CAR_Public/090206.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Friday, February 6, 2009, Vol. 11, No. 26

                           Headlines

ALTRIA GROUP: Faces Suit Over Breach of Consumer Protection Laws
ALTRIA GROUP: Feb. 2010 Trial Set for "Curtis" Suit in Minnesota
ALTRIA GROUP: High Court Rules "Good" Claims Not Barred by FCLAA
ALTRIA GROUP: Jan. 2010 Trial Set for "Craft" Action in Missouri
ALTRIA GROUP: "Miner" Suit Remains Stayed Pending "Good" Ruling

ALTRIA GROUP: Plaintiffs in "Price" Case Seek Relief from Ruling
ALTRIA GROUP: Requests Briefing on Exemption Issue in "Aspinall"
ALTRIA GROUP: Tobacco Price-Fixing Cases Pending in Kans. & N.M.
ALTRIA GROUP: "Watson" Suit Still Stayed Pending "Good" Outcome
APPLE INC: Faces Calif. Consumer Fraud Suit Over iPhone Defects

APPLE INC: Faces Consumer Fraud Suit in N.J. Over iPhone Defects
APPLE INC: Faces Fla. Consumer Fraud Suit Over iPhone Defects
BASF CORP: N.J Judge Certifies Class in Age Discrimination Case
DELL CANADA: Ontario Lawsuit Over Inspiron Notebooks Certfied
IPEX INC: Nev. Court OKs Joint Motion in $90M Kitec Settlement

MORGAN STANLEY: N.Y. Court Nixes Suits Over Research Conflicts
NEUROCRINE BIOSCIENCES: Calif. Court Dismisses Securities Suit
RUTLAND PLYWOOD: Faces Suit in Vermont Alleging WARN Violations
WASHINGTON MUTUAL: Defendants Seek Dismissal of Securities Suit


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

ATRICURE INC: Howard G. Smith Announces Securities Suit Filing
LEVEL 3 COMMS: Izard Nobel LLP Announces Securities Suit Filing
LEVEL 3 COMMS: Stull Stull Announces Securities Lawsuit Filing


                        Asbestos Alerts

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Mallinckrodt Facing 10,500 Cases at Dec. 26
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: La. Court Has Split Rulings in Walker Suit
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Poulton Pensioner's Death Linked to Hazard
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Union Pacific Fined $200T for Mishandling
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Discovered at Courtyard Workshops

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cleanup at New Orleans' Plaza Tower Ongoing
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Owens-Illinois Liability Decreases to $175M
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Harborough Plumber's Death Linked to Hazard
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Discovered at Charles Town School
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Chichester Businesses Screened for Asbestos

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Buffalo Charging $1T for Notification Fees
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 2 Mass. Schools Charged for Cleanup Breach
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Insurers Blamed for Short-Changing Victims
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ZenBio Inc. Awarded $1.88M for Cancer Study
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: UK Group Asks to Keep Aircraft Carrier Away

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ameron Int'l. Facing 24 Actions at Nov. 30
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Pittsburgh Corning's Plan Filed on Jan. 30
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 4 Lawsuits Filed on Jan. 19-23 in Madison
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Reis Asphalt Penalized for Handling Breach
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: DEQ Grants $830,000 to Bozeman for Cleanup

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Rogers Hotel Charged for Health Violations
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Wis. SC Certifies Questions in Plenco Suit
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Carnival Corporation Subject to Health Laws
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Chubb Reserves $747MM for Claims at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Exposure Cases Still Ongoing Against Sensus

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hearings on Grace Plan Set for June & Sept.
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Markel Increases Reserves by $24.9M in 2008
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Marton Cleaner's Death Linked to Exposure
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hardie Ex-Chairman Testifies on Fund Plan
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Mosley's Action v. Norfolk Filed on Jan. 23

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Oswego High School Cleanup to Begin Feb. 13
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazard Removed From Lynemouth First School
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 95% of East Sussex Schools May Have Hazard
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ontario Ministry to Survey 18 Sault Sites
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: N.H. School District Seeks $90T for Cleanup

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Williams Lawsuit Filed v. 4 Firms in Texas
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Burpee Case v. New England Guaranty Dropped
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ACE Incurs $51Mil Charge for A&E at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Dow Chemical Has $824M Liability at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ATL Calls for Cleanup at Lancashire Schools

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Meade County Cleanup Bids to Start March 3
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Regina Qu'Appelle Area Seeks Asbestos Audit
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Maidment to Pay GBP5T for Storage Breaches
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Found at 111 of 116 Medway Schools
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: NJISJ Has $200,000 for Brownfields Training

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 10 West City, Ill. Homes to Get New Piping
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Appeal Court Affirms Stay in Wangen Action
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Graham Corp. Still Facing Exposure Actions
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Unitrin Reserves $13M for Claims at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Whisnant v. DuPont Trial Reset to April '09

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Bourton Carpenter's Death Linked to Hazard
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hawaii Scientist Gets $220,000 Cancer Grant
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Cover at Patea Site Disintegrating
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Westchester Teachers Reveal Botched Cleanup
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Renovation Bares Hazard at Colo. Courthouse

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Pa. School Cleanup, Renovation to Cost $64M


                           *********

ALTRIA GROUP: Faces Suit Over Breach of Consumer Protection Laws
----------------------------------------------------------------
Altria Group, Inc.'s subsidiary Philip Morris USA Inc. (PM USA)
continues to face a purported class-action lawsuit (Reynolds)
filed by a California consumer alleging violations of certain
California consumer protection laws.

In September 2005, the lawsuit was filed by a California
consumer against PM USA alleging that PM USA violated certain
California consumer protection laws in connection with the
alleged expiration of Marlboro Miles' proofs of purchase, which
could be used in accordance with the terms and conditions of
certain time-limited promotions to acquire merchandise from
Marlboro catalogues.

PM USA's motion to dismiss the case was denied in March 2006.

In September 2006, PM USA filed a motion for summary judgment as
to plaintiff's claims for breach of the implied covenant of good
faith and fair dealing.

In October 2006, PM USA filed a second summary judgment motion
seeking dismissal of plaintiff's claims under certain California
consumer protection statutes.

In June 2007, the court denied PM USA's motions for summary
judgment.

In January 2008, PM USA's application for interlocutory review
by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit was granted,
according to the company's Form 8-K filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission on Jan. 29, 2009.

Altria Group, Inc. -- http://www.altria.com/-- is the holding
company of Philip Morris USA Inc. (PM USA) and John Middleton,
Inc., which are engaged in the manufacture and sale of
cigarettes and other tobacco products.  Philip Morris Capital
Corporation (PMCC), another wholly owned subsidiary, maintains a
portfolio of leveraged and direct finance leases.  The company's
segments are U.S. tobacco; European Union; Eastern Europe,
Middle East and Africa; Asia; Latin America, and Financial
Services.  In March 2008, the Company completed the spin-off of
Philip Morris International Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary.  In
January 2009, the Company completed the acquisition of UST Inc.


ALTRIA GROUP: Feb. 2010 Trial Set for "Curtis" Suit in Minnesota
----------------------------------------------------------------
A Feb. 16, 2010 trial has been set for the "Curtis" class-action
suit against Altria Group, Inc.'s subsidiary Philip Morris USA
Inc. (PM USA) in Minnesota, according to the company's Form 8-K
filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Jan.
29, 2009.

In April 2005, the Minnesota Supreme Court denied PM USA's
petition for interlocutory review of the trial court's class
certification order.

In September 2005, PM USA removed Curtis to federal court based
on the Eighth Circuit's decision in Watson, which upheld the
removal of a "Lights" case to federal court based on the
"federal officer" jurisdiction of the Federal Trade Commission.

In February 2006, the federal court denied plaintiffs' motion to
remand the case to state court.

The case was stayed pending the outcome of "Dahl v. R. J.
Reynolds Tobacco Co.," which was argued before the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in December 2006.

In February 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth
Circuit issued its ruling in Dahl, and reversed the federal
district court's denial of plaintiffs' motion to remand that
case to the state trial court.

In October 2007, the federal district court remanded the Curtis
case to state court.

In December 2007, the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed the
trial court's determination in Dahl that plaintiffs' claims in
that case were subject to express preemption, and defendant in
that case has petitioned the Minnesota Supreme Court for review.

The court has set a trial date of Feb. 16, 2010.

Curtis had been stayed pending the U.S. Supreme Court's decision
in "Good et al. v. Altria Group Inc., et al., Case No. 1:05-cv-
00127-JAW."

Altria Group, Inc. -- http://www.altria.com/-- is the holding
company of Philip Morris USA Inc. (PM USA) and John Middleton,
Inc., which are engaged in the manufacture and sale of
cigarettes and other tobacco products.  Philip Morris Capital
Corporation (PMCC), another wholly owned subsidiary, maintains a
portfolio of leveraged and direct finance leases.  The company's
segments are U.S. tobacco; European Union; Eastern Europe,
Middle East and Africa; Asia; Latin America, and Financial
Services.  In March 2008, the Company completed the spin-off of
Philip Morris International Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary.  In
January 2009, the Company completed the acquisition of UST Inc.


ALTRIA GROUP: High Court Rules "Good" Claims Not Barred by FCLAA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Supreme Court, on Dec. 15, 2008, ruled that the claims
in the matter captioned "Good et al. v. Altria Group Inc., et
al., Case No. 1:05-cv-00127-JAW," are not barred by federal
preemption, according to Altria Group, Inc.'s Current Report on
Form 8-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
on Jan. 29, 2009.

The plaintiffs in the purported class action suit allege, among
other things, that the uses of the terms "Lights" and "Ultra
Lights" in cigarettes constitute deceptive and unfair trade
practices, common law fraud, and thus seeks injunctive and
equitable relief, including restitution and, in certain cases,
punitive damages.

The suit was brought on behalf of individuals who purchased and
consumed various brands of cigarettes, including Marlboro
Lights, Marlboro Ultra Lights, Virginia Slims Lights and
Superslims, Merit Lights and Cambridge Lights.

In May 2006, a federal trial court in Maine granted the motion
for summary judgment filed by the company's subsidiary, Philip
Morris USA Inc. (PM USA) in "Good," a purported "Lights" class
action, on the grounds that plaintiffs' claims are preempted by
the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act ("FCLAA") and
dismissed the case.

In August 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
vacated the district court's grant of PM USA's motion for
summary judgment on federal preemption grounds and remanded the
case to district court.

The district court stayed the case pending the U.S. Supreme
Court's ruling on defendants' petition for writ of certiorari
with the U.S. Supreme Court, which was granted on Jan. 18, 2008.

The case was stayed pending the U.S. Supreme Court's decision.

On Dec. 15, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that plaintiffs'
claims are not barred by federal preemption.  Although the Court
rejected the argument that the FTC's actions were so extensive
with respect to the descriptors that the state law claims were
barred as a matter of federal law, the Court's decision was
limited: it did not address the ultimate merits of plaintiffs'
claim, the viability of the action as a class action, or other
state law issues.  Stays entered in various "Lights" cases
pending Good have been lifted.

The suit is "Good et al. v. Altria Group Inc., et al., Case No.
1:05-cv-00127-JAW," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Maine, Judge John A. Woodcock, Jr., presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs are:

          Gerard V. Mantese, Esq. (gmantese@aol.com)
          Mantese and Associates, P.C.
          1361 E. Big Beaver Road
          Troy, MI 48083
          Phone: 248-457-9200

               - and -

          Samuel W. Lanham, Jr., Esq.
          (slanham@lanhamblackwell.com)
          Lanham Blackwell, P.A.
          470 Evergreen Woods
          Bangor, ME 04401
          Phone: 207-942-2898

Representing the defendants are:

          Judith Bernstein-Gaeta, Esq.
          (judith.bernstein-gaeta@aporter.com)
          Arnold & Porter, LLP
          555 Twelfth Street, N.W.
          Washington, DC 20004-1206
          Phone: 202-942-5497

               - and -

          Frances E. Bivens, Esq. (frances.bivens@dpw.com)
          Davis Polk & Wardwell
          450 Lexington Ave.
          New York, NY 10017
          Phone: 212-450-4000


ALTRIA GROUP: Jan. 2010 Trial Set for "Craft" Action in Missouri
----------------------------------------------------------------
A Jan. 11, 2010 trial has been set for the "Craft" class-action
suit against Altria Group, Inc.'s subsidiary Philip Morris USA
Inc. (PM USA) in Missouri, according to the company's Form 8-K
filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Jan.
29, 2009.

In August 2005, a Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the class
certification order.

In September 2005, PM USA removed Craft to federal court based
on the Eighth Circuit's decision in Watson.

In March 2006, the federal trial court granted plaintiffs'
motion and remanded the case to the Missouri state trial court.

In May 2006, the Missouri Supreme Court declined to review the
trial court's class certification decision.

The Court has set a trial date of Jan. 11, 2010.

Craft had been stayed pending the U.S. Supreme Court's decision
in "Good et al. v. Altria Group Inc., et al., Case No. 1:05-cv-
00127-JAW."

Altria Group, Inc. -- http://www.altria.com/-- is the holding
company of Philip Morris USA Inc. (PM USA) and John Middleton,
Inc., which are engaged in the manufacture and sale of
cigarettes and other tobacco products.  Philip Morris Capital
Corporation (PMCC), another wholly owned subsidiary, maintains a
portfolio of leveraged and direct finance leases.  The company's
segments are U.S. tobacco; European Union; Eastern Europe,
Middle East and Africa; Asia; Latin America, and Financial
Services.  In March 2008, the Company completed the spin-off of
Philip Morris International Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary.  In
January 2009, the Company completed the acquisition of UST Inc.


ALTRIA GROUP: "Miner" Suit Remains Stayed Pending "Good" Ruling
---------------------------------------------------------------
The "Miner" class action filed against Altria Group, Inc.'s
subsidiary Philip Morris USA Inc. (PM USA) remains stayed,
according to the company's Form 8-K filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission on Jan. 29, 2009.

The class-action lawsuit alleges that the uses of the terms
"Lights" and "Ultra Lights" constitute deceptive and unfair
trade practices, common law fraud, or violations of the
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).

In December 2005, in the Miner case, which was pending at that
time in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Arkansas, plaintiffs moved for certification of a class composed
of individuals who purchased Marlboro Lights or Cambridge Lights
brands in Arkansas, California, Colorado, and Michigan.

PM USA's motion for summary judgment based on preemption and the
Arkansas statutory exemption is pending.

Following the filing of this motion, plaintiffs moved to
voluntarily dismiss Miner without prejudice, which PM USA
opposed.

The court then stayed the case pending the U.S. Supreme Court's
decision on a petition for writ of certiorari in Watson.

In July 2007, the case was remanded to a state trial court in
Arkansas.

In August 2007, plaintiffs renewed their motion for class
certification.

In October 2007, the court denied PM USA's motion to dismiss on
procedural grounds and the court entered a case management
order.

The case had been stayed pending the U.S. Supreme Court's
decision in "Good et al. v. Altria Group Inc., et al., Case No.
1:05-cv-00127-JAW."

Altria Group, Inc. -- http://www.altria.com/-- is the holding
company of Philip Morris USA Inc. (PM USA) and John Middleton,
Inc., which are engaged in the manufacture and sale of
cigarettes and other tobacco products.  Philip Morris Capital
Corporation (PMCC), another wholly owned subsidiary, maintains a
portfolio of leveraged and direct finance leases.  The company's
segments are U.S. tobacco; European Union; Eastern Europe,
Middle East and Africa; Asia; Latin America, and Financial
Services.  In March 2008, the Company completed the spin-off of
Philip Morris International Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary.  In
January 2009, the Company completed the acquisition of UST Inc.


ALTRIA GROUP: Plaintiffs in "Price" Case Seek Relief from Ruling
----------------------------------------------------------------
The plaintiffs in the purported "Lights" class action in
Illinois (Price), in December 2008, filed a petition for relief
from the final judgment that was entered in favor of Altria
Group, Inc.'s subsidiary Philip Morris USA Inc. (PM USA).

According to the company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Jan. 29, 2009,
trial in the Price case commenced in state court in Illinois in
January 2003, and in March 2003, the judge found in favor of the
plaintiff class and awarded $7.1 billion in compensatory damages
and $3 billion in punitive damages against PM USA.

In connection with the judgment, PM USA deposited into escrow
various forms of collateral, including cash and negotiable
instruments.

In December 2005, the Illinois Supreme Court issued its
judgment, reversing the trial court's judgment in favor of the
plaintiffs and directing the trial court to dismiss the case.

In May 2006, the Illinois Supreme Court denied plaintiffs'
motion for re-hearing, in November 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court
denied plaintiffs' petition for writ of certiorari and, in
December 2006, the Circuit Court of Madison County enforced the
Illinois Supreme Court's mandate and dismissed the case with
prejudice.

In January 2007, plaintiffs filed a motion to vacate or withhold
judgment based on the U.S. Supreme Court's grant of the petition
for writ of certiorari in "Watson."

In May 2007, PM USA filed applications for a writ of mandamus or
a supervisory order with the Illinois Supreme Court seeking an
order compelling the lower courts to deny plaintiffs' motion to
vacate and/or withhold judgment.

In August 2007, the Illinois Supreme Court granted PM USA's
motion for supervisory order and the trial court dismissed
plaintiff's motion to vacate or withhold judgment.

In connection with the trial court's initial judgment in 2003,
PM USA deposited into escrow various forms of collateral,
including cash and negotiable instruments, all of which has
since been released and returned to PM USA.

On Dec. 18, 2008, plaintiffs filed with the trial court a
petition for relief from the final judgment that was entered in
favor of PM USA.  Specifically, plaintiffs seek to vacate the
2005 Illinois Supreme Court judgment, contending that the U.S.
Supreme Court's Dec. 15, 2008, decision in the case styled "Good
et al. v. Altria Group Inc., et al., Case No. 1:05-cv-00127-
JAW," demonstrated that the Illinois Supreme Court's decision
was "inaccurate."

Altria Group, Inc. -- http://www.altria.com/-- is the holding
company of Philip Morris USA Inc. (PM USA) and John Middleton,
Inc., which are engaged in the manufacture and sale of
cigarettes and other tobacco products.  Philip Morris Capital
Corporation (PMCC), another wholly owned subsidiary, maintains a
portfolio of leveraged and direct finance leases.  The company's
segments are U.S. tobacco; European Union; Eastern Europe,
Middle East and Africa; Asia; Latin America, and Financial
Services.  In March 2008, the Company completed the spin-off of
Philip Morris International Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary.  In
January 2009, the Company completed the acquisition of UST Inc.


ALTRIA GROUP: Requests Briefing on Exemption Issue in "Aspinall"
----------------------------------------------------------------
Altria Group, Inc.'s subsidiary Philip Morris USA Inc. (PM USA)
has requested further briefing on the state law statutory
exemption issue in the "Aspinall" class-action lawsuit.

In August 2004, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
affirmed the class certification order in "Aspinall."

In August 2006, the trial court denied PM USA's motion for
summary judgment based on the state consumer protection
statutory exemption and federal preemption.

On motion of the parties, the trial court has subsequently
reported its decision to deny summary judgment to the appeals
court for review and the trial court proceedings are stayed
pending completion of the appellate review.

Motions for direct appellate review with the Massachusetts
Supreme Judicial Court were granted in April 2007, and oral
arguments were heard in January 2008.

In March 2008, the Supreme Judicial Court issued an order
staying the proceedings pending the resolution of the case
styled "Good et al. v. Altria Group Inc., et al., Case No.1:05-
cv-00127-JAW."

On Dec. 23, 2008, subsequent to the U.S. Supreme Court's
decision in "Good," the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
issued an order requesting that the parties advise the court
within 30 days whether the "Good" decision is dispositive of
federal preemption issues pending on appeal.

On Jan. 21, 2009, PM USA notified the Massachusetts Supreme
Judicial Court that "Good" is dispositive of the federal
preemption issues on appeal, but requested further briefing on
the state law statutory exemption issue, according to the
company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission on Jan. 29, 2009.

Altria Group, Inc. -- http://www.altria.com/-- is the holding
company of Philip Morris USA Inc. (PM USA) and John Middleton,
Inc., which are engaged in the manufacture and sale of
cigarettes and other tobacco products.  Philip Morris Capital
Corporation (PMCC), another wholly owned subsidiary, maintains a
portfolio of leveraged and direct finance leases.  The company's
segments are U.S. tobacco; European Union; Eastern Europe,
Middle East and Africa; Asia; Latin America, and Financial
Services.  In March 2008, the Company completed the spin-off of
Philip Morris International Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary.  In
January 2009, the Company completed the acquisition of UST Inc.


ALTRIA GROUP: Tobacco Price-Fixing Cases Pending in Kans. & N.M.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Two separate cases were pending as of Dec. 31, 2008, alleging
that defendants, including Altria Group, Inc.'s subsidiary
Philip Morris USA Inc. (PM USA), conspired to fix cigarette
prices in violation of antitrust laws.

The cases were pending in Kansas and in New Mexico, according to
the company's Form 8-K filed with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission on Jan. 29, 2009.

Altria Group, Inc. is a defendant in the case in Kansas.

Plaintiffs' motions for class certification have been granted in
both cases.

In June 2006, defendants' motion for summary judgment was
granted in the New Mexico case.

On Nov. 18, 2008, the New Mexico Court of Appeals reversed the
trial court decision granting summary judgment as to certain
defendants, including PM USA.

On Jan. 7, 2009, PM USA and other defendants filed a petition
for writ of certiorari with the New Mexico Supreme Court seeking
reversal of the appellate court's decision.

The case in Kansas had been stayed pending the Kansas Supreme
Court's decision on defendants' petition regarding certain
discovery rulings by the trial court; the Kansas Supreme Court
denied the petition in April 2008 and the stay has been lifted.

Altria Group, Inc. -- http://www.altria.com/-- is the holding
company of Philip Morris USA Inc. (PM USA) and John Middleton,
Inc., which are engaged in the manufacture and sale of
cigarettes and other tobacco products.  Philip Morris Capital
Corporation (PMCC), another wholly owned subsidiary, maintains a
portfolio of leveraged and direct finance leases.  The company's
segments are U.S. tobacco; European Union; Eastern Europe,
Middle East and Africa; Asia; Latin America, and Financial
Services.  In March 2008, the Company completed the spin-off of
Philip Morris International Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary.  In
January 2009, the Company completed the acquisition of UST Inc.


ALTRIA GROUP: "Watson" Suit Still Stayed Pending "Good" Outcome
---------------------------------------------------------------
The "Watson" class action filed against Altria Group, Inc.'s
subsidiary Philip Morris USA Inc. (PM USA) in Arkansas remains
stayed, according to the company's Form 8-K filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission on Jan. 29, 2009.

The class action suit alleges that the uses of the terms
"Lights" and "Ultra Lights" constitute deceptive and unfair
trade practices, common law fraud, or violations of the
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).

In June 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the lower court
rulings in the Watson case that denied plaintiffs' motion to
have the case heard in a state, as opposed to federal, trial
court.

The Supreme Court rejected defendants' contention that the case
must be tried in federal court under the "federal officer"
statute.

The case has been remanded to the state trial court in Arkansas.

In March 2008, the case was stayed pending the outcome of the
U.S. Supreme Court's decision in "Good et al. v. Altria Group
Inc., et al., Case No. 1:05-cv-00127-JAW."

Altria Group, Inc. -- http://www.altria.com/-- is the holding
company of Philip Morris USA Inc. (PM USA) and John Middleton,
Inc., which are engaged in the manufacture and sale of
cigarettes and other tobacco products.  Philip Morris Capital
Corporation (PMCC), another wholly owned subsidiary, maintains a
portfolio of leveraged and direct finance leases.  The company's
segments are U.S. tobacco; European Union; Eastern Europe,
Middle East and Africa; Asia; Latin America, and Financial
Services.  In March 2008, the Company completed the spin-off of
Philip Morris International Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary.  In
January 2009, the Company completed the acquisition of UST Inc.


APPLE INC: Faces Calif. Consumer Fraud Suit Over iPhone Defects
---------------------------------------------------------------
Apple, Inc. is facing a purported class-action lawsuit claiming
that the iPhone not only fails to live up to 3G speeds, but that
it also prematurely develops hairline cracks in its outer
casing, Jeffrey Silva of RCR Wireless News reports.

The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California on Jan. 26, 2009 by Jacob Medway, under
the caption, "Medway v. Apple, Inc., Case No. 3:09-cv-00330-
JSW."

The lawsuit lacks a specific dollar amount in damages being
sought, according to RCR Wireless News.

The suit is "Medway v. Apple, Inc., Case No. 3:09-cv-00330-JSW."
3:09-cv-00330-JSW Medway v. Apple, Inc., filed in the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California, Jeffrey
S. White, presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs is:

          Lionel Z. Glancy, Esq.
          Marc Lawrence Godino, Esq.
          Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP
          1801 Avenue of The Stars, Suite 311
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Phone: (310) 201-9150
          Fax: (310) 201-9160
          e-mail: info@glancylaw.com


APPLE INC: Faces Consumer Fraud Suit in N.J. Over iPhone Defects
----------------------------------------------------------------
Apple, Inc. and AT&T Mobility LLC is facing a purported class-
action lawsuit claiming that the iPhone not only fails to live
up to 3G speeds, but that it also prematurely develops hairline
cracks in its outer casing, MacNN reports.

The suit was filed in the U.S. District  Court for the District
of New Jersey on Jan. 30, 2009 by Timothy Ritchie, under the
caption,

The cites a number of blog and forum posts, describing user
frustrations with intermittent or non-existent 3G reception;
without 3G broadband, many of the data functions possible on an
iPhone become impractical or unusable, according to the MacNN
report.

The suit ultimately accuse Apple and carrier AT&T of falsely
marketing flawed devices, not only in terms of cellular
performance but because of hairline cracks forming around areas
such as the camera lens and volume controls.

MacNN reported that in compensation the plaintiffs are demanding
statutory, compensatory and punitive damages with interest, the
restitution of illicit profits, and an injunction against any
misleading advertising.

The suit is "Ritchie v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No. 2:09-cv-
00456-WJM-MF," filed in the U.S. District  Court for the
District of New Jersey, Judge William J. Martini, presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs is:

          Joseph J. DePalma, Esq. (jdepalma@ldgrlaw.com)
          Lite, DePalma, Greenberg & Rivas, LLC
          Two Gateway Center
          12th Floor
          Newark, NJ 07102-5003
          Phone: (973) 623-3000


APPLE INC: Faces Fla. Consumer Fraud Suit Over iPhone Defects
-------------------------------------------------------------
Apple, Inc. and AT&T Mobility LLC is facing a purported class-
action lawsuit claiming that the iPhone not only fails to live
up to 3G speeds, but that it also prematurely develops hairline
cracks in its outer casing, Jeffrey Silva of RCR Wireless News
reports.

The suit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of Florida on Jan. 30, 2009 by Onel Gonzalez and Ron J.
Brayteson under the caption, "Gonzalez et al v. Apple Inc. et
al., Case No. 1:2009-cv-20258."

According to the suit, "The 3G iPhones [both the 8 GB and 16 GB
models] do not and cannot adequately perform due to the
insufficient 3G bandwidths and AT&T infrastructure."

"Additionally, the iPhones have had well-known and documented
issues regarding the premature 'wear-and-tear' of the iPhones'
housing, including the formation of hairline cracks in the
iPhones' casing.  Defendants' conduct constitutes unfair
practices under Florida statutory and common law, including
Florida consumer-protections statutes, negligent
misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and breach of express and
implied warranties."

The lawsuit lacks a specific dollar amount in damages being
sought, according to RCR Wireless News.

The suit is "Gonzalez et al v. Apple Inc. et al., Case No.
1:2009-cv-20258," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Florida, Judge Patricia A. Seitz,
presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs is:

          Emily Cornelia Komlossy, Esq.
          (ekomlossy@faruqilaw.com)
          Faruqi& Faruqi, LLP
          3595 Sheridan Street
          Suite 206
          Hollywood, FL 33021
          Phone: 954-239-0280
          Fax: 954 239-0281


BASF CORP: N.J Judge Certifies Class in Age Discrimination Case
---------------------------------------------------------------
A New Jersey judge has granted class-action status to an age
discrimination lawsuit against Florham Park-based BASF Corp.,
Newsday reports.

G. Martin Meyers, Esq., the plaintiffs' lawyer, told Newsday
that on Jan. 31, 2009 a judge ruled that the case can proceed on
behalf of all former BASF Corp. employees laid off between
January 2002 and June 2007, who were age 40 or over at the time.
Mr. Meyers says that applies to about 900 people.

BASF Corporation spokesman Mark Stephenson tells Newsday that
the company "categorically denies" engaging in any age
discrimination, adding that it may challenge the decision to
grant class-action status to the case.

For more details, contact:

          G. Martin Meyers, P.C.
          35 West Main Street, Suite 106
          Denville, New Jersey 07834
          Phone: 973-625-0838
          Fax: 973-625-5350
          Web site: http://gmeyerslaw.com/


DELL CANADA: Ontario Lawsuit Over Inspiron Notebooks Certfied
-------------------------------------------------------------
     TORONTO, Feb. 4 /PRNewswire/ - In a judgment released
today, Justice Joan Lax of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice
certified a national class action on behalf of Canadians who own
the following Dell Inspiron notebooks: 1100, 1150, 5100, 5150 or
5160.  The Court also denied a motion brought by Dell to dismiss
the class action and require individuals with these Dell
notebooks to arbitrate any dispute they have with Dell about
defective performance of these models. The case was commenced by
the law firm of Rochon Genova LLP in Toronto.

     The class action seeks compensation from Dell Canada Inc.
arising from alleged defects in these Dell notebooks affecting
some 120,000 Canadian consumers.

     In the judgment, Justice Lax decided that an earlier
Supreme Court of Canada decision which arose in Quebec and
involved Dell Canada did not change the law in Ontario or
British Columbia.  Consumers may still proceed with defective
product class proceedings even if the contract with the
manufacturer contains an arbitration clause.  In so deciding,
Justice Lax considered whether individual arbitrations would be
preferable to a single class proceeding and decided in favour of
a class proceeding.

     This decision is significant as it delineates the scope of
the previous decision of the Supreme Court of Canada outside
Quebec.  Joel P. Rochon, counsel for the class stated: "This
decision protects the rights of Canadians to seek compensation
through a class action for defective goods even in the face of
an arbitration clause".  The decision builds on other recent
decisions in Ontario and British Columbia regarding the
enforceability of arbitration clauses.  "This is a significant
development for class actions", he said.

     The allegations raised in the claim have not yet been
proven in court.  The plaintiff and the class members are
represented by the firm of Rochon Genova LLP.



IPEX INC: Nev. Court OKs Joint Motion in $90M Kitec Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Clark County District Court in Nevada approved a $90 million
settlement of a class-action lawsuit involving faulty Kitec
plumbing fixtures manufactured by Canada-based IPEX, Inc., Jeff
Pope of The Las Vegas Sun reports.

According to Judge Timothy William, who approved the agreement
on Feb. 2, 2008, the partial settlement seems fair and
reasonable despite objections from some of the home builders
remaining in the suit who claim IPEX should bear more of the
costs because it designed and manufactured the fittings.

The agreement removes IPEX from the class action suit and
protects the company and its subsidiaries from future lawsuits,
according to The Las Vegas Sun report.

Hubble Smith of the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that in
general the lawsuit alleges that Kitec fittings are defective
because they "dezincify" when exposed to water, resulting in
leaks and breaks in the pipes, reports the Las Vegas Review-
Journal.

Several home builders named in the lawsuit, including Richmond
American, Woodside, Del Webb, Coventry and Rhodes Homes, have
already settled for various amounts.  The rest of the 27
defendants will go to mediation in February.  A trial is
scheduled for May 19, 2009 for those parties who do not settle,
according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal.


MORGAN STANLEY: N.Y. Court Nixes Suits Over Research Conflicts
--------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
dismissed two class-action lawsuits by mutual-fund investors
against Morgan Stanley Inc. and several units over alleged
conflicts of interests between its research and investment
banking operations during the technology stock-driven boom
period, Chad Bray of Dow Jones Newswires reports.

In an order dated Feb. 2, 2009 and made public the next day,
Judge Barbara S. Jones dismissed the complaints brought by
investors in open-ended mutual funds the Morgan Stanley
Technology Fund and the Morgan Stanley Information Fund, reports
Dow Jones Newswires.

According to the judge, "The funds' investment objectives are to
seek long-term capital appreciation by investing in technology
and technology-related industries, or companies in the
communications and information industry," the judge said.

She added, "Plaintiffs have not alleged any facts demonstrating
that the companies held by the funds failed to satisfy this
criteria. Indeed, many of the companies in which the funds
invested are well-known companies in the technology and/or
communications sector."

Dow Jones Newswires reported that the lawsuits had alleged total
compensation for research analysts at Morgan Stanley was based
on securing investment banking business and its analysts
promoted the shares of Morgan Stanley clients or potential
clients, resulting in artificial inflation of their share
prices.

It was also also alleged in the lawsuits that Morgan Stanley
engaged in a practice known as "laddering," in which the bank
allegedly induced institutional investors to buy additional
shares in initial public offerings at higher prices once the
stocks began trading in exchange for allocations of shares in
other hot offerings.

The complaints alleged the funds' portfolios were loaded with
Morgan Stanley-sponsored stocks and the investors ultimately
lost millions of dollars on their purchases in the funds because
Morgan Stanley failed to disclose the alleged conflicts and IPO
practices in the prospectus for each fund.

The judge found the plaintiffs "failed to plead any material
omissions or misstatements" that Morgan Stanley or its units had
a duty to disclose to investors in the two funds, according to
the Dow Jones Newswires report.

One suit sought to represent investors who purchased shares in
the Technology Fund between September 2000 and July 2002, while
the other suit sought to represent investors who purchased
shares in the Information Fund between October 1999 and October
2002, the Dow Jones Newswires reported.


NEUROCRINE BIOSCIENCES: Calif. Court Dismisses Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
dismissed a consolidated class-action suit against Neurocrine
Biosciences, Inc., and certain individual defendants, entitled,
"In re Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc. Securities Litigation, 07-
cv-1111-IEG-RBB."

Initially, Construction Laborers Pension Trust of Greater St.
Louis filed the suit on June 19, 2007, under the caption,
"Construction Laborers Pension Trust of Greater St. Louis v.
Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc."

The complaint alleges, among other things, that the company and
certain of its officers and directors violated federal
securities laws by making allegedly false and misleading
statements regarding the progress toward U.S. Food and Drug
Administration approval and the potential for market success of
"indiplon" in the 15 mg dosage unit.

On June 26, 2007, a second purported class action with similar
allegations was filed with the same court.  That case was,
"Gopal Batra, Ph.D. v. Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc."

On Oct. 16, 2007, both purported class action lawsuits were
consolidated into one action under the caption, "In re
Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc. Securities Litigation, 07-cv-1111-
IEG-RBB."

The court also selected a lead plaintiff who filed a
consolidated amended complaint, which is now the operative
complaint in the litigation.

The complaint alleges, among other things, that the company and
certain of its officers and directors violated federal
securities laws by making allegedly false and misleading
statements regarding the progress toward FDA approval and the
potential for market success of indiplon in the 15mg dosage
unit.

On Jan. 11, 2008, the company and the individual defendants
filed a motion to dismiss the complaint.   Following a hearing
on April 22, 2008, the court granted the motion to dismiss but
gave the lead plaintiffs leave to file an amended complaint.

On June 11, 2008, the lead plaintiffs filed the second
consolidated amended complaint, which is now the operative
complaint in the litigation.

On July 8, 2008, the company and the individual defendants filed
a motion to dismiss the SAC.  The court granted the motion to
dismiss on Sept. 23, 2008, but gave lead plaintiffs further
leave to file a Third Consolidated Amended Complaint (TAC).

On Oct. 23, 2008, rather than filing a TAC, the lead plaintiffs
filed a Notice of Election to Stand on the SAC, requesting that
the court enter a final judgment dismissing the matter.  On Nov.
3, 2008, the court entered a final judgment dismissing the
matter with prejudice.

On Dec. 31, 2008, the time elapsed for lead plaintiffs to appeal
the court's final judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit.

The suit is "In re Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc. Securities
Litigation, 07-cv-1111-IEG-RBB," filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of California, Judge Irma
E. Gonzalez, presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs are:

           Daniel S. Drosman, Esq. (DanD@csgrr.com)
           Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP
           655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
           San Diego, CA 92101
           Phone: 619-231-1058
           Fax: 619-231-7423

           Stuart L. Berman, Esq. (sberman@sbclasslaw.com)
           Schiffrin and Barroway
           280 King of Prussia Road
           Radnor, PA 19087-3481
           Phone: 610-667-7706

                - and -

           Evan Jason Smith, Esq. (esmith@brodsky-smith.com)
           Brodsky & Smith, LLC
           9595 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 900
           Beverly Hills, CA 90212
           Phone: 310-300-8425
           Fax: 310-247-0160

Representing the defendants is:

           Ryan E. Blair, Esq. (rblair@cooley.com)
           Cooley Godward Kronish
           4401 Eastgate Mall
           San Diego, CA 92121
           Phone: 858-550-6000
           Fax: 858-550-6420


RUTLAND PLYWOOD: Faces Suit in Vermont Alleging WARN Violations
---------------------------------------------------------------
Rutland Plywood Corp. is facing a purported class-action suit
alleging that it violated the Worker Adjustment and Retraining
Notification (WARN) Act, Brent Curtis of the Barre Montpelier
Times Argus reports.

The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District
of Vermont on Feb. 3, 2009 by Robert W. Hudson, a former Rutland
Plywood employee who was laid off last year.  Mr. Hudson filed
the suit on behalf of himself and the 75 others who lost their
jobs at the same time, according to the Barre Montpelier Times
Argus.

The plaintiff is charging Rutland Plywood with violating WARN by
failing to provide 60 days' advance written notice of
termination for himself and the others who were laid off.  He is
seeking to recover 60 days' wages and benefits for all affected
former employees, reports the Barre Montpelier Times Argus.

According to the compliant obtained by the Barre Montpelier
Times Argus, "(Rutland Plywood) failed to pay (the laid-off
employees) their respective wages, salary, commissions, bonuses,
accrued holiday pay and accrued vacation for 60 calendar days
following their respective terminations and failed to make
401(k) contributions and provide them with health insurance and
coverage and other employee benefits."

The suit is "Hudson v. Rutland Plywood, Case No. 1:09-cv-00030-
jgm," filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of
Vermont, Judge J. Garvan Murtha, presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs is:

          Alison J. Bell, Esq. (abell@langrock.com)
          Langrock Sperry & Wool, LLP
          210 College Street
          P.O. Box 721
          Burlington, VT 05402-0721
          Phone: (802) 864-0217
          Fax: (802) 864-0137


WASHINGTON MUTUAL: Defendants Seek Dismissal of Securities Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Several defendants in a consolidated securities fraud class-
action lawsuit against Washington Mutual, Inc. are seeking for
the dismissal of the case, which is pending in the U.S. District
Court for the Western District of Washington, Bill Virgin of The
Seattle Post Intelligencer reports.

In general, the suit charged that WaMu's "concerted efforts to
transform itself from a sleepy savings and loan into a high-
margin bank began to include highly questionable and unlawful
practices."  Those practices, the suit charged, included
emphasizing risky subprime mortgages without adequate loss
reserves, underwriting standards or management supervision;
pressuring appraisers to deliver home values that would justify
making those loans; and making misleading disclosures to
investors, reports The Seattle Post Intelligencer.

The Seattle Post Intelligencer reported that the defendants --
former Chief Executive Kerry Killinger, other top executives,
the outside directors of WaMu, accounting firm Deloitte & Touche
and Wall Street firms that issued securities for the company --
recently filed their responses to the plaintiffs' allegations
about the practices that led to the thrift's downfall.

They argue the suit should be dismissed for multiple reasons,
including that it fails legal tests for making a case that those
defendants deliberately misled investors about the company's
condition.

The motions to dismiss also contend that, the length of the suit
(nearly 400 pages) and the number of confidential witnesses
cited in it (89) notwithstanding, the suit fails to make
specific allegations against the defendants.

The defendants told the court that it should not be impressed by
the number of confidential witnesses cited in the plaintiffs'
suit, pointing out, "While 89 (confidential witnesses) may seem
significant, they must be viewed in context. WaMu employed more
than 60,000 employees at the beginning of 2006 -- in 2,140
retail banks, 487 lending stores, and 323 other offices, through
38 states. ... And almost all the (confidential witnesses)
worked in branch offices and not in WaMu's Seattle headquarters,
and thus would be unlikely to have any personal knowledge of the
company's overall performance," The Seattle Post Intelligencer
reported.

The outside directors, meanwhile, argue they have been brought
into the case "in an obvious attempt to capitalize on WaMu's
demise by naming as many defendants as possible ... despite the
fact that the complaint contains no allegations of substantive
involvement by the outside director defendants in the alleged
misconduct."

Oral arguments on the motions to dismiss the securities action
are scheduled for May 1, 2009, according to The Seattle Post
Intelligencer.


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

ATRICURE INC: Howard G. Smith Announces Securities Suit Filing
--------------------------------------------------------------
     BENSALEM, Pa., Feb. 3, 2009 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Law Offices
of Howard G. Smith announces a February 10, 2009, deadline to
move to be a lead plaintiff in the securities class action
lawsuit filed on behalf of all purchasers of the securities of
AtriCure, Inc. ("AtriCure") (Nasdaq:ATRC) between May 10, 2007
and October 31, 2008, inclusive (the "Class Period").  The
shareholder lawsuit is pending in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Ohio.

     The Complaint alleges that the defendants violated federal
securities laws by issuing material misrepresentations to the
market concerning AtriCure's business, operations and prospects,
thereby artificially inflating the price of AtriCure securities.

     No class has yet been certified in the above action.

For more details, contact:

          Howard G. Smith, Esq. (howardsmith@howardsmithlaw.com)
          Law Offices of Howard G. Smith
          3070 Bristol Pike, Suite 112
          Bensalem, Pennsylvania 19020
          Phone: (215)638-4847 or (888)638-4847
          Web site: http://www.howardsmithlaw.com


LEVEL 3 COMMS: Izard Nobel LLP Announces Securities Suit Filing
---------------------------------------------------------------
     February 04, 2009: 04:08 PM ET -- Marketwire -- The law
firm of Izard Nobel LLP, which has significant experience
representing investors in prosecuting claims of securities
fraud, announces that a lawsuit seeking class action status has
been filed in the United States District Court for the District
of Colorado on behalf of those who purchased the common stock of
Level 3 Communications, Inc. ("Level 3" or the "Company")
(NASDAQ: LVLT) between February 8, 2007 and October 23, 2007,
inclusive (the "Class Period").

     The Complaint charges that Level 3 and certain of its
officers and directors violated federal securities laws by
making materially false and misleading statements.

     Specifically, defendants failed to disclose the following:

       -- Level 3 was experiencing problems integrating its
          numerous acquisitions;

       -- the Company's integration problems caused Level 3 to
          experience severe provisioning problems which were
          negatively impacting revenue growth; and

       -- as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a
          reasonable basis for their positive statements about
          Level 3's business, operations and earnings prospects.

     On October 23, 2007, Level 3 issued a press release
announcing its financial results for the third quarter of 2007.
The Company reported consolidated revenue of $1.061 billion.
Level 3 further reported that its core communications services
revenue was negatively impacted by provisioning issues.  On this
news, the price of Level 3 stock fell from $4.32 per share to
$3.18 per share on October 24, 2007.

For more details, contact:

          Nancy A. Kulesa, Esq.
          Wayne T. Boulton, Esq.
          Izard Nobel LLP
          Phone: (800) 797-5499
          e-mail: firm@izardnobel.com
          Web site: http://www.izardnobel.com


LEVEL 3 COMMS: Stull Stull Announces Securities Lawsuit Filing
--------------------------------------------------------------
     February 04, 2009: 07:10 PM ET -- Marketwire -- Stull,
Stull & Brody announces that a class action has been commenced
in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado
on behalf of purchasers of Level 3 Communications, Inc. ("Level
3" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: LVLT) common stock during the
period between February 8, 2007 and October 23, 2007 (the "Class
Period").

     The complaint charges Level 3 and certain of its officers
and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934.

     Level 3 engages in the communications business in North
America and Europe.  The Company's network and Internet services
include transport services, high speed Internet protocol
services, dedicated Internet access, virtual private network
services, co-location services, and dark fiber services.

     The complaint alleges that the representations contained in
Level 3's press releases, SEC filings, conference calls, and
presentations during the Class Period were materially false and
misleading when made because they failed to disclose that:

       -- the Company was experiencing problems integrating its
          numerous acquisitions;

       -- the Company's integration problems caused Level 3 to
          experience severe provisioning problems which were
          negatively impacting revenue growth; and

       -- as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a
          reasonable basis for their positive statements about
          Level 3's business, operations and earnings prospects.

     On October 23, 2007, Level 3 issued a press release
announcing its financial results for the third quarter of 2007,
the period ending September 30, 2007.  For the quarter, the
Company reported consolidated revenue of $1.061 billion.  Level
3 further reported that its core communications services revenue
was negatively impacted by provisioning issues.  In response to
the announcements, the price of Level 3 stock declined from
$4.32 per share to $3.18 per share on October 24, 2007, on
extremely heavy trading volume.

     Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all those
who purchased or otherwise acquired Level 3 common stock during
the Class Period, which is between July 21, 2008 and January 20,
2009.

For more details, contact:

          Tzivia Brody, Esq.
          Stull, Stull & Brody
          6 East 45th Street
          New York, NY 10017
          Phone: 1-800-337-4983
          Fax: 212/490-2022
          e-mail: SSBNY@aol.com
          Web site: http://www.ssbny.com


                        Asbestos Alerts

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Mallinckrodt Facing 10,500 Cases at Dec. 26
----------------------------------------------------------------
Covidien Ltd.'s subsidiary, Mallinckrodt Inc., faced about
10,500 pending asbestos liability cases as of Dec. 26, 2008,
according to the Company's quarterly report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on Jan. 29, 2009.

Mallinckrodt, as of Sept. 26, 2008, faced 10,586 asbestos
liability cases. (Class Action Reporter, Dec. 5, 2008)

Mallinckrodt is named as a defendant in personal injury lawsuits
based on alleged exposure to asbestos-containing materials. Most
of the cases involve product liability claims, based principally
on allegations of past distribution of products incorporating
asbestos.

A limited number of the cases allege premises liability, based
on claims that individuals were exposed to asbestos while on
Mallinckrodt's property. Each case typically names dozens of
corporate defendants in addition to Mallinckrodt. The complaints
seek monetary damages for personal injury or bodily injury
resulting from alleged exposure to products containing asbestos.

The Company's involvement in asbestos cases has been limited
because Mallinckrodt did not mine or produce asbestos.

Furthermore, in the Company's experience, a large percentage of
these claims were never substantiated and have been dismissed by
the courts. The Company has not suffered an adverse verdict in a
trial court proceeding related to asbestos claims. When
appropriate, the Company settles claims. However, amounts paid
to settle and defend all asbestos claims have been immaterial.

Headquartered in Hamilton, Bermuda, Covidien Ltd. develops,
manufactures, and sells healthcare products for use in clinical
and home settings. The Company has operations in nearly 60
countries.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: La. Court Has Split Rulings in Walker Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit, issued split
rulings in a case involving asbestos, styled Joan Walker, et al.
v. Avondale Industries, Inc., et al.

Judges Joan Bernard Armstrong, Charles R. Jones, and Michael E.
Kirby entered judgment in Case No. 2009-C-0047 on Jan. 15, 2009.
Judges Jones and Kirby concurred in part and dissented in part.

The plaintiffs applied for Emergency Supervisory Writ Directed
to Honorable Michael G. Bagneris of the Civil District Court,
Orleans Parish Division "H-12."

The Appeals Court found that the trial court abused its
discretion in excluding the plaintiffs' expert, Dr. Kenneth
Cohen, on the basis that Dr. Cohen has not conducted his own
testing regarding the release of asbestos fibers from wire and
cable.

The Appeals Court disagreed with the trial court's conclusion
that under the Daubert/Foret standard, an expert must have
conducted his own test on a subject in order to be qualified to
testify about that subject. Dr. Cohen is qualified on the basis
of his knowledge and experience as a former California OSHA
inspector.

The Appeals Court grant the writ in part and reversed the trial
court's judgment insofar as it excluded the testimony of Dr.
Cohen.

Because it found that the trial court did not abuse its
discretion by declining to exclude the testimony of the
defendants' expert, Dr. Argento, the Appeals Court denied the
writ application in all other respects.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Poulton Pensioner's Death Linked to Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------
An inquest heard that the death of Morris William Banks, a 78-
year-old pensioner from Poulton, Blackpool, England, was linked
to exposure to asbestos, The Gazette reports.

Mr. Banks was diagnosed with mesothelioma in June 2006 and died
on Nov. 28, 2008.

The inquest at Blackpool Coroner's Court heard Mr. Banks had
worked as an apprentice at John Lumb and Co. in Leeds, where
part of his job involved removing asbestos powder from cables
used for working with high heat and glass manufacture.

Mr. Banks later moved to Central Electricity Generating Board in
Leeds where, he told his solicitor in a statement before he
died, he worked in old power stations, with asbestos insulation
on the pipe work.

Mr. Banks said lagging and other maintenance work often went on
in the vicinity, creating dust and there was no protective
clothing or respiratory protection.

Mark Sissons, consultant pathologist at Blackpool Victoria
Hospital, said when he carried out a post-mortem examination on
Mr. Banks he found a mesothelioma tumor in his chest, which had
started to spread to his heart and liver. There were asbestos
fibers in the lung tissue.

Coroner Anne Hind recorded a verdict of death caused by the
industrial disease diffuse malignant pleural mesothelioma, as a
result of exposure to asbestos.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Union Pacific Fined $200T for Mishandling
----------------------------------------------------------------
Utah State and federal environmental officials are calling on
Union Pacific Railroad Company to pay more than US$200,000 for
mishandling asbestos in 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune reports.

The Company was also ordered to pay investigation costs of
US$28,202. The Company's deal with United States Government
lawyers needs the approval of a U.S. District Court judge.

No court date has been set yet for a judge to review the
settlement.

Company spokeswoman Zoe Richmond said, "We feel this is the best
resolution you can have in a situation like this."

The case arose after the Company removed at least 13 metal
signal sheds along a rail line in 2005 and had Western Metals
Recycling of western Salt Lake City shred all but one of them.
In the last one, 123 square feet of crysotile asbestos was
discovered.

Handling asbestos is covered by the National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants. The Utah Division of Air Quality
and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency determined that the
law had been violated.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Discovered at Courtyard Workshops
----------------------------------------------------------------
Asbestos was discovered at Courtyard Workshops in Bath Street,
Harborough, England, on Jan. 26, 2009, the Harborough Mail
reports.

Scaffolding was placed around the 12 Leicestershire County
Council-owned units and traders were given a Jan. 28, 2009
deadline to leave.

Water with asbestos particles was discovered while contractors
5M were carrying out roof repairs.

On Jan. 27, 2009, Council officials met traders at the
Evangelical Church in Bath Street. A County Hall spokesman said,
The tenants were told the "Council is investigating a potential
breach of health and safety procedures by the contractor who was
carrying out work to the roof. We are providing support and
trying to find alternative accommodation for those who need it."

Some traders have complained the Council has left them in the
dark over how long they will have to stay away.

Landmark Electrical Supplies' owner, Ricky De'ath, said, "We
haven't been told how long the work will take – two days or two
months. I might have to look for alternative premises if the
work is long-term."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cleanup at New Orleans' Plaza Tower Ongoing
----------------------------------------------------------------
Investment firm, Plainfield Asset Management, on Jan. 28, 2009,
said that it began an environmental cleanup that would remove
asbestos and mold out of the Crescent City Towers (f/k/a the
Plaza Tower), located in New Orleans, The Times-Picayune
reports.

The building rises 44 stories above Howard Avenue, and it was
the tallest in the state when it was erected in 1968.

Plainfield acquired the building through foreclosure in 2007,
and partner Tom Walper said the Company plans to demolish the
interior to prepare it for a more substantial renovation.

Plainfield also has hired the Urban Land Institute to produce a
report recommending possible uses for the building, whether as
apartments, condominiums or some kind of mixed-use project. It
has served as an office tower for most of its life.

Despite its stature, the building has sat empty for more than
six years. The mold infiltration and asbestos have all but
precluded a major renovation, but Mr. Walper said Plainfield
plans to spend roughly US$12 million on the remediation effort.

It was unclear on Jan. 28, 2009 whether Plainfield would
ultimately redevelop the building once the cleanup is complete,
or whether it might seek out an investor for the property.

Mr. Walper expected the remediation work to last for about a
year.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Owens-Illinois Liability Decreases to $175M
----------------------------------------------------------------
Owens-Illinois, Inc.'s current asbestos liabilities were US$175
million as of Dec. 31, 2008, down from US$210 million as of Dec.
31, 2007, according to a Company press release dated Jan. 28,
2008.

The Company's current asbestos-related liabilities were US$210
million as of Sept. 30, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 14,
2008)

The Company's long-term asbestos-related liabilities were
US$320.3 million as of Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$245.5
million as of Dec. 31, 2007.

Long-term asbestos-related liabilities were US$105.2 million as
of Sept. 30, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 14, 2008)

Asbestos payments were US$69.9 million during the three months
ended Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$120.9 million during the
three months ended Dec. 31, 2007.

Asbestos payments were US$210.2 million during the year ended
Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$347.1 million during the year
ended Dec. 31, 2007.

Based in Perrysburg, Ohio, Owens-Illinois, Inc. makes recyclable
glass containers. Founded in 1903, the Company employs more than
23,000 people with 80 manufacturing facilities in 22 countries.
In 2008, net sales were US$7.9 billion.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Harborough Plumber's Death Linked to Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------
A Jan. 22, 2009 inquest at Kettering Magistrates' Court heard
that the death of plumber Rodney Arthur Barlow, of Harborough,
England, was linked to exposure to asbestos, the Harborough Mail
reports.

The inquest heard that the 71-year-old Mr. Barlow had worked as
a plumber after learning the trade as an apprentice at the age
of 15.

In a statement read by Coroner Anne Pember, Eileen Barlow told
the court that her husband was born in Welford and, after two
years of National Service, went on to spend more than 30 years
in the trade. During his career he worked for several plumbers
in the town but stopped working in 1993.

In 1997, Mr. Barlow had a serious heart attack and received a
triple bypass, but continued to suffer from breathlessness. When
the cause was investigated, he was found to be suffering from
malignant mesothelioma. He died on July 29, 2009 at Cransley
Hospice in Kettering.

The inquest heard that the local plumbers Mr. Barlow worked for
were W. W. Brown and Son, Plowright and Son, Chappell and Son
and East Goscote Plumbers.

The coroner recorded a verdict that Mr. Barlow died of an
industrial disease.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Discovered at Charles Town School
----------------------------------------------------------------
Health officials, on Jan. 15, 2008, confirmed the presence of
asbestos at the Wee Disciples Christian Enrichment Program in
Charles Town, W.Va., Your4State.com reports.

More than 200 students have been out of class for more than two
weeks after asbestos was discovered in their school.

All books, records, files and other materials are considered
contaminated. School officials say have been assured the
children were not put in any danger.

Ann Lake, whose child attends the school, said, "We have no
intention of putting him anywhere else. He will wait here and we
will pray that something else will open so that we can move the
school to another facility."

School officials are desperately looking for a new space as
parents wait to put their kids back in school.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Chichester Businesses Screened for Asbestos
----------------------------------------------------------------
Council environmental health officers are checking on businesses
in the Chichester, Sussex, England, to make sure these
businesses are not exposing employees, contractors or visitors
to asbestos, the Chichester Observer reports.

Around 25 percent of those dying from asbestos-related disease
had worked in the building maintenance and repair trades at some
time during their working lives.

According to the British Mesothelioma Register, 48 people from
the Chichester district died from the disease between 1985 and
2004, and this number was increasing.

The Chichester officers would be making visits as part of a
Sussex-wide campaign, working in partnership with other councils
and the Health and Safety Executive.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Buffalo Charging $1T for Notification Fees
----------------------------------------------------------------
The city of Buffalo, N.Y., implemented a US$1,000 "asbestos
notification fee," which must be paid by city residents who
locate asbestos that will need to undergo abatement, the
Mesothelioma & Asbestos Awareness Center reports.

City officials say the state does "virtually nothing" to warrant
the high fee.

Buffalo Chief of Inspections James Comerford said that the money
lost by paying the notification fee limits the number of
contaminated and dangerous structures that the city can
demolish. He added that it has reportedly been difficult to
conduct business at demolition sites because people oppose the
asbestos notification fee.

Senator William Stachowski from Buffalo, who is the new Chairman
of the Commerce, Economic Development and Small Business
Committee, has plans to introduce legislation that would do away
with or, at the very least, reduce the high fee associated with
the asbestos notification.

By law, individuals are required to notify the state prior to
removing any asbestos-containing materials, as asbestos exposure
has long been associated with the development of many diseases,
including asbestosis and mesothelioma cancer.

Buffalo has a number of old and dangerous buildings that present
a serious hazard to the community. The asbestos notification fee
prevents the city from demolishing more of these properties,
which only continue to present a health and safety hazard to
Buffalo residents.

Currently, 7,000 buildings need to be torn down, and city
officials say they are unable to do so because they cannot
afford the US$7 million dollars in fees.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 2 Mass. Schools Charged for Cleanup Breach
----------------------------------------------------------------
According to a report by the Massachusetts State's Executive
Office of Labor and Workforce Development's Division of
Occupational Safety, Fitchburg school officials did not update
and ensure proper documentation of asbestos in at least two
schools, resulting in various asbestos violations,
SentinelandEnterprise.com reports.

As a result of an investigation that began on December 2008,
state officials served a total of 54 violations and another 54
orders of corrective action that need to be taken by the
district.

The report states, "It would be difficult for school management
to explain the contents or significance of this management plan
to parents, teachers, or the public. A thorough review of the
management plan will be needed on the part of (the district) and
consultant to ensure that deficiencies are corrected so that
(document) compliance can be achieved."

The investigation stems from district officials finding high
levels of the asbestos in gymnasium tiles at South Street
Elementary School. Officials have said there has been no
evidence of any students or staff being exposed to asbestos and
have said all air-quality tests have come back clean.

The reports from the state outline how the documents are
required to be updated at least annually. They said they had not
been updated since they were created in 1988.

Superintendent Andre Ravenelle said on Jan. 26, 2009 that since
he became superintendent he has not made any changes to any
asbestos-related documents. He said those policies are normally
handled by the district's business and maintenance office.

Mr. Ravenelle said he will be working with Fitchburg State
College and an environmental health group (Woodward & Curran) to
address the issues outlined in the report, respond to the
state's corrective action demands and update the school
documents.

Among the violations:

     -- Failure to designate a person to ensure all asbestos
        requirements are properly implemented.

     -- Failure to ensure that a designated person has received
        adequate training.

     -- Failure to ensure that workers who come in contact with
        asbestos in a school are provided information and
        training related to asbestos handling.

     -- Failure to document the names of companies that have
        performed sample analysis.

     -- Failure of the district to ensure custodial and
        maintenance staff were trained within 60 days of hire.

     -- Failure to ensure that any custodial staff who conduct
        any activities that result in disturbance of
        asbestos-containing materials have at least 16 hours of
        training.

As of Dec. 31, 2008, the district has 30 days to respond in
writing to 29 corrective action measures the district must
undertake. Most of the actions are in direct result of each of
the violations, ordering that the district fix each of the
violations.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Insurers Blamed for Short-Changing Victims
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United Kingdom's insurance industry, on Jan. 27, 2009, was
accused of short-changing the country's victims of pleural
plaques, the Chronicle reports.

Since insurers successfully appealed to the House of Lords,
sufferers of pleural plaques have not been entitled to
compensation.

Until the Lords' ruling, victims who were negligently exposed to
asbestos and developed pleural plaques had been entitled to
compensation since the 1980s.

This is not the first time the insurance industry has been
accused of trying to snatch money away from those left ill or
dying after exposure to asbestos in the workplace.

Court battles have been filed in an attempt to avoid paying
compensation to people with conditions like mesothelioma,
asbestosis, and pleural plaques.

In 2006, the Lords cut the amount of compensation payable to
those suffering from mesothelioma. That ruling left victims in
limbo after the decision made it harder to bring a successful
case against employers where there had been asbestos exposure
with more than one company.

The ruling was overturned after pressure from trade unions and
lobby groups resulting in the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair,
stepping in to introduce legislation which restored the right to
full compensation under the Compensation Act 2006.

In 2008, a nine-week test case backed by the union Unite
protected the rights of asbestos victims and their families
against insurers' attempts to avoid paying up. A High Court
judge decided employers' liability insurers would have to
continue to pay compensation for mesothelioma caused by exposure
to asbestos in the workplace, if they insured the employer at
the time the asbestos exposure occurred.

The insurers had argued the policies they sold, to insure
employers against liability for workers who were injured or
suffered illness due to work, were "triggered" by the
development of the disease rather than by the exposure to
asbestos.

They said compensation should be claimed from the employers'
current insurance company, not the one who insured them at the
time of exposure.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ZenBio Inc. Awarded $1.88M for Cancer Study
----------------------------------------------------------------
ZenBio, Inc. announced that it has been awarded a Phase II SBIR
grant to commercialize primary human peritoneal mesothelial
cells, according to a ZenBio press release dated Jan. 27, 2009.

The US$1.88 million award from the National Institutes of Health
will fund continued optimization and commercial development of
this unique tool for cancer, obesity, and type 2 diabetes
research.

Mesothelial cells are specialized epithelial cells that line the
peritoneal, pleural, and pericardial cavities (as well as
internal organs), providing a frictionless barrier that
facilitates movement of organs and tissues. Pleural mesothelial
cells are the target cells in asbestos-induced mesothelioma.

"These are highly active cells," said Ben Buehrer, Ph.D., Vice
President of ZenBio. "They secrete factors that can have local
and systemic effects on several medical indications, from cancer
to metabolic diseases." The grant will allow ZenBio to make
well-characterized mesothelial cells available to the wider
research community.

Headquartered in Research Triangle Park, N.C., ZenBio, Inc. is a
biotechnology company that provides research tools for the study
of human metabolic disease. The Company performs contract
research for major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies
around the world.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: UK Group Asks to Keep Aircraft Carrier Away
----------------------------------------------------------------
The environmental group, the Friends of Hartlepool, is
protesting the arrival of the French aircraft carrier, the
Clemenceau, Agence France-Presse reports.

The Friends of Hartlepool's opposition stems from the fact that
the vessel contains around 700 tons of materials contaminated by
asbestos.

The Clemenceau is set to be dismantled at Hartlepool, England,
after being rejected by India.

However, others argue the task of taking apart the Clemenceau
will provide much-needed work, at a time when jobs are being cut
across the country due to the global slowdown.

The Clemenceau, a former flagship of the French navy now known
simply as hull Q790, could be towed to Hartlepool, where
shipbreakers Able UK Ltd plan to finally dismantle it.

The vessel is waiting for calmer weather to make its final
journey from Brest, France, where it has been since an 11,200-
mile journey to India in 2006.

Jean Kennedy of the Friends of Hartlepool said, "We don't want
the Clemenceau. We already have a lot of polluting industries
for a town this size...already has the highest cancer and
asbestosis rate of the country and an average life expectancy 13
years lower than the national average."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ameron Int'l. Facing 24 Actions at Nov. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ameron International Corporation faced 24 asbestos-related cases
as of Nov. 30, 2008, compared with 36 cases (60 claimants) as of
Nov. 30, 2007, according to the Company's annual report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Jan. 29, 2009.

The Company was a defendant in asbestos-related cases involving
31 claimants as of Aug. 31, 2008, compared with 29 claimants as
of June 1, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Oct. 3, 2008)

The Company is a defendant in a number of asbestos-related
personal injury lawsuits. These cases generally seek unspecified
damages for asbestos-related diseases based on alleged exposure
to products previously manufactured by the Company and others.

During the year ended Nov. 30, 2008, there were 20 new asbestos-
related cases, 24 cases dismissed, eight cases settled, no
judgments and aggregate net costs and expenses of US$100,000.

Headquartered in Pasadena, Calif., Ameron International
Corporation manufactures highly-engineered products and
materials for the chemical, industrial, energy, transportation
and infrastructure markets. The Company produces water
transmission lines; fiberglass-composite pipe for transporting
oil, chemicals and corrosive fluids and specialized materials;
and products used in infrastructure projects.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Pittsburgh Corning's Plan Filed on Jan. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
PPG Industries, Inc., on Jan. 30, 2009, announced that an
amended plan of reorganization for Pittsburgh Corning
Corporation has been filed in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court,
according to a Company press release filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission.

The Company is a 50 percent shareholder of Pittsburgh Corning,
which filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy protection in 2000.

Under the terms of the amended plan, all current and future
personal injury claims against the Company relating to exposure
to asbestos-containing products manufactured, distributed or
sold by Pittsburgh Corning will be channeled to a trust for
resolution. The amended plan is subject to court approval and
appeals processes, after which it would become effective and
payments to the trust by the Company and its participating
insurers would begin according to a modified PPG settlement
arrangement that is part of the amended plan.

In 2002, the Company entered into a settlement arrangement
relating to asbestos claims. The Company has reserved about
US$900 million for that settlement arrangement.

Under the modified settlement arrangement, the Company's
obligation is currently US$735 million for claims that will be
channeled to the trust. The Company will retain the US$165
million difference as a reserve for asbestos-related claims that
will not be channeled to the trust.

James C. Diggs, the Company's senior vice president, general
counsel and secretary, said, "This amended plan addresses the
issues raised by the court in its 2006 opinion on the matter,
and while we continue to believe PPG is not responsible for
injuries caused by Pittsburgh Corning products, this amended
plan would permanently resolve PPG's asbestos liabilities
associated with Pittsburgh Corning."

Under the modified settlement arrangement, the Company's
obligation to the trust consists of cash payments over a 15-year
period totaling US$825 million, about 1.4 million shares of PPG
stock or cash equivalent, and its shares in Pittsburgh Corning
and Pittsburgh Corning Europe. The obligation under the modified
settlement arrangement at Dec. 31, 2008 totals US$735 million or
about US$460 million net of the associated tax benefit.

The Company's obligation under the modified settlement
arrangement includes the net present value of the cash payments
of US$825 million, which will be adjusted quarterly to reflect
the accretion of interest. In addition, the Company's
participating historical insurance carriers will make cash
payments to the trust of about US$1.6 billion in a series of
payments ending in 2027.

Since the filing of the Pittsburgh Corning bankruptcy in 2000,
interested parties, including the Company, have engaged in
extensive negotiations, made numerous filings with the court and
participated in many hearings on this matter.

In December 2006, the court denied confirmation of the previous
amended reorganization plan for Pittsburgh Corning, on the basis
that the plan was too broad in the treatment of allegedly
independent asbestos claims not associated with Pittsburgh
Corning.

Headquartered in Pittsburgh, PPG Industries, Inc. supplies
paints, coatings, chemicals, optical products, specialty
materials, glass and fiber glass. The Company has more than 140
manufacturing facilities and equity affiliates and operates in
more than 60 countries. Sales in 2008 were US$15.8 billion.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 4 Lawsuits Filed on Jan. 19-23 in Madison
----------------------------------------------------------------
During the week of Jan. 19, 2009 through Jan. 23, 2009, four new
asbestos lawsuits were filed in Madison County Circuit Court,
Ill., The Madison St. Clair Record reports.

The following claims were filed:

     -- In Case No. 09-L-0043, Richard Dean and Vivian Byrd
        claim Mr. Byrd developed pleural mesothelioma after
        serving in the U.S. Navy from 1962 until 1967 and after
        working as a burner and ship dock worker from 1967
        until 1970 and as a painter from 1974 until 1989.
        Donald M. Flack, Esq., of the Flack Law Office in Wood
        River, Esq., and Waters and Kraus in Dallas, represent
        the Byrds.

     -- In Case No. 09-L-0038, Edward Diesko of Missouri, who
        worked from 1941 until 1942 as a laborer at Amoco
        Corporation, from 1942 until 1946 as a machinist in the
        U.S. Coast Guard, from 1946 until 1959 as a pipefitter
        at Amoco and from 1961 until 1979 as a pipefitter and
        foreman at General Electric Company, claims lung
        cancer. Randy L. Gori, Esq., and Barry Julian, Esq., of
        Gori, Julian and Associates in Alton, Ill., represent
        Mr. Diesko.

     -- In Case No. 09-L-0039, Phillip Moore of Tennessee
        claims mesothelioma on behalf of his recently deceased
        father, Thurman Moore, who served in the Army from
        March 1945 until February 1946 and who worked from 1946
        until 1989 as a maintenance worker and machine operator
        at Brown Shoe Company. Randy L. Gori, Esq. and Barry
        Julian, Esq., of Gori, Julian and Associates in Alton,
        Ill., represent Mr. Moore.

     -- In Case No. 09-L-0049, Lorelei Stumpf of Oregon claims
        her recently deceased husband, William Stumpf,
        developed mesothelioma while working from 1963 until
        1970 as a laborer at Al's and Ed's Garage, from 1970
        until 1972 as a laborer at Pierce Hardwood Floors and
        from 1975 until 1979 as a laborer at Jim Walters Doors.
        Randy L. Gori, Esq., and Barry Julian, Esq., of Gori,
        Julian and Associates in Alton, Ill., represent Mrs.
        Stumpf.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Reis Asphalt Penalized for Handling Breach
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
(MassDEP) penalized Dartmouth-based demolition contractor, Reis
Asphalt Inc., US$8,090 after the Company violated state
regulations in demolishing a single-family residence in New
Bedford, according to a MassDEP press release dated Jan. 30,
2009.

During an inspection of the site on Oct. 24, 2007, MassDEP found
Reis failed to remove asbestos transite shingles and transported
10 yards of mixed demolition and asbestos transite shingles in
violation of state regulations.

David Johnston, acting director of MassDEP's Southeastern
Regional Office in Lakeville, said, "By not removing these
shingles first, the Company's demolition activities rendered
these asbestos materials friable 'or airborne' in a densely-
populated urban residential area. Every contractor needs to act
responsibly where public health is concerned and have the
foresight to see that certain activities could have an impact on
the surrounding general public."

MassDEP regulations require the removal of all asbestos-
containing materials from buildings must be done using proper
removal and disposal practices. For most buildings scheduled for
demolition "commercial, industrial, institutional or residential
with 20 or more units," a written notification of these
demolition activities is required.

Additionally, MassDEP recommends that building owners or
contractors planning to demolish any building older than 1980
should hire a licensed asbestos inspector to inspect the
structure prior to demolition in order to identify and remove
any asbestos-containing material.

During enforcement discussions, Reis properly disposed of all
the asbestos-containing material and provided copies of receipts
and manifests to MassDEP.

Under the agreement, Reis will pay US$2,023 to the Commonwealth
and conduct a Supplemental Environmental Project (SEP). Under
this SEP, Reis will provide asbestos training for its employees
in order to avoid any similar violations in the future.

MassDEP has agreed to suspend US$6,067 of the penalty pending
full completion of the SEP.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: DEQ Grants $830,000 to Bozeman for Cleanup
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Montana Department of Environmental Quality granted the City
of Bozeman, Mont., US$830,000 to help pay for the public
library's cleanup of toxic materials, including asbestos, the
Associated Press reports.

Finance director Anna Rosenberry said that since 2002, the City
has paid contractors more than US$2.4 million to remove
thousands of yards of soil contaminated with lead, asbestos and
petroleum. The property was used for storage of asbestos ore
mined in Gallatin County during the first half of the 20th
century.

The City and State have negotiated over reimbursement for the
cleanup, and Bozeman officials hope the DEQ will contribute
another US$1 million by July 2009.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Rogers Hotel Charged for Health Violations
----------------------------------------------------------------
Larry Tighe, a resident of Wheeling, W.V., filed complaints
(including asbestos-related) against the Rogers Hotel for
violations of building and health codes, The Intelligencer:
Wheeling News-Register reports.

The hotel was built about 1915. It closed during the late 1980s
and was condemned in 1994 while owned by the late Charles
Pugliese.

Mr. Tighe believes the vacant hotel is "in obvious violation of
building and health codes," which led him to file complaints
with both the City's building inspections department and the
Wheeling-Ohio County Health Department.

A sign painted on the hotel's west side claims it is "fire
proof," meaning that its walls could be loaded with asbestos.
The building has several open windows on its upper floors, and
peeling paint and collapsing plaster are visible when peering
through the hotel's front door on 14th Street.

According to records in the Ohio County Assessor's Office, Mark
Jaber of Akron, Ohio, purchased the Rogers Hotel for US$3,000
from Christopher Wright of Montgomery, W.Va., in January 2005.

From 2005 to 2008, Mr. Jaber claimed he had plans to renovate
and expand the hotel and possibly create a "full-blown" casino.

In 2005, Mr. Jaber said his lawyer did a title search on the
property to make sure Mr. Wright was the owner. The search
revealed that the last owner before Mr. Wright was Akron
resident Barbara Fragale, representing Land of Oz of Montgomery,
W.Va. Mr. Jaber said he contacted Ms. Fragale, who confirmed she
sold the property to Mr. Wright.

However, City Solicitor Rosemary Humway-Warmuth said it is
unclear who actually owns the property.

Nancy Prager, city economic and community development director,
said the city is following up on Mr. Tighe's complaint.

Both Ms. Humway-Warmuth and Ms. Prager said it is difficult for
the city to enforce its building code regulations against out-
of-state property owners.

If the rightful owner of the hotel grants entry, Sanitarian
Laughlin Johnson can proceed with inspection and investigation
of Mr. Tighe's complaints related to lead paint and asbestos.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Wis. SC Certifies Questions in Plenco Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Supreme Court of Wisconsin certified certain questions of
law an asbestos lawsuit styled Plastics Engineering Company,
Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Liberty Mutual Insurance
Company, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee.

Judges Annette Kingsland Ziegler, Shirley S. Abrahamson, and
Michael J. Gableman entered judgment in Case No. 2008AP333-CQ on
Jan. 29, 2009. Judge Gableman concurred in part and dissented in
part.

This was a certification of questions of law from the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. The questions certified for
determination were:

     -- What constitutes an "occurrence" in an insurance
        contract when exposure injuries are sustained by
        numerous individuals, at varying geographical
        locations, over many years;

     -- Whether Wisconsin Statute s 631.43(1) applies to
        successive insurance policies; and

     -- Whether Wisconsin courts would adopt an "all sums" or
        pro rata allocation approach to determining liability
        when an injury spans multiple, successive insurance
        policies.

From about 1950 until 1983, Plastics Engineering Company
(Plenco) manufactured and sold certain compounds that
incorporated asbestos. Plenco had now been named a defendant in
a number of lawsuits because of bodily injury or wrongful death
that are allegedly related to or have arisen from exposure to
asbestos-containing products sold by Plenco.

During periods of the alleged exposure and resulting injury,
Liberty Mutual Insurance Company provided various insurance
policies to Plenco. From May 8, 1970, through Jan. 1, 1984,
Liberty Mutual also insured Plenco under umbrella excess
liability policies.

Liberty Mutual had been paying all of Plenco's defense costs,
settlements and judgments, and Liberty Mutual advised Plenco
that through Dec. 15, 2005, Liberty Mutual has paid about
US$14.3 million in asbestos claims on Plenco's behalf. Liberty
Mutual defended Plenco and paid settlements and judgments under
a reservation of rights as set forth in correspondence sent to
Plenco on or about Jan. 6, 2004 and June 15, 2004.

On Sept. 1, 2004, Plenco sued Liberty Mutual seeking declaratory
judgment regarding Liberty Mutual's obligation to defend and
indemnify Plenco for lawsuits that arose out of the claimants'
alleged exposure to Plenco's asbestos-containing products. On
Dec. 15, 2005, the parties stipulated to the pertinent facts
regarding their respective summary judgment motions.

On Oct. 27, 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Wisconsin issued a written decision and order. The
district court granted in part and denied in part each party's
motion for summary judgment. The district court issued a final
declaratory judgment on Dec. 6, 2006.

Liberty Mutual appealed the district court's first and third
conclusions, and Plenco appealed the district court's second
conclusion.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reasoned that
the three conclusions present important questions of unresolved
Wisconsin law. The Supreme Court accepted the certification.

Certified questions of law were answered and cause was remanded
to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Carnival Corporation Subject to Health Laws
----------------------------------------------------------------
Carnival Corporation is subject to various international,
national, state and local environmental protection and health
and safety laws, regulations and treaties that govern the
storage, handling, use and disposal of hazardous substances like
asbestos, chemicals, solvents, and paints.

No other asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the
Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on Jan. 29, 2009.

Miami-based Carnival Corporation is a cruise and vacation
company, which provides cruises to all major vacation
destinations.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Chubb Reserves $747MM for Claims at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Chubb Corporation's carried net reserve of US$747 million at
Dec. 31, 2008 represents the Company's best estimate of its
ultimate asbestos liability, according to a Company report, on
Form 8-K, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
Jan. 29, 2009.

Net payments for asbestos liabilities in 2008 were US$46 million
and current reserves calculate to a three-year survival ratio of
9.9.

Headquartered in Warren, N.J., The Chubb Corporation provides
property and casualty insurance for personal and commercial
customers worldwide through 8,500 independent agents and
brokers. The Company's global network includes branches and
affiliates throughout North America, Europe, Latin America, Asia
and Australia.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Exposure Cases Still Ongoing Against Sensus
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sensus Metering Inc. and other third parties continue to face
several lawsuits filed related to illnesses from exposure to
asbestos or asbestos-containing products, according to the
Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on Jan. 30, 2009.

The complaints fail to specify which plaintiffs allegedly were
involved with the Company's products, and because the cases are
in initial stages, it is uncertain whether any plaintiffs have
asbestos-related illnesses or dealt with the Company's products,
much less whether any plaintiffs were exposed to an asbestos-
containing component part of the Company's product or whether
that part could have been a substantial contributing factor to
the alleged illness.

Although the Company is entitled to indemnification for legal
and indemnity costs for asbestos claims related to these
products from certain subsidiaries of Invensys under the stock
purchase agreement under which the Company acquired Invensys
Metering Systems, such indemnities, when aggregated with all
other indemnity claims, are limited to the purchase price paid
by the Company in connection with the acquisition of Invensys
Metering Systems.

Headquartered in Raleigh, N.C., Sensus Metering Systems Inc.
provides advanced metering and related communications solutions
to the worldwide utility industry. The Company manufactures
water, gas, heat and electric meters including comprehensive
metering communications system solutions that include both
automatic meter reading and advanced metering infrastructure
systems.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hearings on Grace Plan Set for June & Sept.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Confirmation hearings on W. R. Grace & Co.'s Joint Plan of
Reorganization are set to be heard in June 2009 and September
2009, according to a Company press release dated Feb. 2, 2009.

On April 2, 2001, the Company and 61 of its U.S. subsidiaries
and affiliates, including its primary U.S. operating subsidiary
W. R. Grace & Co.–Conn., filed voluntary petitions for
reorganization under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code in
the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware in order
to resolve the Company's asbestos-related liabilities.

On Sept. 19, 2008, the Company filed the Plan and several
associated documents, including a disclosure statement, with the
Bankruptcy Court. The Official Committee of Asbestos Personal
Injury Claimants, the Representative for Future Asbestos
Personal Injury Claimants, and the Official Committee of Equity
Security Holders are co-proponents of the Plan.

The committee representing general unsecured creditors and the
Official Committee of Asbestos Property Damage Claimants are not
co-proponents of the Plan.

The Plan is consistent with the terms of the previously
announced settlements of the Company's asbestos personal injury
liability and claims related to its former attic insulation
product, and requires the establishment of two asbestos trusts
under Section 524(g) of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code to which all
present and future asbestos-related claims would be channeled.

The Bankruptcy Court has issued a case management order
providing for a final hearing on the disclosure statement on
March 9, 2009, and confirmation hearings on the Plan in June
2009 and September 2009.

Most of the Company's noncore liabilities and contingencies
(including asbestos-related litigation, environmental claims and
other obligations) are subject to compromise under the Chapter
11 process.

Expenses related to the Company's Chapter 11 proceedings, net of
filing entity interest income, were US$17.4 million in the
fourth quarter compared with US$23.7 million in the prior year
quarter.

Long-term asbestos-related insurance was US$500 million as of
Dec. 31, 2008 and Dec. 31, 2007. Long-term asbestos-related
contingencies were US$1.7 billion as of Dec. 31, 2008 and Dec.
31, 2007.

Headquartered in Columbia, Md., W. R. Grace & Co. supplies
catalysts and other products to petroleum refiners; catalysts
for the manufacture of plastics; silica-based engineered and
specialty materials for a wide-range of industrial applications;
sealants and coatings for food and beverage packaging, and
specialty chemicals, additives and building materials for
commercial and residential construction.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Markel Increases Reserves by $24.9M in 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------
Markel Corporation increased its estimate of ultimate loss
reserves for asbestos and environmental exposures by US$24.9
million in 2008 and US$34 million in 2007, according to a
Company press release dated Feb. 2, 2009.

The Company's Other segment produced an underwriting loss of
US$28.1 million for the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, compared with
an underwriting loss of US$14.3 million in 2007.

The underwriting loss in 2008 and 2007 was primarily a result of
the completion of the Company's annual review of A&E exposures
during the third quarters of 2008 and 2007.

During these reviews, the Company noted higher than expected
settlements on existing claims, which caused the Company to
increase its estimate of ultimate A&E loss reserves.

The underwriting loss related to A&E reserve increases in 2007
was partially offset by favorable development of loss reserves
in other discontinued lines of business.

Headquartered in Glen Allen, Va., Markel Corporation markets and
underwrites specialty insurance products and programs to a
various niche markets.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Marton Cleaner's Death Linked to Exposure
----------------------------------------------------------------
An inquest heard that the death of Freda Davidson Hague, a 71-
year-old dry cleaner from Marton, Blackpool, England, was linked
to exposure to asbestos, The Gazette reports.

On Dec. 3 2008, Mrs. Hague died of mesothelioma at Trinity
Hospice. She had worked for a dry cleaning business in
Failsworth.

Mrs. Hague's husband, Alan Hague, told the hearing, "It is my
belief that Freda came into contact with asbestos while working
at a dry cleaners. She shook out workers' overalls before they
were put in the machine and would have breathed in the asbestos
at that time. There were no protective masks or overalls."

Coroner Anne Hind recorded a verdict of death by industrial
disease.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hardie Ex-Chairman Testifies on Fund Plan
----------------------------------------------------------------
Meredith Hellicar, James Hardie Industries N.V.'s former
chairman, said she had believed in 2001 that a new asbestos
compensation trust would meet all future claims, the Business
Day reports.

In her evidence at the New South Wales, Australia, Supreme
Court, Ms. Hellicar said she did not see the February 2001 media
release announcing the new trust. She added that its statement
that James Hardie had allocated sufficient funds to meet all
anticipated claims accorded with her state of mind at the time.

The media release is central to the civil penalty claim by the
Australian Securities and Investments Commission that 10 former
executives and directors breached their duties to Hardie by
allowing it to issue misleading statements about asbestos
compensation.

Ms. Hellicar said, "My state of mind would have been that it
provided certainty that a set amount had been put aside and
therefore it couldn't be whittled away by business operations or
takeovers or liquidation, and secondly, my state of mind would
have been that not unqualifiedly did it provide certainty that
there would be enough funds for ever more."

On Feb. 2, 2009, Ms. Hellicar abandoned some of her December
2008 evidence when confronted with her phone records. Previously
she said she was at a conference in Queensland on Feb. 20, 2001,
and so had not joined a telephone conference of James Hardie
directors to discuss public reaction to the trust.

On Feb. 2, 2009, she was "flabbergasted" when ASIC's barrister,
Tony Bannon, SC, handed her records showing she had rung Hardie
that morning. She said, "I have no rational explanation other
than that I must have been mistaken."

At issue is whether the media release was formally approved at a
board meeting on Feb. 15, 2001. Mr. Bannon also challenged Ms.
Hellicar's previous evidence that she was unaware in 2004 that
Hardie's submissions to a special commission of inquiry accepted
that the board had approved the media release.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Mosley's Action v. Norfolk Filed on Jan. 23
----------------------------------------------------------------
Felix L. Mosley, III, on Jan. 23, 2009, filed an asbestos-
related lawsuit against Norfolk Southern Railway Company in the
Circuit Court of Ohio County, W.Va., The West Virginia Record
reports.

It is claimed while during Mr. Mosley's his employment, exposure
to carcinogenic materials resulted in occupationally related
lung disease, specifically asbestosis. A just jury award is
demanded.

Robert F. Daley, Esq., represents Mr. Mosley and Case No. 09-C-
26 is assigned to Judge Ronald E. Wilson.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Oswego High School Cleanup to Begin Feb. 13
----------------------------------------------------------------
Asbestos removal at the Oswego High School in Oswego, N.Y., will
begin on Feb. 13, 2009, The Post-Standard reports.

Construction crews will be at Oswego High School during the
upcoming February 2009 vacation to conduct asbestos removal and
continue work on the school's hot water system.

David Butts, of Christa Construction, said, "We will be doing
asbestos removal in the cafeteria. However, we need to post the
asbestos removal signs 10 days before the actual work begins."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazard Removed From Lynemouth First School
----------------------------------------------------------------
Asbestos was removed from Lynemouth First School, located in
Northumberland, England, after it was closed due to a burst pipe
and heating problems, the Morpeth Herald reports.

The school was closed due to those problems. However, when the
main school corridor was dug up to carry out repairs, asbestos
was found around pipes under the floor. Specialists were called
in to remove the material before the heating system could be
fixed.

A spokeswoman for education authority Northumberland County
Council said there was no cause for alarm. She said, "All
schools in Northumberland have an effective asbestos management
plan to ensure the safety of occupants. All schools have an up
to date asbestos survey and condition monitoring is carried out
regularly.

"Over the past years we have allocated substantial funding for
the safe removal of asbestos. We therefore have an effective
management system in place, which safeguards the staff and
pupils at all of our schools. Historically, like most older
public buildings, Lynemouth First School had asbestos in-situ,
around some pipes under the main corridor and other locations."

The school was closed from Jan. 21, 2009 and reopened on Jan.
29, 2009.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 95% of East Sussex Schools May Have Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------
East Sussex County Council confirmed that 10 of its 193 schools
are free of asbestos, which means that up to 95 percent of East
Sussex, England, state school buildings could contain the
substance, This Is Sussex reports.

The Council conducts regular surveys that comply with legal
requirements, searching for the presence of asbestos in schools,
but these are only visual.

This approach has been criticized by the National Union of
Teachers. The NUT secretary for East Sussex Dave Brinson said,
"Our position has always been that East Sussex should make
provision to have asbestos completely removed. Our line is that
for the safety of teachers and pupils asbestos should be removed
and removed completely. Our relationship with East Sussex County
Council has been very good on this but rather than have it
contained we want asbestos removed."

About GBP200,000 a year is allocated by the Council to complete
asbestos surveys and treat the problem.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ontario Ministry to Survey 18 Sault Sites
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Ministry of Transportation of Ontario seeks to know how much
asbestos is in its Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, Canada, area
buildings, The Sault Star reports.

The project is to take inventory of asbestos at the MTO's 18
area sites.

Lance Knox, technical services supervisor for the area, said the
MTO's buildings "are of an age that construction back then may
have had asbestos." He said the province has asked that an
inventory be taken.

Asbestos was widely used in building materials because of its
fireproof, waterproof and soundproof qualities, but was phased
out in the early 1970s and banned in 1986.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: N.H. School District Seeks $90T for Cleanup
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Seabrook School District in Seabrook, N.H., seeks US$90,000
for an asbestos-removal project to be conducted in the
district's elementary and middle schools, the Mesothelioma &
Asbestos Awareness Center reports.

The asbestos-removal project is part of a five-year plan.

Many buildings constructed during the early 20th century contain
asbestos as use of the substance was not regulated until the
1970s. It was at that time that Congress created the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

Today those who work around asbestos are required to wear the
proper protective gear in order to prevent exposure to asbestos
fibers.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Williams Lawsuit Filed v. 4 Firms in Texas
----------------------------------------------------------------
The family of James C. Williams, on Jan. 26, 2009, filed an
asbestos-related lawsuit against four defendant corporations in
Jefferson County District Court, Tex., The Southeast Texas
Record reports.

Grace Williams and her daughters, Brenda and Caroline, claim Mr.
Williams' mesothelioma was wrongfully caused.

According to the suit, the family says Mr. Williams worked from
1943 until 1989 doing general maintenance as a laborer and lab
technician in Port Neches at the Goodrich Corp. (formerly known
as B.F. Goodrich Co. and Goodrich Gulf), Gulf Oil Corp., Guide-
Line, and Michelin North America Inc. facilities.

The Williams family claim Mr. Williams' disease was caused after
he was exposed to and inhaled, ingested or otherwise absorbed
asbestos fibers at the defendant companies' facilities.

The Williams family seeks unspecified general, special, punitive
and exemplary damages, plus costs, interest and other relief to
which they may be entitled.

Randall D. Collins, Esq., of Brent Coon and Associates in
Beaumont, Tex., represents the Williams family.

Case No. D183-117 has been assigned to Judge Milton Shuffield of
the 136th District Court.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Burpee Case v. New England Guaranty Dropped
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Appeals Court of Massachusetts upheld a Superior Court's
decision, which dismissed Arthur L. Burpee's lawsuit against New
England Guaranty Insurance Company, Inc.

The case is styled Kathleen A. Moore, Executrix of the Estate of
Arthur L. Burpee v. New England Guaranty Insurance Company, Inc.

Judges Scott L. Kafker, R. Malcolm Graham, and Gabrielle R.
Wolohojian entered judgment in Case No. 08-P-304 on Jan. 30,
2009.

Mr. Burpee's Somerville, Mass., home was determined to be unsafe
after a fire severely damaged it. He had the house torn down,
using the services of BC Contracting Company, Inc., and its
subcontractor Darling Asbestos Disposal Company.

Mr. Burpee filed a claim with New England Guaranty and recovered
US$157,119 for the total fire loss of the building.

BC submitted a bill to Mr. Burpee for the demolition and
cleanup, which amounted to US$123,278.88. Mr. Burpee failed to
pay BC for its work and BC commenced an action against him,
seeking to recover the amount of the invoice.

Meanwhile, Mr. Burpee made a claim under his policy with New
England Guaranty for those portions of BC's invoice relating to
the removal of asbestos (Darling's work in the amount of
US$75,400), asserting that those costs were not property damage
under the policy, but rather, were liability damages under
Section II of the policy.

Mr. Burpee also sought payment for costs in the BC invoice for
air-quality monitoring equipment in the amount of US$2,160 and
fire department details in the amount of US$11,169.40, for a
total of US$88,729.40. In addition, Mr. Burpee claimed that New
England Guaranty had a duty to defend the action brought against
him by BC.

New England Guaranty denied Mr. Burpee's claim for the
additional monies and also refused to defend Mr. Burpee in the
lawsuit brought by BC. New England Guaranty contended that
Section II of the policy provided coverage for costs related to
bodily injury or property damage caused by an "occurrence."
Moreover, New England Guaranty claimed, since the alleged
property damage was to property owned by Mr. Burpee, the
policy's exclusions to Section II coverage applied.

Mr. Burpee died on Oct. 20, 2003, and Ms. Moore was the duly
appointed executrix of Mr. Burpee's estate and had pursued Mr.
Burpee's claims for coverage under the policy.

On cross motions for summary judgment, a judge of the Superior
Court granted New England Guaranty's motion on all counts, and
dismissed the complaint. The Appeals Court affirmed.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ACE Incurs $51Mil Charge for A&E at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
ACE Limited, during the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, incurred a
pre-tax charge of US$51 million for asbestos, environmental and
other run-off losses as a result of both internal and external
actuarial reviews, according to a Company press release dated
Feb. 3, 2009.

Based in Hamilton, Bermuda, ACE Limited specializes in insurance
and reinsurance, serving a diverse group of clients. The Company
conducts its business in 50 countries.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Dow Chemical Has $824M Liability at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Dow Chemical Company's non-current asbestos-related
liabilities were US$824 million as of Dec. 31, 2008, compared
with US$1.001 billion as of Dec. 31, 2007, according to a
Company press release dated Feb. 3, 2009.

The Company's non-current asbestos-related liabilities were
USS$904 million as of Sept. 30, 2008. (Class Action Reporter,
Oct. 31, 2008)

The Company's non-current asbestos-related insurance receivables
were US$658 million as of Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$1.001
billion as of Dec. 31, 2007.

The Company's non-current asbestos-related insurance receivables
were US$662 million as of Sept. 30, 2008. (Class Action
Reporter, Oct. 31, 2008)

In December 2008, Company unit Union Carbide Corporation reduced
its asbestos-related liability US$54 million based on a new
study completed in the fourth quarter by Analysis, Research &
Planning Corporation using historical claims data for Union
Carbide and former affiliate Amchem Products, Inc.

Based in Midland, Mich., The Dow Chemical Company serves
customers in 160 countries, connecting chemistry and innovation
with the principles of sustainability to help provide everything
from fresh water, food and pharmaceuticals to paints, packaging
and personal care products. The Company has annual sales of
US$58 billion and 46,000 employees worldwide.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ATL Calls for Cleanup at Lancashire Schools
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Association of Teachers and Lecturers is calling for
asbestos to be removed from all schools in Lancashire, England,
the Lancashire Evening Post reports.

Asbestos was banned for use in 1999. All but eight of the
authority's 632 schools have "low risk" asbestos in them. This
includes 81 schools in Preston, 53 schools in South Ribble, and
60 schools in Chorley. All identified "high risk" incidences of
asbestos have been dealt with.

Councilor Vali Patel, cabinet member for schools, said, "I have
been assured that where asbestos occurs in the county's schools,
it is inspected regularly and does not represent any threat to
staff, children or young people. The majority of buildings
constructed before 2000 have some asbestos in them, and as long
as it is in good condition, well sealed, and not disturbed, then
it is far safer to leave well alone.

"If schools are undergoing building work or renovation which may
affect existing asbestos, then a careful survey is undertaken
and if necessary its removal is carried out by a specialist
firm."

According to the County Council, the schools are assessed every
year and Lancashire County Property Group monitors and manages
the presence and condition of asbestos in all county buildings,
including schools, in accordance with the Asbestos Regulations
and Health and Safety Executive advice.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Meade County Cleanup Bids to Start March 3
----------------------------------------------------------------
Meade County, S.D., on March 3, 2009 at 9:30 a.m., will open
bids for asbestos abatement at the Erskine School building in
Sturgis, S.D., the Rapid City Journal reports.

Kevin Forrester, director of building maintenance for Meade
County, said at the Meade County Commission meeting on Feb. 3,
2009 that asbestos abatement needs to be complete before any
other work may begin.

Students of the Erskine building moved to the new Sturgis
Elementary School building, which opened in January 2009.
However, Erskine and the neighboring Primary Building will be
used for some county offices.

According to the construction schedule, asbestos abatement and
cleanup should be performed in April 2009 or May 2009.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Regina Qu'Appelle Area Seeks Asbestos Audit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Regina Qu'Appelle Health Region in Saskatchewan, Canada, is
looking for a company to audit and assess region-owned
facilities with asbestos, the Leader-Post reports.

Region spokesman Mark Torjusen said, "Saskatchewan Labour's
Occupational Health and Safety regulations require that the
region know where asbestos is located and what condition it is
in."

Mr. Torjusen added that there are no identified problems with
asbestos in any RQHR-owned facilities. However, if the audit
identifies any problems, they will be remedied by encasing the
asbestos so it is no longer an exposure problem or by having it
removed by trained specialists.

Gordon Campbell, president of the Canadian Union of Public
Employees Health Council, said, "I know asbestos is a huge
(occupational health and safety) issue for health-care workers
in all sites and so I would say if the employer is doing an
audit of asbestos in the workplace that can only benefit the
workers."

According to Health Canada's website, asbestos poses health
risks only when fibers become airborne and are inhaled in
significant quantities.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Maidment to Pay GBP5T for Storage Breaches
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Salisbury Magistrates Court, on Feb. 4, 2009, ordered Robert
Maidment to pay GBP5,048 in fines and costs for storing asbestos
a site near Salisbury, Wiltshire, England, the Environment
Agency reports.

The case was filed by the Environment Agency.

Mr. Maidment was fined GBP3,000 and ordered to pay GBP2,048
costs after pleading guilty to receiving a skip of bonded
asbestos at Maidment Skip Hire on May 22, 2008 in contravention
of his site operator's environmental permit and contrary to the
Environmental Permitting Regulations 2007.

On May 22, 2008, Agency officers were carrying out a routine
inspection of a waste transfer station known as "Stainers Yard"
on the A30 near Swallowcliffe when they saw a skip full of
cement-bonded asbestos. The skip was in an open yard covered
with a tarpaulin.

Mr. Maidment is only licensed to handle non-hazardous waste like
wood, plastics and builder's rubble because the site does not
have the facilities to accept consignments of hazardous
materials including asbestos.

Inquiries revealed the corrugated asbestos sheets had come from
a block of garages in Tisbury. Mr. Maidment had been paid by a
roofing company, the waste producer, to take the asbestos away
to a landfill site in Redlynch near Salisbury for safe disposal.
Instead he transported it to his own premises in breach of the
Environmental Permitting Regulations 2007.

Emily Pitts of the Environment Agency said, "Because of its
hazardous nature, asbestos must be handled with great care and
only kept at sites with suitable facilities. The defendant had
been warned by the Agency about the illegal storage of asbestos
at Stainers Yard, yet chose to ignore our advice."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Found at 111 of 116 Medway Schools
----------------------------------------------------------------
A Freedom of Information request by the BBC found that 111 of
the 116 schools in Medway, England, contain asbestos, This Is
Kent reports.

Of the 111 schools, 12 contain crocidolite, which is considered
the most dangerous form of asbestos.

The news has sparked calls from the National Union of Teachers
demanding the complete removal of the substance from the area's
schools.

Doug Macari, a spokesman for the Medway branch of the National
Union of Teachers, said, "It's just not acceptable to have this
deadly material in our schools. It can't be used now in
hospitals or any other public place so why is it ok for our
children?"

About 4,000 deaths annually are due to breathing in asbestos
fibers and some five teachers a year die from mesothelioma.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: NJISJ Has $200,000 for Brownfields Training
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency granted US$200,000 to
the New Jersey Institute for Social Justice (NJISJ) to teach
local residents environmental assessment and cleanup skills that
can land them good jobs, according to an EPA press release dated
Feb. 3, 2009.

Under the grant, NJISJ will train more than 80 underemployed or
unemployed Newark residents. The project has multiple benefits,
because the skills students learn can be applied to assessing
and cleaning up its estimated 700 acres of brownfields,
abandoned, and underused properties.

Newark projects a growing need for environmental workers as its
brownfields cleanups are revamped and plans to redevelop the
waterfront get underway.

George Pavlou, Acting Regional Administrator, said, "This
program marries perfectly the need to get people back to work
and the need to clean up and put potentially contaminated
properties to use throughout Newark. What better way to tackle
Newark brownfields than to teach its very own residents the
skills needed to transform these community eyesores into useful
pieces of land that will benefit the city."

Under the recent EPA grant, NJISJ plans to train 87 students,
place at least 53 graduates in environmental technician jobs,
and track students for one year.

The training program will consist of four 100-hour training
cycles that include coursework in lead abatement, asbestos
removal, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and other
issues often faced at brownfields sites.

Once the training is complete, NJISJ will work with the
Workforce Investment Board and Essex County Building Trades
Council to place graduates in environmental jobs.

Since 1998, EPA has awarded more than US$25 million in
brownfields job training funds. More than 4,000 people have
completed training programs, with more than 3,000, or about 75
percent, obtaining employment in the environmental fields.

The program is designed to ensure that the economic benefits
derived from brownfields redevelopment remain in the affected
communities.

For more information about this job training grant, go to:
http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/09jtgrants/jt_r02_nj_njinstitutef
orsocialjustice.pdf.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 10 West City, Ill. Homes to Get New Piping
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ten homes located on West Webster Street in West City, Ill.,
will get new piping to replace old asbestos piping, the
Mesothelioma & Asbestos Awareness Center reports.

These 10 homes use water lines that are hooked to four inch
asbestos lines. Officials feel that the asbestos pipes should be
replaced in order to avoid future exposure issues and the
potential development of asbestos cancer.

Dale Watkins, the utilities trustee in West City, said the
project is expected to cost around US$7,000 for both the labor
and the materials necessary for the removal.

Officials are waiting for a break in weather before beginning
the project.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Appeal Court Affirms Stay in Wangen Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Court of Appeal, Second District, California, affirmed the
Superior Court of Los Angeles County's ruling, which stayed, on
the grounds of forum non conveniens, an asbestos personal injury
lawsuit filed by William and Mary Jo Wangen against more than
three dozen defendants.

The case is styled William Wangen, et al., Plaintiffs and
Appellants v. Gardner Denver, Inc. et al., Defendants and
Respondents.

Justices Nora M. Manella, Steven C. Suzukawa, and Thomas L.
Willhite, Jr. entered judgment in Case No. B208347 on Feb. 2,
2009.

Mr. Wangen was born in Seattle in 1932. Except for the four
years he served in the military, he lived his entire life in
Washington. In 2006, he bought a home in Arizona. Since then, he
and Mrs. Wangen split their time between their homes in
Washington and Arizona.

Mr. Wangen served in the U.S. Navy aboard the USS Wiltsie from
July 1950 to May 1954, including three six-month combat tours in
Korea. His duties included ship maintenance and repair. This
work put him into immediate contact with asbestos containing
products manufactured by many different companies.

During Mr. Wangen's tour of duty, the USS Wiltsie ported several
times at the Long Beach, Calif., and San Diego, Calif., Naval
Shipyards for maintenance and repair. During these visits, Mr.
Wangen suffered further occupational exposure to asbestos. These
port visits were the only times Mr. Wangen ever spent in
California.

Mr. Wangen claimed that he was at the Long Beach Naval Shipyard
for a period of 12 to 18 weeks at some point between January
1951 to December 1952 and for an undetermined amount of time at
the San Diego Naval Shipyard between January 1951 and December
1954.

After his discharge from the Navy, Mr. Wangen returned to
Washington. While living there, Wangen had multiple occupational
and non-occupational exposures to asbestos.

In October 2007, Mr. Wangen was diagnosed with mesothelioma. In
December 2007, he filed his personal injury action in California
naming over three dozen defendants. The complaint alleged more
than 10 causes of action, each derivative of Mr. Wangen's
exposures (occupational and non-occupational) to asbestos from
1950 to 1994.

In January and February 2008, nine defendants moved to stay or
dismiss the action on forum non conveniens ground. The Wangens
opposed the defense motions.

On March 19, 2008, the trial court stayed the action. After a
hearing conducted on April 1, 2008, the trial court granted the
defense motion. This appeal followed.

The trial court concluded that Washington was the appropriate
forum to adjudicate the matter and stayed the California action.

The Appeal Court concluded the motion was properly granted and
therefore affirmed.

The Law Office of Bryce C. Anderson (Bryce C. Anderson, Esq.)
and Paul & Hanley (Dean Hanley, Esq., and Deborah R. Rosenthal,
Esq.) represented the Wangens.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Graham Corp. Still Facing Exposure Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Corporation continues to be a defendant in certain
lawsuits alleging personal injury from exposure to asbestos
contained in products made by the Company, according to the
Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on Feb. 3, 2009.

The Company is a co-defendant with numerous other defendants in
these lawsuits . The claims are similar to previous asbestos
suits that named the Company as defendant, which either were
dismissed when it was shown that the Company had not supplied
products to the plaintiffs' places of work or were settled for
minimal amounts below the expected defense costs.

Headquartered in Batavia, N.Y., Graham Corporation designs and
manufactures custom-engineered ejectors, liquid ring pump
packages, condensers and heat exchangers. The Company's
equipment is designed for critical applications in the
petrochemical, oil refinery and electric power generation
industries, including cogeneration and geothermal plants.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Unitrin Reserves $13M for Claims at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
Unitrin, Inc.'s asbestos-related reserves were US$13 million at
Dec. 31, 2008, according to the Company's annual report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 4, 2009.

The Company's reserves for environmental matters were US$5
million and construction defects were US$53 million at Dec. 31,
2008.

The Company has experienced favorable development in some
particularly long-tail lines such as asbestos, environmental and
construction defect.

Development in these lines emerge over a longer period of time
and thus are more difficult to ascertain. In 2008, the Company
updated certain analyses for these long-tail lines using
industry analyses as well as its own experience.

The Company's Business Insurance's total A&E reserves were about
US$18 million at both Dec. 31, 2007 and Dec. 31, 2006. (Class
Action Reporter, Feb. 8, 2008)

Headquartered in Chicago, Unitrin, Inc. is engaged in the
property and casualty insurance, life and health insurance and
automobile finance businesses. The Company conducts its
operations through five operating segments: Kemper, Unitrin
Specialty, Unitrin Direct, Life and Health Insurance and
Fireside Bank.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Whisnant v. DuPont Trial Reset to April '09
----------------------------------------------------------------
A new trial in the asbestos case filed by Willis Whisnant Jr.
against E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company and other defendant
corporations is scheduled for April 2009, instead of the
original Feb. 9, 2009 date, The Southeast Texas Record reports.

In 2008, attorneys for DuPont convinced a Jefferson County,
Tex., jury that the Company was not responsible for Mr.
Whisnant's mesothelioma. A few months later, the judge granted
Mr. Whisnant's motion for a new trial and set the date for Feb.
9, 2009.

The trial was held in February 2008 and March 2008 in Judge
Donald Floyd's 172nd District Court.

The plaintiffs claimed that Mr. Whisnant contracted mesothelioma
and died because of his exposure to asbestos at DuPont's Sabine
River Works. Mr. Whisnant was a former B.F. Shaw pipe fitter who
worked at DuPont back in 1966 as an independent contractor.

Jurors found no negligence on the part of DuPont and awarded
nothing to Mr. Whisnant's family.

During the trial, plaintiffs' attorney Glen Morgan, Esq., argued
that there had been indisputable evidence that DuPont knew of
the hazards of asbestos for decades, but failed to provide a
reasonably safe place to work or properly warn workers of the
danger.

A month following the verdict, Mr. Morgan submitted a motion for
a new trial, contending that the jury verdict was completely
contradictory to the preponderance of the evidence.

Without giving a reason for his decision, Judge Floyd granted
Mr. Morgan's motion May 28, 2008. Mr. Morgan asked Judge Floyd's
court coordinator to schedule the new trial for February 2009.

When Mr. Morgan argued for a new trial, he alleged that coverage
of the trial by the Southeast Texas Record may have influenced
the jury's decision.

Mr. Morgan tried to make a connection between the Southeast
Texas Record's coverage of the Whisnant trial, DuPont and the
U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which owns the Southeast Texas Record.

Mr. Morgan told Judge Floyd that the Chamber's goal was to have
the Record influence juries by writing stories favorable to the
defense and then making the paper available free of charge right
outside the courthouse. He said because the verdict did not
match the evidence, the jury may have been affected by an
outside influence, like the Southeast Texas Record.

But DuPont's attorney M.C. Carrington, Esq., said Mr. Morgan's
request for a new trial was like kids asking for a "do over." At
the hearing, Mr. Carrington argued that Mr. Morgan presented no
legal reasons that justified a new trial.

The plaintiffs' argument for a new trial, Mr. Carrington said,
is based on Mr. Morgan's belief that if the jury did not believe
him "then something cannot be right, that there's no way he
could lose."

After Judge Floyd agreed to the new trial anyway, DuPont's
counsel asked the Texas Ninth District Court of Appeals for a
writ of mandamus.

However, Beaumont, Tex., justices denied DuPont's appeal on July
24, 2008, ruling that "the discretion and judgment of the trial
court in granting a new trial cannot be controlled or directed
by mandamus."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Bourton Carpenter's Death Linked to Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------
An inquest heard that the death of 71-year-old James Bredin, a
carpenter from Cotswold, England, was linked to exposure to
asbestos.

Mr. Bredin had cut up sheets of asbestos in the 1960s died
nearly 50 years later from exposure to the deadly substance.
Gloucestershire coroner Alan Crickmore recorded a verdict of
death by industrial disease.

Mr. Bredin, who was married to his wife Mary for 52 years, had
retired nine months before his death. His past work included
doing maintenance at Sudeley Castle in the 1990s. His son,
James, said, "In the sixties I had been present when he cut
asbestos sheets with a handsaw to fit backing plates to fires."

Mr. Bredin became sick after retirement and his GP treated him
for lung infection. During tests, a radiographer told him he had
a terminal disease and it was later confirmed to be
mesothelioma.

On March 20, 2008, Mr. Bredin was taken to Cheltenham General
Hospital when he began to make a "rasping noise" and he died
three days later.

Pathologist Dr. Richard Bryan said tests found 32,421 fibers of
asbestos per gram of dry lung tissue, a "relatively low" level
of the mineral but higher than would be found in a person who
had never been exposed to it industrially.

Dr. Bryan gave the cause of death as bronchial pneumonia due to
mesothelioma.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hawaii Scientist Gets $220,000 Cancer Grant
----------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Haining Yang, a Cancer Research Center of Hawai'i scientist,
got two grants totaling US$220,000 to study mesothelioma, The
Honolulu Advertiser reports.

Dr. Yang is one of five recipients of a two-year, US$100,000
grant from the Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation. He also
received a two-year, US$120,000 grant from the Hawai'i Community
Foundation's Leahi Fund.

The grants will support Dr. Yang's research, which involves
studying ways to detect mesothelioma early.

Mesothelioma causes about 2,500 deaths each year in the United
States.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Cover at Patea Site Disintegrating
----------------------------------------------------------------
A coating sprayed onto the remains of a former meatworks
building at Patea, South Taranaki, New Zealand, has crumbled,
raising the possibility of asbestos blowing into town, Radio New
Zealand News reports.

The polyvinyl acrylic co-polymer covering was meant to contain
asbestos ash from the fire that gutted the works in 2008. It was
applied by water cannon on Feb. 6, 2008.

In 2009, there is little sign of the sticky blanket authorities
said would bind the microscopic, cancer-causing fibers. The
surface of the ash-pile is loose and blowing it causes dust to
rise.

Pipe insulation have burst open, leaving asbestos exposed to
wind from the nearby Tasman Sea. The nearest houses are less
than 200 meters away.

South Taranaki District Council environment manager, Graham
Young said it was never intended to contain every speck of the
dust, and the council is comfortable that the polymer coating is
still doing its job.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Westchester Teachers Reveal Botched Cleanup
----------------------------------------------------------------
Members of the Westchester Community College Federation of
Teachers uncovered violations by Superior Abatement Inc., a
contractor hired to remove asbestos from a Westchester Community
College campus building, NYSUT (New York State United Teachers)
reports.

Anne D'Orazio, president of the faculty union, alerted college
officials. The action has led to calls for better safety
policies.

The faculty union at Westchester Community College was
successful in stopping an ill-planned January 2009 asbestos
removal project in an occupied campus building.

Working with NYSUT's health and safety director and two members
of the Civil Service Employees Association, Ms. D'Orazio was
able to halt a project she said was put in motion without the
legally required 10-day notice. She also said the college had
not met with faculty, staff and the abatement contractor to
explain procedures and allow for questions.

On Jan. 5, 2009, two CSEA computer technicians who were working
in the older, two-story building, noticed business letter-sized
notices taped to Technology Building doors. The signs announced
asbestos would be removed from Jan. 12, 2009 to Jan. 30, 2009,
while employees and students would be in the building.

Ms. D'Orazio said no one contacted union representatives;
faculty and staff had not received any global e-mail; and there
was no contact from buildings and grounds or the campus health
and safety committee.

The technicians, Michele Maya and Lucy McGuire, found that
Superior Abatement had a history of safety and employment
violations and had been fined several times, including an
incident at SUNY New Paltz.

The pair contacted Ms. D'Orazio, who is also a member of NYSUT's
Health and Safety Committee. She worked with Wendy Hord, NYSUT's
health and safety director, for clarity on asbestos removal
laws, and then wrote to the college president.

Ms. D'Orazio said that college officials told her that Superior
Abatement was hired as a subcontractor for the general
contractor renovating the Tech Building.

Ms. D'Orazio has called for meetings between administrators and
union representatives to establish procedures that include
proper notification, protective measures and employee
involvement.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Renovation Bares Hazard at Colo. Courthouse
----------------------------------------------------------------
Renovations in the old district courtroom of the Grand County,
Colo. administration building uncovered asbestos during the week
of Jan. 26, 2009 through Jan. 30, 2009, the Sky-Hi Daily News
reports.

On Feb. 2, 2009, immediate testing of the asbestos confirmed on
that particulate levels of 75 structures per square millimeter
on the third floor surpassed safe levels, exceeding limits in
accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency.

County Manager Lurline Underbrink Curran said, "We were quite
shocked when we found this out. Immediately we took steps to
deal with it."

Information technology, accounting and water specialist
employees who worked on the third floor promptly moved
downstairs.

County officials learned the disturbance of 1937 plaster in the
old courtroom at the outset of construction work on the third
floor created the airborne asbestos particles.

Ms. Underbrink Curran said walls blocked employees' third-floor
offices from the construction zone, but a hole bored through
allowed the dust to spread.

Subsequent air monitoring and testing of the material confirmed
air hazards on the third floor. Air monitoring throughout the
county building has confirmed the level exceeding air-quality
health standards is isolated to the third floor.

According to Scott Sanders of Sunrise Environmental Inc., who is
monitoring air-sampling pumps throughout the building, second
floor air is safe. Samples show second-floor levels at 15
structures per millimeter squared.

The EPA considers levels above 70 unsafe.

Meanwhile, the company, Custom Environmental of Denver, is
performing hazard abatement of the third floor and construction
has stopped until further testing can be accomplished on all
levels. Officials said that the third floor may be cleared by
Feb. 6, 2009.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Pa. School Cleanup, Renovation to Cost $64M
----------------------------------------------------------------
Pittsburgh School Superintendent Mark Roosevelt outlined that it
costs US$64.4 million to remediate asbestos from and renovate
the Schenley Hight School in Pittsburgh, Mesothelioma reports.

The school was closed during the summer of 2008 when peeling,
falling, asbestos-laden plaster kept ending up on the floor in
hallways and classrooms, a remediation job that cost the School
District about US$750,000 to fix.

The issue of Schenley's closing has since flowed over onto other
buildings used by the Pittsburgh School District and threatens
to become ugly, as parents and other officials challenge the
District's handling of the situation.

Why, they asked at a Jan. 12, 2009 meeting, does Schenley need
to remain closed, when other schools in the District, also
containing asbestos, remain open?

Constructed in 1916, Schenley High School is one of the oldest
and most beautiful buildings in Pittsburgh. It is also the first
United States' high school to cost more than a million dollars
to build and contains a Skinner pipe organ. Unfortunately,
extensive use of asbestos makes the historic structure too
costly to remediate for its continued use as a school, according
to school district officials.

District representatives highlighted the recently completed
asbestos abatement at McKelvy, Vann and Woolslair Elementary
schools. District environmental specialist Bob Kennedy also
added that the asbestos problem at Schenley was much worse than
at any other school. In addition, Schenley also has serious
mechanical issues as well, while, according to Mr. Roosevelt,
the other schools have all been inspected and deemed safe.

Werner's rebuttal, which highlighted more than 40 asbestos
remediation projects at McKelvy School since 1989, as well as 12
at Vann School and about 10 at the Woolslair building, outlines
a policy of school closures which parents and Schenley school
supporters see as uneven, arbitrary and inconsistent.

Like many historic buildings in Pittsburgh, Schenley will likely
pass into the hands of a developer and be remodeled into upscale
living units.


                            *********

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 research,
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 S. Senorin, Stephanie T. Umacob, Gracele D.
Canilao, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2009.  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  * * *