/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/090323.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Monday, March 23, 2009, Vol. 11, No. 57 Headlines ALASKA: Governor Sued In Connection to Juneteenth Proclamation AMERICAN ELECTRIC: Continues to Defend Claims in ERISA Lawsuit CHEMED CORP: Unit Continues to Contest "Santos" Claims in Calif. CINCINNATI FINANCIAL: Still Faces State Suits for Reimbursements COLGATE-PALMOLIVE: Suits Over ERISA Violations Pending in N.Y. FNC INC: Miss. Court Postpones Trial Date for Appraisers' Suit FREMANTLE MEDIA: Faces Ex-Workers' Wage, Hour Suit in California INTUIT INC: Pa. Judge Nixes Suit Over Fees Charged to Taxpayers KNAUF GIPS: Gilman and Pastor Files Fla. Lawsuit Over Drywalls LOUISIANA CITIZENS: Orleans Parish Judge Approves $35M Agreement MAINE: Magistrate Judge Issues Recommendation in Prisoners' Suit PLANET TOYS: Faces N.Y. Litigation Over "CSI" Fingerprint Kits REDFLEX INC: Ohio Suit Over Red-Light, Speed Cameras Withdrawn ROYAL BANK: Mn Services Files U.S. Suit Over Preference Shares SOUTH KENDALL: Faces Suit in Florida Over Defective Drywall ST. JUDE: Certification Ruling in Minn. Silzone Lawsuit Pending ST. JUDE: Expects Ruling on Judgment Bid in Securities Suit Soon ST. JUDE: Four Silzone-Related Lawsuits Remain Pending in Canada WORLDSPACE INC: Seeks Stay For Securities Fraud Litigation New Securities Fraud Cases CENTURY ALUMINUM: Coughlin Stoia Announces Stock Lawsuit Filing UBS AG: Howard G. Smith Announces Securities Fraud Suit Filing ********* ALASKA: Governor Sued In Connection to Juneteenth Proclamation -------------------------------------------------------------- Washington, DC (PRWEB) March 19, 2009 -- Jazz musician and America's Hot Musician judge Gregory Charles Royal, who filed a federal lawsuit against Alaska Governor Sarah Palin earlier this month for allegedly violating the law by failing to issue a 2007 Juneteenth Proclamation, will seek class action status in the case. This means that the complaint, which would be amended by counsel and transferred to a U.S. District Court in Alaska, would put Governor Palin and widely reported allegations of racial insensitivity, back in the national spotlight. In a related development, National Juneteenth Chairman Rev. Ronald V. Myers, Sr., M.D has requested a meeting with Governor Palin to allow her an opportunity to reconcile the conflict surrounding Juneteenth, stating that in addition to the 2007 failure, Palin "not responding to invitations to participate in the annual Alaska Juneteenth Celebration has created doubts in the minds of Alaska Juneteenth leaders about ever receiving any support for Juneteenth from the governor". Myers, who is Founder & Chairman of the National Juneteenth Holiday Campaign, the National Juneteenth Observance Foundation (NJOF) and the National Juneteenth Christian Leadership Council (NJCLC), will travel to Alaska in May. Juneteenth, a holiday observance which celebrates the freeing of the last remaining slaves in Galveston, Texas on June 19, 1865, has been adopted in 29 states and was signed into law in Alaska in 2001. The bill known as HB 100 specifies that the "governor shall issue a proclamation observing the day." The civil rights complaint for injunction and other "equitable relief" filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (case no. 1:09-cv-00428), stems from a prior complaint with the Alaska Personnel Board for the same allegations under the Alaska Ethics Act. According to documents, the board could not take action under the ACT citing such allegations were not due to personal or monetary gain. The complaint also stems from a press conference held at the National Press Club in Washington, DC on October 7, 2008 by Royal who claimed Palin made a racially disparaging comment to him back in 1990 while touring Alaska with the Duke Ellington Orchestra. During that press conference, several representatives of the Juneteenth celebration, including chairman Myers, spoke to reporters about their concerns regarding Governor Palin's race relations in Alaska. However, Governor Palin's office has pushed back in an email response to Royal's lawsuit stating that though the failure was a clerical oversight, she is "not aware of any "great distress" in the African-American community of Alaska", and that, "except for those few of you involved in the mudslinging campaign last fall," she is not aware this matter "was ever commented upon by anybody". "I know there are many Alaskans who would differ and this is precisely why class action status is warranted here", says Royal. "The utter disrespect in failing to issue the 2007 Proclamation, even retroactively, is a slap in the face to black people. But then to essentially say 'oops', my bad, it's no big deal, I think shocks the conscience of all people, not to mention undermining the integrity of law." Still, some Alaskans hope that chairman Myers will be successful in his efforts to meet and reconcile with Governor Palin, including Bishop Dave Thomas, Pastor of Jesus Holy Temple in Anchorage and the Alaska Representative of NJCLC. Bishop Thomas will be hosting Dr. Myers to speak at the Alaska Juneteenth Conference May 22-24 in Anchorage. Citizens from the lower 48 states will also attend. "Dr. Myers will be bringing a message of Biblical reconciliation and healing from the legacy of enslavement that we pray Gov. Palin will be open to hearing because we need racial healing in Alaska", says Thomas. Royal said, "If anyone can fix this and avoid a legal battle, I believe it is Reverend Myers. But I fear that instead of taking the few simple steps to make this emancipation day whole, Palin will opt to spend tens of thousands of dollars to pursue legal arguments. I hope I am wrong." AMERICAN ELECTRIC: Continues to Defend Claims in ERISA Lawsuit -------------------------------------------------------------- American Electric Power Co., Inc. continues to defend against the claims in a suit, which alleged violations of Employee Retirement Income Security Act, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. In the fourth quarter of 2002 and the first quarter of 2003, three putative class action complaints were filed against AEP, certain executives and AEP's ERISA Plan Administrator alleging violations of ERISA in the selection of AEP stock as an investment alternative and in the allocation of assets to AEP stock. The suits, which were later consolidated, were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. Aside from American Electric Power, other defendants named are American Electric Power Service Corp.; E. Linn Draper, Jr.; and Thomas V. Shockley, III. In July 2006, the court denied the plaintiff's motion for class certification and dismissed all claims without prejudice. In August 2007, the appeals court reversed the trial court's decision and held that the plaintiff did have standing to pursue his claim. The appeals court remanded the case to the trial court to consider the issue of whether the plaintiff is an adequate representative for the class of plan participants. In September 2008, the trial court denied the plaintiff's motion for class certification and ordered briefing on whether the plaintiff may maintain an ERISA claim on behalf of the Plan in the absence of class certification. In October 2008, counsel for the plaintiff filed a motion to intervene on behalf of an individual seeking to intervene as a new plaintiff. The company opposed this motion and will continue to defend against these claims, according to the company's Feb. 27, 2009 Form 10-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008. The suit is "Bridges v. American Electric Po, et al., Case No. 2:03-cv-00067-ALM-MRA," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Judge Algenon L. Marbley, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs are: Edwin J. Mills, Esq. Stull, Stull and Brody 6 East 45th Street New York, NY 10017 Phone: 212-687-7230 e-mail: ssbny@aol.com James Edward Arnold, Esq. (jarnold@cpaslaw.com) Clark Perdue Arnold & Scott 471 East Broad Street, Suite 1400 Columbus, OH 43215 Phone: 614-469-1400 - and - Joseph J. Braun, Esq. (jjbraun@strausstroy.com) Strauss & Troy - 1 The Federal Reserve Bldg. 150 E Fourth St., 4th Floor Cincinnati, OH 45202-4018 Phone: 513-621-2120 Representing the defendants are: Michael J. Chepiga, Esq. Charlie L. Divine, Esq. Joseph M. McLaughlin, Esq. Issa Mikel, Esq. George S. Wang, Esq. Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP 425 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10017-3954 Phone: 212-455-2000 Fax: 212-455-2502 Web site: http://www.stblaw.com/ CHEMED CORP: Unit Continues to Contest "Santos" Claims in Calif. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Vitas Healthcare Corp., a subsidiary of Chemed Corp., continues to contest the allegations in a class action lawsuit filed by Bernadette Santos, Keith Knoche and Joyce White ("Santos"). The lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, in September 2006. This case alleges failure to pay overtime and failure to provide meal and rest periods to a purported class of California admissions nurses, chaplains and sales representatives. The case seeks payment of penalties, interest and plaintiffs' attorney fees. The lawsuit is in its early stage, according to the company's Feb. 27, 2009 Form 10-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008. Chemed Corp. -- http://www.chemed.com/-- is organized in two segments: Vitas Group (Vitas) and the Roto-Rooter Group (Roto- Rooter). The company operates two wholly owned subsidiaries: VITAS Healthcare Corporation and Roto-Rooter. VITAS is a provider of end-of-life hospice care and Roto-Rooter is a provider of plumbing and drain cleaning services. CINCINNATI FINANCIAL: Still Faces State Suits for Reimbursements ---------------------------------------------------------------- Cincinnati Financial Corp. and its subsidiaries continue to face legal actions including putative state class-action lawsuits seeking certification of a state or national class. Such putative class-action suits have alleged, among others, improper reimbursement of medical providers paid under workers' compensation insurance policies. The company did not provide specific details regarding the pending class action lawsuits in its Feb. 27, 2009 Form 10-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008. Cincinnati Financial Corp. -- http://www.cinfin.com/-- is engaged in the business of marketing property casualty insurance. During the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, Cincinnati Financial Corporation owned 100% of four subsidiaries: The Cincinnati Insurance Company, CSU Producer Resources Inc., CFC Investment Company and CinFin Capital Management Company. The Company operates in four segments: commercial lines property casualty insurance, personal lines property casualty insurance, life insurance and investments. In addition to The Cincinnati Insurance Company, the Company's standard market property casualty insurance group includes two subsidiaries: The Cincinnati Casualty Company and The Cincinnati Indemnity Company. COLGATE-PALMOLIVE: Suits Over ERISA Violations Pending in N.Y. -------------------------------------------------------------- Colgate-Palmolive Co. continues to face several purported class- action lawsuits in New York over alleged violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, according to the company's Feb. 27, 2009 Form 10-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008. In October 2007, a putative class action suit claiming that certain aspects of the cash balance portion of the Colgate- Palmolive Company Employees' Retirement Income Plan do not comply with ERISA was filed against the Plan and the company in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Specifically, "Proesel, et al. v. Colgate-Palmolive company Employees' Retirement Income Plan, et al.," alleges improper calculation of lump sum distributions, age discrimination and failure to satisfy minimum accrual requirements, thereby resulting in the underpayment of benefits to Plan participants. Two other putative class-action lawsuits filed earlier in 2007, "Abelman, et al. v. Colgate-Palmolive company Employees' Retirement Income Plan, et al.," in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, and "Caufield v. Colgate- Palmolive company Employees' Retirement Income Plan," in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, both allege improper calculation of lump sum distributions and, in the case of "Abelman," claims for failure to satisfy minimum accrual requirements. These two cases have been transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The relief sought in the three actions includes recalculation of benefits in unspecified amounts, pre- and post-judgment interest, injunctive relief and attorneys' fees. None of the actions has been certified as a class action yet (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 14, 2008). Colgate-Palmolive Co. -- http://www.colgate.com/-- is a consumer products company, whose products are marketed in over 200 countries and territories throughout the world. Colgate's Oral Care products include toothpaste, toothbrushes, oral rinses, dental floss and pharmaceutical products for dentists and other oral health professionals. Product launches include Colgate Max Fresh, Colgate Max White, Colgate Sensitive Multi Protection, Colgate Total Advanced Clean, Colgate Total Professional Clean, Colgate Max Fresh BURST and Colgate Herbal Seabuckthorn toothpastes; Colgate 360�, Colgate 360� Sensitive and Colgate Twister Fresh manual toothbrushes, and Colgate 360� Sonic Power battery toothbrush and Colgate Plax Whitening mouth rinse. The company operates in two product segments: Oral, Personal and Home Care, and Pet Nutrition. FNC INC: Miss. Court Postpones Trial Date for Appraisers' Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi has postponed the March 29, 2010 trial date that was set for the purported class-action suit against FNC, Inc., Daily Journal reports. On March 18, 2009, the court had set a trial date for March 29, 2010. However, five hours later, the trial was postponed until further order of the court, according to the Daily Journal report. Case Background The suit was originally filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland on May 9, 2007 by a group of professional appraisers in Maryland, Virginia and Oklahoma (Class Action Repoter, June 7, 2007). Captioned, "Harold H. Huggins Realty, Inc. et al v. FNC, Inc., Case No. 8:2007cv01203," the suit was specifically filed by Harold H. Huggins Realty Inc. of Burtonsville, Maryland and P.E. Turner & Co. Ltd. of Richmond Virginia, and Residential Appraisal and Consulting Inc. of Tulsa Oklahoma. The appraisers accuse FNC of systematically taking their appraisal report information and marketing them to lenders and developers of electronic substitutes for traditional appraisals. The information is allegedly converted into electronic formats before being sent to mortgage-lender customers. The company is accused of False Advertising under the Lanham Act, Intentional Misrepresentation (Fraud), Negligent Misrepresentation; Conversion, Misappropriation, and Breach of Bailment Breach of Implied Contract. The plaintiffs claim that FNC defrauded thousands of appraisers into using its "secure" AppraisalPort system, only to find out FNC is accessing and marketing it, cutting appraisers out of potential additional business with no compensation. "The Plaintiffs bring this action as a class action on behalf of all appraisers, including both individuals and entities engaged in performing appraisals, who have used the AppraisalPort web service of FNC since its inception through at least April 2007, and who were damaged thereby." The appraisers are seeking a minimum of $25 million plus punitive damages. Patsy R. Brumfield of the Daily Journal previously reported that the case was moved from the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi (Class Action Reporter, Jan. 21, 2009). According to the U.S. District Court records obtained by the Daily Journal, the case was assigned to Senior Judge Glen Davidson and Magistrate S. Allan Alexander. It was transferred on Jan 13, 2009 and now falls under the caption, "Harold H. Huggins Realty, Inc. et al v. FNC, Inc., Case No. 3:2009cv00007." Representing the plaintiffs is: Paul G. Gaston, Esq. (pgaston@attglobal.net) Law Office of Paul G. Gaston 1120 19th St. N.W., Suite 750 Washington D.C. 20036 Phone: 202-296-5856 Fax: 202-296-4154 Representing the defendants are: Maria Candace Burnette, Esq. (cburnette@mcglinchey.com) McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC 200 South Lamar Street, Suite 1100 City Centre South Jackson, MS 39201 Phone: (601) 960-8400 Fax: 601-960-3520 - and - Kirk D. Jensen, Esq. (kjensen@buckleykolar.com) Buckley Kolar LLP 1250 24th St NW Ste 700 Washington, DC 20037 Phone: 12023498000 Fax: 12023498080 FREMANTLE MEDIA: Faces Ex-Workers' Wage, Hour Suit in California ---------------------------------------------------------------- Fremantle Media, producer of the hit Fox show "American Idol," is facing a purported class-action suit from three former employees who are accusing the company of depriving them of overtime pay and meal breaks required under state law, Richard Verrier of The Los Angeles Times reports. The lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court on March 19, 2009. The former employees -- a music coordinator for "American Idol," an associate producer for the reality-based TV series "Janice Dickinson Modeling Agency" and a producer for the game show "Temptation" -- are contending that the London-based company and its various subsidiaries exposed them to sweatshop conditions, according to The Los Angeles Times. According to the lawsuit, "Employees work ten, twelve and even twenty-hour days, six or seven days a week, without overtime compensation and are forced to forgo meal and rest breaks as required by law." The workers further alleged that Fremantle engaged in a "fraudulent scheme" to conceal the hours they worked, forcing them to falsify their time cards so that they would not be paid overtime, reports The Los Angeles Times. The suit, which seeks class-action status on behalf of past and current Fremantle employees, according to The Los Angeles Times report. INTUIT INC: Pa. Judge Nixes Suit Over Fees Charged to Taxpayers --------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Thomas N. O'Neill, Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania dismissed the amended complaint in the matter, "Byers v. Intuit, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:07-cv- 04753-MK," according to BNA's Daily Tax Report. WebCPA reports that the judge's decision, issued on March 19, 2009, is the second time the judge has ruled against the plaintiffs. Judge O'Neill had dismissed an earlier complaint in June 2008. In 2007, the law firms Feldman Shepherd Wohlgelernter Tanner & Weinstock and Cooley & Handy filed a class action suit against a group of income tax software companies that are part of a cartel known as the Free File Alliance LLC. The suit names as defendant Intuit Inc., H&R Block Inc., H&R Block Digital Tax Solutions LLC and Free Fire Alliance LLC (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 15, 2007). The suit, brought by Philadelphia resident Stacie Byers, alleges that cartel members including H&R Block and Intuit unlawfully charged millions of U.S. taxpayers excessive e-filing fees. Damages are estimated in the billions of dollars. "This amounts to a tax on e-filing tax returns. Hardworking taxpayers deserve better," said Feldman Shepherd partner Thomas More Marrone. "This is government outsourcing at its worst." The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, asserts that the IRS contracted with the cartel to collect e-filed federal tax returns on its behalf. As agents of the IRS, federal law required cartel members to set "fair and uniform" fees for e-filing. But cartel members set their fees based solely on profit, the complaint states. "The private tax software companies have used the 'Free File' arrangement to push commercial products they sell, and until recently tried to get taxpayers to buy high-rate 'refund anticipation loans,' said Alan M. Feldman, Managing Partner of Feldman Shepherd. "The name 'Free File Alliance' is clearly misleading," Marrone said. "E-filing has become an enormous profit center for cartel members." The class action seeks a full refund of all fees paid for e- filing, as well as injunctive relief. Defendants include all members of the cartel which charged fees to electronically file federal tax returns. Cooley & Handy partner Kevin Handy said, "The U.S. should join other civilized nations in allowing its citizens to e-file tax returns for free. The truth is it costs the government less to process an e-filed return than a paper one." The suit is "Byers v. Intuit, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:07-cv- 04753-MK," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania under Judge Marvin Katz. Representing the plaintiff are: Thomas More Marrone, Esq. Feldman Shepherd 1845 Walnut Street 25th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19103 Phone: 215-567-8300 Fax: 215-567-8333 e-mail: cherling@feldmanshepherd.com KNAUF GIPS: Gilman and Pastor Files Fla. Lawsuit Over Drywalls -------------------------------------------------------------- BOSTON, March 19 /PRNewswire/ -- Notice is hereby given that Gilman and Pastor has filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, asserting class action claims on behalf of homeowners, building owners, community developments and owner associations across the United States to recover losses associated with the removal, replacement and remediation of defective "Chinese Drywall," as well as damages for personal injury. Residents who may be affected include those living in homes that were built between 2002 and 2007, when imported Chinese Drywall was used by several of the major building companies. The defendants named in this lawsuit include Knauf Gips KG, the leading manufacturer in drywall located in Germany, Knauf Plasterboard Tianjin (KPT), a Chinese drywall manufacturer; Knauf Group, the German parent company of KPT; Banner Supply, a Miami building supply company; and Rothchilt International Ltd., a China-based exporter. Developers that have been identified as possible users of this drywall include Lennar Homes, W.C.I., Tousa, Engel Homes and other national home builders. The lawsuit alleges that "fly ash" waste material from Chinese power plants was used in the manufacture of this Chinese Drywall. These waste materials can leak into the air and emit harmful sulfur compounds, including sulfur dioxide and hydrogen sulfide. The investigation has concluded that this is far more serious and vastly more extensive than previously determined. More than 550 million pounds of Chinese drywall was imported to the U.S. during the housing boom from 2004 to 2006. There are approximately 60,000 homes affected by these defective building materials in multiple states across the USA, with defective Chinese drywall gaining entry through ports in Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia and Washington, among others. There is no easy way to fix the damage caused by the defective drywall. In most cases, owners of homes where the toxic drywall was installed are forced to move out, gut their homes to remove the toxic materials, and rebuild the interiors of the homes with new drywall before moving back in. All personal property inside the home that may have been contaminated by the sulfur gases must also be replaced. The Sulfur emissions may also cause extensive electrical damage. Corrosion of air-conditioning units and wiring has been linked to Chinese drywall. Residents in homes built with the defective drywall have also reported suffering from respiratory problems, nose bleeds, coughing, and irritation of sinuses, eyes and throats. Prompt action is important. With many builders and developers filing for bankruptcy protection or closing their doors, a delay in asserting your claim may limit your recourse against the builders that installed the defective materials or their suppliers. News agencies and informational web sites could be especially helpful to consumers by alerting them to this serious problem. For more details, contact: Kenneth G. Gilman, Esq. (kgilman@gilmanpastor.com) Gilman and Pastor LLP Phone: (888) 252-0048 Web site: http://www.gilmanpastor.com LOUISIANA CITIZENS: Orleans Parish Judge Approves $35M Agreement ---------------------------------------------------------------- Orleans Parish Civil District Court Judge Kern Reese ruled on March 19, 2009 that the $35 million settlement brokered in a class-action lawsuit against Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corp. should stand, Rebecca Mowbray of The Times- Picayune reports. The ruling finalizes a deal to award $1,000 apiece to policyholders whose 2005 hurricane claims were handled or paid slowly, according to The Times-Picayune report. The Times-Picayune reported that the plaintiffs' attorneys -- Madro Bandaries, Gregory DiLeo, Jeffrey Berniard and Ray Orrill -- also net a tidy sum. They will be paid $5 million for their work, or about 38 percent of what the estimated 13,000 class action members will be paid. The Associated Press previously reported that the board of Louisiana Citizens Insurance Corp. approved paying up to $35 million to settle the class-action lawsuit, alleging that the firm took too long to pay off policyholders' claims after the 2005 hurricanes (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 17, 2008). The board of Louisiana's last-resort insurance company vote decision means that the settlement could get its final approval in a hearing Dec. 15, 2008 from state District Judge Kern Reese in New Orleans, according to The Associated Press. The roughly 30,000 claimants could get up to $1,000 each, depending on how many are approved to join the class-action lawsuit, The Associated Press reported. MAINE: Magistrate Judge Issues Recommendation in Prisoners' Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- Judge John Rich, III, U.S. Magistrate Judge for the US District Court for the District of Maine is recommending that a lawsuit over mail policies at the Maine State Prison go forward as a class-action, The Associated Press reports. Judge Rich made his recommendation on March 4, 2009 in a case brought by an inmate organization called the Long Timers Group Inc. and some individual inmates. Their suit challenges the constitutionality of the prison's mail screening policies, reports The Associated Press. In their civil suit, prisoners allege that their mail has been improperly withheld, confiscated or destroyed by corrections employees, according to the AP report. PLANET TOYS: Faces N.Y. Litigation Over "CSI" Fingerprint Kits -------------------------------------------------------------- Planet Toys, Inc. faces a purported class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York over its "CSI" fingerprint kits, Reuters reports. The suit was filed by Jeffrey Morris against Planet Toys, Inc. and CBS Broadcasting, Inc. over the alleged presence of asbestos in the kits. The nonprofit Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization had sued the company and CBS Corp. last year, claiming they sold toy crime-scene kits based on the hit CBS series "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" that contained the cancer-causing substance, according to Reuters. Planet Toys pulled the kits from the market over the group's claims and said multiple tests had shown no traces of asbestos, Reuters reported. According to court papers, obtained by Reuters, plaintiffs in the case have a March 30, 2009 deadline to file a motion to certify the class. The suit is "Morris v. Planet Toys, Inc et al., Case No. 08- 00592," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Judge Harold Baer, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs are: Rachel L. Jensen, Esq. Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 655 West Broadway Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: (619) 231-1058 Fax: (619) 231-7423 Scott Adam Kamber, Esq. (skamber@kolaw.com) Kamberedelson, LLC 11 Broadway 22nd Floor New York, NY 10004 Phone: (212) 920-3072 Fax: (212) 202-6364 - and - Gregory M. Sheffer, Esq. Brayton Purcell, L.L.P. 222 Rush Landing Road Novato, CA 94948 Phone: (415) 898-1555 Fax: (415) 898-1247 Representing the defendants is: James Robert Maxwell, Esq. Rogers Joseph O'Donnell 311 California Street 10th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Phone: (415) 956-2828 Fax: (415) 956-6457 REDFLEX INC: Ohio Suit Over Red-Light, Speed Cameras Withdrawn -------------------------------------------------------------- Citizens Against Photo Enforcement (CAPE) has decided to withdraw its purported class-action lawsuit against the City of Chillicothe, Ohio, and Redflex, Inc. in connection to red-light and speed cameras, Ashley Phillips of The Chillicothe Gazette reports. Rebekah Valentich, speaking on behalf of CAPE, told The Chillicothe Gazette that the decision to withdraw was made in order to focus instead on getting an initiative ordinance banning the cameras onto the November ballot. In addition, CAPE said it reserved the option to re-file the lawsuit at a later date. The Chillicothe Gazette reported that in November 2008, six members of CAPE and local attorney Katherine Hine, Esq. filed the lawsuit against the city, Redflex, Inc., and Mayor Joe Sulzer, and requested class-action status to suspend the cameras' traffic enforcement. The complaint filed in Ross County Common Pleas court alleged Chillicothe's red-light and speed enforcement system is void and unenforceable as it conflicts with state statute and federal constitutions, according to The Chillicothe Gazette report. The complaint stated the lights were installed in conflict with an Ohio Revised Code provision which states, "No local authority shall place or maintain any traffic control device upon any highway under the jurisdiction of the department of transportation except by the permission of the director of transportation," reports The Chillicothe Gazette. A temporary restraining order requiring the city suspend enforcement against the six plaintiffs in the case was issued in December, but that order expired earlier this year. A motion to extend the order was filed Jan. 21, 2009 with a response from the city's attorneys filed Jan. 23, 2009, The Chillicothe Gazette reports. ROYAL BANK: Mn Services Files U.S. Suit Over Preference Shares -------------------------------------------------------------- The Royal Bank of Scotland faces a U.S. class-action lawsuit from Dutch asset manager Mn Services and others demanding compensation on preference shares that have fallen in value, Reuters reports. Kris Douma, Mn Services corporate governance head told Reuters that the asset manager is looking for compensation on preference shares and other securities, but declined to give details. Mn Services, which manages about 56 billion euros (53 billion pounds) for Dutch pension funds, is one of the main parties seeking damages, together with British pension funds Merseyside and North Yorkshire and possibly other parties, Mr. Douma told Reuters. Mr. Douma told Reuters that the U.S. law firm Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP has sued RBS on behalf of Mn Services and other parties. On Feb. 27, 2009, Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP announced that a class-action lawsuit has been commenced in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc publicly traded securities during the period between June 26, 2007 and Jan. 19, 2009, (Class Period) including purchasers or acquirers of the preferred American Depositary Shares (ADSs) of RBS (Class Action Reporter, March 3, 2009). The complaint charges RBS, certain of its officers and directors and the underwriters of certain RBS offerings with violations of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the U.S. Securities Act of 1933. RBS is a holding company of The Royal Bank of Scotland plc and National Westminster Bank plc, which are United Kingdom-based clearing banks. The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants falsely reassured investors that RBS was well capitalized when, in fact, the Company was effectively insolvent as a result of impaired assets, bad loans, and its disastrous partial acquisition of ABN AMRO. On May 11, 2008, Times Online reported that the SEC was investigating RBS over its exposure to American sub-prime mortgages. On Oct. 7, 2008, news began to emerge that the British government was holding talks with major banks, including RBS, concerning the possibility of government funding, and on November 28, 2008, RBS announced that the government would take majority control of the bank, buying a 57.9% stake in the Company. In December 2008, it was revealed that RBS had lost half a billion dollars in the Madoff scandal. Then, on Jan. 19, 2009, RBS announced that it expected to lose approximately �28 billion in 2008, in large part due to the write-off of goodwill associated with ABN as well as charges associated with bad loans, the biggest loss in British corporate history. Thereafter, as the truth regarding the company's deteriorating financial results began to emerge, the prices of RBS's publicly traded securities declined significantly. According to the complaint, defendants' statements during the Class Period were materially false and misleading for failing to disclose the following: -- the Company's portfolio of debt securities was impaired to a much larger extent than the Company had disclosed; -- the Company had failed to properly record losses for impaired assets; -- the Company's internal controls were inadequate to prevent the Company from improperly reporting its debt securities; -- the Company's capital base was not adequate enough to withstand the significant deterioration in the subprime market and, as a result, RBS would be forced to raise significant amounts of additional capital; -- the Company failed to properly report the goodwill associated with the ABN acquisition; and -- the Company's internal controls were inadequate to prevent the Company from improperly reporting the goodwill associated with the ABN acquisition. Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of RBS publicly traded securities during the Class Period, including purchasers of ADSs pursuant and/or traceable to the Registration Statements issued in connection with certain RBS offerings. For more details, contact: David A. Rosenfeld, Esq. (djr@csgrr.com) Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP Phone: 800-449-4900 or 619-231-1058 Web site: http://www.csgrr.com/cases/rbs/ SOUTH KENDALL: Faces Suit in Florida Over Defective Drywall ----------------------------------------------------------- MIAMI, March 19 /PRNewswire/ -- Jason and Melissa Harrell recently filed a class action lawsuit in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court on behalf of themselves and other homeowners who purchased defective homes. The Harrells allege that drywall installed in their new home, and those of their neighbors, emits destructive and harmful toxins and renders the homes unsafe and uninhabitable. The defective drywall was installed in the Harrell's home by the builder, South Kendall Construction Corp., and supplied by Banner Supply Company. In January 2008, Jason and Melissa Harrell purchased their newly constructed home in Palm Isle Estates, a single family home community in Homestead, Fla. Shortly after moving in, the Harrells noticed foul odors in the home, their children began experiencing significant respiratory problems and Jason began suffering headaches. The Harrells also experienced problems with their air conditioning system, appliances, internal wiring and other electrical systems rendering them, in some cases, inoperable. Black soot appeared on the copper wiring in the home and in other places. The Harrells repeatedly asked their builder to fix the problems, but it failed to correct them. The Harrells were forced to move out of their home and into a rental. With no resolution in sight, the Harrells turned to legal counsel. "The Harrells thought they were buying their dream home," said Joey Givner, attorney for the Harrells. "Instead, they stepped into a nightmare." Several of the approximate 100 homeowners in the Palm Isles Estates have already relocated for similar reasons. The lawsuit, brought by the law firms of Higer Lichter & Givner, The Blumstein Law Firm and Podhurst Orseck, alleges that the defective drywall emits toxins, including carbon disulfide, carbonyl sulfide and hydrogen sulfide. "These toxins pose serious health threats, including headaches, respiratory ailments and other health problems. They also corrode various metals within the structure of the homes and disrupt with the operation of electronic equipment," said attorney Mark Blumstein. "People buy homes for shelter and protection; not homes that make them sick." According to the lawsuit, South Kendall Construction Corp. purchased this defective Chinese drywall from suppliers including Banner, a Miami-based company who supplied the drywall for the construction of the homes. It is believed that the manufacturer of the drywall exported approximately 67.3 million pounds of Chinese-made drywall into the United States, which is enough to build up to 7,500 average-size single-family homes. "There are many others experiencing the same problems as the Harrells," said attorney David Lichter. "Unfortunately, sometimes the only way to get companies to do the right thing is to sue them. The Harrells want a safe house, not a sick house." A special phone line has been set up for those seeking information on the issue 305-356-7549. ST. JUDE: Certification Ruling in Minn. Silzone Lawsuit Pending --------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota has yet to certify a new class in a consolidated lawsuit against St. Jude Medical Inc. over its Silzone-coated mechanical heart valves, according to the company's Feb. 27, 2009 Form 10-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Jan. 3, 2009. Consolidated Litigation In October 2001, eight complaints were consolidated into one class-action lawsuit by the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. The company requested the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit to review the District Court's initial class certification orders and, in October 2005, the Eighth Circuit issued a decision reversing these class certification rulings and directed the District Court to undertake further proceedings. In October 2006, the District Court granted the plaintiffs' renewed motion to certify a nationwide consumer protection class under Minnesota's consumer protection statutes and Private Attorney General Act. The company again requested the Eighth Circuit to review the District Court's class certification orders and, in April 2008, the Eighth Circuit again issued a decision reversing the October 2006 class certification rulings. The Eighth Circuit again returned the case to the District Court for continued proceedings. The plaintiffs have recently requested the District Court to certify a new class. Silzone Background In July 1997, the company began marketing mechanical heart valves which incorporated Silzone coating. The company later began marketing heart valve repair products incorporating Silzone coating. Silzone coating was intended to reduce the risk of endocarditis, a bacterial infection affecting heart tissue, which is associated with replacement heart valve surgery. In January 2000, the company initiated a voluntary field action for products incorporating Silzone coating after receiving information from a clinical study that patients with a Silzone- coated heart valve had a small, but statistically significant, increased incidence of explant due to paravalvular leak compared to patients in that clinical study with heart valves that did not incorporate Silzone coating. Subsequent to its voluntary field action, the company has been sued in various jurisdictions by some patients who received a product with Silzone coating. Some of these claimants allege bodily injuries as a result of an explant or other complications, which they attribute to Silzone- coated products. Others, who have not had their Silzone-coated heart valve explanted, seek compensation for past and future costs of special monitoring they allege they need over and above the medical monitoring all other replacement heart valve patients receive. Some of the lawsuits seeking the cost of monitoring have been initiated by patients who are asymptomatic and who have no apparent clinical injury. St. Jude Medical, Inc. -- http://www.sjm.com/-- develops, manufactures and distributes cardiovascular medical devices for the global cardiac rhythm management, cardiology and cardiac surgery and atrial fibrillation therapy areas and implantable neurostimulation devices for the management of chronic pain. The company operates in four business segments: Cardiac Rhythm Management, Cardiovascular, Atrial Fibrillation and Advanced Neuromodulation Systems. The company's principal products in each operating segment include CRM-tachycardia implantable cardioverter defibrillator systems and bradycardia pacemaker systems (pacemakers); CV-vascular closure devices and heart valve replacement and repair products; AF-electrophysiology introducers and catheters, advanced cardiac mapping and navigation systems and ablation systems, and ANS- neurostimulation devices. ST. JUDE: Expects Ruling on Judgment Bid in Securities Suit Soon ---------------------------------------------------------------- St. Jude Medical, Inc. expects federal district court in Minnesota will issue a decision in 2009, on the company's motion for summary judgment in a consolidated securities class-action suit. In April and May 2006, five shareholders, each purporting to act on behalf of a class of purchasers during the period Jan. 25 through April 4, 2006, separately sued the company and certain of its officers in federal district court in Minnesota, alleging that the company made materially false and misleading statements during the Class Period relating to financial performance, projected earnings guidance and projected sales of implantable cardioverter defibrillator systems. The complaints, all of which seek unspecified damages and other relief, as well as attorneys' fees, have been consolidated. The company filed a motion to dismiss that was denied by the district court in March 2007. The discovery process concluded in September, and the company has filed a motion for summary judgment. The company's directors and officers liability insurance provides US$75 million of insurance coverage for St. Jude, the officers and the directors, after a US$15 million self-insured retention level has been reached. The company has filed a motion for summary judgment which was argued before the Court on Jan. 23, 2009, according to the company's Feb. 27, 2009 Form 10-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Jan. 3, 2009. St. Jude Medical, Inc. -- http://www.sjm.com/-- develops, manufactures and distributes cardiovascular medical devices for the global cardiac rhythm management, cardiology and cardiac surgery and atrial fibrillation therapy areas and implantable neurostimulation devices for the management of chronic pain. The company operates in four business segments: Cardiac Rhythm Management, Cardiovascular, Atrial Fibrillation and Advanced Neuromodulation Systems. The company's principal products in each operating segment include CRM-tachycardia implantable cardioverter defibrillator systems and bradycardia pacemaker systems (pacemakers); CV-vascular closure devices and heart valve replacement and repair products; AF-electrophysiology introducers and catheters, advanced cardiac mapping and navigation systems and ablation systems, and ANS- neurostimulation devices. ST. JUDE: Four Silzone-Related Lawsuits Remain Pending in Canada ---------------------------------------------------------------- Four purported class-action lawsuits over St. Jude Medical Inc.'s Silzone-coated mechanical heart valves remain pending in Canada, according to the company's Feb. 27, 2009 Form 10-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Jan. 3, 2009. Canadian Litigation In one such case in Ontario, the court certified that a class- action suit involving Silzone patients may proceed. The company's request for leave to appeal the rulings on certification was rejected, and the trial of the initial phase of this matter is scheduled for April 2009. A second case seeking class-action suit in Ontario has been stayed pending resolution of the other Ontario action. A case filed as a class-action suit in British Columbia is in the early stages of discovery and has not been certified by the court as a class action. That case remains pending. A court in Quebec has certified a class-action suit, and that matter is proceeding in accordance with the court orders. In addition, in December 2005, the company was served with a lawsuit by the Quebec Provincial health insurer to recover the cost of insured services furnished or to be furnished to class members in the class-action suit pending in Quebec. The complaints in these cases request damages ranging from 1.5 million to 2.0 billion Canadian Dollars (the equivalent to US$1.2 million to US$1.6 billion at Jan. 3, 2009). Silzone Background In July 1997, the company began marketing mechanical heart valves which incorporated Silzone coating. The company later began marketing heart valve repair products incorporating Silzone coating. Silzone coating was intended to reduce the risk of endocarditis, a bacterial infection affecting heart tissue, which is associated with replacement heart valve surgery. In January 2000, the company initiated a voluntary field action for products incorporating Silzone coating after receiving information from a clinical study that patients with a Silzone- coated heart valve had a small, but statistically significant, increased incidence of explant due to paravalvular leak compared to patients in that clinical study with heart valves that did not incorporate Silzone coating. Subsequent to its voluntary field action, the company has been sued in various jurisdictions by some patients who received a product with Silzone coating. Some of these claimants allege bodily injuries as a result of an explant or other complications, which they attribute to Silzone- coated products. Others, who have not had their Silzone-coated heart valve explanted, seek compensation for past and future costs of special monitoring they allege they need over and above the medical monitoring all other replacement heart valve patients receive. Some of the lawsuits seeking the cost of monitoring have been initiated by patients who are asymptomatic and who have no apparent clinical injury to date. St. Jude Medical, Inc. -- http://www.sjm.com/-- develops, manufactures and distributes cardiovascular medical devices for the global cardiac rhythm management, cardiology and cardiac surgery and atrial fibrillation therapy areas and implantable neurostimulation devices for the management of chronic pain. The company operates in four business segments: Cardiac Rhythm Management, Cardiovascular, Atrial Fibrillation and Advanced Neuromodulation Systems. The company's principal products in each operating segment include CRM-tachycardia implantable cardioverter defibrillator systems and bradycardia pacemaker systems (pacemakers); CV-vascular closure devices and heart valve replacement and repair products; AF-electrophysiology introducers and catheters, advanced cardiac mapping and navigation systems and ablation systems, and ANS- neurostimulation devices. WORLDSPACE INC: Seeks Stay For Securities Fraud Litigation ---------------------------------------------------------- WorldSpace, Inc., and several other defendants in a consolidated securities fraud class-action lawsuit for damages resulting from "violations of certain federal securities laws, and the Securities Act 1933" and relating to Worldspace's IPO, and the IPO Prospectus, are seeking for a stay of the matter, Chris Forrester of Rapid TV News reports. On March 16, 2009, defendants asked the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware that the case be "stayed" pending the completion of the Worldspace sale process. In response to the filing, the lead plaintiff in the case filed a motion before the Bankruptcy Court on March 18, 2009, asking that the court order that no Worldspace documents be destroyed, abandoned or otherwise rendered unavailable following the transfer to its new owners. Several lawsuits were filed in March and April 2007 on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the company's publicly traded securities. They were filed against the company; its president and chief executive officer, Noah A. Samara; its chief financial officer, Sridhar Ganesan; Cowen & Co. LLC; and UBS Securities LLC (Class Action Reporter, June 27, 2008). The complaints allege violations of Sections 11, 12(a)2, and 15 of the U.S. Securities Act of 1933. They claim that certain customers were incorrectly counted as subscribers after they had ceased to be paying subscribers. The complaints have been consolidated and on Aug. 9, 2007, an amended complaint was filed on behalf of all the plaintiffs. New Securities Fraud Cases CENTURY ALUMINUM: Coughlin Stoia Announces Stock Lawsuit Filing --------------------------------------------------------------- SAN DIEGO, Mar 19, 2009 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP ("Coughlin Stoia") http://www.csgrr.com/cases/centuryaluminum/)announced that a class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of purchasers of Century Aluminum Company ("Century Aluminum")(NASDAQ:CENX) common stock during the period between April 24, 2008 and March 2, 2009 (the "Class Period"). The complaint charges Century Aluminum and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Century Aluminum, through its subsidiaries, produces primary aluminum in the United States and internationally. The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants materially misrepresented the Company's financial performance. Specifically, defendants failed to report cash flows associated with the termination of forward financial sales contracts as a financing activity, as required. On March 2, 2009, the Company filed a Form 8-K with the SEC announcing that on February 27, 2009, the Company determined that its previously issued financial statements for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 should no longer be relied upon as a result of an error in the interim consolidated statement of cash flows. As a result of this disclosure, Century Aluminum's stock price dropped from $2.22 on February 27, 2009 to $1.67 the next trading day. Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of Century Aluminum common stock during the Class Period (the "Class"). For more details, contact: David A. Rosenfeld, Esq. (djr@csgrr.com) Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP Phone: 800-449-4900 or 619-231-1058 Web site: http://www.csgrr.com/cases/centuryaluminum/ UBS AG: Howard G. Smith Announces Securities Fraud Suit Filing -------------------------------------------------------------- Fri, 20 Mar 2009 02:00:58 GMT -- BENSALEM, Pa. - (Business Wire) Law Offices of Howard G. Smith announces that a securities class action lawsuit was filed on January 30, 2009, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly traded securities of UBS AG ("UBS")(NYSE: UBS) between May 4, 2004 and January 26, 2009, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The lawsuit was filed against UBS, Marcel Ospel, Marcel Rohner, Peter Wuffli, Peter Kurer, Raoul Weil, Martin Liechti, Mark Branson, and Philip Lofts. The case is "New Orleans Employees' Retirement System v. UBS AG, No. 1:09-cv-00893 (S.D.N.Y.)." The complaint accuses the defendants of violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by virtue of the Company's failure to disclose during the Class Period that its strategy to attract "Net New Money," touted by the Company as a primary indicator of the Company's performance and future prospects, was accomplished through a fraudulent scheme to help ultra-high net worth U.S. investors evade federal taxes by secreting billions of dollars of their funds in "undeclared" Swiss bank accounts. According to the complaint, when the scheme was finally uncovered by U.S. authorities and UBS began disclosing the true nature of its Swiss banking business, the value of UBS's stock declined significantly. 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 ********* 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 * * *