfield Resorts timeshares in the
Williamsburg area, Victor Reklaitis of The Daily Press reports.

The default decision was made against A to Z Best Service Inc., Sergey
Shishkin, Igor Evstiveef, Vadim Ramazaev and Mykhaylo Sandulyak for not
showing up at a hearing or for disputing the employees’ issues.  

The court held these defendants liable, but didn’t award actual damages on
the ground that they are currently "not easily ascertainable."

The suit was filed in August 2005 on behalf of 44 workers from Mongolia,
Slovakia, Russia and Ukraine.  The plaintiffs alleged they were not paid
three years in overtime pay, had been wrongly required to pay pre-employment
deposits and had been threatened about seeking legal help.

In December 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Virginia certified the suit as class action (Class Action Reporter, Dec 26,
2006).

About 300 to 400 people could be included in the suit, according to the
plaintiffs’ attorney Sandy Waterman.  He said he represents about 105 workers
in three lawsuits against Fairfield and some companies that staff the resorts.

A federal judge has already approved class-action notices for the legal
battle.  It will run in the Daily Press on July 8 and in The Virginia Gazette
on Wednesday and July 7.

Mr. Waterman said workers who qualify to join the class have until Aug. 31 to
get included in the action.

For more details, contact the plaintiffs’ lawyer:

          Avery Tillinghast "Sandy" Waterman, Jr., Esq.
          Patten, Wornom, Hatten & Diamonstein, L.C.
          Patrick Henry Corporate Center
          12350 Jefferson Avenue Suite 300
          Newport News, Virginia 23602
          Phone: 757-223-4500  
          Fax: 757-249-3242; 757-249-1627; 757-223-4518


FIRST AMERICAN: Accused of Violating Real Estate Laws in Calif.
---------------------------------------------------------------
The First American Corp. and First American Title Insurance Co. are named
defendants in a class-action complaint filed June 12 in the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California, the CourtHouse News Service
reports.

Named plaintiff Denise P. Edwards accuses the companies of violating real
estate laws. The companies tried to increase their market share by paying
title agencies in exchange for exclusive referral agreements, the lawsuit
claims.

The suit is “Denise P Edwards v. The First American Corp. et al., Case No.
2:07-cv-03796-SJO-FFM,” filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central
District of California, under Judge S. James Otero, with referral to Judge
Frederick F. Mumm.

Representing plaintiffs are:

          Richard S. Gordon
          Martin E. Wolf
          Quinn Gordon and Wolf
          102 West Pennsylvania Avenue Suite 402
          Baltimore, MD 21294
          Phone: 410-824-2300

          James W. Spertus
          Lawrence C Jones
          James W Spertus Law Offices
          12100 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 620
          Los Angeles, CA 90025
          Phone: 310-826-4700
          E-mail: jim@spertuslaw.com

          David Oakley
          The Fair Housing Law Clinic
          3214 Prospect Avenue East
          Cleveland, OH 44115
          Phone: 216-431-5300

          - and -

          Cyril V Smith
          Zuckerman Spaeder
          100 East Pratt Street Suite 2440
          Baltimore, MD 21202
          Phone: 410-332-0444


FOX BROADCASTING: Cal. Suit Alleges Violation of Gambling Laws
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fox Broadcasting Co. and Fox Interactive Media Inc. are named defendants in a
class-action complaint filed June 15 in the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California, the CourtHouse News Service reports.

Named plaintiff Darlene Couch accuses Fox Broadcasting and others are accused
of violating gambling laws by their promotions of the “American Idol” TV show.

A similar class-action complaint was been filed in Atlanta Federal Court
against NBC Universal, Endemol USA and Verisign, for their “Deal or No Deal”
promos.

The suit is “Darlene Couch v. Telescope Inc. et al., Case No. 2:07-cv-03916-
FMC-VBK,” complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District
of California, under Judge Florence-Marie Cooper, with referral to Judge
Victor B. Kenton.

Representing plaintiffs are:

          Paul R Kiesel
          Kiesel Boucher Larson
          8648 Wilshire Blvd
          Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2910
          Phone: 310-854-4444
          E-mail: kiesel@kbla.com

          Kevin T. Moore
          6111 Peachtree Dunwoody Road, Northeast, Suite 201
          Atlanta, GA 30328
          Phone: 770-396-3622

          - and -

          William A. Pannell
          3460 Kingsboro Road, Northeast, Suite TH5
          Atlanta, GA 30326
          Phone: 404-353-2283


GRAND TRAVERSE: Spa Workers File Suit over Illegal Deductions
-------------------------------------------------------------
A luxurious resort in Acme, Michigan is facing a class action allegedly
violating labor laws and employees’ rights, Victor Skinner of Record Eagle
reports.

The class action filed Friday in 13th Circuit Court claims the Grand Traverse
Resort & Spa violated state employment and wage laws for imposing $150
paycheck deductions on several spa workers to help fund marketing efforts for
the last six years.

According to the plaintiffs’ attorney, Enrico Schaefer, the employees started
raising their grievances last year.  As a result, the Grand Traverse
disclosed that it has been unilaterally and without the employees’ knowledge,
deducting $150 from their paychecks as a marketing expense.   

He added that a Michigan statute “makes it unlawful for employers to deduct
amounts from an employee's paycheck without their full, free, and written
consent. This particular deduction was never disclosed to employees and they
never even knew about it.”

Mr. Schaefer believes the resort has also bilked employees’ tips as well as
product commissions, which is undeniably a violation of the Michigan Sales
Representatives Commission Act.  This could cost the company up to twice the
amount of commissions plus lawyers’ fees.

According to the report, KSL Recreation Inc., the resort’s former owner,
started this practice when it first opened in 1999.  Grand Traverse Band of
Ottawa and Chippewa Indians acquired the spa in March 2003 and put an end to
the policy in December 2006.

Mr. Schaefer, who represents nearly 150 plaintiffs in the lawsuit, said the
company may claim sovereign immunity and profess they are immune from
Michigan labor and employment laws.  He might meet with the company’s lawyers
in two weeks and see if they can reach a settlement, according to the report.

For more information, contact the plaintiffs’ counsel:

          Enrico Schaefer, Esq.
          Traverse Legal, PLC
          810 Cottageview Drive Unit G-20
          Traverse City, MI 49684
          Phone: (231) 668-4633
          Fax: (231) 932-0636


HEALTH NET: N.J. Court Orders Mailing of Notices in ERISA Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey ordered the mailing of
notices about the certification of a class in a consolidated Employee
Retirement Income Security Act violations suit against Health Net, Inc.,

Initially, two class actions were filed:

       -- “McCoy v. Health Net, Inc. et al,” and

       -- “Wachtel v. Guardian Life Insurance Co.”

These two lawsuits are styled as nationwide class actions and are pending in
the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of a class
of subscribers in a number of the company's large and small employer group
plans.

The Wachtel complaint initially was filed as a single plaintiff case in New
Jersey State court on July 23, 2001.  Subsequently, the company removed the
Wachtel complaint to federal court, and plaintiffs amended their complaint to
assert claims on behalf of a class of subscribers in small employer group
plans in New Jersey on Dec. 4, 2001.

The McCoy complaint was filed on April 23, 2003 and asserts claims on behalf
of a nationwide class of Health Net subscribers.  

These two cases have been consolidated for purposes of trial.

Plaintiffs allege that Health Net, Inc., Health Net of the Northeast, Inc.
and Health Net of New Jersey, Inc. violated ERISA in connection with various
practices related to the reimbursement of claims for services provided by out-
of-network providers.

Plaintiffs seek relief in the form of payment of additional benefits,
injunctive and other equitable relief, and attorneys’ fees.

On April 23, 2003, plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification seeking
to certify nationwide classes of Health Net subscribers.

The District Court granted plaintiffs’ motion for class certification on Aug.
5, 2004, and issued an order (Class Certification Order) certifying two
nationwide classes of Health Net subscribers who received medical services or
supplies from an out-of-network provider and to whom the defendants paid less
than the providers’ billed charge during the period from 1995 to Aug. 31,
2004.

Health Net appealed the Class Certification Order to the Court of Appeals for
the Third Circuit.  

On June 30, 2006, the Third Circuit ruled in Health Net’s favor on the
appeal.  

The Third Circuit held that the District Court’s class certification opinion
failed to properly define the claims, issues and defenses to be treated on a
class basis.

The Third Circuit thus vacated the certification order and remanded the case
to the District Court for further proceedings.

In September 2006, the District Court certified the same classes but limited
them to the resolution of 19 legal issues.  

The District Court has ordered that the notice to the classes be mailed
forthwith and that Health Net pay the cost of such notice.

The suit is "Wachtel, et al. v. Health Net, Inc., et al., Case  
No. 2:01-cv-04183-FSH-PS," filed in the U.S. District Court for  
the District of New Jersey under Judge Faith S. Hochberg with  
referral to Patty Shwartz.

Representing the plaintiffs is:

          Barry M. Epstein at Sills, Esq.
          Cummis, Epstein & Gross PC
          One Riverfront Plaza
          Newark, NJ 07102-5400
          Phone: (973) 643-7000
          E-mail: bepstein@sillscummis.com

Representing the defendants are:  

         John J. Gibbons, Esq.
         Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger & Vecchione, PC
         One Riverfront Plaza
         Newark, NJ 07102-5496
         Phone: (973) 596-4500
         E-mail: jgibbons@gibbonslaw.com

              - and -

         Herve Gouraige, Esq.
         Epstein Becker & Green, PC
         Two Gateway Center, 12th Floor
         Newark, NJ 07102-5003  
         Phone: (973) 642-1900
         E-mail: hgouraige@ebglaw.com


IMAGE ENTERTAINMENT: Faces Suit in Calif. Over BTP Transaction
--------------------------------------------------------------
Image Entertainment, Inc., its officers and members of its board face a
purported class action in the Superior Court of the State of California,
County of Los Angeles over the company’s merger agreement with BTP
Acquisition Company LLC.

Under the terms of the amended merger agreement, Image stockholders will
receive the same aggregate cash consideration as under the original merger
agreement, but also will retain between 5% and 9% of their common shares in
the post-transaction company.

The purported class action shareholder complaint, entitled, Henzel v. Image
Entertainment, Inc., et al. was filed on April 10, 2007.

The named plaintiff proposes to represent a class of the company’s
stockholders and claims, among other things, that in connection with the
proposed business combination transaction with BTP, our directors breached
their fiduciary duties of due care, good faith and loyalty by failing to
maximize stockholder value and by creating deterrents to third-party offers.

Among other things, the complaint seeks class action status, and a court
order enjoining the consummation of the merger and directing the company to
take appropriate steps to maximize stockholder value.  

Image Entertainment, Inc. -- http://www.image-entertainment.com-- is a  
vertically integrated independent home entertainment content supplier engaged
in the acquisition, production and worldwide distribution of exclusive
content for release on a variety of formats and platforms.  The Company is
primarily engaged in the domestic acquisition and wholesale distribution of
content for release on digital versatile disc (DVD).  It also acquired rights
to audio content for distribution on compact disc (CD) spread across a
variety of genres and configurations. The Company has two business segments:
Domestic (United States and Canada) and International.  The domestic segment
primarily consists of acquisition, production and distribution of exclusive
DVD content and, through Egami Media, exclusive content for digital
distribution via video-on-demand, streaming video and download.  The
international segment includes international video sublicensing and worldwide
broadcast rights exploitation.


INDONESIA: Suit Against City Over February Flood Still in Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Central Jakarta District Court heard on June 25 a suit brought by victims
of the February flood in Jakarta, saying the city administration
discriminated against poor victims in providing aid during and after the
disaster, according to the Jakarta Post.

Eleven flood victims filed the suit in April accusing Governor Suityoso and
Jakarta's five mayors of failing to properly manage the flooding.  

The suit also alleges that the administration commercialized flood aid and
failed to quickly distribute them.

The plaintiffs have dismissed some defense arguments that the suit was
wrongfully filed, saying the fact that the government didn’t oppose their
claims about disaster management only meant that they acknowledge their
failure.

They demanded IDR100 million for each flood victim and IDR5.16 trillion to
rebuild the ruined city.  They also sought a public apology to be printed in
national newspapers and aired on television stations (Class Action Reporter,
June 22, 2007).

The court will not hold a hearing for a week and when it resumes, the
government will defend itself.

Made Suarjaya represents the governor.

Representing the plaintiffs is Nurkholis Hidayat.


INFANTINO LLC: Recalls Toys with Parts Posing Choking Hazard
-------------------------------------------------------------
Infantino LLC, of San Diego, Calif., in cooperation with the U.S. Consumer
Product Safety Commission, is conducting a voluntary recall of about 68,000
Shape Sorting Toy Castles.

According to the firm, the plastic rod can come loose allowing the colored
counting beads to slide off of the toy, posing a choking hazard to young
children.

Infantino has received four reports of children nearly choking on the colored
beads after putting them in their mouths.

The recalled toy castles have counting beads, four play figures and several
different shapes and letters that fit into holes in the castle.  “infantino®”
is printed in the lower right-hand corner of the side with the letters.

The recall only includes castles with the following date codes: 5349, 6087,
6132 and 0906.  Castles with other date codes, no date code or with a plastic
rod attached with a metal screw are not included in this recall.  The date
code is stamped on the underside of the blue top and can be viewed through
the top square shape or top “A” letter openings.

These toys were manufactured in China and were sold through Wal-Mart, Target,
Marshalls, Meijers and other specialty toy retailers nationwide from January
2006 through May 2007 for about $12.

To view photo of the recalled product, click on the link:
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml07/07230.html

Consumers should take the recalled toy away from young children immediately
and contact Infantino for instructions on how to return the product for a
free replacement.  A free return shipping label can be accessed on the firm’s
Web site.

For more information, call Infantino toll-free at (888) 808-3111 between 8
a.m. and 4 p.m. PT Monday through Friday or visit the firm’s Web site at
http://www.service.infantino.com.


ISRAEL: Lands Registry Sued Over “Improper” Registration Fees
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Ministry of Justice is facing a lawsuit seeking class-action status in
Tel Aviv District Court in Israel, according to Yitzhak Danon of Globes
Online.

The suit alleges that the Lands Registry Office improperly charged two fees
and caused monetary damages to the public.  It further charges the government
of unjust enrichment.

The plaintiff claims he was required to pay two separate fees.  One was the
NIS27 service fee for registration of a transaction or other service, where
actually, none was rendered at all.  He considers the other NIS53 an
overcharge in contravention of the limit in the Land Regulations.

In addition, he said that the total fee of NIS80 was just too much.


JA CAMBECE: Faces Suit Over Alleged Violation of Fair Debt Law
---------------------------------------------------------------
J.A. Cambece Law Office in Peabody, Mass. faces a potential class action in
relation to the company’s compliance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices
Act, it emerged in a report by Sheri Qualters of The National Law Journal.

The suit is “Stephen D. Smith v. J.A. Cambece Law Office, No. 07-40144,”
filed in federal court in Massachusetts.  It revolves around allegedly
deceptive and unfair statements in one of the firm's standard dunning
letters, according to the report.

The Cambece firm's attorney is:

          Kathryn Pieczarka, Esq.
          Lawson & Weitzen, LLP
          Web site: http://www.lawson-weitzen.com


JACKSON HEWITT: Discovery Begins for "Hunter" Lawsuit in W.Va.
--------------------------------------------------------------
A purported class action against Jackson Hewitt Tax Service
Inc., which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
West Virginia, and alleged violations of West Virginia's Credit Service
Organization Act is in discovery stage.

On Oct. 30, 2006, Linda Hunter brought a purported class action complaint
against the company in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of West
Virginia, for an alleged breach of fiduciary duty, for breach of West
Virginia's Credit Service Organization Act, for breach of contract, and for
unfair or deceptive acts or practices, and seeking damages.

On Nov. 22, 2006, the company filed a motion to dismiss.  A decision by the
court is currently pending, and during such time the case is in its discovery
stage, according to the company’s June 29, 2007 Form 10-K filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended April 30,
2007.

The suit is "Hunter v. Jackson Hewitt, Inc., Case No. 3:06-cv-
00919," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West
Virginia under Judge Robert C. Chambers.

Representing the plaintiff is

         John W. Barrett, Esq.
         Bailey & Glasser
         227 Capitol Street
         Charleston, WV 25301-1386
         Phone: 304/345-6555
         Fax: 304/342-1110
         E-mail: jbarrett@baileyglasser.com

Representing the defendants are:

         Michael P. Kelly, Esq.
         Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom
         1440 New York Avenue, NW
         Washington, DC 20005
         Phone: 202/371-7000
         Fax: 202/393-5760
         E-mail: mikelly@skadden.com
      
              - and -

         Debra Lee Hovatter, Esq.
         Spilman Thomas & Battle
         P.O. Box 615
         Morgantown, WV 26504-0615
         Phone: 304/291-7935
         Fax: 304/291-7979
         E-mail: dhovatter@spilmanlaw.com


JACKSON HEWITT: Allows “Wooley” Suit Plaintiff to Amend Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jackson Hewitt Tax Service, Inc. agreed to plaintiff’s request to permit him
to file an Amended Complaint in a lawsuit pending in the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of Illinois with regards to the company’s tax
return preparation services.

On April 20, 2007, Brent Wooley brought the purported class action complaint
against the company and certain unknown franchisees in the on behalf of
customers who obtained tax return preparation services that allegedly
included false deductions without support by the customer that resulted in
penalties being assessed by the IRS against the taxpayer for violations of
the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act, and the Racketeer
and Corrupt Organizations Act, seeking compensatory and punitive damages,
restitution, and attorneys’ fees.

The alleged violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices
Act relate to representations regarding tax return preparation and Gold
Guarantee coverage and denial of Gold Guarantee claims.

On June 20, 2007, the company agreed to plaintiff’s request to permit him to
file an Amended Complaint in exchange for extending the deadline for filing a
motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint to July 31, 2007.

The suit is “Wooley v. Jackson Hewitt Tax Service Inc. et al., Case No. 1:07-
cv-02201,” filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois under Judge Ruben Castillo.

Representing the plaintiffs is:

         Clinton A. Krislov, Esq.
         Krislov & Associates, Ltd.
         20 North Wacker Drive, Suite 1350
         Chicago, IL 60606
         Phone: (312) 606-0500
         E-mail: clint@krislovlaw.com

Representing the defendants is:

         Christina M. Tchen, Esq.
         Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom, LLP
         333 West Wacker Drive, Suite 2100
         Chicago, IL 60606
         Phone: (312) 407-0700
         Fax: (312) 407-0411
         E-mail: ttchen@skadden.com


JERRY RYCE: Ill. Lawsuit Alleges Misclassification of Employees
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jerry Ryce Builders, Inc. is facing a class-action complaint filed May 29 in
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, accusing it of
misclassifying employees as independent contractors to duck payroll taxes and
of employing undocumented workers.

Named plaintiffs are Illinois District Council No.1 of the International
Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers.

This case involves an alleged fraudulent scheme executed by defendant to
underbid construction contracts by classifying its employees as independent
contractors to avoid payment of payroll taxes and insurance.  This case also
involves an alleged fraudulent scheme executed by defendant to employ
undocumented workers in violation of federal immigration and employment laws.

In addition, the defendant improperly categorized employees as independent
contractors, thereby gaining an illegal and fraudulent advantage over A.L.L.
Masonry, U.S. Masonry in the bidding process and damaged A.L.L. Masonry, U.S.
Masonry and the Union.

Plaintiffs claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 1961 et. seq.

Defendant is liable to plaintiffs pursuant to RICO 18 U.S.C. Section 1962(c)
which makes it unlawful to "conduct or participate, directly or indirectly,
in the conduct" of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity.
The defendant's scheme to employ illegal aliens and harbor them, as well as
categorize its employees as independent contractors meets the elements of a
Section 1962(c) RICO claim in that the defendant's activity was conducted by
an enterprise and through a pattern of racketeering activity.

The suit is “A.L.L Masonry Construction Co. Inc. et al. v. Jerry Ryce
Builders Inc., Case No. 1:07-cv-02992,” filed in the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of Illinois, under Judge James B. Zagel.

Representing defendant are:

          Anthony Sargent Graefe
          Mark David Hansen
          Graefe & Hansen, Ltd.
          55 West Monroe, #3550
          Chicago, IL 60603
          Phone: (312)236-0177
          E-mail: graefe@ghemployerlaw.com or
                  hansen@ghemployerlaw.com

Representing plaintiffs are:

          Travis J. Ketterman
          Raymond James Sanguinetti
          Whitfield & McGann
          111 East Wacker, Suite 2600
          Chicago, IL 60601
          Phone: (312) 251-9700
          E-mail: tketterman@whitfield-mcgann.com or
                  sangpac@sbcglobal.net


KFC CORP: Faces Lawsuit in Ga. Alleging Labor Code violations
-------------------------------------------------------------
KFC Corp. is facing a class-action complaint filed June 29, in the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, the CourtHouse News
Service reports.

Named plaintiffs are:

          -- Alice Daugherty
          -- Annie Crowell
          -- Arturo Estrada
          -- Audrey Hardison
          -- Aziz Alibhai
          -- Barbara Lancelin
          -- Beternia Baker
          -- Bobby Pilcher
          -- Bose Omaivboje
          -- Brandon Sheppard
          -- Chameka Washington
          -- Charlotte Smith
          -- Clarence Richardson
          -- Collin Walters
          -- Constance Wilson
          -- Derek Needham
          -- Donna Chapman
          -- Edna McGill
          -- Erica Greenwood
          -- Greta Louissaint
          -- Gyrone Hilliard
          -- Harold McCoy
          -- Innocent Mafu
          -- James Hunter
          -- Jeffery Rainey, Jr.
          -- June Nicholson
          -- Kendra Taylor
          -- Kimberly Roberts
          -- Kristi Rosenkrans
          -- Lenora Williams
          -- Linda Graves
          -- Melvin Johnson
          -- Michael Harvey
          -- Michelle Horton
          -- Nadiene Santos
          -- Olga Segal
          -- Peter Augustin
          -- Peter Omaivboje
          -- Rasheeda Parks
          -- Ricky Kitts
          -- Rochelle Brister
          -- Roderick Barton
          -- Roxanne Morris
          -- Roxie Morris
          -- Sabrina Fortson
          -- Sandra Cable
          -- Sherilyn Jackson
          -- Sherrea Heyward
          -- Sulpice Aguey-Zinsou
          -- Tanya Bowden
          -- Tiffany Hutchinson
          -- Tracy Deaton
          -- Verna Workman
          -- William Evans
          -- Yolanda Whaley
          -- Kelly White  

They allege denial of overtime compensation, a violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

The suit is “Wilson et al. v. KFC Corp., Case No. 1:07-cv-01538-ODE,” filed
in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, under Judge
Orinda D. Evans.

Representing plaintiffs are:

          Edward D. Buckley
          Daniel M. Klein
          Buckley & Klein
          1180 West Peachtree Street, Suite 1100
          Atlantic Center Plaza
          Atlanta, GA 30309
          Phone: 404-781-1100
          Fax: 404-781-1101
          E-mail: edbuckley@buckleyklein.com or
                  dmklein@buckleyklein.com


NEW MEXICO: Lottery Faces Suit for Prematurely Stopping Games
-------------------------------------------------------------
Lottery retailers have filed a class action against New Mexico Lottery in the
state District Court in Albuquerque last week for allegedly prematurely
pulling games from markets.

Named plaintiffs in the suit are Stansell’s Thriftway Supermarket owner Randy
Stansell, Kenneth Nut of three KC Express stores, and Logan Super Stop
employee Chris Channing.

The suit charges the lottery of engaging in unfair trade practices and
negligent misrepresentation.  It further states that for several years it has
been prematurely stopping games despite the considerable prizes that are
still up for grabs.

The lawsuit seeks for monetary damages and asks the court to issue the
lottery with a permanent injunction to stop it from untimely withdrawing
unsold scratch-off games.

In addition, it also wants the court to specifically define the conditions
and circumstances when the lottery can stop unsold games.

According to lottery spokeswoman Linda Hamlin, the lottery officials are
currently reviewing the lawsuit and that it’s premature to comment.

Representing the plaintiffs are:

          Warren F. Frost, Esq.
          Timothy L. Rose
          Warren F. Frost, P.C.
          401 South First Street
          Tucumcari, NM 88401-2708
          Phone: (505) 461-2488
          Fax: (505) 762-7738


MANTRA FILMS: Sued for Sexual Harassment, Overtime Non-payment
--------------------------------------------------------------
A former employee of Mantra Films and Girls Gone Wild has filed a lawsuit,
which includes class-action claims, for unfair business practices and sexual
harassment against the two companies on Monday, according to TMZ.com.  The
suit was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court.

Plaintiff Tranae Hammond alleges that a few days after her employment at the
two companies, a supervisor repeatedly sexually harassed her.

The suit, which also names Joe Francis and another person as defendants,
states that the supervisor’s lascivious acts included touching, massaging of
her shoulders and arms, and regular discussion about sex in front of her.  
She added that in at least one instance, she was tapped on her buttocks with
a clipboard.

Ms. Hammond further asserts that after she made claims of sexual harassment,
the company started treating her with hostility and fired her.

The lawsuit doesn’t charge Mr. Francis of direct sexual harassment.  However,
it says he “improperly managed, controlled and dominated Mantra Films, Inc.
and Girls Gone Wild as his alter ego, agent and instrumentality.”

The suit’s class action claims include unpaid overtime, not providing
required meal and rest periods for employees and failure to keep required
records.


MICHIGAN: Strip Clubs File Suit over Dancers’ Pricey ID Cards
-------------------------------------------------------------
A lawyer for a strip bar plans to file a class action for dancers as part of
a pending Zoo Bar lawsuit against the city, The Detroit News’ Christine
MacDonald reports.

Attorney Brad Shafer and attorneys of other strip bars are striving to topple
the city’s requirement, which provides that strip dancers need to obtain
identification cards for $250.

The lawyers agree that the fee is illegally high.

Lawsuits by Zoo Bar and All Stars against the city are currently pending in
U.S. District Court in Detroit.

The complaints challenge the constitutionality of the city’s provision.

All Stars attorney Michael Donaldson said there is no due process when the
police confiscate the cards.  He finds it unfair that other dancers don’t
have to go through similar requirements.

Strip dancers need to undergo criminal record checks and provide fundamental
documents such as birth certificate and Social Security card.

The Detroit Police Department issues the permits at $250, annual renewals at
$125.

According to a general manager that works with Zoo Bar and Deja vu, these ID
cards for dancers are rare across the country.  In fact, he only knows five
other cities with similar permit requirements.

Plaintiffs’ council are:

          Bradley J. Shafer, Esq.
          3800 Capital City Blvd, Suite 2
          Lansing, Michigan 48906
          Phone: 517.886.6560
          Fax: 517.886.6565
          E-mail: bjshafer@acd.net


MID-STATES EXPRESS: Sued Over Delayed Medical Bills Payment
-----------------------------------------------------------
Mid-States Express, Inc. is facing a class-action complaint filed June 27 in
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, accusing it of
delaying payment of medical bills for no apparent reason.

Named plaintiff John Smith brings this suit to obtain redress for defendant's
failure to promptly pay medical bills of employees and their dependents.

Mr. Smith brings this suit pursuant to 29 U.S.C. Section 1132 to recover
benefits due him under the terms of his employee benefit plan, to enforce his
rights under the terms of the plan.

Plaintiff requests the court to enter judgment in his favor against defendant
as follows:

     -- enjoining defendants from delaying payment of medical
        bills;

     -- appointing an independent administrator to manage the
        plan;

     -- entering judgment for unpaid benefits and contributions;

     -- awarding attorney's fees, litigation expenses and costs
        of suit;

     -- awarding prejudgment interest; and

     -- granting such other and further relief sa the court
        deems proper.

The suit is “Smith v. Mid-States Express, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:07-cv-
03616,” filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois, under Judge Virginia M. Kendall.

Representing plaintiffs are:

          Daniel A. Edelman
          Francis Richard Greene
          Edelman, Combs, Latturner & Goodwin, LLC
          120 South LaSalle Street, 18th Floor
          Chicago, IL 60603
          Phone: (312) 739-4200
          E-mail: courtecl@edcombs.com or fgreene@edcombs.com


OKLAHOMA: SC Returns Suit over High Traffic Fines to Dist. Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Oklahoma Supreme Court sent back to a district court the issue whether
the town of Dickson fined motorists too much for traffic violations, Capitol
Bureau’s Michael McNutt reports.

The lawsuit was filed in 2005 against the southern Oklahoma town on behalf of
a Sulphur physician who was ticketed for reckless driving for going 65 in a
45 mile-per-hour zone and was fined $398.

Attorney David Pyle, legal representative for Dr. Franklin
House, said the town hadn't re-approved its town laws since
1992.

Last December, the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals upheld a lower court’s
decision that restricts how much the town of Dickson can fine motorists for
traffic violations.

The appeals court also says Mr. House could proceed with a class action
against the town (Class Action Reporter Jan. 05, 2007).

According to the state Supreme Court, the district judge issued an incomplete
summary judgment and an error was made in ordering that the action be
maintained as a class action.

Mr. Pyle said they’re not going to give up.

Representing the town of Dickson is Attorney Ed Frock.


PIZZA HUT: Faces Calif. Suit Over Alleged Labor Code Violations
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pizza Hut of Southeast Kansas Inc. is facing a class-action complaint filed
June 11 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California,
the CourtHouse News Service

Named plaintiff Mija J. Elsbury alleges denial of overtime compensation, a
violation of the Labor Code.

The suit is “Mija J. Elsbury v. Pizza Hut of Southeast Kansas Inc et al.,
Case No: 5:07-cv-00695-SGL-JCR,” filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California, under Judge Stephen G. Larson, with referral
to John Charles Rayburn, Jr.

Representing plaintiffs are:

          Jade Erin Butman
          Eric A. Grover
          Keller Grover
          425 Second Street, Suite 500
          San Francisco, CA 94107
          Phone: 415-543-1305
          E-mail: jbutman@kellergrover.com or
                  eagrover@kellergrover.com

          Scott Allen Miller
          Scott Allen Miller Law Offices
          16133 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1200
          Encino, CA 91436
          Phone: 818-788-8081
          E-mail: millaw@sbcglobal.net

          - and -

          Mark R. Thierman
          Thierman Law Firm
          7287 Lakeside Drive
          Reno, NV 89511
          Phone: 775-284-1500
          E-mail: laborlawyer@pacbell.net


RANDOM HOUSE: Nov. 2 Fairness Hearing Set in Suit Over Memoirs
--------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York will hold a
fairness hearing on Nov. 2, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. for the $2.35 million
settlement in the matter, “In Re 'A Million Little Pieces' Litigation, Case
No. 06-md-1771.”

The hearing will be held in Room 17B of the federal courthouse in Manhattan,
located at 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York.

Any objections to the settlement must be made on or before Aug. 23, 2007.

The settlement is for a class action relating to the publication of the
book “A Million Little Pieces” or AMLP.
                                      
James Frey is the author of the book “A Million Little Pieces.” Random House
published the book in 2003.  The book was marketed as a “memoir/literature.”

In early January 2006, it was reported on the Internet, various television
programs, including a widely covered January 26, 2006 telecast of a
nationally syndicated program, and other media outlets that certain facts in
the book had been altered and that incidents had been embellished.

Both prior to and following the Jan. 26, 2006 telecast and many of the other
reports referenced above, a number of putative class actions were filed
claiming that purchasers of the book had been misled by the marketing of the
book and would not have purchased the book had they known that certain facts
in the book had been altered and that incidents had been embellished.

These class actions were later consolidated into one action in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York.   

The parties have now reached an agreement to settle the actions and
compensate purchasers of the book who claim they were misled.

                         Settlement Terms

Under the settlement, Random House, the publisher of the book, will notify
potential class members of a refund available under the settlement.  Once the
Web site is in place, readers will be able to obtain claim forms at
http://www.amlpsettlement.com. They can also call (866)459-3651 (Class  
Action Reporter, May 30, 2007).

Readers who bought the book on or before Jan. 26, would be eligible for a
refund of the full suggested retail price, regardless of discounts or sales.  
Mr. Frey and Random House acknowledged that the author had made up parts of
the book on that day.   

Readers who have bought hardcover will receive $23.95; those who bought
paperback will receive $14.95 (Class Action Reporter, Sept. 11, 2006).  To
receive refunds readers have to submit a receipt or other proof of purchase:
for the hardcover, page 163; for the paperback, the front cover.  They also
will need to sign a sworn statement that they bought the book because they
thought it was a memoir.

For more details, contact:

         Larry D. Drury, Esq.
         Larry D. Drury, Ltd.
         205 West Randolph St., Suite 1430
         Chicago, IL 60606
         Phone: (312) 346-7950

              - and -

         Evan J. Smith, Esq.
         Brodsky & Smith, LLC
         240 Mineola Blvd.
         Mineola, NY 11501
         Phone: (516) 741-4977
         Fax: (516) 741-0626
         Web site: http://www.brodsky-smith.com


NORTHERN LEASING: Accused of Fraudulent Business Practice
---------------------------------------------------------
Northern Leasing Systems, Inc., a leading financier of credit card terminals
and other small business items, is facing a class action asserting a
fraudulent scheme to entrap small business persons fraudulently into
equipment leases with undisclosed charges and onerous terms, reports say.

The suit was brought on behalf of four businessmen, Kevin Pludeman of Dallas,
Texas; Chris Hanzsek of Seattle, Washington; Sarah Jane Hush and Ozark
Granite & Tile Co., Ozark, Missouri and Deninis E. Lauchman, of
Gilbertsville, New York.  

The suit claims that plaintiffs were manipulated to sign in a hurry so that
at the time of signing, plaintiffs were kept unaware of allegedly additional
three pages of the lease or their contents.  The lawsuit said the business
owners were not given a copy of the lease but instead asked to call a special
number and request for it. In certain cases, the signatures were forged, the
suit said.

New York Supreme Justice Shirley Klein has previously allowed the fraud
claims and also upheld claims for punitive damages.

The suit, “Pludeman v. Northern Leasing,” was brought by New York attorney
Krishnan Chittur of Chittur & Associates P.C.  It was entered under Active
Cases in the firm's Web site.

Chittur & Associates P.C on the Net: http://www.chittur.com/

Northern Leasing’s contact information is:

          Northern Leasing Systems Inc.
          132 West 31st St., 14th Floor
          New York, NY 10001
          Phone: 800.683.5433
          Fax: 212.760.0862
          E-mail: contact@northernleasing.com


ROBERT’S AMERICAN: Expands Recall of Snacks Posing Health Risks
---------------------------------------------------------------
Robert’s American Gourmet Food, Inc. of Sea Cliff, New York is expanding its
snack recall to include Super Veggie Tings Crunchy Corn Sticks Snack Food,
all lots and sizes, because it has the potential to be contaminated with
Salmonella, an organism which can cause serious and sometimes fatal
infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and others with
weakened immune systems.  

Healthy persons infected with Salmonella often experience fever, diarrhea
(which may be bloody), nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain.  In rare
circumstances, infection with Salmonella can result in the organism getting
into the bloodstream and producing more severe illnesses such as arterial
infections (i.e., infected aneurysms), endocarditis and arthritis.
     
Super Veggie Tings Crunchy Corn Sticks were distributed nationwide and
Canada, and sold through local distributors, internet sales, phone orders,
mail orders and retail outlets.

Super Veggie Tings Crunchy Corn Sticks are packed in a flexible, plastic foil
bag in a 6 oz. size, and has UPC 15665-10356.  The brand name is Robert’s
American Gourmet and all codes and expiration dates of Super Veggie Tings
Crunchy Corn Sticks are being recalled.

Veggie Booty has been associated or related with approximately 54 cases of
Salmonella across 17 states.  Roberts American Gourmet has decided to add
Super Veggie Tings Crunchy Corn Sticks to the recall as a precautionary
measure.  The extensive investigation at the contract manufacturer and by the
company is ongoing to determine the source of the contamination.  The company
has ceased production and distribution of both products pending results of
the investigation by the FDA and the company.

Consumers who purchased Super Veggie Tings Crunchy Corn Sticks, and still
have product in their homes should discard the contents of the package Super
Veggie Tings and contact us at 1-800-626-7557 for reimbursement of your
purchase.  Anyone with any questions pertaining to the situation may also
contact us at 800-626-7557.


STOCKERYALE INC: Settles N.H. Securities Fraud Lawsuit for $3.4M
----------------------------------------------------------------
A settlement agreement by and between StockerYale, Inc. and the lead
plaintiffs in a pending consolidated securities class action was submitted to
the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire for preliminary
approval on June 26, 2007.

Under the terms of the proposed settlement, plaintiffs would receive $3.4
million, which would be paid by the Company’s insurance carrier. The
settlement would resolve all claims asserted against the Company and the
individual defendants.

The settlement contains no admission of wrongdoing by the Company or the
individual defendants. The Company has denied and continues to deny any and
all allegations of wrongdoing by the Company or any of the individual
defendants in connection with this matter, but the Company believes that
given the uncertainties and cost associated with litigation, the settlement
is in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders.

The settlement is conditioned on preliminary court approval and final court
approval after notice to the plaintiff class and expiration of the time for
appeal from any order of the Court approving the settlement. There can be no
assurance that final approval of the settlement will be obtained.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

                        Case Background

Beginning in May 2005, three putative securities class action complaints were
filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire against
the company and Mark Blodgett, the company's President, Chief Executive
Officer and Chairman of the Board, Lawrence Blodgett, a former director,
Frances O'Brien, former Chief Financial Officer, Richard Lindsay, former
Chief Financial Officer, and Ricardo Diaz, the company's former Chief
Operating Officer, purportedly on behalf of some of the company's
shareholders.

The complaints, which assert claims under the Exchange Act, allege that some
disclosures in company press releases dated April 19, 2004 and April 21, 2004
were materially false or misleading.  They seek unspecified damages, as well
as interest, costs, and attorneys' fees.

The three complaints were consolidated into one action and assigned to a
single federal judge.  The court also appointed a group of lead plaintiffs
and plaintiffs' counsel, who recently filed a consolidated amended complaint
to supersede the previously filed complaints.

Mr. Lindsay is not named as a defendant in the amended complaint; therefore,
he is not a party to the currently pending proceeding.

The consolidated amended complaint asserts claims under Sections
10(b), 20(a), and 20A of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder.

On Jan. 31, 2006, the company and the individual defendants moved to dismiss
all claims asserted against the company in the consolidated amended
complaint.  

The court ruled on Sept. 29, 2006 for the plaintiffs, according to the
company's Nov. 13, 2006 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the period ended Sept. 30, 2006.

The suit is "In re StockerYale, Inc. Securities Litigation, Case
Oo. 1:05-cv-00177-JM," filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of
New Hampshire under Judge James R. Muirhead.   
Representing the plaintiffs is William L. Chapman and Jennifer
A. Eber of Orr & Reno PA, One Eagle Sq., P.O. Box 3550, Concord,
NH 03302-3550, Phone: 603-224-2381, E-mail: wlc@orr-reno.com or
jaeber@orr-reno.com.

Representing the Company is Douglas C. Doskocil of Goodwin
Procter, LLP, (MA), Exchange Place, 53 State St., Boston, MA
02109-2881, Phone: 617 570-1000, E-mail:
ddoskocil@goodwinprocter.com.


                        Asbestos Alert

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: GenCorp Inc. Has 152 Pending Lawsuits at 2Q
----------------------------------------------------------------
GenCorp Inc., for the period ending May 31, 2007, recorded 152 pending
asbestos-related cases filed against it, according to the Company’s quarterly
report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on June 27,
2007.

As of Feb. 28, 2007, the Company recorded 161 pending asbestos-related cases
filed against it.

For the year ended Nov. 30, 2006, the Company faced 154 pending cases,
compared with 152 cases for the year ended Nov. 30, 2005.

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

Since 1998, more than 200 of these asbestos suits have been resolved with
most being dismissed.

For the six months ended May 31, 2007, the Company recorded 32 claims filed,
compared with 62 claims for the year ended Nov. 30, 2006 and 149 claims for
the year ended Nov. 30, 2005.

For the six months ended May 31, 2007, the Company recorded 27 claims
dismissed, compared with 55 claims for the year ended Nov. 30, 2006 and 65
claims for the year ended Nov. 30, 2005.

For the six months ended May 31, 2007, the Company recorded seven claims
settled, compared with five claims for the year ended Nov. 30, 2006 and two
claims for the year ended Nov. 30, 2005.

The aggregate settlement costs, for the six months ended May 31, 2007,
amounted to US$26,000, compared with US$67,000 for the year ended Nov. 30,
2006 and US$50,000 for the year ended Nov. 30, 2005.

The average settlement costs, for the six months ended May 31, 2007, amounted
to US$4,000, compared with US$14,000 for the year ended Nov. 30, 2006 and
US$25,000 for the year ended Nov. 30, 2005.

Rancho Cordova, Calif.-based GenCorp Inc. is a technology-based manufacturer
of aerospace and defense products and systems with a real estate segment that
includes activities related to the re-zoning, entitlement, sale, and leasing
of the Company’s excess real estate assets.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court Reverses Board Ruling in Barscz Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, reversed a Sept. 29, 2005 Benefits
Review Board ruling to favor Anna Barscz, in an asbestos-related action filed
by Mrs. Barscz’s late husband, Charles, against Electric Boat Corp.

Circuit Judges Katzmann, Kearse, and Jose Cabranes, entered the decision of
Docket No. 05-6420-AG on May 18, 2007.

Mr. Barscz worked at Electric Boat in New London, Conn., from 1950 through
1978. In November 1978 he was diagnosed with asbestosis. He sought
compensation for his injuries sustained while working for Electric Boat under
both the Longshoreman's Act and under Connecticut workers' compensation laws.

On June 21, 1984, Mr. Barscz and Mrs. Barscz settled with Electric Boat and
three insurance companies. On June 24, 2007, the Settlement was approved by
the Compensation Commissioner for the 2nd Compensation District.

Mr. Barscz also sought compensation for his asbestosis under the
Longshoreman's Act. In a Dec. 3, 1984 decision, administrative law judge
Chester Shatz determined that Mr. Barscz was permanently disabled as of Nov.
24, 1978 and awarded him compensation for permanent total disability from
that date forward.

Judge Shatz also determined that Mr. Barscz had suffered partial disability
since 1974, which was when a chest x-ray first revealed to Electric Boat that
Mr. Barscz had lung abnormalities including emphysema and pulmonary fibrosis.
Judge Shatz concluded that Electric Boat continued to employ Mr. Barscz
despite that partial disability.

After Mr. Barscz's death, Mrs. Barscz sought death benefits under the
Longshoreman's Act. On June 9, 2004, administrative law judge Colleen A.
Geraghty concluded that because Mr. Barscz's "work-related lung disease
hastened [his] death," Mrs. Barscz was entitled to death benefits.

Electric Boat moved for reconsideration of the June 9 Order, and for the
first time, raised the existence of the Settlement. ALJ Geraghty granted the
motion and modified her original order to reflect a credit for the entire
amount of the Settlement.  

The Director of the Office of Workers' Compensation Programs appealed the
ALJ's decision to the Board. In a decision and order dated Sept. 29, 2005, a
two-member majority of the Board affirmed Judge Geraghty's decision.

Mrs. Barscz appealed the Board's decision on Nov. 23, 2005. The Director
moved to dismiss the appeal as untimely, but that motion was denied on July
19, 2006.

The Appeals Court held that only the portion of the Settlement that covered
Mrs. Barscz's state law death claims may be credited against her
Longshoreman's Act death benefits. Further, the Appeals Court held that on
remand, Electric Boat bears the burden of proof in establishing the
apportionment of the Settlement.

The Appeals Court reversed the Sept. 29, 2005 decision and remanded for
further proceedings.

Carolyn P. Kelly of O'Brien, Shafner, Stuart, Kelly & Morris, P.C. in Groton,
Conn., represented Anna Barcsz, Charles Barscz’s widow.

Peter D. Quay of Murphy and Beane in New London, Conn., represented Electric
Boat Corp.

Matthew W. Boyle, (Howard M. Radzely, Solicitor of Labor, Allen H. Feldman,
Associate Solicitor, Mark A. Reinhalter, Counsel for Longshore on the brief),
U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, D.C., represented the Director, Office
of Workers' Compensation Programs.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court Junks Remand Motion in Ballenger Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court, N.D. California, denied the remand motion filed by
Mara J. Ballenger for John M. Ballenger (Mr. Ballenger), James M. Ballenger,
and Charles J. Ballenger, in an asbestos-related action filed against Todd
Shipyards Corp. and other defendants.

U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken entered decision of Case No. C 06-2271 CW
on June 22, 2007.

Mr. and Mrs. Ballenger sued for asbestos personal injury and loss of
consortium in San Francisco County Superior Court. Todd Shipyards was named
as a defendant in that action.

Mr. and Mrs. Ballenger dismissed without prejudice the claims against Todd
Shipyards. Mr. Ballenger died of mesothelioma in 2005.

After Mr. Ballenger’s death, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, seeking
damages for asbestos-caused wrongful death and loss of consortium and
reviving the claims against Todd Shipyards.

The complaint alleged that Mr. Ballenger's terminal mesothelioma stemmed, in
part, from his occupational exposure to asbestos-containing products while
working on premises owned or operated by Todd Shipyards.
     
On March 30, 2006, Todd Shipyard filed its notice of removal, contending that
removal is proper. Plaintiffs filed a motion to remand.

Before the Court ruled on Plaintiffs' motion, the Judicial Panel on
Multidistrict Litigation ordered the case transferred to the Eastern District
of Pennsylvania for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.

The Eastern District of Pennsylvania court severed all claims for punitive
damages and advised the MDL Panel that coordinated or consolidated pretrial
proceedings with respect to the remaining claims had been completed.

After the MDL panel conditionally remanded all claims in this case, except
for the severed punitive damages claims, to the District Court, Plaintiffs re-
noticed their motion to remand.

The District Court denied the Plaintiffs' motion to remand this case and
their request for attorneys' fees and costs incurred in bringing their motion
to remand.

Removal was proper under the federal officer removal statute.

Jeffrey A. Kaiser and William A. Levin of Levin Simes Kaiser & Gornick LLP,
San Francisco, represented Mara J. Ballenger, James M. Ballinger, and Charles
J. Ballenger.

James J. Braze of Gordon & Rees, LLP, Alex Paul Catalona of Schiff Hardin
LLP, D. David Steele, George D. Yaron, and Keith E. Patterson of Yaron &
Associates, Evan Craig Nelson of Carroll, Burdick & McDonough LLP, San
Francisco, and Bradley S. Thomas of Mason Thomas, Sacramento, Calif.
represented the Defendants.
     

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court Orders New Trial in Favor of Garlock
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Court of Appeals of New York ordered a new trial in favor of Garlock
Sealing Technologies LLC in an asbestos-related action filed by Nancy
Reynolds and Donald Reynolds.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Pigott, Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, and Jones
entered decision on June 27, 2007.

From 1942 through 1987, Mr. Reynolds worked at the Ashland Oil Refinery in
Tonawanda, N.Y., and purportedly contracted mesothelioma from his exposure to
asbestos while employed at that facility.

Mr. Reynolds and his wife, Nancy, filed this product liability-negligence
action against various manufacturers and distributors of alleged asbestos-
containing products used at the refinery.

At the time of trial, two defendants remained in the action: Garlock Sealing
Technologies LLC and Niagara Insulations Inc.

Mr. Reynolds died after the entry of judgment.

Not known to Garlock, plaintiffs and Niagara entered into a high-low
agreement two weeks before trial where it was agreed that Niagara's total
liability would fall into a predetermined range.

Although Supreme Court was aware that plaintiffs and Niagara had entered into
a high-low agreement, it was unaware of its terms or the amounts involved.

Neither Supreme Court nor the agreeing parties advised Garlock of the
agreement, and the matter proceeded to trial with Garlock and the jury
unaware of its existence.

The jury apportioned 60 percent liability against Garlock and 40 percent
liability against Niagara and awarded plaintiffs damages in the amount of
US$3,750,000.

Having learned of the high-low agreement just days after the jury's verdict,
Garlock moved to set aside the verdict and requested a new trial on various
grounds.

Garlock asserted that Niagara's continued participation in the trial after
entering into the high-low agreement with plaintiffs was inherently unfair
and prejudicial, and that Supreme Court's failure to disclose the existence
of the agreement prejudiced Garlock and constituted reversible error. Supreme
Court disagreed and entered judgment accordingly.

The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment, holding that Supreme Court's
failure to disclose the high-low agreement did not warrant reversal absent
evidence of collusion between plaintiffs and Niagara to the detriment of
Garlock, noting that Niagara never lost its incentive to magnify Garlock's
liability or minimize its own.

The Appeals Court granted leave and now reverse. The Appeals Court also
reversed the Appellate Division’s ruling and ordered a new trial.

Michael J. Hutter represented Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC.

John Ned Lipsitz represented Nancy Reynolds.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: OSHA Issues $750 Penalty to Postal Service
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration issued a US$750 penalty to
the U.S. Postal Service for the presence of potentially-dangerous asbestos in
its Oak Ridge, Tenn., building, Associated Press reports.

The violation held an original penalty of US$1,500.

According to an OSHA citation issued in May 2007, employees could be “exposed
to the asbestos through contact with the mail cases, mail totes and mail
trays through getting asbestos on their hands and clothing.”

Both Postal Service and OSHA officials say despite the citation's wording,
there is no health hazard to employees.

The building, of which about 40 employees work, on South Tulane Avenue is the
collection and sorting point for all incoming and outgoing Oak Ridge mail.

Postal Service employee Ralph Markowicz filed two complaints with OSHA about
asbestos dust being swept into piles and settling on carrier bags and sorting
cases.

OSHA and a private lab conducted air-quality tests of the building, which
showed no health hazard existed, said David Flippo, safety manager for the
Postal Service's Tennessee district.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: OSHA Probes Worker Exposure at Mo. Hospital
----------------------------------------------------------------
Barb Theriot, area director of the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, on June 28, 2007, said that OSHA opened an investigation into
whether workers were exposed to asbestos at Research Medical Center in Kansas
City, Mo., KansasCity.com reports.

On June 27, 2007, the Kansas City Health Department sealed two wings on the
hospital’s fourth floor when sampling of construction debris from renovation
work determined that it contained harmful asbestos.

A health inspector who was at the site on a separate matter on June 26, 2007
spotted what he suspected was asbestos-containing materials and ordered the
construction work stopped. Sampling came back positive for asbestos.

Other testing found that the asbestos did not migrate into the rest of the
hospital.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: UKAS & ARCA Warn v. Unqualified Surveyors
----------------------------------------------------------------
According to Contract Journal, the United Kingdom Accreditation Service is
warning that clients could be employing firms who lack suitable accreditation
for asbestos surveys, Workplace Law reports.

Steve Sadley, general manager at the Asbestos Removal Contractors'
Association, said, “Currently, anyone can advertise themselves as an asbestos
surveyor as far as the law is concerned - they do not need any qualifications
or to demonstrate that they are competent. The onus lies with the client
commissioning the surveyor to ensure that they are competent.”

UKAS said it believes that advice from those firms may be incorrect or
biased, with contractors advising clients that unnecessary work needs to done.




ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Demolition of N.Y. Endicott Plant Delayed
----------------------------------------------------------------
Asbestos at the former Endicott Forging plant in Endicott, N.Y., has caused a
delay in the demolition of the condemned industrial site, Press & Sun-
Bulletin reports.

The demolition was originally expected to begin in May 2007.

A proposal by Mayor Joan Hickey Pulse to have a contractor raze the buildings
at no cost to the village will have to wait until asbestos is removed,
village and Broome County officials said.

Village officials are working with the Town of Union and the county to
reclaim the burned-out ruins near the heart of the village.

The county is helping the village draft a request for bids for asbestos
removal and will know more after estimates are received in coming weeks,
county spokeswoman Darcy Fauci said.

Asbestos removal work could range from several hundred thousand dollars to
US$1 million.

In May 2007, the village completed an order condemning the 5 1/2-acre site
that would allow the village to move ahead with demolition.

Officials said that the site has been a problem since it was destroyed by
fire and abandoned in 2000. It attracts vandals, drug dealers and homeless
people who sometimes build fires in the ruins.

Stephen Hrustich, acting village fire chief, said the remains of the complex
also pose a risk for public safety workers.

Endicott Forging was established in 1915.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Alstom Transportation Probes Work Exposure
----------------------------------------------------------------
Alstom Transportation Inc. said that some of its employees in Hornell, N.Y.,
may have been exposed to asbestos, 18 WETM reports.

Health and safety staff at Alstom said they have discovered trace amounts of
asbestos in at least one rail car that crews have been working on as part of
a contract out of Georgia.

In the meantime, production has stopped on the contract. However, crews
continue working on other projects.

A spokesman says Alstom has hired an assessment team to find out more about
the problem, and that they plan on fixing it and starting back up on
refurbishing the cars as soon as possible.


COMPANY PROFILE

Alstom Transportation Inc
111 Loder St
Hornell, NY 14843
United States
Tel:  607-324-4595


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Replacement of Pipes in Tenn. Prioritized
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Gatlinburg, Tenn. City Commission gave priority status to the replacement
of 32,325 lineal feet of asbestos cement waterlines over the next five years,
The Mountain Press reports.

However, commissioners do expect to fund the US$1.16 million AC removal
project over the five-year period, rather than continuing the project past
2012. A 1,000-foot section of AC pipe on Sherman Clabo Road is currently
being replaced.

Dale Phelps, water systems manager, told commissioners, "It's do-able, and
the schedule still allows for one or two other projects, such as line
extensions, to also be completed each year."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Shop Fitter’s Widow Gets GBP330,000 Payout
----------------------------------------------------------------
Colin Bryenton’s widow, Anita, has won more than GBP330,000 in compensation
over Mr. Bryenton’s exposure to asbestos, which led him to contract
mesothelioma, Evening Courier reports.

Mrs. Bryenton, of Guildway, Warley, Halifax, U.K., sued Mr. Bryenton’s former
employees Halifax Fisheries Ltd., claiming they failed to provide adequate
protection while Mr. Bryenton carried out his job between 1966 and 1990.

Mr. Bryenton died from malignant mesothelioma in December 2003, aged 53,
leaving two sons Andrew, now 18, and Oliver, now 15.

Mr. Bryenton was exposed to asbestos while installing cooking ranges in fish
and chip shops for the firm, which was formerly Frank Ford’s.

In Mrs. Bryenton’s claim, Mr. Bryenton cut, drilled and sawed asbestos
sheets, and removed and broke up old asbestos sheets when overhauling or
removing ranges.

Judgment was entered against the firm on the issue of liability in April 2007
and a hearing set.

However, the Company, based in Sovereign Works, Lister Lane, Halifax, agreed
to pay GBP330,000 to settle.

Judge Seymour QC said GBP5,000 should go to each of Mr. Bryenton’s sons.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Council Probes Queensland Site for Hazards
----------------------------------------------------------------
A site in Leichhardt in Ipswich, Queensland, Australia, is under council
investigation after an unnamed resident contacted the Queensland Times,
saying he feared for the health and safety of people in the area, The
Queensland Times reports.

The man said a visible amount of asbestos was also contained on the Avon
Street site. He said he had been on to the site and noticed blue asbestos.

The property is owned by Rosewood Heights Pty Ltd.

When the contacted Ipswich City Council was contacted on July 2, 2007,
officers were immediately sent to inspect the site.

Workplace Health and Safety inspectors also viewed the site where a house and
smaller building was recently demolished.

A council spokesman said its records "indicate that no approval has been
issued for these demolition works nor have any concurrence agency referrals
or building works approvals been obtained as required under the Building Act,
Integrated Planning Act and Regulations."

The statement said, "Council is continuing with investigations regarding the
demolition of the buildings to determine if asbestos was present and to take
any necessary enforcement action against the owner of the property."

The concerned local said warning signs while construction started on the site
(to be made into 29 lots) were necessary.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Congress Slams EPA for Katrina Cleanup Risk
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Government Accountability Office, the U.S. Congress’ investigative
arm, report stated the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency potentially
exposed residents, volunteers, and workers to asbestos by not doing more to
monitor the substance in the cleanup after Hurricane Katrina, Associated
Press reports.

The GAO report stated that although asbestos air data has not found potential
problems, those results might not be an accurate picture of the risk because
of gaps in monitoring and scale backs in monitoring once demolitions began.

The report came as the EPA faces renewed criticism of its assurances about
the safety of the air near the fallen World Trade Center following the
September 11 terrorist attacks.

On June 25, 2007, former EPA chief Christie Whitman was reprimanded at a
congressional hearing for telling people that it was safe to breathe the air
around the World Trade Center after the attacks.

Since 2001, studies have found that many ground zero workers, rescue workers
and firefighters suffered from respiratory problems and a serious lung-
scarring disease.

Hugh Kaufman, a senior policy analyst at EPA, said the new GAO report
confirmed serious concerns about EPA's assurances after both the World Trade
Center attacks and Katrina.

Mr. Kaufman said that in the wake of Katrina, church groups, college
students, philanthropists and day laborers have flocked to south Louisiana to
help in the rebuilding,.

The report also said EPA at times issued "unclear and inconsistent"
information on the potential danger of asbestos, mold and other contaminants
as people went about gutting and demolishing homes.

Jessica L. Emond, an EPA deputy press secretary, said EPA "and the other
first responder agencies responded quickly and decisively to help their
fellow citizens."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Researcher Says Grace May Owe Victims $6.2B
----------------------------------------------------------------
Mark A. Peterson, a research scientist at the RAND Corp. estimates that W.R.
Grace and Co. would need to spend from US$4.7 billion to US$6.2 billion to
resolve hundreds of thousands of asbestos cases, Bloomberg reports.

Mr. Peterson was hired by attorneys suing the Company.

Mr. Peterson, in papers filed June 20, 2007 in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in
Wilmington, Del., said, “Because Grace continued to make and sell asbestos
products after other defendants quit, it now faces greater and longer-
extending asbestos liability than other defendants.”

The Company used more stringent criteria to conclude in May 2007 that it owes
a maximum of US$1.31 billion. In 2008, the dueling estimates are set to be
the focal point of a trial before U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Judith K. Fitzgerald,
who will determine the value of the claims.

A third estimate, by another group of lawyers representing asbestos victims
who have not yet filed a claim, put the Company’s liability at as much as
US$5.3 billion.

The final figure will be used to set up a victims' trust funded by the
Company and its insurers.

The Company filed for bankruptcy in 2001 to protect itself from at least
135,000 asbestos claims. Since then, the Company has battled with lawyers for
asbestos victims about how to structure the trust.

While the Company is in bankruptcy, none of the civil asbestos cases against
it can go forward. The criminal case is on hold pending legal appeals.

Mr. Peterson estimated that most of the Company's liability will come in the
future. The Company's pending cases will cost it about US$578 million, while
future claims will cost US$5.1 billion. The total, US$5.68 billion, is the
figure Mr. Peterson said was the most reliable in his estimated range.

The Company proposed settling all the lawsuits as part of its plan to exit
bankruptcy.

Under a plan proposed last year by the Company, the victim compensation fund
would be no larger than US$1.48 billion, according to court papers filed by
asbestos lawyers.

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


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: More Tests Urged to Verify Worker’s Death
----------------------------------------------------------------
Further tests are to be carried out to establish the cause of death of Alan
Rigg, a 63-year-old man from Clitheroe, U.K., The Clitheroe Advertiser and
Times reports.

The inquest, which was opened into Mr. Rigg’s death, heard that during his
working life as a molder, he was exposed to silica sand and possible asbestos.

Mr. Rigg was diagnosed as suffering from lung cancer.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazard Linked to U.K. Store Worker’s Death
----------------------------------------------------------------
Coroner Stuart Atkinson links the death of Michael Whitfield, a former
director of a superstore in Grimsby, England, to industrial asbestos-related
disease, Grimsby Telegraph reports.

Mr. Whitfield, who died aged 71, was the executive director of Ramsdens.

However, the inquest held at Cleethorpes Town Hall heard it was impossible to
determine when and how Mr. Whitfield contracted the disease.

One theory about when the problem occurred was when the store on Cleethorpe
Road, Grimsby, was being altered in the middle of the 1970s.

Mr. Atkinson expressed his surprise at the amount of asbestos found in Mr.
Whitfield's body, four times the amount normally found in people.

Mr. Whitfield worked at the Grimsby family store from 1962 until 1999,
starting as a clerical worker. He was also a clerical worker for Bellamy's in
Grimsby in the 1950s and early 1960s, during which time he also did national
service with the Royal Air Force.

Ruth Whitfield, Mr. Whitfield’s widow, said, “He was unable to recall ever
being exposed to asbestos... He was an office manager, but he did really
enjoy being involved in the building projects.”

While Mr. Whitfield did not want to claim compensation or to bring any case,
his family was awarded a small amount of compensation through a Government-
funded scheme automatically after his diagnosis.

After developing a cough around Christmas 2005, Mr. Whitfield's condition
worsened throughout the following year and he was diagnosed with mesothelioma.

Mr. Whitfield died at Grimsby's Diana, Princess of Wales Hospital on Dec. 9,
2007.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Firms Move to Junk Non-Madison County Cases
----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendant corporations are fighting to dismiss asbestos-related cases that do
not seem to belong to Madison County Circuit Court, Ill., The Madison St.
Clair Record reports.

When Circuit Judge Daniel Stack took over the Court's asbestos docket in
September 2004, he declared that the "astronomical burden" of looming trials
demanded he dismiss cases that were not connected directly to Madison County.

Four defendant corporations which are regularly named in Madison County
asbestos cases urge Judge Stack to dismiss several asbestos cases based on
Forum Non Conveniens.

Union Carbide Corp., Bayer CropScience AG, Essex Specialty Products Inc., and
The Dow Chemical Co., all represented by Heyl Royster in Edwardsville, Ill.,
filed nine FNC motions in the asbestos cases of one particular attorney:
Randy Gori of the Edwardsville based Goldenberg firm.

In addition to the FNC motions, the four companies also filed motions for
summary judgment and motions to compel in 21 other Gori cases.

Citing the Illinois Supreme Court decision in Dawdy v. Union Pacific, Barney
Shultz of Heyl Royster argues that a plaintiff who engages in forum shopping
to suit their individual interests is contrary to the purposes behind venue
rules.

Mr. Shultz argues that the only reasonable conclusion is that the plaintiff
has engaged in forum shopping.

Mr. Shultz argues that because one or more of the defendants are residents of
Illinois is not enough to deny a FNC motion citing the case, Gridley v. State
Farm.

Mr. Shultz further argues that Madison County residents should not be
burdened with jury duty and the costs of non-resident litigation.

Mr. Shultz argues that the laws of Illinois and Ohio are different in
numerous areas affecting asbestos cases.

Judge Stack has set the motions for July 5, 2007.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court Issues Split Ruling in DiCenzo Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Court of Appeals of Ohio, 8th District, Cuyahoga County, issued separated
rulings in an asbestos-related action filed by Genevieve DiCenzo, for Joseph
DiCenzo, against Borg-Warner Corp. and George V. Hamilton Inc.

Judges Rocco, Gallagher, and Blackmon entered decision of Case No. 88583 on
June 28, 2007.

Mrs. DiCenzo, appealed from a common pleas court order granting summary
judgment in favor of Borg-Warner and Hamilton on her claims for injuries
sustained by Mr. DiCenzo, as well as her claims for wrongful death and loss
of consortium as a result of the defendants' negligence, breach of warranty,
failure to warn, and defective product design.

Mrs. DiCenzo contended that she presented evidence establishing that Mr.
DiCenzo was exposed to asbestos products made by Borg-Warner, and that this
exposure was a substantial factor in causing his mesothelioma.

Mrs. DiCenzo further contended that Hamilton is subject to strict liability
as a supplier in a product liability action, and that genuine issues of
material fact precluded judgment on her claim against Hamilton for negligent
failure to warn.

The record before the Appeals Court consisted of an agreed group of filings
from the underlying case which the parties have deemed necessary to its
review.

However, the Appeals Court noted that the record does include the trial
court's orders granting Borg-Warner's motion for summary judgment, Hamilton's
motion for summary judgment as to Mrs. DiCenzo’s negligence claims, and
Hamilton's motion for judgment on Mrs. DiCenzo’s strict liability claim.

The record also included a "final order" dismissing the case because all
claims by or against all parties had been determined.

Accordingly, the Appeals Court reversed the judgment in favor of Borg-Warner
and remanded for further proceedings.

The Appeals Court affirmed the judgment in favor of Hamilton with respect to
Mrs. DiCenzo’s claim for negligent failure to warn, but reversde the judgment
in favor of Hamilton with respect to Mrs. DiCenzo’s strict liability claim,
and remanded for further proceedings on that claim as well.

Mark C. Meyer, Joseph J. Cirilano, Diana Nickerson Jacobs, Charles J.
McLeigh, and Jason T. Shipp of Goldberg, Persky & White, P.C., Pittsburgh,
John J. Duffy of John J. Duffy & Associates, North Olmsted, Ohio, represented
Genevieve DiCenzo.

Bruce P. Mandel, Max W. Thomas of Ulmer & Berne LLP, Cleveland, represented
Borg-Warner Corp.

Ruth A. Antinone, Michael A. Katz of Willman & Arnold, LLP, Pittsburgh,
represented George V. Hamilton Inc.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ASARCO LLC Urges Extension of Plan Filing
----------------------------------------------------------------
ASARCO LLC is seeking more time to file its bankruptcy reorganization plan,
stating that it still is facing claims for asbestos-related injuries and
environmental pollution, Associated Press reports.

Representatives of people with asbestos claims against the Company have said
the Company's asbestos liabilities are between US$906 million and US$2.66
billion.

According to court documents, on June 29, 2007, the Company has asked the
U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Corpus Christi, Tex., to extend the filing date of
its plan to Dec. 10, 2007. The deadline is set to expire Aug. 9, 2007.

In its court filing, the Company said, that filing that the extension is
justified given the complexity of the case, which includes 95,000 asbestos-
related personal-injury claims and billions of dollars in environmental
liabilities.

The Company has received six extensions of its exclusive period since filing
for bankruptcy in August 2005. The Company said it has made "significant
progress" in developing its restructuring plan and negotiating with creditors.

According to court papers, the Company made company information available on
June 19, 2007 to potential investors in its reorganization plan.

Earlier in 2007, the Company reached an agreement with its unions following a
July 2005 strike.

The Company has also filed motions to obtain court-approved estimates of the
asbestos claims, 850 tort claims and its liability for environmental cleanup.

Tucson, Ariz.-based ASARCO LLC, a subsidiary of diversified mining firm Grupo
Mexico, operates mining and copper smelting activities. The Company produces
around 600 million pounds of copper, 300 million pounds of zinc, and 20
million ounces of silver. The Company’s mines are primarily in the
southwestern U.S.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Delays Renovation of Mass. School
----------------------------------------------------------------
A renovation project at King and Amigos School in Cambridge, Mass., may be
delay a month after crews found asbestos in the school’s walls, Cambridge
Chronicle reports.

According to school spokesperson Justin Martin, the school, which had been
undergoing a US$1.8 million dollar overhaul of its HVAC system, has been
closed to all faculty while the state completes its examination of the
building.

Mr. Martin said the school department was confident no students,  who have
been out of school since June 18, 2007, were exposed to the asbestos, which
was found clinging to one of the ventilators in the Amigos section of the
building.

On June 19, 2007, the asbestos was discovered, less than a week into the
renovation project. Upon learning of the presence of asbestos, the school
department contacted the state department of environmental protection, and
scheduled an asbestos abatement team to remove the materials.

Mr. Martin said that it could take as many as four weeks to remove the
asbestos, a process that will cost about US$50,000.

The King and Amigos school building was originally constructed in 1972.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: U.K. Museum Asbestos Find Leads to Transfer
----------------------------------------------------------------
A cafe in Ewell, Surrey, U.K., has been temporarily relocated while asbestos
found in the adjoining Bourne Hall Museum is being removed by experts,
icSurreyOnline.co.uk reports.

Although Epsom and Ewell Council says the asbestos find poses no danger to
the public, museum staff and volunteers are clearing the store area and also
using the opportunity to reorganize and refurbish.

Work is expected to take six to eight weeks and the museum closed while
volunteers remove artifacts from the store.

Councilor Alan Winkworth, the chairman of the leisure committee, said, “I
would like to reassure everyone that we have been told there is nothing to be
concerned about from this small amount of asbestos and there should be no
risk to the public.”


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Aussie Shipyard Worker Files Lawsuit v. BHP
----------------------------------------------------------------
Rodney King, of Adelaide, South Australia, is suing BHP Billiton for
allegedly exposing him to asbestos 40 years ago, ABC News reports.

Dying of lung cancer, the 71-year-old Mr. King worked as a fitter at the
Company’s Whyalla, South Australia, shipyard for five years.

In District Court paperwork, Mr. King says he worked in an area where
asbestos insulation was put on pipes, boilers and turbines, releasing dust
which he inhaled.

Mr. King is suing the Company as well as the now defunct Wallaby Grip, which
manufactured the asbestos products.

Mr. King alleges his exposure occurred when both companies knew of the health
risks.

Lawyers for Wallaby Grip have filed papers rejecting the claims.

BHP Billiton is yet to submit its defense statement.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Removal at Sheraton Hotel to Cost $500,000
----------------------------------------------------------------
The cost of asbestos removal at the closed Sheraton Gary building in Gary,
Ind., would amount to US$500,000, Post-Tribune reports.

Asbestos removal is included in a 13-page preliminary budget prepared for the
city by the New Gary Development Group.

Chet Kondas, New Gary’s finance manager, said that the asbestos cost is based
on a study conducted by New Gary more than a month ago.

Doreen Carey, director of Gary's Department of Environmental Affairs, said
the city has federal grant money it might be able to loan to New Gary for the
clean-up. The loan would have to be approved by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.

The building has not been used since it closed in 1985. Asbestos was
discovered inside in 1990.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Locals at Risk from Nikenbah Station Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------
The City Council of Hervey Bay, Queensland, Australia, said the health of
staff and members of the public were put at risk when asbestos was illegally
dumped at the Nikenbah Transfer Station, ABC Wide Bay Queensland reports.

Ron Smith, the Council’s director of city assets, says staff had to wear
protective clothing to wrap and move the material and wash down the area.

Mr. Smith says the people who dumped the material have been identified and
face a fine from the Environmental Protection Agency.

Mr. Smith said, “The people who put it there themselves are foolish because
they've obviously handled it themselves and if there's any fibre dust
floating about it becomes dangerous for other users of our transfer stations.”


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ashland to Record $16M Adjustment in 2Q07
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ashland Inc. states that income from discontinued operations for the June
2007 quarter will include a favorable net adjustment to asbestos reserves and
related receivables for insurance recoveries of US$16 million, according to a
Company press release dated July 3, 2007.

The Company provided an update to its fiscal third-quarter outlook. Results
for the quarter, which ended June 30, 2007, will include several favorable
developments in certain of the Company’s reserves and cost estimates.

Favorable adjustments to environmental reserves are expected to total about
US$4 million, reflecting updates of future costs based on engineering
estimates for identified sites and improvements to the environmental
assessment process.

The Company will announce preliminary results for the third quarter on July
25, 2007.

Covington, Ky.-Ashland Inc., a diversified, global chemical company, provides
quality products, services and solutions to customers in more than 100
countries. The Company operates through four divisions: Ashland Performance
Materials, Ashland Distribution, Valvoline and Ashland Water Technologies.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Cladding to be Removed from School
----------------------------------------------------------------
Asbestos cladding at the Hayling College, in Hayling Island, U.K., is to be
removed from the roof and walls and replaced by new asbestos-free insulating
panels, Hayling Islander reports.

The removal of asbestos will take place during the school summer holidays,
although some other work will extend into term time.

The Hampshire County Council submitted a planning application for the work,
which was approved by Havant Borough Council.

Jan Mitchell, who lives close to the sports hall at Burwood Grove, initially
expressed some anxieties about the scheme because inhalation of asbestos
fibers is known to cause chest cancer and serious lung disease.

After talking to county council officers, Ms. Mitchell was reassured that the
work would be carried out safely.

Hampshire County Council Press Officer Mary Stone told the Hayling Islander
that the work would start on July 9, 2007.

Ms. Stone said, “It's an eight-week contract, but please note that these
dates are still provisional subject to contract formation.

“Some works will be done in term time as the summer holiday is only six weeks
long. However, the asbestos removal will be completed in the holiday period.”

Leader of Hampshire County Council, Councilor Ken Thornber, added, “The
removal of asbestos at Hayling College will be completed during the summer
holiday period by licensed asbestos removal contractors, who will notify the
Health and Safety Executive of the works.”


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Sen. Murray Pushes for Bill to Ban Asbestos
----------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Senator Patty Murray is moving forward with legislation that would ban
asbestos, The Seattle Times reports.

Sen. Murray has pushed the issue for six years, and introduced a bill on it
in 2004. The bill would ban asbestos in products two years from its enactment.

Under the GOP-controlled Congress, Sen. Murray could not get a hearing on the
issue.

However, on June 12, 2007, Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., the chair of the
Environment and Public Works Committee, held a hearing.

Sen. Murray testified about deaths from asbestos and the cost to taxpayers.

According to an interest group, the Environmental Working Group, Washington
state ranks eighth in asbestos-related deaths in the last 20 years.

Sen. Murray is now getting support from Republicans like Johnny Isakson, R-Ga.

In April 2007, Sen. Murray's concerns over asbestos forced the Architect of
the Capitol, who supervises maintenance of the building, to pull a team of 10
workers from the miles of utility tunnels, reportedly containing asbestos,
under the complex.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: BECTU Supports Thompsons’ Compensation Bid
----------------------------------------------------------------
Broadcasting Entertainment Cinematograph and Theatre Union is supporting
Thompsons Solicitors’ campaign to achieve justice for English and Welsh
families affected by asbestos, according to a BECTU news release dated July
3, 2007.

BECTU is the independent union for those working in broadcasting, film,
theatre, entertainment, leisure, interactive media and allied areas. The
union represents permanently employed, contract and freelance workers who are
based in the U.K.

Thompsons has highlighted the fact that in England and Wales the level of
bereavement compensation is set at GBP10,000 by law and is only payable to
the spouse of the deceased.

However, in Scotland bereavement payments of up to GBP30,000 have been made
to widows, while other family members like siblings and children can also
receive up to GBP15,000 each.

Bereavement awards are payable in the event of death caused by negligence,
whether through accident or industrial disease.

In England and Wales the fixed statutory award of GBP10,000 payable to only
spouses is set by the Fatal Accidents Act 1976.

It is predicted that 90,000 people in the U.K. will die from mesothelioma as
a result of previous exposure to asbestos.

Thompsons head of asbestos policy Ian McFall said, “Restricting bereavement
damages to GBP10,000 is a derisory sum for the grief caused by the death of a
close family member.”

The only way to increase the level of bereavement damages is by a change in
the law. Already scores of MPs have backed an Early Day Motion in Parliament
which urges the government to “act swiftly to ensure that those suffering
from this deadly disease have the same rights in England and Wales as they do
in Scotland.”

BECTU General Secretary Gerry Morrissey said, “Bereavement compensation for
families of those who have died from mesothelioma, many of whom have been our
members, should be equal no matter where you were exposed to asbestos in the
U.K.”


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Heffron to be Checked for Airborne Hazards
----------------------------------------------------------------
The City Council of Randwick, New South Wales, Australia, announced that
Heffron Park will be tested for airborne asbestos fibers, Southern Courier
reports.

To be accomplished by consultants Pickford and Rhyder, the testing will
consist of six air-monitoring units situated at the park's boundaries,
netball courts and sand basins, and will be carried out for one day every
three months.

The monitoring method, similar to practices used to test air pollution, will
involve sampling pumps trapping air from the park through a membrane filter.

The samples will then be taken to a laboratory and examined for asbestos
fibers and materials. A report on the findings of the investigations will be
submitted to the Council after each series of sampling.

Deputy Mayor Murray Matson praised the move and said the asbestos issue
was “an emotive one.”

Asbestos Diseases Foundation of Australia president Barry Robson said the
move was a “positive step in the right direction” but added it should have
been started as soon as asbestos was found in the area.

Mr. Robson also expressed his concerns that testing for just one day every
three months was “not nearly enough.”


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Illegal Dumping Prompts Aussie Site Cleanup
----------------------------------------------------------------
Illegal dumping of asbestos building material prompted an emergency cleanup
of land in Bonnyrigg, New South Wales, Australia, on June 28, 2007, Fairfield
City Champion reports.

The land, adjacent to Bonnyrigg High School, in Elizabeth Drive, was sold by
Fairfield Council to a developer on June 29, 2007. The Council declined to
name the buyer or what is planned for the site.

Mayor Nick Lalich said, “During the sales procedure, the council became aware
of the possibility of contamination on the site from the illegal dumping of
building materials. This material appeared to include some asbestos typical
of fibro sheeting that is commonly used in housing across Sydney.”

Mr. Lalich said site remediation experts were hired for the work which he
said met the relevant standards and regulations.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court OKs Commission Ruling in Gainey Case
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Court of Appeals of North Carolina upheld the Industrial Commission’s
March 2, 2006 decision, which entitled benefits to plaintiff, in an asbestos-
related case filed by the Estate of Leward Benmack Gainey against Southern
Flooring & Acoustical Co. Inc.

Judges Stroud, Martin, and Hunter entered decision of Case No. COA06-785 on
July 3, 2007.

Mr. Gainey began work for Southern Flooring in 1969 as a field installer,
which involved the installation of asbestos tiles in ceilings. He retired
from Southern Flooring in 1983 and started his own company, Gainey Acoustical.

As owner of Gainey Acoustical, Mr. Gainey’s main duty was soliciting
contractors in order to procure orders for his company. He retired from
Gainey Acoustical in November 1995.

Mr. Gainey testified that he was first diagnosed with asbestosis "five or six
years" before the Nov. 30, 2000 hearing. He died on May 9, 2005.

On April 8, 1999, Mr. Gainey, through the Commission, sought benefits for an
occupational disease resulting from exposure to asbestos while working for
Southern Flooring.

Southern Flooring denied that Mr. Gainey was entitled to benefits, contending
that he did "not have a compensable occupational disease, and that he was not
last injuriously exposed to the hazards of any such disease while employed by
defendant-employer." The claim was initially heard before Deputy Commissioner
W. Bain Jones on Nov. 30, 2000.

On March 30, 2001 (2001 Opinion and Award), Mr. Jones concluded
that "plaintiff [had] failed to prove by the greater weight of the evidence
that he [had] contracted asbestosis as a result of his employment with
defendant-employer," and his claim was therefore denied.

Mr. Gainey appealed the 2001 Opinion and Award to the Full Commission. The
Full Commission reviewed his claim on March 12, 2003.

On Sept. 2, 2003, the Commission reversed the 2001 Opinion and Award and
entered an Opinion and Award (2003 Opinion and Award) which concluded
that "plaintiff was last injuriously exposed to asbestos during his
employment with Southern Flooring and that plaintiff had contracted
asbestosis as a result of that exposure."

On Sept. 22, 2004, Mr. Gainey’s claim as to disability was heard by Deputy
Commissioner George T. Glenn II, upon remand by the Full Commission.

After the hearing, Mr. Glenn entered an Opinion and Award on June 16, 2005
(2005 Opinion and Award), which concluded that Mr. Gainey had been totally
disabled since January 1995 and that he was entitled to compensation from
that date forward at the rate of US$481.24 per week.

On June 28, 2005, defendants filed notice of appeal to the Full Commission
from the 2005 Opinion and Award. The Full Commission reviewed Mr. Gainey’s
claim on Nov. 8, 2005.

In its March 2, 2006 Opinion and Award, the Commission concluded that as a
result of his asbestosis, Mr. Gainey was entitled to permanent and total
disability compensation at the weekly rate of US$481.24 from Dec. 3, 1999
through May 9, 2005.

Defendants were ordered to pay the compensation awarded to Mr. Gainey’s
estate in a lump sum, along with attorney's fees in the amount of 25 percent
of the compensation awarded.

Defendants filed an appeal with the Appeals Court from the 2006 Opinion and
Award.

The Commission's findings were sufficient to support the Commission's
conclusion that Mr. Gainey was totally and permanently disabled, and entitled
to benefits starting Dec. 3, 1999.

The findings that Mr. Gainey stopped working in 1995 as a result of his
disease, and that Mr. Gainey’s asbestos-related condition continued to
deteriorate until his death, though erroneous, did not affect the
Commission's conclusions of law, and are therefore not reversible error.

Accordingly, the Appeals Court affirmed the March 2, 2006 Opinion and Award
of the Industrial Commission.

Edward L. Pauley of Wallace and Graham P.A. represented the Estate of Leward
Benmack Gainey.

Thomas M. Clare and Courtney C. Britt of Teague, Campbell, Dennis & Gorman
LLP represented Southern Flooring & Acoustical Co. Inc.


                            *********


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, Ma. Cristina Canson, and Janice Mendoza, and Mary
Grace Durana, Editors.

Copyright 2007.  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  * * *