CAR_Public/090417.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

             Friday, April 17, 2009, Vol. 11, No. 75

                           Headlines

CASH MONEY: Court Approval Sought For CDN $4,750,000 Settlement
COACH INC: Faces Proposed Securities Fraud Class Suit in N.Y.
CONSECO INC: Briefing on Revised Definition Set to End in March
CONSECO INC: Briefing on Langendorf Certification to End in July
CONSECO INC: "Cohen" Contract Breach Suit Dismissed on Jan. 12

CONSECO INC: Contests Claims in Merged Annuity Marketing Lawsuit
CONSECO INC: Defends "Fletcher" Suit Over Unpaid Wages in Calif.
CONSECO INC: Defends "Yue" Contract Breach Lawsuit in California
CONSECO INC: Nov. 2 Jury Trial Set for Ruderman's Suit in Fla.
CONSECO INC: Sandock's Suit v. Bankers Life Dismissed Nov. 2008

CONSECO INC: Securities Lawsuit Set for May 10, 2010 Jury Trial
CONSECO INC: To Defend "Brady" Contract Breach Suit in Calif.
E.I. DU PONT: Urges W.Va. Supreme Court to Dismiss Smelter Case
GENESCO INC: Faces Proposed Securities Fraud Litigation
HELLER EHRMAN: Calif. Court Sends WARN Violations Suit To ADR

KOLTER CITY: Faces Fla. Litigation Over Condominium's Completion
LIFE SCIENCES: Faces Proposed Securities Fraud Lawsuit in N.J.
VICTORIA'S SECRET: Attorneys Seeks Consolidation of Bra Cases
ZYNEX INC: Faces Proposed Securities Fraud Litigation in Colo.

* PricewaterhouseCoopers Study Says Securities Litigation Rising


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

COACH INC: Dyer & Berens Files Securities Fraud Lawsuit in N.Y.
COACH INC: Izard Nobel Announces Securities Fraud Lawsuit Filing
GENERAL ELECTRIC: Berman DeValerio Files Securities Fraud Suit
PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Kirby McInerney Announces Lawsuit Filing
REGIONS FINANCING: Brower Piven Announces Securities Suit Filing

ROCHESTER FUND: Coughlin Stoia Files Securities Fraud Lawsuit
ZYNEX INC: Shuman Law Firm Files Securities Fraud Suit in Colo.


                        Asbestos Alerts

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Kitchen Suit v. Phipps Dismissed on Feb. 5
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Denial of Motion in Aidnik Case Recommended
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ampco Faces 9,354 Pending Claims at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ampco Reserves $207M for Claims at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Orion Marine Still Facing Liability Actions

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Actions v. Park-Ohio Drop to 315 at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: DXP Still Processing Remaining Settlements
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Southern Star Unit Has $2.6M ARO Liability
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Sears Holdings Subject to Exposure Lawsuits
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ING Groep Cites EUR52Mil for A&E at Dec. 31

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Colonial Comm'l. Cites 27 Claims at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: RAL Supply Still Facing 1 Action at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: No H.B. Fuller Suits Settled in Last Qtr.
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: H.B. Fuller Has $4.2MM Liability at Feb. 28
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: J. C. Penney's A&E Liabilities Total $39Mil

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Alcatel Lucent Still Facing Exposure Claims
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Prime Group Cites $7.8M Abatement Liability
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: AXA Reserves EUR1.005Bil for Claims in 2008
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Deal in AXA, Philips Action Reached in June
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ABI Records $13.56Mil Liability at Dec. 31

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: American Biltrite Has 1,269 Pending Claims
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ABI Assessing Coverage Costs at Maine Sites
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Brookfield Records $7Mil Income at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Allianz SE's A&E Reserves Total EUR3.140Bil
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Catalyst Ordered to Pay $75T Penalty in '08

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: BMCA Still Subject to Bodily Injury Claims
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Congoleum Cites $50M Liabilities at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Suits Still Pending v. Kaanapali Land, D/C
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Majestic Expends $300T for Cleanup in 2008
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: $100T of Amerex Deposit Marked for Cleanup

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Enstar Reserves $748.5MM for Claims in 2008
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: RPM Long-Term Liability at $442M at Feb. 28
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: RPM Units Facing 10,281 Actions at Feb. 28
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Appeal Court to Set Order in Bondex Action
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Suit v. Chase Still Inactive as of March 31

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Met-Pro Facing 57 Pending Cases at Jan. 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazard Found Near Old Samsung Headquarters
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Yawn Suit v. Texaco, Chevron Filed in Texas
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Schmidheiny, Marchienne Face Exposure Suit
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Grupo Mexico to Appeal Order in Asarco Case

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Majkut's Action v. Garlock Filed on April 3
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: McAnulty Pleads Guilty for False Statements
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Childress Action Filed v. 200 Firms in Ill.
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Talc-Containing Drugs Restricted in Korea
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: CSX Partial Summary Judgment Filed April 6

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Remand Motion in Foster Wheeler Case Denied
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Crown Cork, DAP Favored in Vanaman's Action
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court Favors 4 Manufacturers in Burger Case
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Bid for Attorney's Fees OK'd in Harvey Case
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: James Hardie Awards AUD500T to Sydney Local

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Galuten Orders LCMC to Dispose of Asbestos
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Discovered at Weston Creek Center
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Aussie Home Renovators Facing Exposure Risk
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Poses Threat to Vietnamese Workers
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: U.S. Gov't. Suit v. BPXA Filed on March 31

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Monmouth School Cleanup to Begin in Summer
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cleanup at Wis. High School to Cost $100T
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazards Discovered in Morgens Hall in Ohio
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Knight-Celotex Files for Ch. 11 Protection
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazard Slows Sale of Old Tecumseh Facility

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: U.K. Study Says Welsh Teachers at High Risk
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Canada Charged for Exporting to Third World
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: N.H. Supreme Court OKs Ruling in SSGC Case
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Remand Motion Denied in Beamis Case in R.I.
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court Upholds Board Ruling in McLaurin Case

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: White Mountains Cites $173.3Mil Losses, LAE
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Grace Engineer Testimony Heard on April 13
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Demolition of 2 Conn. Buildings Set for May
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Alameda's Residents Raise Exposure Concerns
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Santa Fe Building to be Checked for Hazards

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Fitzpatricks to Pay $1T for Cleanup Breach
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Bradford Firm to Train Teachers on Hazards
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Mitigation Ongoing in Mass. Site
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Nevada Site Cleanup to Create More Jobs
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 50 Ottawa Firefighters Exposed to Asbestos

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Found at Fort Carson Site in Colo.
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Areyonga Locals Likely Exposed to Asbestos
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazard Found at HMAS Albatross on March 27
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: CSX Still Subject to Hazard Exposure Claims
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Global Energy Finds Hazard in N.C. Facility

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: EPA Adds Nine Waste Sites to Superfund NPL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Youngstown School Cleanup Estimated at $1M
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Lo Presti Says Ford Should Pay Legal Costs
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Korea Consumers Sue Makers of Talc Products
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazard Found at Redmond High School in Ore.

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Schools Reminded to Comply With TSCA, AHERA
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Deleon Added to EPA's "Fugitives" Web Site
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Bond Sues N.C. Town for Cleanup Violations
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Appeal Court Revives Smith Action in Kansas
ASBESTOS ALERT: Kuhles Sued for Hazards at Dewey-Humboldt Plant


                           *********

CASH MONEY: Court Approval Sought For CDN $4,750,000 Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------
     A settlement has been reached in the proposed class action
brought against payday lender Cash Money Cheque Cashing Inc. in
respect of all claims for the payment of excessive interest,
other than in the Provinces of British Columbia and Quebec.  The
settlement has been made without any admission of liability by
Cash Money, and remains subject to the approval of the Ontario
Superior Court of Justice.

     Under the terms of the settlement, every Cash Money payday
loan customer who is not in default of repayment of the loan
will be entitled to receive a voucher valued at $50.00 which
will be fully transferable, and may be used to pay for any
payday loan services provided by Cash Money, including towards
repayment of a current outstanding loan, or future loan.  A
total of $4,750,000.00 worth of vouchers will be available to
the class members.  To qualify to receive a payment, customers
will have to complete a claim form and submit it to Cash Money.
If the settlement is approved, the claim forms will be available
at any Cash Money location outside of British Columbia.

     In addition to the vouchers, Cash Money will pay to the
Ontario Class Proceedings fund an amount equivalent to 10% of
each redeemed voucher.  Class counsel will be seeking court
approval for Cash Money to pay their legal fees in the amount of
$380,000.00 plus disbursements and taxes.

     The hearing of the motion for certification as a class
action and settlement approval will take place on Monday, June
15, 2009 at the Court House, 361 University Avenue, Toronto, ON,
at 10 am.

For more details, contact:

          Margaret Waddell
          Paliare Roland Rothstein Rosenberg LLP
          Phone: (416) 646-4300
          Web site: http://www.cashmoneyclassaction.com


COACH INC: Faces Proposed Securities Fraud Class Suit in N.Y.
--------------------------------------------------------------
     An investor in Coach, Inc. (NYSE:COH), on April 14, 2009,
filed a proposed securities class action lawsuit in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York on
behalf of purchasers of Coach, Inc. (NYSE:COH) publicly traded
securities during the period between January 23, 2007 and
October 22, 2007 against Coach, Inc. and certain of its
officers and directors over alleged Federal Securities Laws
violations.

     According to the complaint the plaintiff alleges that
Coach, Inc and certain of its officers and directors violated
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by reporting between January
23, 2007 and October 22, 2007, strong growth for Coach, Inc. and
forecast similar growth going forward, while failing to disclose
that its growth rate was, in fact, unsustainable.  Then, on
October 23, 2007, before the market opened, Coach, Inc.
announced that although its fiscal first-quarter profit rose
23%, traffic in its U.S. retail stores was weak and Coach
expected a slow-down in the coming holiday season.  As a result
of this announcement, Coach's stock (NYSE:COH) price dropped
$4.87 per share (or 12%) to close at $36.60 per share on October
23, 2007, so the lawsuit.


CONSECO INC: Briefing on Revised Definition Set to End in March
---------------------------------------------------------------
Briefing in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of
Louisiana to determine the appropriate revised class definition
in Diana Doiron's lawsuit against a Conseco, Inc. subsidiary was
set to conclude in March 2009, according to the company's March
31, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008.

On Sept. 24, 2004, a purported statewide class-action lawsuit
was filed in the 18th Judicial District Court, Parish of
Iberville, Louisiana, "Diana Doiron, Individually And On Behalf
of All Others Similarly Situated v. Conseco Health Insurance
Company, Case No. 61,534."

In her complaint, plaintiff claims that she was damaged due to
Conseco Health Insurance Company's failure to pay claims made
under her cancer policy, and seeks compensatory and statutory
damages in an unspecified amount along with declaratory and
injunctive relief.

Conseco Health Insurance Company caused the case to be removed
to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana
on Nov. 3, 2004, and it was assigned Case No. 04-784-D-M2.

An order was issued on Feb. 15, 2007, granting plaintiff's
motion for class certification.  The order specifically
certifies two sub-classes identifying them as the radiation
treatment sub-class and the chemotherapy treatment sub-class.

The company appealed the certification order to the 5th Circuit
Court of Appeals, and by order entered May 28, 2008, the 5th
Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed class certification but made
modifications to the class definitions.  The company's
subsequent petition for rehearing was denied by order dated June
27, 2008.

Briefing in the district court on remand, to determine the
appropriate revised class definition, is scheduled to be
concluded in March 2009.

Conseco, Inc. -- https://www.conseco.com/ -- is the holding
company for a group of insurance companies operating throughout
the U.S. that develop, market and administer supplemental health
insurance, annuity, individual life insurance and other
insurance products.  The company focuses on serving the senior
and middle-income markets.  CNO sells its products through three
distribution channels: career agents, professional independent
producers (some of whom sell one or more of its product lines)
and direct marketing.  The company manages its business through
three primary business segments: Bankers Life, Conseco Insurance
Group and Colonial Penn.


CONSECO INC: Briefing on Langendorf Certification to End in July
----------------------------------------------------------------
Briefing on class certification in a contract breach and
consumer fraud lawsuit against Conseco Senior Health Insurance
Company is set to conclude on July 20, 2009.

On June 4, 2008, a purported class action complaint was filed in
the Cook County Illinois Circuit Court Chancery Division,
"Sheldon Langendorf, et. al. individually and on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated v. Conseco Senior
Health Insurance Company, and Conseco, Inc., et. al. Case No.
08CH20571."

Plaintiff is claiming breach of contract and consumer fraud and
seeks a declaratory judgment, claiming that Senior Health
(formerly Conseco Senior Health Insurance Company prior to its
name change in October 2008) and other affiliated companies
routinely and improperly refuse to accept Medicare explanations
of benefits as documentation in support of proofs of claim on
individual hospital indemnity and other policies of health
insurance.

Senior Health subsequently removed the action to the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, where it
is now pending as Case No. 08-CV-3914.

By stipulation of the parties, Conseco, Inc. was dismissed as a
party on Sept. 29, 2008.

Senior Health filed a motion to dismiss and/or for summary
judgment on Aug. 22, 2008, which the court granted in part and
denied in part by entry dated Dec. 18, 2008, dismissing the
claim for Illinois statutory consumer fraud.  The court has also
established a schedule for briefing on class certification,
which will be concluded by July 20, 2009.

The company agreed to assume liability for this litigation in
connection with the separation of Senior Health, according to
its March 31, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008.

Conseco, Inc. -- https://www.conseco.com/ -- is the holding
company for a group of insurance companies operating throughout
the U.S. that develop, market and administer supplemental health
insurance, annuity, individual life insurance and other
insurance products.  The company focuses on serving the senior
and middle-income markets.  CNO sells its products through three
distribution channels: career agents, professional independent
producers (some of whom sell one or more of its product lines)
and direct marketing.  The company manages its business through
three primary business segments: Bankers Life, Conseco Insurance
Group and Colonial Penn.


CONSECO INC: "Cohen" Contract Breach Suit Dismissed on Jan. 12
--------------------------------------------------------------
A purported class-action lawsuit filed by Anna M. Cohen against
Washington National Insurance Corporation was dismissed on Jan.
12, 2009, according to Conseco, Inc.'s March 31, 2009 Form 10-K
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008.

Washington National Insurance Corporation is a subsidiary of the
company.

On July 22, 2008, a purported class-action lawsuit was filed in
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida,
"Anna M. Cohen individually and on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. Washington National Insurance
Corporation Case No. 08-CV-61153-JIC."

Plaintiff is claiming breach of contract alleging that the 8%
annual inflation adjustment rider, which is part of her
Washington National policy of long-term care insurance, acts to
increase the lifetime maximum benefit above the stated $150,000
benefit and not just the stated per day benefit, such that
Washington National prematurely stops paying benefits before the
correct lifetime maximum benefit amount is paid.

On Sept. 26, 2008, Washington National filed a motion to dismiss
the complaint.  While the motion to dismiss was pending, a
settlement was reached with the individual plaintiff, without
certification of a class.  The court entered an order of
dismissal with prejudice based on the settlement on Jan. 12,
2009.

Conseco, Inc. -- https://www.conseco.com/ -- is the holding
company for a group of insurance companies operating throughout
the U.S. that develop, market and administer supplemental health
insurance, annuity, individual life insurance and other
insurance products.  The company focuses on serving the senior
and middle-income markets.  CNO sells its products through three
distribution channels: career agents, professional independent
producers (some of whom sell one or more of its product lines)
and direct marketing.  The company manages its business through
three primary business segments: Bankers Life, Conseco Insurance
Group and Colonial Penn.


CONSECO INC: Contests Claims in Merged Annuity Marketing Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Conseco, Inc. intends to oppose any form of class-action
treatment of the claims in the consolidated action captioned,
"In re Conseco Insurance Co. Annuity Marketing & Sales Practices
Litigation."

On Nov. 17, 2005, a complaint was filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of California, "Robert H.
Hansen, an individual, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Conseco Insurance Company, an Illinois corporation
f/k/a Conseco Annuity Assurance Company, Cause No. C0504726."

Plaintiff in this putative class action purchased an annuity in
2000, and is claiming relief on behalf of the proposed national
class for alleged violations of  the Racketeer Influenced and
Corrupt Organizations Act; elder abuse; unlawful, deceptive and
unfair business practices; unlawful, deceptive and misleading
advertising; breach of fiduciary duty; aiding and abetting of
breach of fiduciary duty; and unjust enrichment and imposition
of constructive trust.

On Jan. 27, 2006, a similar complaint was filed in the same
court entitled, "Friou P. Jones, on Behalf of Himself and All
Others Similarly Situated v. Conseco Insurance Company, an
Illinois company f/k/a Conseco Annuity Assurance Company,
Cause No. C06-00537.  Mr. Jones had purchased an annuity in
2003."

Each case alleged that the annuity sold was inappropriate and
that the annuity products in question are inherently unsuitable
for seniors age 65 and older.

On March 3, 2006, a first amended complaint was filed in the
Hansen case adding causes of action for fraudulent concealment
and breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing.

In an order dated April 14, 2006, the court consolidated the two
cases under the original Hansen cause number and retitled the
consolidated action: "In re Conseco Insurance Co. Annuity
Marketing & Sales Practices Litigation."

A motion to dismiss the amended complaint was granted in part
and denied in part, and the plaintiffs filed a second amended
complaint on April 27, 2007, which has added as defendants
Conseco Services, LLC and Conseco Marketing, LLC.

The court has not yet made a determination whether the case
should go forward as a class action, according to the company's
March 31, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008.

Conseco, Inc. -- https://www.conseco.com/ -- is the holding
company for a group of insurance companies operating throughout
the U.S. that develop, market and administer supplemental health
insurance, annuity, individual life insurance and other
insurance products.  The company focuses on serving the senior
and middle-income markets.  CNO sells its products through three
distribution channels: career agents, professional independent
producers (some of whom sell one or more of its product lines)
and direct marketing.  The company manages its business through
three primary business segments: Bankers Life, Conseco Insurance
Group and Colonial Penn.


CONSECO INC: Defends "Fletcher" Suit Over Unpaid Wages in Calif.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Conseco, Inc. defends a purported class-action lawsuit styled,
"Robin Fletcher individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated vs. Bankers Life and Casualty Company, and
Does 1 through 100, Case No. RG08366328."

Bankers Life and Casualty Company is a subsidiary of the
company.

On Jan. 16, 2008, the purported class action was filed in the
Superior Court of the State of California for the County of
Alameda.

In her original complaint, plaintiff alleged nonpayment by
Bankers Life and Casualty Company of overtime wages, failure to
provide meal and rest periods, failure to reimburse expenses,
and failure to provide accurate wage statements to its sales
representatives in the State of California for the time period
Jan. 16, 2004 to present.

In addition, the complaint alleges failure to pay wages on
termination and unfair business practices.

On Oct. 7, 2008, the plaintiff filed a first amended complaint
which changes the proposed scope of the putative class from all
agents in California for the subject time period to all agents
at a single branch office in Alameda, California.  This would
reduce the putative class from hundreds of members to
approximately 100 members, according to the company's March 31,
2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008.

Conseco, Inc. -- https://www.conseco.com/ -- is the holding
company for a group of insurance companies operating throughout
the U.S. that develop, market and administer supplemental health
insurance, annuity, individual life insurance and other
insurance products.  The company focuses on serving the senior
and middle-income markets.  CNO sells its products through three
distribution channels: career agents, professional independent
producers (some of whom sell one or more of its product lines)
and direct marketing.  The company manages its business through
three primary business segments: Bankers Life, Conseco Insurance
Group and Colonial Penn.


CONSECO INC: Defends "Yue" Contract Breach Lawsuit in California
----------------------------------------------------------------
Conseco, Inc. defends a complaint entitled, "Celedonia X. Yue,
M. D. on behalf of the class of all others similarly situated,
and on behalf of the General Public v. Conseco Life Insurance
Company, successor to Philadelphia Life Insurance Company and
formerly known as Massachusetts General Life Insurance Company,
Cause No. CV08-01506 CAS."

On March 4, 2008, the Complaint was filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California.

Plaintiff in this putative class action owns a Valulife
universal life policy insuring the life of Ruth S. Yue
originally issued by Massachusetts General Life Insurance
Company on Sept. 26, 1995.

Plaintiff is claiming breach of contract on behalf of the
proposed national class and seeks injunctive and restitutionary
relief pursuant to Business & Professions Code Section 17200 and
Declaratory Relief.

The putative class consists of all owners of Valulife and
Valuterm 'universal life' insurance policies issued by either
Massachusetts General or Philadelphia Life and that were later
acquired and serviced by Conseco Life.

Plaintiff alleges that members of the class will be damaged by
increases in the cost of insurance that are set to take place in
the twenty first policy year of Valulife and Valuterm policies.
No such increases have yet been applied to the subject policies,
and none is scheduled to take effect until around 2011.

The company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on June 25,
2008, which was denied by the court.

Plaintiff has not yet filed a motion for certification of the
class, and the company intends to oppose any form of class
treatment of these claims, according to its March 31, 2009 Form
10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for
the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008.

Conseco, Inc. -- https://www.conseco.com/ -- is the holding
company for a group of insurance companies operating throughout
the U.S. that develop, market and administer supplemental health
insurance, annuity, individual life insurance and other
insurance products.  The company focuses on serving the senior
and middle-income markets.  CNO sells its products through three
distribution channels: career agents, professional independent
producers (some of whom sell one or more of its product lines)
and direct marketing.  The company manages its business through
three primary business segments: Bankers Life, Conseco Insurance
Group and Colonial Penn.


CONSECO INC: Nov. 2 Jury Trial Set for Ruderman's Suit in Fla.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida has
scheduled a jury trial for Sydelle Ruderman's purported class-
action suit against a Conseco, Inc. subsidiary on Nov. 2, 2009.

On Dec. 8, 2008, the purported class-action suit was filed in
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida,
"Sydelle Ruderman individually and on behalf of all other
similarly situated v. Washington National Insurance Company,
Case No. 08-23401-CIV-Cohn/Selzer."

In the complaint, plaintiff alleges that the inflation
escalation rider on her policy of long-term care insurance
operates to increase the policy's lifetime maximum benefit, and
breached the contract by stopping her benefits when they reached
the lifetime maximum.

The company takes the position that the inflation escalator only
affects the per day maximum benefit, according to its March 31,
2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008.

Conseco, Inc. -- https://www.conseco.com/ -- is the holding
company for a group of insurance companies operating throughout
the U.S. that develop, market and administer supplemental health
insurance, annuity, individual life insurance and other
insurance products.  The company focuses on serving the senior
and middle-income markets.  CNO sells its products through three
distribution channels: career agents, professional independent
producers (some of whom sell one or more of its product lines)
and direct marketing.  The company manages its business through
three primary business segments: Bankers Life, Conseco Insurance
Group and Colonial Penn.


CONSECO INC: Sandock's Suit v. Bankers Life Dismissed Nov. 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
dismissed Ruby Sandock's purported class-action complaint
against Conseco, Inc.'s subsidiary, Bankers Life and Casualty
Company, without prejudice on Nov. 12, 2008.

On June 4, 2008, a purported class-action complaint was filed in
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois,
"Ruby Sandock, individually and on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. Bankers Life and Casualty Company
Case No. 08-CV-3218."

Plaintiff is claiming breach of contract, consumer fraud and
deceptive business practices, and unjust enrichment on behalf of
the proposed national class and seeks compensatory and punitive
damages, injunctive and restitutionary relief.

Plaintiff alleges that Bankers Life and Casualty systematically
and intentionally failed to comply with standard contractual
waiver of premium provisions that are included in its long-term
care insurance policy contracts that it offers and sells to
consumers.

Plaintiffs allege that Bankers Life and Casualty has a policy or
practice of continuing to charge and/or bill its insureds for
policy premiums after the insured has received 90 days of
benefits.

The company's answer was filed on July 3, 2008, denying
liability and denying that the action is properly maintainable
as a class action.  It also filed a motion to dismiss the
complaint.

On Sept. 26, 2008, the district court entered an order
dismissing two out of the three claims asserted by the
plaintiff.

According to the company's March 31, 2009 Form 10-K filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year
ended Dec. 31, 2008, after the court's ruling dismissing
portions of the complaint, plaintiff elected to dismiss the
entire action without prejudice to its refiling and the court
therefore entered an order of dismissal without prejudice on
Nov. 12, 2008.

Conseco, Inc. -- https://www.conseco.com/ -- is the holding
company for a group of insurance companies operating throughout
the U.S. that develop, market and administer supplemental health
insurance, annuity, individual life insurance and other
insurance products.  The company focuses on serving the senior
and middle-income markets.  CNO sells its products through three
distribution channels: career agents, professional independent
producers (some of whom sell one or more of its product lines)
and direct marketing.  The company manages its business through
three primary business segments: Bankers Life, Conseco Insurance
Group and Colonial Penn.


CONSECO INC: Securities Lawsuit Set for May 10, 2010 Jury Trial
---------------------------------------------------------------
A consolidated securities class-action lawsuit filed in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Indiana against
Conseco, Inc., and some of its former officers is scheduled for
jury trial on May 10, 2010.

After the company's predecessor announced its intention to
restructure on Aug. 9, 2002, eight purported securities fraud
class action suits were filed with the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of Indiana.  These suits were filed on
behalf of persons or entities that purchased the predecessor's
common stock on various dates between Oct. 24, 2001, and Aug. 9,
2002.

The plaintiffs allege claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and allege
material omissions and dissemination of materially misleading
statements regarding, among other things, the liquidity of
Conseco and alleged problems in Conseco Finance Corp.'s
manufactured housing division, allegedly resulting in the
artificial inflation of the company's Predecessor's stock price.

On March 13, 2003, all the cases were consolidated into one in
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana,
captioned, "Franz Schleicher, et al. v. Conseco, Inc., Gary
Wendt, William Shea, Charles Chokel and James Adams, et al.,
Case No. 02-CV-1332 DFH-TAB."

The complaint seeks an unspecified amount of damages.  The
plaintiffs then filed an amended consolidated class-action
complaint with respect to the individual defendants on Dec. 8,
2003.  A motion to dismiss the case was filed on behalf of the
individual defendants and on July 14, 2005, the court granted
the request.  The plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint on
Aug. 24, 2005.

The plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification on May
2, 2008.

On March 20, 2009 the court granted that motion.  The matter is
scheduled for a jury trial on May 10, 2010, according to the
company's March 31, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
Dec. 31, 2008.

The suit is "Schleicher, et al. v. Wendt, et al., Case No. 1:02-
cv-01332-DFH-TAB," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Indiana, Judge David Frank Hamilton
presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs are:

         Kwasi Abraham Asiedu, Esq. (laskido@hotmail.com)
         3858 Carson Street, Suite 204
         Torrance, CA 90503
         Phone: 310-792-3948
         Fax: 310-792-0600

              - and -

         Brian Joseph Barry, Esq. (bribarry1@yahoo.com)
         Law Offices Of Brian Barry
         1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 307
         Los Angeles, CA 90046
         Phone: 310-788-0831
         Fax: 310-788-0841

Representing the defendants are:

         Steven Kenneth Huffer, Esq.
         (steve_huffer@hufferandweathers.com)
         Huffer & Weathers
         151 North Delaware Street, Suite 1850
         Indianapolis, IN 46204
         Phone: 317-822-8010
         Fax: 317-822-8088

              - and -

         Robert J. Kopecky, Esq. (rkopecky@kirkland.com)
         Kirkland & Ellis
         200 East Randolph Drive
         Chicago, IL 60601
         Phone: 312-861-2084
         Fax: 317-660-0412


CONSECO INC: To Defend "Brady" Contract Breach Suit in Calif.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Conseco, Inc. intends to defend a purported class action filed
by Cedric Brady in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California, according to the company's March 31,
2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008.

On Dec. 24, 2008, a purported class-action lawsuit was filed in
California, "Cedric Brady, et. al. individually and on behalf of
all other similarly situated v. Conseco, Inc. and Conseco Life
Insurance Company Case No. 3:08-cv-05746."

In their complaint, plaintiffs allege that the company committed
breach of contract and insurance bad faith and violated various
consumer protection statutes in the administration of various
interest sensitive whole life products sold primarily under the
name "Lifetrends" by requiring the payment of additional cash
amounts to maintain the policies in force.

Conseco, Inc. -- https://www.conseco.com/ -- is the holding
company for a group of insurance companies operating throughout
the U.S. that develop, market and administer supplemental health
insurance, annuity, individual life insurance and other
insurance products.  The company focuses on serving the senior
and middle-income markets.  CNO sells its products through three
distribution channels: career agents, professional independent
producers (some of whom sell one or more of its product lines)
and direct marketing.  The company manages its business through
three primary business segments: Bankers Life, Conseco Insurance
Group and Colonial Penn.


E.I. DU PONT: Urges W.Va. Supreme Court to Dismiss Smelter Case
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2009/04/07/ap6266956.html
E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co. urged the West Virginia Supreme
Court in earlier this month to fix what it called mistakes that
led to a nearly $400 million verdict against the company by
overturning the Spelter, W.Va., zinc smelter class-action
lawsuit filed against the company, Tim Huber of The Associated
Press reports.

Company lawyer David Thomas, Esq. said during oral arguments
that the court can order a new trial or even decide the case in
DuPont's favor.  DuPont contends Harrison County Circuit Judge
Thomas Bedell erred by not ruling the plaintiffs filed the
lawsuit after the statute of limitations had expired, among
other things, according to the AP report.

The Associated Press reported that the case centers on a 2007
Harrison County jury's decision that DuPont downplayed and lied
about health threats on and around the site of a former zinc
plant in Spelter.  Damages awarded against the giant chemical
maker included $196 million meant to punish it for its conduct;
$130 million to fund a 40-year health screening program for area
residents; and $55.5 million to clean up private properties.

Landowners' attorney Farrest Taylor countered that Judge Bedell
was not mistaken and the verdicts should stand.  The plaintiffs
have filed their own appeal seeking to expand a cleanup plan
that they say improperly excludes about 300 people with property
near the former smelter, reports The Associated Press.

                         Case Background

In 2004, 10 property owners from the town of Spelter filed a
negligence suit against the companies for dumping arsenic,
cadmium and lead on a 112-acre site of a former zinc-smelting
plant.  Dupont bought the property in 1899.  It re-assumed
ownership of the zinc smelting plant when it was shut down by
authorities in 2001 due to health concerns (Class Action
Reporter, Feb. 28, 2008).

The lawsuit demands long-term medical monitoring, property
damages and punitive damages.

The defendants are:

     -- Dupont;

     -- T.L. Diamond & Co. in New York and plant manager Joe
        Puashel;

     -- Nuzum Trucking Co. of Shinnston; and
        two defunct companies:

        * Matthiesen & Hegeler Zinc Co. Inc. of Illinois, and
        * Meadowbrook Corp. of West Virginia.

In Oct. 2007, an 11-member jury heard closing arguments in the
class action filed against E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co., and
New York-based T.L. Diamond and Co., among others, over
pollution at Harrison County (class Action Reporter, Oct. 2,
2007).

During opening arguments, DuPont lawyers portrayed the company
as a good corporate neighbor, according to Associated Press.
DuPont and Diamond deny wrongdoing.  During closing arguments,
an attorney for the plaintiffs argued that DuPont should be
required not only to clean up the mess but also to monitor the
health of the people living around it.

Dupont's attorneys denied the company deliberately created the
waste site saying there is no evidence to support that claim.
They also said Dupont capped the site so it might someday be
redeveloped.  They also insisted that Dupont kept up its
responsibility of cleaning up the site.  DuPont lawyer Dave
Thomas said even now DuPont does quarterly testing of the West
Fork River, where runoff from the waste piles once went.
Defense attorney Jeffrey A. Hall also argued for the company.

The jury is to decide whether the companies have committed
wrongdoing.  If it found out that they did, it will next
determine whether the plaintiffs deserve medical screenings.  A
third phase would address property damages.  Finally, the jury
would address whether punitive damages should be awarded.

DuPont has set aside $15 million to deal with the lawsuit,
according to an Aug. 1 filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission.

Wilmington, Delaware-based E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Co.
(NYSE: DD) -- http://www.dupont.com/-- operates globally,
manufacturing a range of products for distribution and sale to
many different markets, including the transportation, safety and
protection, construction, motor vehicle, agriculture, home
furnishings, medical, electronics, communications, protective
apparel, and the nutrition and health markets.


GENESCO INC: Faces Proposed Securities Fraud Litigation
----------------------------------------------------------------
     An investor in Genesco, Inc. (NYSE:GCO) shares has filed a
proposed securities class action against UBS Securities, LLC on
behalf of all holders of the common stock of Genesco, Inc.

     According to the complaint the plaintiff alleges claims
arising from the defendants' tortious interference with an
existing economic relationship with regard to the planned
acquisition by The Finish Line, Incorporated of all of the
common stock of Genesco for $54.50 per share.  On June 17, 2008,
Finish Line and Genesco, Inc. executed a definitive Agreement
and Plan of Merger after Finish Line won a bidding contest for
the right to acquire all of the outstanding common stock of
Genesco for $54.50 per share in cash.  UBS Securities, LLC acted
as Finish Line's financial advisor and financier in connection
with the Planned Merger and played an active role in conducting
due diligence and negotiating the tenus of the Merger Agreement,
so the lawsuit.

     The complaint reportedly alleges that defendants' tortious
conduct included, among other things, intentionally failing to
prepare financing documents essential for timely completion of
the merger financing; using a consultant to strategize ways for
UBS to force Genesco to share the pain caused by credit market
changes; making unreasonable and baseless demands for millions
of pages of information about Genesco's then-current operating
and financial performance; making baseless public allegations
that a "Material Adverse Effect" had occurred in Genesco's
business that would negate the Merger Agreement; refusing to do
any work on critical merger financing documents; threatening to
file fraud claims against Genesco and suggesting that such
claims would lead to the commencement of government
investigations; making baseless public allegations that Genesco
and its senior management fraudulently induced UBS to enter the
Commitment Letter; making baseless public allegations that
Genesco and its senior management violated federal securities
laws; and orchestrating circumstances to suggest that the merged
Genesco Finish Line entity would be insolvent.


HELLER EHRMAN: Calif. Court Sends WARN Violations Suit To ADR
-------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Claudia Wilken of the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California has agreed to send a purported class-
action lawsuit against Heller Ehrman LLP to early neutral
evaluation, Law360 reports.

On April 14, 2009, Judge Wilken granted the parties' joint
stipulation selecting early neutral evaluation, a form of
alternative dispute resolution (ADR), according to the the
Law360 report.

The CourtHouse News Service previously reported that the
nationwide law firm Heller, Ehrman, White & McAuliffe is facing
a class-action complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of California alleging it fired more than
100 employees in violation of the Worker Adjustment and
Retraining Notification Act, 29 USC Section 2101 et seq. (Class
Action Reporter, Oct. 30, 2008).

The case arises out of the dissolution of the law firm.  The
plaintiffs and proposed class members are employees who seek
wages that defendants have refused to pay following the abrupt
termination of their employment.

The plaintiffs say the law firm told workers on Oct. 3, 2008
that they would not be paid for accrued but unused vacation
time.  The firm fired more than 100 employees on Oct. 10, 2008
and hundreds more on Oct. 17, 2008, the complaint states.  It
informed many others that their last day will be Nov. 28, 2008.

The suit says that plaintiffs and those they seek to represent
were discharged without cause on their part on or about Oct. 10,
2008 or within 30 days of that date, as the reasonable
foreseeable consequence of the mass layoff or plant closing
ordered by defendants, and are "affected employees" within the
meaning of 29 USC Section 2101(a)(5).

The plaintiffs want the court to rule on:

     (a) whether defendants were covered employees under the
         WARN Act and/or the CA WARN Act;

     (b) whether all class members were protected under the WARN
         Act and/or the CA WARN Act;

     (c) whether all class members' employment locations were
         covered facilities under the WARN Act and/or the CA
         WARN Act;

     (d) whether defendants acted as a single employer in
         terminating class members' employment;

     (e) whether defendants gave at least 60 days advance
         written notice to the class members, as required by the
         WARN Act and/or the CA WARN Act; and

     (f) whether defendants failed to pay the class members
         wages and to provide other employee benefits for the
         60-day period following their respective terminations.

The plaintiffs demand relief as follows:

     -- that the court determine that this action may be
        maintained as a class action under Federal Rule of Civil
        Procedure 23;

     -- that the defendants are found to have violated the
        provisions of the WARN Act as to plaintiffs and the
        class;

     -- that defendants are found to have violated the
        provisions of the California WARN Act as to plaintiffs
        and the class;

     -- that defendants are found to have violated Cal. Labor
        Section 227.3 requiring payment of unused vacation upon
        termination;

     -- that defendants are found to have breached a contract
        with Washington and New York Vacation class members by
        failing to pay unused vacation at the time of
        termination;

     -- for an award, of damages or in equity, in the amount of
        unpaid vacation owed to members of the California,
        Washington and New York vacation classes;

     -- that defendants are found to have violated Sections 201,
        202 and 203 of the California Labor Code for willful
        failure to pay all compensation owed at the time of
        separation to plaintiffs and the class;

     -- an award to plaintiffs and the class for the amount of
        all unpaid wages and compensation owed, including
        interest thereon, and penalties subject to proof at
        trial;

     -- that defendants be ordered and enjoined to pay
        restitution to plaintiffs and the 17200 class due to
        defendants' unlawful activities, pursuant to Business
        and Professions Code Sections 17200-05;

     -- that defendants further be enjoined to cease and desist
        from unlawful activities in violation of California
        Business and Professions Code Section 17200;

     -- for leave to amend the complaint to add additional state
        law claims, including but not limited to claims in the
        District of Columbia, State of Oregon, State of Alaska
        and the State of Wisconsin; and

     -- for such other and further relief, in law or in equity,
        as the court may deem appropriate and just.

The suit is "Laura Werth et al v. Heller, Ehrman, White &
McAuliffe, Case No. C 08 4799," filed in the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of California.

Representing plaintiffs is:

          Matthew C. Helland
          Nichols Kaster, LLP
          One Embarcadero Center, Suite 720
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Phone: (415) 277-7235
          Fax: (415) 277-7238


KOLTER CITY: Faces Fla. Litigation Over Condominium's Completion
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/business/epaper/2
009/04/10/0410condosuit.html
Three buyers of a unit at Two City Plaza in downtown West Palm
Beach filed a purported class-action lawsuit against Kolter City
Plaza II saying their contract should be canceled because the
condo developer took too long to finish the units, The Palm
Beach post reports.

The proposed class-action lawsuit was filed on April 9, 2009 in
Palm Beach County Circuit Court, according to Scott Gelfand,
Esq., who is representing the plaintiffs.

Mr. Gelfand argues that the units were to be completed in July
2007, but the developer didn't finish until more than a year
after that, reports The Palm Beach Post.

Listed as plaintiffs in the suit are Andrew Pretka, Paul Litvak
and Michele Litvak, according The Palm Beach Post report.


LIFE SCIENCES: Faces Proposed Securities Fraud Lawsuit in N.J.
--------------------------------------------------------------
    An investor Life Sciences Research, Inc. (NYSE:LSR), on
March 9, 2009, filed a proposed securities class action lawsuit
in Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Somerset
County against Life Sciences Research, Inc. over alleged breach
of fiduciary duty by the board of directors of Life Sciences
Research, Inc.

     According to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission from March 12, 2009 the complaint alleges, among
other things, that the directors breached their fiduciary duties
with respect to the proposal made by Andrew Baker to acquire all
of the outstanding shares of the Company for $7.50 per share.

     The lawsuit names as defendants Mr. Baker, all other
members of the Company's Board of Directors and Life Sciences
Research, Inc. Life Sciences Research, Inc.'s Board of Directors
has established a special committee of independent directors to
evaluate the proposal.  The process of considering the Baker
Proposal is only in its beginning stages, and consequently the
special committee has not made any decisions in respect of the
Company's response, if any, to the proposal.


VICTORIA'S SECRET: Attorneys Seeks Consolidation of Bra Cases
-------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.columbusdispatch.com/live/content/business/stories/20
09/04/09/lingerie_lawsuits_0409.ART_ART_04-09-
09_A9_S2DGIB5.html?sid=101
Several attorneys representing women who are claiming that
Victoria's Secret bras gave them rashes and other skin problems
have sought to consolidate their cases against the lingerie
chain, Michael Kunzelman of The Associated Press reports.

Federal lawsuits filed in Louisiana, Florida, New Jersey and New
York accuse Victoria's Secret and its parent company, Limited
Brands, of negligently designing undergarments and
misrepresenting the safety of the products.

The attorney's petition is limited to four cases pending in
federal courts, but plaintiffs' attorneys said they are prepared
to file more than 600 cases once the panel rules on their bid to
consolidate the litigation, according to The Associated Press
report.

Jerilyn Amaya, 66, of West Palm Beach, Fla., one of the four
plaintiffs, told The Associated Press that the bras she wore
gave her a "horrible rash" and hives.  She adds, "It kept
burning and itching.  I finally stopped wearing the bras.  It
disappeared, but it still burns every once in a while."

Plaintiffs' attorneys suspect formaldehyde resins in the bras
are responsible for the alleged ailments.  Formaldehyde is a
preservative found in many products.  At elevated levels, it can
irritate skin, The Associated Press reported.

"When you heat the bras by putting it in the dryer, it releases
the resins embedded in the fabric," plaintiffs' attorney Daniel
Becnel, Jr., whose Reserve, La.-based law firm filed both the
consolidation petition and a lawsuit on behalf of a Baton Rouge
woman tells The Associated Press.

The petition, filed on April 8, 2009 with the Judicial Panel on
Multidistrict Litigation, asks that the cases be heard together
by a federal judge in Baton Rouge.  The Washington, D.C., panel
didn't immediately act on the request, reports The Associated
Press.


ZYNEX INC: Faces Proposed Securities Fraud Litigation in Colo.
--------------------------------------------------------------
     An investor in Zynex, Inc. (OTC: ZYXI), on April 7, 2009,
filed a proposed securities class action lawsuit in the United
States District Court for the District of Colorado on behalf of
all purchasers of Zynex, Inc. formerly known as Zynex Medical
Holdings, Inc. (OTC: ZYNX) securities between May 21, 2008 and
March 31, 2009 inclusive over alleged violations of Securities
Laws by Zynex, its chief executive officer and chief financial
officer.

     According to the complaint the plaintiff alleges that
Zynex Inc., its CEO, and CFO violated the Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 in connection with
Zynex, Inc.'s issuance of allegedly materially false financial
statements to the investing public between May 21, 2008 and
March 31, 2009.

     According to the Complaint, the Defendants, in violation of
the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and Zynex's own
internal polices, misstated the Company's reported net revenues
and accounts receivable for the first three quarters of fiscal
2008.

     On April 1, 2009, Zynex, Inc. announced that its unaudited
financial statements and press releases issued on results for
the first three quarters of 2008 can no longer be relied upon
and would have to issue restated financial results to reflect
adjustments to accounts receivable and net revenue for such
periods.  Zynex, Inc. announced that it believed the cumulative
impact of these adjustments would be $5.1 million.  This adverse
news caused Zynex's stock (OTC: ZYXI) price to decline, so the
lawsuit.


* PricewaterhouseCoopers Study Says Securities Litigation Rising
----------------------------------------------------------------
A study released by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP reveals that
after a hefty surge in federal securities class-action lawsuits
in 2008, U.S. companies can expect to be under even more intense
scrutiny by regulators and enforcement agencies this year as the
global financial crisis unfolds, The Business First of Columbus
reports.

In its 2008 Securities Litigation Study, PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP points out that 210 federal securities class-action lawsuits
were filed in 2008, a 29 percent increase from the 163 case
filings a year earlier.  Nearly half of those, at 48 percent,
were in the financial services sector, the firm said.

"Not surprisingly, the majority of filings during 2008 were
related to the financial crisis, with investment banks most
often named as defendants," said Grace Lamont,
PricewaterhouseCoopers principal and U.S. securities litigation
practice leader, reports The Business First of Columbus.

The study shows that the Securities and Exchange Commission and
U.S. Department of Justice had an unprecedented number of Ponzi
schemes on their radar last year.  The SEC tracked 70 Ponzi
cases between 2007 and last year while the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission reported that it followed twice as many leads
in possible Ponzi cases last year, resulting in 15 prosecutions.

The Business First of Columbus reported that as for settlements,
95 were reached in 2008, the lowest number in the past decade.
The six largest settlements in 2008 all had institutional
investors as the lead plaintiff, the report said.

The total value of federal class-action settlements reached $3.8
billion in 2008, and the nine highest settlements were
exclusively accounting related.  The overall percentage of
accounting-related cases, however, dropped to 40 percent from 52
percent in 2007.

Of the lawsuits filed, 18 percent were against Fortune 500
companies, up from 12 percent in 2007.  In addition, the number
of class-action lawsuits filed against foreign companies listed
on U.S. stock exchanges reached an all-time high of 36 in 2008,
up from 27 a year earlier,  The Business First of Columbus
reported.

A copy of the full report is available free of charge at:

              http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?3b85


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

COACH INC: Dyer & Berens Files Securities Fraud Lawsuit in N.Y.
---------------------------------------------------------------
     Dyer & Berens LLP filed a class action lawsuit in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York on behalf of certain investors of Coach, Inc. (NYSE: COH)
who purchased the Company's publicly traded securities between
January 23, 2007 and October 22, 2007.  The complaint charges
Coach and certain of its senior officers and directors with
violations of the federal securities laws.

     The complaint alleges that during the Class Period,
defendants reported strong growth for the Company and forecast
similar growth going forward.  However, defendants failed to
disclose that the Company's growth rate was unsustainable.
Then, on October 23, 2007, Coach announced that although its
fiscal first-quarter profit rose 23%, traffic in its U.S. retail
stores was weak and the Company expected a slow-down in the
coming holiday season.  In response, Coach's stock price dropped
$4.87 per share to close at $36.60 per share on October 23,
2007.

     Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of Coach
investors.

     A request for lead plaintiff status must satisfy certain
criteria and be made on or before June 15, 2009.

For more details, contact:

          Jeffrey A. Berens, Esq. (jeff@dyerberens.com)
          682 Grant Street
          Denver, CO 80203
          Dyer & Berens LLP
          Phone: (888) 300-3362 or (303) 861-1764
          Web site: http://www.DyerBerens.com


COACH INC: Izard Nobel Announces Securities Fraud Lawsuit Filing
----------------------------------------------------------------
     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 Southern District of New York on behalf of those who
purchased the publicly traded securities of Coach, Inc. (NYSE:
COH) between January 23, 2007 and October 22, 2007, inclusive.

     The Complaint charges that Coach and certain of its
officers and directors violated federal securities laws.

     Specifically, the Complaint alleges that during the Class
Period, defendants reported strong growth for the Company and
forecast similar growth going forward.  However, defendants
failed to disclose that the Company's growth rate was, in fact,
unsustainable.  Then, on October 23, 2007, before the market
opened, Coach announced that although its fiscal first-quarter
profit rose 23%, traffic in its U.S. retail stores was weak and
the Company expected a slow-down in the coming holiday season.
On this news, Coach's stock price dropped $4.87 per share (or
12%) to close at $36.60 per share on October 23, 2007.

     A request for lead plaintiff status must satisfy certain
criteria and be made on or before June 15, 2009.

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/


GENERAL ELECTRIC: Berman DeValerio Files Securities Fraud Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
     The law firm of Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt &
Pucillo -- on behalf of The City of Brockton Contributory
Retirement System -- filed a purported class action lawsuit
against General Electric Co., claiming GE violated federal
securities laws by concealing risks incurred by its financial
services unit, General Electric Capital Services.

     GE operates worldwide as a technology, media and financial
services company.  Almost half of GE's revenues are derived from
GE Capital, which operates in commercial finance, consumer
finance, leasing and real estate services.

     Berman DeValerio filed the class action complaint in United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York on
behalf of purchasers of GE common stock from September 25, 2008
through and including March 19, 2009 (the "Class Period").

     The lawsuit was also filed on behalf of investors that
purchased shares pursuant or traceable to the Company's $12
billion public offering of common stock commencing on October 1,
2008.

     The complaint, filed as 09-civ-3787, seeks damages for
violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act
of 1933, as well as Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.

     The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period,
defendants issued numerous materially false and misleading
statements which caused GE's securities to trade at artificially
inflated prices throughout the Class Period.

     More specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants
made the following false and misleading statements in the
offering documents for the October Offering and/or throughout
the Class Period:

       -- that GE would not lower its quarterly dividend of
          $0.31 per share;

       -- that the Company had sufficiently reserved for
          anticipated loan losses due to underperforming
          mortgages issued by GE Capital;

       -- that GE Capital would earn $5 million in revenues in
          2009; and

       -- that the Company's Triple-A credit rating was safe.

     The complaint alleges that the truth was slowly disclosed
to the public regarding GE and GE Capital's true financial
health and well being in a series of partial disclosures issued
throughout the Class Period.  In response to these disclosures,
the Company's share price fell by more than seventy-five percent
from a high of more than $26 per share to a low of approximately
$5.90 per share.  Thus, Brockton and other members of the
putative class have suffered significant damages as a result of
defendants' alleged fraud.

     A request for lead plaintiff status must satisfy certain
criteria and be made on or before May 4, 2009.

For more details, contact:

           Jeffrey C. Block, Esq. (jblock@bermanesq.com)
           Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo
           One Liberty Square
           Boston, MA 02109
           Phone: (617) 542-8300
           Fax: (617) 542-1194


PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Kirby McInerney Announces Lawsuit Filing
--------------------------------------------------------------
     Kirby McInerney LLP announces that a class action lawsuit
has been commenced in the United States District Court for the
District of New Jersey on behalf of all persons who acquired
Prudential Financial, Inc. 9% Junior Subordinated Notes
(NYSE:PHR) pursuant and/or traceable to a false and misleading
registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with
Prudential's June 2008 initial public offering of the
Securities.

     The lawsuit charges Prudential, certain of its officers and
directors, the underwriters of the Offering and Prudential's
auditor with violations of the Securities Act of 1933.  The
lawsuit alleges that defendants consummated the Offering
pursuant to the false and misleading Registration Statement,
selling 36.8 million shares of the Securities at $25 per share,
for proceeds of over $920 million.  The Registration Statement
incorporated Prudential's financial results for 2007 and the
first quarter of 2008.  Prudential ultimately announced
writedowns associated with its exposure to subprime mortgages.

The Registration Statement failed to disclose that:

       -- the Company's asset-backed securities collateralized
          with subprime mortgages were impaired to a greater
          extent than the Company had disclosed;

       -- defendants failed to properly record losses for
          impaired assets; and

       -- the Company's internal controls were inadequate to
          prevent the Company from improperly reporting its
          impaired assets.

     A request for lead plaintiff status must satisfy certain
criteria and be made on or before May 11, 2009.

For more information, contact:

          Francisco Loya (floya@kmllp.com)
          Steven Cohn, Esq.
          Kirby McInerney LLP
          830 Third Avenue, 10th Floor
          New York, NY 10022
          Phone: 888-529-4787
          Web site: http://www.kmllp.com/


REGIONS FINANCING: Brower Piven Announces Securities Suit Filing
----------------------------------------------------------------
     Brower Piven, A Professional Corporation, announces that a
class action lawsuit has been commenced in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf
of persons who acquired the 8.875% Trust Preferred Securities of
Regions Financing Capital Trust III (NYSE: RF-PZ) pursuant
and/or traceable to a materially false and misleading
registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with
the April 2008 offering of the Securities.

     The complaint accuses the defendants of violations of the
Securities Act of 1933 by virtue of the Company's failure to
disclose in its Registration Statement and related prospectuses
for the offering of its 8.875% Trust Preferred Trust Securities
the extent of its impaired assets and that it failed to properly
record provisions for loan losses.  According to the complaint,
after the Company announced on January 20, 2009 that the Company
would have a loss for the year and quarter ended December 31,
2008, the value of Regions Financial's 8.875% Trust Preferred
Trust Securities declined significantly.

     No class has yet been certified in the above action.

     A request for lead plaintiff status must satisfy certain
criteria and be made on or before June 1, 2009.

For more details, contact:

          Charles J. Piven, Esq. (hoffman@browerpiven.com)
          Brower Piven
          The World Trade Center-Baltimore
          401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525
          Baltimore, Maryland 21202
          Phone: 410/332-0030
          Web site: http://www.browerpiven.com


ROCHESTER FUND: Coughlin Stoia Files Securities Fraud Lawsuit
-------------------------------------------------------------
     Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP announced that a
class action has been commenced in the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of New York on behalf of
purchasers of certain shares of Rochester Fund Municipals
(NASDAQ:RMUNX) between February 26, 2006 and October 21, 2008.

     The complaint charges Rochester Fund and certain of its
Trustees with violations of the Securities Act of 1933.

     Rochester Fund is a diversified mutual fund which seeks to
provide a high level of income exempt from federal income tax as
well as New York State and New York City income taxes.
Rochester Fund has more than $9 billion under management and its
shares are offered in four separate classes: Class A Shares
requiring the payment of an initial sales charge; Class B Shares
on which no initial sales charge is paid at the time of
purchase, but requiring a contingent deferred sales charge if
the shares are sold within 6 years of buying them; Class C
Shares on which no initial sales charge is paid, but requiring
the payment of an annual asset-based sales charge and the
payment of 1.0% sales charge if sold within 12 months of buying
them; and Class Y Shares which are offered pursuant to special
arrangements.

     The complaint alleges that the Registration Statements
through which shares of the Fund were sold failed to disclose
that under certain circumstances Trusts which contain Inverse
Floaters, such as those employed by the Fund, may be put to the
Fund for repayment of principal.  According to the complaint, on
October 21, 2008, Rochester Fund filed a Prospectus Supplement
which disclosed the relevant risks associated with the Fund's
investment in Inverse Floaters.  As a result of these
disclosures, as of October 21, 2008, the Fund's shares traded at
$12.35 per share, down from $18.00 per share at the beginning of
the year.

     Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all
purchasers of certain shares of Rochester Fund between February
26, 2006 and October 21, 2008.

     A request for lead plaintiff status must satisfy certain
criteria and be made on or before April 25, 2009.

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/rochester/


ZYNEX INC: Shuman Law Firm Files Securities Fraud Suit in Colo.
---------------------------------------------------------------
     The Shuman Law Firm filed a lawsuit seeking class action
status in the United States District Court for the District of
Colorado on behalf of a class consisting of all persons or
entities who purchased Zynex, Inc. (OTCBB:ZYXI) formerly known
as Zynex Medical Holdings, Inc. (OTCBB:ZYNX) securities between
May 21, 2008 and March 31, 2009 inclusive.

     The Complaint charges Zynex, its Chief Executive Officer
Sandgaard, and Chief Financial Officer Allison with violations
of the Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 in connection with Zynex's issuance of materially false
financial statements to the investing public during the Class
Period.  According to the Complaint, the Defendants, in
violation of the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and
Zynex's own internal polices, misstated the Company's reported
net revenues and accounts receivable for the first three
quarters of fiscal 2008.

     On April 1, 2009 Zynex announced that its unaudited
financial statements and press releases issued on results for
the first three quarters of 2008 can no longer be relied upon
and would have to issue restated financial results to reflect
adjustments to accounts receivable and net revenue for such
periods.  The Company announced that it believed the cumulative
impact of these adjustments would be $5.1 million. This adverse
news caused Zynex's stock price to fall dramatically, injuring
Zynex shareholders.

     A request for lead plaintiff status must satisfy certain
criteria and be made on or before June 8, 2009.

For more information, contact:

          Kip B. Shuman, Esq. (kip@shumanlawfirm.com)
          Rusty E. Glenn, Esq. (rusty@shumanlawfirm.com)
          The Shuman Law Firm
          885 Arapahoe Avenue
          Boulder, CO 80203
          Phone: 866-974-8626
          Fax: 303-484-4886
          Web site: http://www.shumanlawfirm.com/


                        Asbestos Alerts

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Kitchen Suit v. Phipps Dismissed on Feb. 5
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York,
dismissed a lawsuit filed by William Kitchen against The Phipps
Houses Group of Companies and several government agencies from
the City of New York.

The case is styled William Kitchen, Plaintiff v. Phipps Houses
Group of Companies et al., Defendants.

U.S. District Judge Denny Chin entered judgment in Case No. 08
Civ. 4296(DC) on Feb. 5, 2009.

On May 7, 2008, Mr. Kitchen filed a complaint against 15
different parties, claiming that his constitutional rights were
violated because of the conditions in his apartment and the way
he was treated as a litigant in a landlord-tenant proceeding.

The complaint purported to be brought under the First Amendment,
but the Court has also discerned claims under 42 U.S.C. 1983 as
well as the New York City Housing Maintenance Code (HMC) and the
Rules of the City of New York (RCNY) governing asbestos control.

Several of the 15 defendants were dismissed from the case,
leaving the following two groups of defendants:

-- The Phipps Houses Group of Companies, Phipps Houses Services,
   Inc., 1691 Fulton Avenue Associates L.P., Crotona Park West
   Housing Development Fund Corporation, Lynda Simmons Homes,
   Adam Weinstein, and George Morris (collectively, the "Phipps
   Defendants"); and

-- The New York City Department of Buildings, the New York City
   Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), and the New
   York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development
   (collectively, the "City Defendants").

The Phipps Defendants and the City Defendants move to dismiss.
In the alternative, they sought to compel Mr. Kitchen to provide
a more definite statement of his claims.

Mr. Kitchen's 1983 claim was dismissed and his state law claims
were dismissed.

William Kitchen of Bronx, N.Y., pro se.

Nixon Peabody LLP (Joseph J. Ortego, Esq., James W. Weller,
Esq., and Thomas M. Mealiffe, Esq.) in Jericho, N.Y.,
represented Phipps Defendants.

Michael A. Cardozo, Esq., Corporation Counsel of the City of New
York, Christina L. Hoggan, Esq., Assistant Corporation Counsel,
in New York, represented City Defendants.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Denial of Motion in Aidnik Case Recommended
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California,
recommended that several motions filed by Jeff Aidnik, in a case
including asbestos exposure, be denied.

The case is styled Jeff Aidnik, Plaintiff v. O'Conner, et al.,
Defendants.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan entered judgment in Case
No. CIV S-07-1273 MCE EFB P on Jan. 28, 2009.

Mr. Aidnik is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an
action brought under 42 U.S.C. s 1983. The action proceeded on
Mr. Aidnik's April 17, 2008 amended complaint, wherein he
alleged that defendants knowingly exposed him to asbestos and
lead when he assisted in a demolition project at the California
Medical Facility.

Mr. Aidnik filed two lawsuits on the same date, Aug. 31, 2007,
intending to pursue separate lawsuits against separate
defendants. Due to clerical error, both complaints were assigned
the same case number.

By order filed Oct. 30, 2008, the court corrected the clerical
error and ordered that a new action be opened, and that this
action was to proceed against defendants O'Conner, Veal, and
Russel.

Pending before the court were three requests filed by Mr.
Aidkin. In sum, Mr. Aidkin requested that the court stop alleged
harassment at CMF, ensure his safety, rehouse him in a specified
dormitory, and prevent his transfer from CMF, or in the
alternative, to place him into federal custody.

The court hereby construed these request as motions for
preliminary injunctions, and so construed, found that each must
be denied.

It was hereby recommended that Mr. Aidkin's Nov. 16, 2007, Feb.
11, 2008, and March 27, 2008 letters, construed as motions for
preliminary injunctions, be denied.

Jeff Aidnik of Vacaville, Calif., pro se.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ampco Faces 9,354 Pending Claims at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ampco-Pittsburgh Corporation faced 9,354 open asbestos-related
claims for the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, compared with 8,335
claims for the year ended Dec. 31, 2007.

For the nine months ended Sept. 30, 2008, the Company faced
about 9,372 open asbestos-related claims. (Class Action
Reporter, Dec. 5, 2008)

Gross settlement and defense costs were US$10,102,000 for the
year ended Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$19,736,000 for the
year ended Dec. 31, 2008.

The Company recorded 1,015 claims resolved for the year ended
Dec. 31, 2008, compared with 1,638 for the year ended Dec. 31,
2007.

Claims have been asserted alleging personal injury from exposure
to asbestos-containing components historically used in some
products of certain of the Company's operating subsidiaries and
of an inactive subsidiary and another former division of the
Company.

Those subsidiaries, and in some cases the Company, are
defendants (among a number of defendants, typically over 50) in
cases filed in various state and federal courts.

In 2006, for the first time, a claim for Asbestos Liability
against one of the Company's subsidiaries was tried to a jury.
The trial resulted in a defense verdict.

Plaintiffs appealed that verdict and, in 2008, the California
Court of Appeals reversed the jury verdict and remanded the case
back to the trial court.

Headquartered in Pittsburgh, Ampco-Pittsburgh Corporation
manufactures metal products. Its forged and cast steel rolls
unit makes hardened-steel rolls for the steel and aluminum
industries. The air and liquid processing segment includes
Buffalo Pumps; Aerofin; and Buffalo Air Handling.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ampco Reserves $207M for Claims at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ampco-Pittsburgh Corporation's asbestos-related claims reserve,
at Dec. 31, 2008, was US$207 million, according to the Company's
2008 annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.

The reserve includes defense costs for Asbestos Liability claims
that were pending or projected to be asserted through 2018.
About 86 percent was attributable to settlement costs for
unasserted claims projected to be filed through 2018 and future
defense costs.

The Company, at Sept. 30, 2008, reserved US$107,978,000 for
asbestos liability claims. (Class Action Reporter, Dec. 5, 2008)

Certain of the Company's subsidiaries and the Corporation have
an arrangement (Coverage Arrangement) with insurers responsible
for historical primary and some umbrella insurance coverage for
Asbestos Liability (Paying Insurers).

Under the Coverage Arrangement, the Paying Insurers accept
financial responsibility, subject to the limits of the policies
and based on fixed defense percentages and specified indemnity
allocation formulas, for a substantial majority of the pending
claims for Asbestos Liability. The claims against the inactive
subsidiary of the Company, about 330 as of Dec. 31, 2008, are
not included within the Coverage Arrangement.

The Coverage Arrangement includes an acknowledgment that Howden
Buffalo, Inc. is entitled to coverage under policies covering
Asbestos Liability for claims arising out of the historical
products manufactured or distributed by Buffalo Forge, a former
subsidiary of the Company.

The Company's receivable at Dec. 31, 2008 for insurance
recoveries attributable to the claims for which the Company's
Asbestos Liability reserve has been established, including the
portion of incurred defense costs covered by the Coverage
Arrangement, and the probable payments and reimbursements
relating to the estimated indemnity and defense costs for
pending and unasserted future Asbestos Liability claims, is
US$136.2 million.

The US$70.8 million difference between insurance recoveries and
projected costs at Dec. 31, 2008 is not due to exhaustion of all
insurance coverage for Asbestos Liability.

The Corporation and the subsidiaries have substantial additional
insurance coverage which the Corporation expects to be available
for Asbestos Liability claims and defense costs the subsidiaries
and it may incur after 2018.

Headquartered in Pittsburgh, Ampco-Pittsburgh Corporation
manufactures metal products. Its forged and cast steel rolls
unit makes hardened-steel rolls for the steel and aluminum
industries. The air and liquid processing segment includes
Buffalo Pumps; Aerofin; and Buffalo Air Handling.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Orion Marine Still Facing Liability Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Orion Marine Group, Inc. continues to be subject to legal
actions (including asbestos-related lawsuits) claiming damages
in connection with marine infrastructure projects and other
matters.

These are typically claims that arise in the normal course of
business, including employment-related claims and contractual
disputes or claims for personal injury (including asbestos-
related lawsuits) or property damage which occurs in connection
with services performed relating to project or construction
sites.

No other asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the
Company's annual report filed with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission on March 16, 2009.

Headquartered in Houston, Orion Marine Group, Inc. is a marine
specialty contractor serving the heavy civil marine
infrastructure market. The Company provides marine construction
services on, over and under the water along the Gulf Coast, the
Atlantic Seaboard and in the Caribbean Basin.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Actions v. Park-Ohio Drop to 315 at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
Park-Ohio Holdings Corp., at Dec. 31, 2008, was a co-defendant
in 315 cases asserting claims on behalf of about 4,500
plaintiffs alleging personal injury as a result of exposure to
asbestos.

These asbestos cases generally relate to production and sale of
asbestos-containing products and allege various theories of
liability, including negligence, gross negligence and strict
liability and seek compensatory and, in some cases, punitive
damages.

At Sept. 30, 2008, the Company faced 365 cases asserting claims
on behalf of about 8,400 plaintiffs alleging personal injury as
a result of exposure to asbestos. (Class Action Reporter, Nov.
21, 2008)

In substantially all of the asbestos cases, the plaintiffs
either claim damages in excess of a specified amount, typically
a minimum amount sufficient to establish jurisdiction of the
court in which the case was filed (jurisdictional minimums
generally range from US$25,000 to US$75,000), or do not specify
the monetary damages sought.

There are five asbestos cases, involving 23 plaintiffs, which
plead specified damages. In each of the five cases, the
plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive damages based on a
variety of potentially alternative causes of action. In one
case, the plaintiff has alleged compensatory, punitive and other
damages of at least US$1 million for five separate causes of
action; in three cases, the plaintiff has alleged compensatory
damages in the amount of US$3 million for four separate causes
of action and US$1 million for another cause of action and
punitive damages in the amount of US$10 million.

In the other case, the plaintiff has alleged compensatory
damages in the amount of US$20 million for three separate causes
of action and US$5 million for another cause of action and
punitive damages in the amount of US$20 million.

Historically, the Company has been dismissed from asbestos cases
on the basis that the plaintiff incorrectly sued one of its
subsidiaries or because the plaintiff failed to identify any
asbestos-containing product manufactured or sold by the Company
or its subsidiaries.

Headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio, Park-Ohio Holdings Corp.,
primarily through the subsidiaries owned by its direct
subsidiary, Park-Ohio Industries, Inc., is an industrial supply
chain logistics and diversified manufacturing business operating
in three segments: Supply Technologies, Aluminum Products and
Manufactured Products.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: DXP Still Processing Remaining Settlements
----------------------------------------------------------------
DXP Enterprises, Inc. says that the remaining asbestos-related
settlements are in the process of completion, according to the
Company's 2008 annual report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on March 16, 2009.

In 2003, the Company was notified that it had been sued in
various state courts in Nueces County, Tex. The suits allege
personal injury resulting from products containing asbestos
allegedly sold by the Company. The suits do not specify products
or the dates on which the Company allegedly sold the products.

The plaintiffs' attorney has agreed to a global settlement of
all suits for a nominal amount to be paid by the Company's
insurance carriers. Settlement has been consummated as to more
than 85 percent of the 133 plaintiffs.

The cases are all dismissed or dormant pending the remaining
settlements.

Houston-based DXP Enterprises, Inc. distributes maintenance,
repair and operating (MRO) products, equipment and service to
industrial customers. The Company is organized into two
segments: MRO and Electrical Contractor.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Southern Star Unit Has $2.6M ARO Liability
----------------------------------------------------------------
Southern Star Central Corp.'s subsidiary, Southern Star Central
Gas Pipeline, Inc., recorded an asbestos-related asset
retirement obligation liability of US$2.6 million in its
Consolidated Balance Sheet.

The corresponding amount of the regulatory asset was US$2.5
million in the Consolidated Balance Sheet.

In 2005, Central has recorded an ARP for the remediation of
asbestos existing on its system. The asbestos existing on
Central's system is primarily in building materials and pipe
coatings used prior to the Clean Air Act of 1973 that
established the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) that regulates the use of asbestos.

The amount of both the regulatory asset and the related ARO
liability on the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet at Dec.
31, 2007 was US$2.4 million.


COMPANY PROFILE:

Southern Star Central Corp.
4700 Highway 56
Owensboro, Ky. 42301
Tel. No.: (270) 852-5000

Description:
The Company is involved in natural gas pipeline operations and
development opportunities. The Company owns the development
rights for a natural gas pipeline in the Rocky Mountain region,
which could be developed in the future.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Sears Holdings Subject to Exposure Lawsuits
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sears Holdings Corporation is still subject to legal
proceedings, which include asbestos exposure allegations.

These claims may seek compensatory, punitive or treble damage
claims (potentially in large amounts) or as well as other types
of relief.

No other asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the
Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on March 17, 2009.

Headquartered in Hoffman Estates, Ill., Sears Holdings
Corporation is a broadline retailer with 2,297 full-line and
1,233 specialty retail stores in the United States operating
through Kmart and Sears and 388 full-line and specialty retail
stores in Canada operating through Sears Canada Inc., a 73
percent-owned subsidiary.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ING Groep Cites EUR52Mil for A&E at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
ING Groep N.V. had an outstanding balance of EUR52 million as at
Dec. 31, 2008 (2007: EUR66 million) relating to environmental
and asbestos claims of the insurance operations, according to
the Company's annual report, on Form 20-F, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on March 19, 2009.

In establishing the liability for unpaid claims and claims
adjustment expenses related to asbestos related illness and
toxic waste cleanup, management considers facts currently known
and current legislation and coverage litigation.

Liabilities are recognized for IBNR (incurred but not reported)
claims and for known claims (including the costs of related
litigation) when sufficient information has been obtained to
indicate the involvement of a specific insurance policy, and
management can reasonably estimate its liability.

Headquartered in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, ING Groep N.V.
offers banking, investments, life insurance and retirement
services. The Company serves more than 85 million private,
corporate and institutional customers in Europe, North and Latin
America, Asia and Australia.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Colonial Comm'l. Cites 27 Claims at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
Colonial Commercial Corp.'s Hilco, Inc. subsidiary, subsequent
to Dec. 31, 2008, faced asbestos-related lawsuits involving 27
plaintiffs.

Hilco, subsequent to Sept. 30, 2008, faced asbestos-related
lawsuits involving 42 plaintiffs. (Class Action Reporter, Dec.
5, 2008)

Universal Supply Group, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of the
Company. On June 25, 1999, Universal acquired substantially all
of the assets of Universal Supply Group, Inc.

Subsequent to the sale, Universal Supply Group, Inc. (the
selling corporation) formerly known as Universal Engineering
Co., Inc., changed its name to Hilco, Inc.

Hilco, Inc. acquired the assets of Amber Supply Co., Inc.,
formerly known as Amber Oil Burner Supply Co., Inc., in 1998,
prior to Hilco's sale of assets to Universal. Hilco, Inc. is
hereinafter referred to as the "Universal Predecessor." The
majority shareholders of Hilco, Inc. were John A. Hildebrandt
and Paul Hildebrandt.

The Company said that it understands that the Universal
Predecessor and many other companies have been sued in the
Superior Court of New Jersey (Middlesex County) by plaintiffs
filing lawsuits alleging injury due to asbestos.

As of Dec. 31, 2008, there exist 37 plaintiffs in these lawsuits
relating to alleged sales of asbestos products, or products
containing asbestos, by the Universal Predecessor. Subsequent to
Dec. 31, 2008, 10 plaintiffs have had their actions dismissed,
which results in 27 remaining plaintiffs in these lawsuits. The
Company never sold any asbestos related products.

Of the existing plaintiffs as of Dec. 31, 2008, 15 filed actions
in 2007, seven filed actions in 2006, three filed actions in
2005, nine filed actions in 2004, and three filed actions in
2003.

There are 173 other plaintiffs that have had their actions
dismissed and 13 other plaintiffs that have settled as of Dec.
31, 2008 for a total of US$3,358,500. There has been no judgment
against the Universal Predecessor.

The Company's Universal subsidiary was named by 36 plaintiffs;
of these, 11 filed actions in 2007, six filed actions in 2006,
11 filed actions in 2005, five filed actions in 2001, one filed
an action in 2000, and two filed actions in 1999.

Sixteen plaintiffs naming Universal have had their actions
dismissed and, of the total US$3,358,500 of settled actions, two
plaintiffs naming Universal have settled for US$26,500. No money
was paid by Universal in connection with any settlement.
Following these dismissed and settled actions there exists 18
plaintiffs that name Universal, as of Dec. 31, 2008.

Headquartered in Hawthorne, N.J., Colonial Commercial Corp.
distributes heating, ventilating and air conditioning equipment
(HVAC), parts and accessories, climate control systems,
appliances, and plumbing and electrical fixtures and supplies,
primarily in New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts and portions of
eastern Pennsylvania, Connecticut and Vermont.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: RAL Supply Still Facing 1 Action at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
Colonial Commercial Corp.'s subsidiary, The RAL Supply Group,
Inc., is party to one asbestos-related lawsuit as of Dec. 31,
2008, according to the Company's annual report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on March 27, 2009.

The lawsuit alleges injury due to asbestos during the 1970s,
prior to RAL Predecessor's acquisition of assets from the RSG
Predecessor and RAL's acquisition of assets from the RAL
Predecessor. The Company never sold any asbestos related
products.

The RAL Supply Group, Inc. was formerly known as RAL Purchasing
Corp. On Sept. 30, 2003, RAL acquired substantially all of the
assets of The RAL Supply Group, Inc., formerly known as The LAR
Acquisition Corp., including its name, under the terms of a
purchase agreement.

The Company filed a copy of the purchase agreement (RAL APA)
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Oct. 15, 2003.
Subsequent to the sale, The RAL Supply Group, Inc. (the selling
corporation) changed its name to RSG, Inc. RSG, Inc. is
hereinafter referred to as the "RAL Predecessor."

The RAL Predecessor acquired certain assets from Dyson-Kissner-
Moran Corporation (RSG Predecessor) in 1993, prior to the RAL
Predecessor's sale of assets to RAL.

The Company's RAL subsidiary and other companies have been sued
in the Supreme Court of New York (Orange County) by a plaintiff
filing a lawsuit on or about July 30, 2008 alleging injury due
to asbestos.

The RAL Predecessor agreed in the RAL APA to indemnify and hold
harmless the Company's RAL subsidiary from and against damages
that relate to products sold or manufactured or services
performed or other actions taken or omitted by the RAL
Predecessor before the closing of the acquisition.

Headquartered in Hawthorne, N.J., Colonial Commercial Corp.
distributes heating, ventilating and air conditioning equipment
(HVAC), parts and accessories, climate control systems,
appliances, and plumbing and electrical fixtures and supplies,
primarily in New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts and portions of
eastern Pennsylvania, Connecticut and Vermont.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: No H.B. Fuller Suits Settled in Last Qtr.
----------------------------------------------------------------
H.B. Fuller Company says that, during the quarter ended Feb. 28,
2009, it did not settle any asbestos-related lawsuits, according
to the Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on April 3, 2009.

During the year ended Nov. 29, 2008, the Company settled five
asbestos-related lawsuits for US$808,000, in which the Company's
insurers have paid or are expected to pay US$599,000 of that
amount. (Class Action Reporter, Jan. 30, 2009)

The Company has been named as a defendant in lawsuits in which
plaintiffs have alleged injury due to products containing
asbestos manufactured more than 25 years ago. The plaintiffs
generally bring these lawsuits against multiple defendants and
seek damages (both actual and punitive) in very large amounts.

In many cases, plaintiffs are unable to demonstrate that they
have suffered any compensable injuries or that the injuries
suffered were the result of exposure to products manufactured by
the Company, which is typically dismissed as a defendant in
those cases without payment.

During the fourth quarter of 2007, the Company and a group of
other defendants entered into negotiations with certain law
firms to settle a number of asbestos-related lawsuits and
claims.

The Company expects to contribute up to US$4.3 million towards
the settlement amount to be paid to the claimants in exchange
for a full release of claims. Of this amount, the Company's
insurers have committed to pay US$2.1 million based on a
probable liability of US$4.3 million.

Given that the payouts were expected to occur on certain dates
over a four-year period and that the accrual is based on the
maximum number of cases to be settled, the Company applied a
present value approach and has accrued US$4.2 million and
recorded a receivable of US$2 million.

Based in St. Paul, Minn., H.B. Fuller Company makes adhesives,
sealants, powder coatings for metals (office furniture,
appliances), and liquid paints (in Latin America). The Company's
industrial and performance adhesives customers include companies
in the packaging, graphic arts, automotive, woodworking, and
nonwoven textiles industries.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: H.B. Fuller Has $4.2MM Liability at Feb. 28
----------------------------------------------------------------
H.B. Fuller Company's probable liabilities related to asbestos
claims consisted of US$4.2 million as of Feb. 28, 2009,
according to the Company's quarterly report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on April 3, 2009.

As of Feb. 28, 2009, the Company's probable insurance recoveries
related to asbestos claims consisted solely of US$2 million.

As of Nov. 29, 2008, the Company had recorded US$4,341,000 for
probable liabilities and US$2,133,000 for insurance recoveries
related to asbestos claims. (Class Action Reporter, Jan. 30,
2009)

Based in St. Paul, Minn., H.B. Fuller Company makes adhesives,
sealants, powder coatings for metals (office furniture,
appliances), and liquid paints (in Latin America). The Company's
industrial and performance adhesives customers include companies
in the packaging, graphic arts, automotive, woodworking, and
nonwoven textiles industries.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: J. C. Penney's A&E Liabilities Total $39Mil
----------------------------------------------------------------
J. C. Penney Company, Inc.'s estimates that its asbestos and
environmental liabilities amounted to US$39 million as of Jan.
31, 2009, according to the Company's annual report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 31, 2009.

As of Jan. 31, 2009, the Company estimated its total potential
environmental liabilities to range from US$34 million to US$46
million and recorded its best estimate of US$39 million in other
liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheet as of that date.

This estimate covered potential liabilities primarily related to
underground storage tanks, remediation of environmental
conditions involving the Company's former Eckerd drugstore
locations, and asbestos removal in connection with approved
plans to renovate or dispose of Company facilities.

Headquartered in Plano, Tex., J. C. Penney Company, Inc. is a
holding company whose principal operating subsidiary is J. C.
Penney Corporation, Inc. The Company operates 1,093 JCPenney
department stores in 49 states and Puerto Rico as of Jan. 31,
2009. The Company sells merchandise and services to consumers
through its department stores and Direct (Internet/catalog)
channels.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Alcatel Lucent Still Facing Exposure Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Alcatel Lucent continues to be a defendant in various lawsuits,
including asbestos-related exposure claims.

No other asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the
Company's annual report, on Form 20-F, filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on March 31, 2009.

Headquartered in Paris, Alcatel Lucent supplies high-tech
equipment for telecommunications networks. The Company's core
carrier unit offers network switching and transmission systems
for wireline and wireless networks, terrestrial and submarine
optical systems, microwave radio products, and fixed access
equipment.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Prime Group Cites $7.8M Abatement Liability
----------------------------------------------------------------
Prime Group Realty Trust, at Dec. 31, 2008, recorded a liability
of US$7.8 million and an asset of US$8.7 million related to
asbestos abatement, according to the Company's annual report
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 31,
2009.

The Company's 330 N. Wabash Avenue office property currently
contains asbestos in the form of spray-on insulation located on
the decking and beams of the building. The Company has been
informed by its environmental consultants that the asbestos in
330 N. Wabash Avenue is being properly maintained and no
remediation of the asbestos is necessary.

However, the Company has in the past and may in the future
voluntarily decide to remove or otherwise remediate some or all
of this asbestos in connection with the releasing and
redevelopment of this property.

A conditional asset retirement obligation for the removal of
asbestos at the Company's 330 N. Wabash Avenue property was
estimated to be US$4.5 million as of Dec. 31, 2007.

During 2008, this obligation was increased as follows:

     -- US$5.7 million for abatement work to be performed on
        floors 2-13 as part of the Hotel sale;

     -- US$6.5 million due to the increased probability of
        abatement on the remaining floors as lease termination
        moved closer; and

     -- US$500,000 in accretion of the liability.

This was partially offset by payments of US$9.4 million.


COMPANY PROFILE:
Prime Group Realty Trust
77 West Wacker Drive, Suite 3900
Chicago, Ill., 60601
Tel. No.: (312) 917-1300

Description:
The Company is a fully-integrated, self-administered and self-
managed real estate investment trust that owns, manages, leases,
develops and redevelops office and industrial real estate,
primarily in the Chicago metropolitan area.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: AXA Reserves EUR1.005Bil for Claims in 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------
AXA's asbestos-related claims reserves were EUR1.005 billion
(gross) for the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, compared with EUR1.172
billion (gross) for the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, according to
the Company's annual report, on Form 6-K, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on March 27, 2009.

The Company's asbestos-related reserves were EUR961 million
(net) for the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, compared with EUR1.124
billion for the year ended Dec. 31, 2007.

In 2008, the Company paid claims and legal costs of EUR56
million net of reinsurance (including EUR50 million in respect
of asbestos and EUR6 million in respect of environmental
pollution).

This was significantly higher than last year (EUR31 million) as
2008 was impacted by large settlements in both asbestos and
environmental liabilities.

Headquartered in Paris, AXA is the holding company for the AXA
Group, which is an insurance group with consolidated gross
revenues of EUR91.2 billion for the year ended Dec. 31, 2008.
The AXA Group is also an asset manager with total assets under
management as at Dec. 31, 2008 of EUR981.5 billion.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Deal in AXA, Philips Action Reached in June
----------------------------------------------------------------
Parties in asbestos-related insurance litigation involving AXA
and Philips N.V. reached a settlement in June 2008, following
litigation initiated in the Netherlands and United States,
according to the Company's annual report, on Form 6-K, filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 27, 2009.

From 1998 through 2001, Company subsidiaries, along with a
syndicate of other insurers, participated in the Philips
worldwide liability program (Policy) providing certain insurance
covers for Philips N.V. and its subsidiaries on a worldwide
basis.

Thompson Hayward Agriculture & Nutrition LLC (THAN), an indirect
U.S. subsidiary of Philips, made a claim under the Policy in
respect of asbestos-related claims resulting from its
distribution of raw asbestos fiber from 1961 to 1980. The
insurers sought to void the policy on grounds that Philips had
failed to disclose material information concerning THAN and its
business during subscription and underwriting of the Policy.

Headquartered in Paris, AXA is the holding company for the AXA
Group, which is an insurance group with consolidated gross
revenues of EUR91.2 billion for the year ended Dec. 31, 2008.
The AXA Group is also an asset manager with total assets under
management as at Dec. 31, 2008 of EUR981.5 billion.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ABI Records $13.56Mil Liability at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
American Biltrite Inc.'s long-term asbestos-related liabilities
were US$13,563,000 at Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$12.6
million at Dec. 31, 2007, according to the Company's annual
report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
March 30, 2009.

The Company's long-term asbestos-related liabilities were
US$12,880,000 at Sept. 30, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Nov.
14, 2008)

The Company's long-term insurance for asbestos-related
liabilities were US$13,509,000 at Dec. 31, 2008, compared with
US$11,140,000 at Dec. 31, 2007.

The Company's long-term insurance for asbestos-related
liabilities were US$11,140,000 at Sept. 30, 2008. (Class Action
Reporter, Nov. 14, 2008)

Headquartered in Wellesley Hills, Mass., American Biltrite
Inc.'s tape division makes adhesive-coated, pressure-sensitive
tapes and films used to protect materials during handling and
storage. The Company's Congoleum unit, which makes resilient
sheet and tile flooring, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy
protection amid asbestos-related suits.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: American Biltrite Has 1,269 Pending Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
American Biltrite Inc. is a co-defendant with many other
manufacturers and distributors of asbestos containing products
in 1,269 pending claims involving 1,824 individuals as of Dec.
31, 2008, according to the Company's annual report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 30, 2009.

These claims relate to products of the Company's former Tile
Division, which the Company contributed to Congoleum Corporation
in 1993. The claimants allege personal injury or death from
exposure to asbestos or asbestos-containing products.

During the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, the Company noted 356 new
claims, 13 settlements, and 434 dismissals. During the year
ended Dec. 31, 2007, the Company noted 523 new claims, 20
settlements, 475 dismissals, and 1,360 pending claims.

The total indemnity costs incurred to settle claims were
US$867,000 in 2008 and US$2.2 million in 2007. In June 2008, the
Company's primary layer insurance carriers advised the Company
that coverage limits under the February 1996 coverage-in-place
agreement had exhausted.

In August 2008, the Company and its applicable first-layer
umbrella carriers reached an understanding on the coverage under
the Company's applicable first-layer excess umbrella policies
(Umbrella Coverage), including defense and indemnity
obligations, allocation of claims to specific policies, and
other matters. There was no gap in coverage following the
exhaustion of the primary layer insurance coverage.

In addition to coverage available under the Umbrella Coverage,
the Company has additional excess liability insurance policies
that should provide further coverage if and when limits of
certain policies within the Umbrella Coverage exhaust.

The estimated range of liability for settlement of current
claims pending and claims anticipated to be filed through 2014
was US$13.6 million to US$44 million as of Dec. 31, 2008.

The Company has recorded a liability of US$13.6 million in its
financial statements which represents a probable and reasonably
estimable amount for the future liability at the present time.
The Company also said it believes that the corresponding amount
of insurance probable of recovery is US$13.5 million at Dec. 31,
2008.

Headquartered in Wellesley Hills, Mass., American Biltrite
Inc.'s tape division makes adhesive-coated, pressure-sensitive
tapes and films used to protect materials during handling and
storage. The Company's Congoleum unit, which makes resilient
sheet and tile flooring, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy
protection amid asbestos-related suits.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ABI Assessing Coverage Costs at Maine Sites
----------------------------------------------------------------
American Biltrite Inc. is still assessing the potential
availability of insurance coverage for costs over a former vinyl
plant in Lisbon Falls, Maine.

The State of Maine Department of Environmental Protection (Maine
DEP) has put Miller Industries, Inc, the present owner of the
plant on notice to clean up a dumpsite where there is exposed
asbestos from sheet vinyl waste along with other hazardous
substances.

In September 2005, a lawsuit was brought by Miller against the
Company, which alleged that the Company and one other named
defendant were liable for costs to clean up a dumpsite (Parcel
A) and a second parcel of land (Parcel B), which is alleged to
contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in the soil.

The lawsuit, captioned Miller Industries, Inc. v American
Biltrite Inc. et al, was filed on Sept. 22, 2005 in the
Androscoggin Superior Court of Maine. Miller was seeking
indemnification or contribution from the Company for the clean-
up of both parcels of land (together, the "Maine Sites"). The
lawsuit was dismissed by the Superior Court of Maine on Feb. 3,
2006 for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to
state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

In January 2006, the Company was notified by the Maine DEP that
it is a potentially responsible party as to both Parcel A and
Parcel B. Subsequently, Parcel B was named an EPA site. Prior to
the commencement of the lawsuit by Miller, the Company had been
investigating and reviewing the condition of Parcel A and its
potential liability for its share of any cleanup costs.

The Company said it believes, at this time, that the cost of
site investigation, remediation, maintenance and monitoring at
the site will be between US$1.3 million and US$2.3 million. The
Company has been advised by Miller that the cleanup for Parcel B
has been completed under budget.

Under the Company's preexisting agreement with The Biltrite
Corporation (TBC), TBC is liable for 37.5 percent of costs these
incurred by the Company for the Maine Sites.

Headquartered in Wellesley Hills, Mass., American Biltrite
Inc.'s tape division makes adhesive-coated, pressure-sensitive
tapes and films used to protect materials during handling and
storage. The Company's Congoleum unit, which makes resilient
sheet and tile flooring, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy
protection amid asbestos-related suits.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Brookfield Records $7Mil Income at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
Brookfield Properties Corporation's 2008 results for interest
and other income includes US$7 million of income related to an
asbestos settlement in the Company's favor associated with its
One Liberty Plaza property.

Interest and other income includes interest charged on real
estate mortgages and residential receivables, interest received
on cash balances, and transactional gains. Interest and other
income was US$52 million during the year ended Dec. 31, 2008,
compared with US$44 million during the year ended Dec. 31, 2007.

Headquartered in Toronto, Canada, Brookfield Properties
Corporation owns more than 100 commercial properties throughout
the United States and Canada, primarily in the metropolitan
areas of Boston, Houston, Los Angeles, New York, Washington
D.C., Calgary, and Toronto. The Company's portfolio totals some
75 million sq. ft. and includes most of Manhattan's World
Financial Center.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Allianz SE's A&E Reserves Total EUR3.140Bil
----------------------------------------------------------------
Allianz SE's loss and loss adjustment expense reserves for
asbestos and environmental claims were US$3.140 billion during
the year ended Dec. 31, 2008.

The Company's loss and LAE reserves for A&E claims were US$3.287
billion during the year ended Dec. 31, 2007.

Headquartered in Munich, Germany, Allianz SE offers insurance
products and services -- including life, health, and
property/casualty coverage for individuals and businesses --
through some 100 subsidiaries and affiliates operating
worldwide.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Catalyst Ordered to Pay $75T Penalty in '08
----------------------------------------------------------------
Catalyst Paper Corporation, during 2008, was ordered to pay a
US$75,000 fine by WorkSafeBC (a provincial government agency) in
connection with an asbestos-exposure incident in 2006.

The Company was not subject to any significant fines or non-
monetary sanctions for non-compliance with laws or regulations
during 2008, according to a Company report, on Form 6-K, filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 6, 2009.

Headquartered in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, Catalyst
Paper Corporation produces telephone directory paper. The
Company also produces newsprint, pulp, and specialty papers. The
Company also produces pulp from sawdust and operates a recycling
division that produces de-inked pulp from newspapers and
magazines.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: BMCA Still Subject to Bodily Injury Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Building Materials Corporation of America continues to be
involved in asbestos-related bodily injury claims relating to
the inhalation of asbestos fibers contained in products sold by
its indirect parent, G-I Holdings Inc., or its predecessors.

In connection with its formation, the Company contractually
assumed and agreed to pay the first US$204.4 million of
liabilities of G-I Holdings Inc. for the asbestos claims.

As of March 30, 1997, the Company had paid all of its assumed
liabilities for Asbestos Claims. G-I Holdings has agreed to
indemnify the Company against any other existing or future
Asbestos Claims if asserted against the Company.

In January 2001, G-I Holdings filed a voluntary petition for
reorganization under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code due
to Asbestos Claims.

Claimants in the G-I Holdings' bankruptcy, including judgment
creditors, might seek to satisfy their claims by asking the
Bankruptcy Court to require the sale of G-I Holdings' assets,
including its holdings of BMCA Holdings Corporation's common
stock and its indirect holdings of its common stock.

About 1,900 Asbestos Claims were filed against the Company prior
to Feb. 2, 2001. On Feb. 2, 2001, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for
the District of New Jersey issued a temporary restraining order
enjoining any existing or future claimant from bringing or
prosecuting an Asbestos Claim against the Company.

By oral opinion on June 22, 2001, and written order entered Feb.
22, 2002, the Bankruptcy Court converted the temporary
restraints into a preliminary injunction prohibiting the
bringing or prosecution of any such Asbestos Claims against the
Company.

On Feb. 7, 2001, G-I Holdings filed an action in the U.S.
Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey seeking a
declaratory judgment that the Company has no successor liability
for Asbestos Claims against G-I Holdings and that it is not the
alter ego of G-I Holdings (BMCA Action). One of the parties to
this matter, the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants
(creditors' committee), subsequently filed a counterclaim
against the Company seeking a declaration that it has successor
liability for Asbestos Claims against G-I Holdings and that it
is the alter ego of G-I Holdings.

On May 13, 2003, the U.S. District Court for the District of New
Jersey overseeing the G-I Holdings' Bankruptcy Court withdrew
the reference of the BMCA Action from the Bankruptcy Court. By
order dated May 30, 2008, the District Court dismissed the BMCA
Action without ruling on the merits of BMCA's position that it
has no successor liability for Asbestos Claims.

The District Court ruled that a federal court declaratory
judgment action was not the proper vehicle for resolving this
issue. The District Court's ruling did not affect the
preliminary injunction enjoining the prosecution of Asbestos
Claims against BMCA, and the Company said it believes that it
does not have liability for Asbestos Claims.

G-I Holdings has also been named as a co-defendant in asbestos-
in-buildings cases for economic and property damage or other
injuries based upon an alleged present or future need to remove
asbestos-containing materials from public and private buildings.
Most Building Claims do not seek to recover an amount of
specific damages.

Since these actions were first initiated about 20 years ago, G-I
Holdings has not only successfully disposed of 145 of these
cases, but was a co-defendant in three remaining lawsuits at the
time of the filing of its Chapter 11 petition. No new Building
Claims were filed in 2008.

Headquartered in Wayne, N.J., Building Materials Corporation of
America manufactures and markets asphalt and polymer-based
roofing products and accessories for the residential and
commercial roofing markets. The Company also makes specialty
building products and accessories for the professional and do-
it-yourself remodeling and residential construction industries.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Congoleum Cites $50M Liabilities at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
Congoleum Corporation's current asbestos-related liabilities
were US$50,022,000 at Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$31,207,000
at Dec. 31, 2007, according to the Company's annual report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 30, 2009.

The Company's current asbestos-related liabilities were
US$53,254,000 at Sept. 30, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Nov.
14, 2008)

The Company is a party to a significant number of lawsuits
stemming from its manufacture of asbestos-containing products.
During 2008, the Company paid US$15.9 million in fees and
expenses related to implementation of its planned reorganization
under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code and litigation with
certain insurance companies.

Based on the Amended Joint Plan, the Company has made provision
in its financial statements for the minimum estimated cost to
effect its plan to settle asbestos liabilities through
confirmation of a plan that complies with section 524(g) of the
Bankruptcy Code. The Company recorded charges aggregating
US$92.6 million in prior years.

Based on the terms of the Amended Joint Plan, in the third
quarter of 2008, the Company recorded an additional
US$11,491,000 charge for estimated costs for the reorganization
proceedings and coverage litigation.

The total balances of environmental, asbestos-related, and other
liabilities and the related insurance receivable and deemed
probable of recovery is US$1.3 million at Dec. 31, 2008 and
US$10.5 million at Dec. 31, 2007.

Headquartered in Mercerville, N.J., Congoleum Corporation
produces both sheet and tile floor covering products with
various product features, designs and colors. The Company also
produces through-chip-inlaid sheet products for both residential
and commercial markets.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Suits Still Pending v. Kaanapali Land, D/C
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kaanapali Land, LLC, as successor by merger to other entities,
and D/C Distribution Corporation, a Company subsidiary, still
face personal injury actions allegedly based on exposure to
asbestos.

While there are a few cases that name the Company, there are a
substantial number of cases that are pending against D/C on the
U.S. mainland (primarily in California).

Cases against the Company are allegedly based on its prior
business operations in Hawaii and cases against D/C are
allegedly based on D/C's prior distribution business operations
primarily in California.

On Feb. 15, 2005, D/C was served with a lawsuit entitled
American & Foreign Insurance Company v. D/C Distribution and
Amfac Corporation, Case No. 04433669 filed in the Superior Court
of the State of California for the County of San Francisco,
Central Justice Center. No other purported party was served.

In the eight-count complaint for declaratory relief,
reimbursement and recoupment of unspecified amounts, costs and
for such other relief as the court might grant, plaintiff
alleged that it is an insurance company to whom D/C tendered for
defense and indemnity various personal injury lawsuits allegedly
based on exposure to asbestos containing products.

Plaintiff alleged that because none of the parties have been
able to produce a copy of the policy or policies in question, a
judicial determination of the material terms of the missing
policy or policies is needed.

Plaintiff sought a declaration: of the material terms, rights,
and obligations of the parties under the terms of the policy or
policies; that the policies were exhausted; that plaintiff is
not obligated to reimburse D/C for its attorneys' fees in that
the amounts of attorneys' fees incurred by D/C have been
incurred unreasonably; that plaintiff was entitled to recoupment
and reimbursement of some or all of the amounts it has paid for
defense and/or indemnity; and that D/C has breached its
obligation of cooperation with plaintiff.

D/C filed an answer and an amended cross-claim. In order to fund
that action and its other ongoing obligations while such lawsuit
continued, D/C entered into a Loan Agreement and Security
Agreement with the Company, in August 2006, whereby the Company
provided certain advances against a promissory note delivered by
D/C in return for a security interest in any D/C insurance
policy at issue in this lawsuit.

In June 2007, the parties settled this lawsuit with payment by
plaintiffs in the amount of US$1.6 million. That settlement
amount was paid to the Company in partial satisfaction of the
secured indebtedness.

Because D/C was substantially without assets and was unable to
obtain additional sources of capital to satisfy its liabilities,
D/C filed with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of
Illinois, its voluntary petition for liquidation under Chapter 7
of Title 11, U.S. Bankruptcy Code during July 2007, Case No. 07-
12776.

Prior to the deadline, the Company filed claims that aggregated
US$26.8 million, relating to both secured and unsecured
intercompany debts owed by D/C to the Company.

In addition, a personal injury law firm based in San Francisco
that represents clients with asbestos-related claims, filed
proofs of claim on behalf of 700 claimants.

Chicago-based Kaanapali Land, LLC's operations are in two
business segments: Agriculture and Property. The Agriculture
segment grows seed corn and soybeans under contract and leases
or provides harvesting rights to a third party on certain lands
cultivated in or used for the processing of coffee. The Property
segment develops land for sale and negotiates bulk sales of
undeveloped land.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Majestic Expends $300T for Cleanup in 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Majestic Star Casino, LLC has spent US$300,000 on asbestos
abatement in the 302 Carson Street Office Building in Pittsburgh
in 2008.

As of Sept. 30, 2008, the Company spent US$300,000 on asbestos
abatement in the 302 Carson Street Office Building. (Class
Action Reporter, Nov. 21, 2008)

On March 31, 2008, the Company entered into a lease with Carson
Properties Nevada LLC (Landlord), a subsidiary of Barden
Development, Inc., for office space (Lease). The Lease has an
initial term of five years and six months (Initial Term) and
allows for one five-year extension under substantially similar
terms as the Initial Term.

The Lease will commence upon receipt of a temporary certificate
of occupancy and abatement of asbestos to the area being
occupied by the Company (Premises). Base rent will be US$1.80
per square foot, for a total of 11,549 square feet, for the
first 18 months and US$2.50 per square foot beginning in month
19, and will increase by three percent on the second anniversary
date of commencement of the Lease and every anniversary date
thereafter.

The Company will perform asbestos abatement to the Premises and
be reimbursed by the landlord for all direct and indirect costs,
not to exceed US$400,000, through rent offset.

In October 2008, the Landlord sold the building and assigned the
Lease to the buyer. The Landlord reimbursed the Company for
US$600,000 of general improvements previously made to the
Premises by the Company.

The US$300,000 spent on asbestos treatment will be reimbursed
through rent offset from the new landlord.

Headquartered in Las Vegas, The Majestic Star Casino, LLC is a
multi-jurisdictional gaming company with operations in three
states: Indiana, Mississippi and Colorado.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: $100T of Amerex Deposit Marked for Cleanup
----------------------------------------------------------------
Amerex Group, Inc. says that, during 2008, US$100,000 of a
US$400,000 deposit was released to it to pay some vendor bills
related to the removal of asbestos in a Pryor, Okla. site.

In February 2006, Amerex Acquisition Corp., a Company
subsidiary, acquired 155 acres of heavily developed industrial
property in Pryor, Okla., from Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical
Corporation in consideration for US$700,000 in cash and delivery
of a cash collateralized irrevocable letter of credit with JP
Morgan Chase Bank, in the amount of US$800,000, to provide
financial assurance for the removal of all asbestos and asbestos
containing materials from the property within 18 months
following closing.

The asbestos removal was completed in September 2007 and the
Company received clearance by the Oklahoma Department of
Environmental Quality and Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical
Corporation instructed JP Morgan Chase Bank to release the
letter of credit.

The proceeds from the release of the cash collateralized letter
of credit were deployed in accordance with the Company's
agreements with Asbestos Handlers, Inc. and X Interchange, Inc.
Asbestos Handlers, Inc. is an asbestos abatement contractor
based in Tulsa, Okla.

The Company engaged Asbestos Handlers, Inc. to remove the
asbestos from the Pryor facility. X Interchange, Inc. is an
intermodal transportation logistics company based in Leawood,
Kans. The Company engaged X Interchange, Inc. to manage the
demolition and scrap metal salvage at the Pryor facility.

The Company was also required to deposit US$400,000 with the
Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality through Guaranteed
Abstract Company, a title company located in Tulsa, Okla., to
provide financial assurance of its ability to close the two
injection wells on the Pryor property.

During 2008, US$100,000 of the deposit was released to the
Company to pay some vendor bills related to the removal of
asbestos.

This amount is currently being held in escrow for the benefit of
the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality to secure the
Company's obligation to close the wells. The Company has closed
the two injection wells and it has a contractual obligation to
pay the US$300,000 escrow deposit, when returned to the Company,
to CAMOFI under the terms of the recent amendment to the
indebtedness payable to CAMOFI. The Company is making efforts to
sell the 155 acres in Pryor, Okla.

The estimated fair value of the property was US$400,000 at Dec.
31, 2008. The Company has recognized an impairment of real
estate held for sale associated with this property at Dec. 31,
2008 of US$734,203 in the accompanying consolidated statement of
operations.

Headquartered in Tulsa, Okla., Amerex Group, Inc. makes
outerwear for men, women, and children. Founded in 1946, the
Company has licensing agreements with brands like Jones New
York, London Fog, OshKosh, and Mudd. The Company also sells
outerwear under its own labels (Static and Weather Tamer) and
sports-oriented outdoor wear through subsidiary Gerry (Bombshell
and Mambosok).


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Enstar Reserves $748.5MM for Claims in 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------
Enstar Group Limited, as of Dec. 31, 2008, had net loss reserves
of US$748.5 million for asbestos-related claims, according to
the Company's 2008 annual report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission.

A number of the Company's subsidiaries wrote general liability
policies and reinsurance prior to the Company's acquisition of
them under which policyholders continue to present asbestos-
related injury claims and claims alleging injury, damage or
cleanup costs arising from environmental pollution.

As of Dec. 31, 2008, the Company had 24 separate insurance and
reinsurance subsidiaries whose reserves are categorized into 195
reserve categories in total, including 26 distinct asbestos
reserving categories and 19 distinct environmental reserving
categories.

The Company's provision for asbestos and environmental claims
and allocated loss adjustment expenses were a gross of
US$943,970,000 during the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, compared
with US$677,610,000 during the year ended Dec. 31, 2007.

The Company's provision for A&E claims and ALAE were a net of
US$846,421,000 during the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, compared
with US$419,977,000 during the year ended Dec. 31, 2007.

During 2008, excluding the impact of loss reserves acquired
during the year, the reserves for A&E liabilities decreased by
US$113.3 million on a gross basis and increased by US$94.1
million on a net basis.

During 2007, excluding the impact of loss reserves acquired
during the year, the reserves for A&E liabilities decreased by
US$34.5 million on a gross basis and by US$2.2 million on a net
basis.

Headquartered in Hamilton, Bermuda, Enstar Group Limited
acquires and manages insurance and reinsurance companies in run-
off. The Company also provides management, consulting and other
services to the insurance and reinsurance industry.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: RPM Long-Term Liability at $442M at Feb. 28
----------------------------------------------------------------
RPM International Inc.'s long-term asbestos-related liabilities
were US$442,549,000 as of Feb. 28, 2009, compared with
US$494,745,000 as of May 31, 2008, according to the Company's
latest quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on April 9, 2009.

The Company's long-term asbestos-related liabilities were
US$462,309,000 as of Nov. 30, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Jan.
16, 2009)

The Company's current asbestos-related liabilities were US$65
million as of both Feb. 28, 2009 and May 31, 2008.

Payments made for asbestos-related claims were US$52,196,000
during the nine months ended Feb. 28, 2009, compared with
US$67,595,000 during the nine months ended Feb. 29, 2008.

Based in Medina, Ohio, RPM International Inc. manufactures and
sells specialty paints, protective coatings and roofing systems,
sealants and adhesives. The Company has two reportable segments:
the industrial reportable segment and the consumer reportable
segment.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: RPM Units Facing 10,281 Actions at Feb. 28
----------------------------------------------------------------
RPM International Inc.'s subsidiaries had a total of 10,281
active asbestos cases as of Feb. 28, 2009, compared with a total
of 11,350 cases as of Feb. 29, 2008, according to the Company's
quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on April 9, 2009.

The Company's subsidiaries faced 10,048 active asbestos cases as
of Nov. 30, 2008, compared with 11,117 cases as of Nov. 30,
2007. (Class Action Reporter, Jan. 16, 2009)

Certain of the Company's wholly owned subsidiaries, principally
Bondex International, Inc., are defendants in various asbestos-
related bodily injury lawsuits filed in various state courts
with the vast majority of current claims pending in six states:
Texas, Florida, Mississippi, Maryland, Illinois and Ohio. These
cases seek unspecified damages for asbestos-related diseases
based on alleged exposures to asbestos-containing products
previously manufactured by the subsidiaries or others.

For the quarter ended Feb. 28, 2009, the subsidiaries secured
dismissals and settlements of 228 cases and made total payments
of US$19.8 million, which included defense-related payments of
US$6.9 million. For the comparable period ended Feb. 29, 2008,
dismissals and settlements covered 225 cases and total payments
were US$18.7 million, which included defense-related payments of
US$9.4 million.

For the nine months ended Feb. 28, 2009, the subsidiaries
secured dismissals and settlements of 2,253 cases and made total
payments of US$52.2 million, which included defense-related
payments of US$19.7 million. For the comparable period ended
Feb. 29, 2008, dismissals and settlements covered 882 cases and
total payments were US$67.6 million, which included defense-
related payments of US$32 million.

Of the 2,253 cases that were dismissed in the nine months ended
Feb. 28, 2009, about 1,420 were non-malignancies or unknown
disease cases that had been maintained on an inactive docket in
Ohio and were administratively dismissed by the Cuyahoga County
Court of Common Pleas during the second fiscal quarter ended
Nov. 30, 2008. These claims were dismissed without prejudice and
may be re-filed should the claimants involved be able to
demonstrate disease in accordance with medical criteria laws
established in the state of Ohio.

During the quarter ended Feb. 28, 2009, one payment totaling
US$3.6 million was made to satisfy an adverse judgment in a
previous trial that occurred in calendar 2006 in California.
This payment, which included a significant amount of accrued
pre-judgment interest as required by California law, was made on
Dec. 8, 2008, about two and a half years after the adverse
verdict and after all post-trial and appellate remedies had been
exhausted.

Excluding defense-related payments, the average payment made to
settle or dismiss a case was about US$57 million for the quarter
ended Feb. 28, 2009, compared with US$41 million for the quarter
ended Feb. 29, 2008.

Based in Medina, Ohio, RPM International Inc. manufactures and
sells specialty paints, protective coatings and roofing systems,
sealants and adhesives. The Company has two reportable segments:
the industrial reportable segment and the consumer reportable
segment.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Appeal Court to Set Order in Bondex Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
RPM International Inc. says that, at present, the U.S. Sixth
Circuit Court of Appeals has not yet entered a scheduling order
in connection with an appeal in the case styled Bondex
International, Inc. et al. v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity
Company et al.

During fiscal 2004, certain of the Company's subsidiaries'
third-party insurers claimed exhaustion of coverage. On July 3,
2003, certain of the subsidiaries filed Case No. 1:03-cv-1322 in
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, for
declaratory judgment, breach of contract and bad faith against
these third-party insurers, challenging their assertion that
their policies covering asbestos-related claims have been
exhausted.

The coverage litigation involves insurance coverage for claims
arising out of alleged exposure to asbestos containing products
manufactured by the previous owner of the Bondex tradename
before March 1, 1966. On March 1, 1966, Republic Powdered Metals
Inc. (as it was known then), purchased the assets and assumed
the liabilities of the previous owner of the Bondex tradename.

That previous owner subsequently dissolved and was never a
subsidiary of Republic Powdered Metals, Bondex, RPM, Inc. or the
Company. Because of the earlier assumption of liabilities,
however, Bondex has historically responded, and must continue to
respond, to lawsuits alleging exposure to these asbestos-
containing products.

The Company discovered that the defendant insurance companies in
the coverage litigation had wrongfully used cases alleging
exposure to these pre-1966 products to erode their aggregate
limits. Two of the defendant insurers have filed counterclaims
seeking to recoup certain monies should the plaintiffs prevail
on their claims.

During the second fiscal quarter ended Nov. 30, 2006, plaintiffs
and one of the defendant insurers reached a settlement of US$15
million. The settling defendant was dismissed from the case.

In 2007, plaintiffs had filed motions for partial summary
judgment against the defendants and defendants had filed motions
for summary judgment against plaintiffs. In addition, plaintiffs
had filed a motion to dismiss the counterclaim filed by one of
the defendants.

On Dec. 1, 2008, the court decided the pending motions for
summary judgment and dismissal. The court denied the plaintiffs'
motions for partial summary judgment and granted the defendants'
motions for summary judgment against plaintiffs on a narrow
ground. The court also granted the plaintiffs' motion to dismiss
one defendant's amended counterclaim.

In light of its summary judgment rulings, the court entered
judgment as a matter of law on all remaining claims and
counterclaims, including the counterclaim filed by another
defendant, and dismissed the action. The court also dismissed
certain remaining motions as moot.

Plaintiffs have filed a notice of appeal.

Based in Medina, Ohio, RPM International Inc. manufactures and
sells specialty paints, protective coatings and roofing systems,
sealants and adhesives. The Company has two reportable segments:
the industrial reportable segment and the consumer reportable
segment.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Suit v. Chase Still Inactive as of March 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chase Corporation says that, as of March 31, 2009, there have
been no new developments as an Ohio asbestos lawsuit has been
inactive with respect to the Company, according to its quarterly
report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
April 9, 2009.

The Company is one of over 100 defendants in a personal injury
lawsuit, pending in Ohio, which alleges personal injury from
exposure to asbestos contained in certain Chase products. The
plaintiff in the case issued discovery requests to the Company
in August 2005, to which the Company timely responded in
September 2005.

The trial had initially been scheduled to begin on April 30,
2007. However, that date was postponed and no new trial date has
been set.

Based in Bridgewater, Mass., Chase Corporation makes tapes and
protective coatings used by the electronic, public utility, and
oil industries. Products include insulating and conducting
materials for electrical wire; electrical repair tapes;
protective pipe coatings; thermoelectric insulation for
electrical equipment; and moisture protective coatings for
electronics.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Met-Pro Facing 57 Pending Cases at Jan. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
Met-Pro Corporation, as of Jan. 31, 2009, faced 57 asbestos-
related cases pending against it (with a majority of those cases
pending in New York, Mississippi and Maryland), as compared with
38 cases that were pending as of Jan. 31, 2008, according to the
Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on April 10, 2009.

A total of 50 asbestos-related cases were pending against the
Company as of Oct. 31, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Dec. 12,
2008)

Beginning in 2002, the Company and one of its business units
began to be named as one of many defendants in asbestos-related
lawsuits filed predominantly in Mississippi on a mass basis by
large numbers of plaintiffs against a large number of industrial
companies including those in the pump and fluid handling
industries.

The complaints filed against the Company and this business unit
have been vague, general and speculative, alleging that the
Company and the business unit sold unidentified asbestos-
containing products and engaged in other related actions which
caused injuries (including death) and loss to the plaintiffs.
More recent cases typically allege more serious claims of
mesothelioma.

The Company and the business unit have been dismissed from or
settled a number of these cases. The sum total of payments made
through Jan. 31, 2009 to settle these cases is US$355,000, all
of which has been paid by the Company's insurers including legal
expenses, except for corporate counsel expenses, with an average
cost per settled claim, excluding legal fees, of US$24,000.

During the fiscal year ended Jan. 31, 2009, 29 new cases were
filed against the Company, and the Company was dismissed from 10
cases.

Most of the pending cases have not advanced beyond the early
stages of discovery, although a number of cases are on schedules
leading to, or are scheduled for trial.

Headquartered in Harleysville, Pa., Met-Pro Corporation
manufactures and sells product recovery and pollution control
equipment for purification of air and liquids, fluid handling
equipment for corrosive, abrasive and high temperature liquids,
and filtration and purification products.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazard Found Near Old Samsung Headquarters
----------------------------------------------------------------
The South Korean Ministry of Labor, on April 7, 2009, said that
Samsung Group's former headquarters in Taepyeong-ro, Seoul,
contained the class-A carcinogen, asbestos, The Korea Times
reports.

The Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency, an MoL unit,
said that among samples taken was crocidolite, more commonly
known as blue asbestos, the most toxic kind of the deadly
substance. The research team took air samples from 12 spots
inside the building, eight from dust on the building floor and
nine from settled dust outside the building.

No asbestos was found in the air but was detected in all eight
samples taken from the building floors, and five from the
outside piles. The blue asbestos was found in all the floor
samples and one sample from outdoors.

The Agency said that as asbestos was not detected in the air, it
is unclear whether it could have harmed anyone's health. The
Agency also assumed that the asbestos was used to spray coat
ceilings, walls and floors since it used to be a popular fire-
proofing material before its harmful effects were known.

Lee Na-ru, a researcher at the Agency, said, "We are not even
sure whether the Samsung building alone is responsible for the
detection since nearby buildings could have used the material
for the same purpose and the substance could have been carried
in the air, too."

The Korean Federation for Environmental Movements claimed that
the government should share responsibility for the use of the
asbestos. The group will send its samples to an American
institute for thorough study. If different results are found, it
will take legal measures against Samsung and the labor and
environment ministry, the organization said.

Samsung refuted that the air quality and other chemical
management was thoroughly conducted according to U.S. standards.

Samsung also claimed that there is no country in the world that
has a standard for asbestos on the floor, and the amount of the
blue asbestos detected was not a cause for concern. The Company
stated, "We will clean up all the dust with a high efficiency
particulate air - HEPA - filters once the operation is over."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Yawn Suit v. Texaco, Chevron Filed in Texas
----------------------------------------------------------------
The family of Ronald Yawn, on April 1, 2009, filed an asbestos-
related lawsuit against Chevron Corporation and Texaco Inc. in
Jefferson County District Court, Tex., The Southeast Texas
Record reports.

Mr. Yawn's widow (Betty Lou Yawn) and daughter (Sheila Newall)
filed the suit, claiming Mr. Yawn died of pulmonary asbestosis
and lung cancer.

According to the suit, during the course of his employment, Mr.
Yawn was allegedly exposed to asbestos dust and fibers, which
caused him to die "a painful and terrible" death on Oct. 9,
2008.

The plaintiffs allege Texaco and Chevron knew asbestos-
containing products could cause cancers, but still allowed their
employees to work around the products.

Mrs. Yawn and Mrs. Newall seek unspecified exemplary and
punitive damages, plus interest, costs and other relief to which
they may be entitled.

J. Keith Hyde, Esq., and D'Juana Parks, Esq., of Provost and
Umphrey Law Firm in Beaumont, Tex., represent Mrs. Yawn and Mrs.
Newall.

Case No. B183-698 has been assigned to Judge Gary Sanderson of
the 60th District Court.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Schmidheiny, Marchienne Face Exposure Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Swiss billionaire Stephan Schmidheiny and Belgian baron Jean-
Louis de Cartier de Marchienne face legal action in Italy over
illnesses and deaths linked to four asbestos factories they
owned, swissinfo.ch reports.

Hundreds of people packed a Turin, Italy, courtroom on April 6,
2009 to hear preliminary proceedings against the 66-year-old Mr.
Schmidheiny and the 88-year-old Baron de Marchienne. The two men
have been charged with intentionally causing injury.

Turin prosecutors mounted the action on behalf of more than
2,600 former employees and close to 300 local residents alleged
to have been affected by asbestos.

They say that the company, S.p.A Genoa, knew that asbestos was
dangerous and that it did not ventilate shops or provide proper
protection to workers.

A judge must now decide whether proceedings will move forth. The
two businessmen could face up to 13 years in prison, according
to Sergio Bonetto, a lawyer for the victims.

On April 6, 2009, trade unionists joined hundreds of former
employees from Italy, Switzerland, France and Belgium demanding
the Company "stop the massacre."

A lawyer for Mr. Schmidheiny called for a fair trial. "We are
convinced that the judge will make a balanced judgment and will
not be affected by banners," said Guido Carlo Alleva.

The St Gallen-born Mr. Schmidheiny became chief executive of
Eternit, his family's asbestos construction materials firm, in
his 20s. He later diversified his holdings, acted as a special
advisor to the United Nations and now focuses on sustainable
development.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Grupo Mexico to Appeal Order in Asarco Case
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Mesothelioma & Asbestos Awareness Center said that it
expects that Grupo Mexico S.A.B. de C.V. will appeal an
asbestos- and environmental-related ruling in favor of its
subsidiary ASARCO LLC.

Asarco, an Arizona-based mining and smelting company, filed for
bankruptcy in 2005. In the week of April 5, 2009 to April 11,
2009, a court ruling in favor of Asarco will force Grupo Mexico
to pay out an estimated US$6 million dollars in stocks and
damages.

This money could help Asarco pay off more than US$1 billion in
asbestos-related environmental claims from Washington and eight
other states, as well as the federal Environmental Protection
Agency.

The remaining funds could be put towards the cost of remediating
dozens of seriously polluted mining and smelting sites across
the West.

Irv Terrell, Esq., a lawyer for Asarco, said, "This is a
complete victory, and the thing that is most satisfying is that
a big part of money will go to environmental cleanup in the
western United States."

Grupo Mexico purchased Asarco in 1999 to get its hands on
Asarco's majority interest in two lucrative Peruvian copper
mines.

The judge ruled that Grupo Mexico had fraudulently transferred
Asarco's Peruvian mining interests to Americas Mining Corp. as
part of a corporate conspiracy to force Asarco into bankruptcy.

When it declared bankruptcy, Asarco faced more than US$11
billion in environmental claims involving across 75 sites.
Asarco was fielding about 95,000 asbestos-related claims.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Majkut's Action v. Garlock Filed on April 3
----------------------------------------------------------------
Donna Weeden, as trustee of the Majkut Family Living Trust,
filed an asbestos lawsuit against Garlock Sealing Technologies
in Jefferson County Court, Tex., on April 3, 2009, The Southeast
Texas Record reports.

Ms. Weeden alleged Garlock failed to adequately warn Stanley
Majkut of the dangers of asbestos exposure. According to the
complaint, Mr. Majkut was employed as a machine mechanic and
worked with or around asbestos and asbestos-containing products
and materials.

The suit alleges Garlock negligently failed to adequately test
its products to determine the hazards and continued to
distribute the asbestos-containing products after the hazards of
asbestos were well-known.

Mr. Majkut experienced physical pain and suffering, mental
anguish, lost wages, disfigurement and physical impairment and
incurred medical bills, the complaint says.

Ms. Weeden seeks unspecified actual and exemplary damages, plus
costs, pre- and post-judgment interest at the legal rate and
other other relief to which she may be entitled.

Bryan O. Blevins Jr., Esq., and Colin D. Moore, Esq., of Provost
Umphrey Law Firm in Beaumont, Tex., represent Ms. Weeden.

Case No. B183-710 has been assigned to Judge Gary Sanderson of
the 60th District Court.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: McAnulty Pleads Guilty for False Statements
----------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen E. McAnulty, a former owner of an asbestos monitoring
contractor that provided services to New York Presbyterian
Hospital (NYPH), on April 8, 2009, pleaded guilty to making
false statements to FBI agents and representatives of the U.S.
Department of Justice's Antitrust Division, according to a DOJ
press release dated April 8, 2009.

Mr. McAnulty, of Brooklyn, N.Y., pleaded guilty in U.S. District
Court in Manhattan, for lying about his knowledge of a kickback
and fraud conspiracy that took place at NYPH.

According to the charge, on Nov. 20, 2007, during an interview
with agents of the FBI and representatives of the Antitrust
Division, Mr. McAnulty falsely claimed that he was not aware
that any purchasing official at NYPH received kickbacks in
return for asbestos monitoring and asbestos removal contracts at
NYPH.

In fact, at the direction of the owner of an asbestos removal
company, Mr. McAnulty negotiated the amount of the kickbacks
with a purchasing official in order for Mr. McAnulty's company
to be the asbestos monitoring company at NYPH. Mr. McAnulty
understood that the kickbacks to that purchasing official
totaled at least US$28,000, the Department said.

Scott D. Hammond, Assistant Attorney General in charge of the
Department's Antitrust Division, said, "This criminal charge
serves to underscore the seriousness with which the Justice
Department views attempts to compromise the integrity of our
investigations. Today's filing should send a clear signal that
the Division is, and will continue to be, committed to
prosecuting these violations."

The crime that Mr. McAnulty is charged with carries a maximum
penalty of five years in prison, three years of supervised
release and a US$250,000 fine.

The investigation is being conducted by the Antitrust Division's
New York Field Office, the FBI and the Internal Revenue Service
Criminal Investigation's New York Field Office.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Childress Action Filed v. 200 Firms in Ill.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Randy Gori, Esq., and Barry Julian, Esq., of Alton, Ill., on
April 2, 2009, filed an asbestos lawsuit against more than 200
businesses and state universities on behalf of Charles
Childress, a Kentucky bricklayer, The Madison St. Clair Record
reports.

The lawyers traced 50 years of exposure across 10 states for Mr.
Childress who did not know until March 2009 that he suffered
from mesothelioma.

Mr. Gori traced the exposure to Mr. Childress' father, brother,
and uncle.

Along with customary asbestos defendants, Mr. Childress sued The
Coca-Cola Company, The Kroger Co., General Mills Inc., Eli Lilly
and Company, Pfizer Inc., Pharmacia Corporation, the University
of Kentucky, and Indiana University.

Mr. Childress lives in Russellville, Ky., Mr. Gori wrote, and
since 1967 he has worked through unions in Indianapolis and
Cincinnati.

Mr. Gori wrote that Mr. Childress worked for contractors from
New York to Illinois, including Shell and Sinclair in Madison
County.

Circuit Judge Daniel Stack will preside over the case.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Talc-Containing Drugs Restricted in Korea
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Korea Food and Drug Administration unveiled a list of 1,122
medicines with talc (contaminated with asbestos), and banning
all but 11 of them, JoongAng Daily reports.

Hospitals and pharmacies were plunged into confusion a day after
the KFDA unveiled the list. Many medical practices have been
scrambling to find alternative drugs to the ones that have been
withdrawn.

On April 11, 2009, Gangnam Hospital, located in Yongin on the
outskirts of Seoul, withdrew 27 banned medicines it has been
using so far. The private hospital has also changed its computer
system so that the prohibited drugs will automatically be
filtered out if prescribed.

The KFDA said it will impose fines on hospitals that prescribe
any of the medicine.

Although the KFDA delayed sales bans on 11 drugs that have no
immediate replacements, the hospital said it had no alternative
for one drug for treating piles that had been placed on the list
of banned drugs.

Konkuk University Hospital found that two banned tablet drugs -
a potassium supplement and a tranquilizer did not have
replacements, either. The alternative medicines that the KFDA
had recommended are no longer available, the hospitals said,
adding that it is prescribing the two drugs despite the ban.

The KFDA has ordered hospitals and pharmacies to stop
prescribing and selling drugs that were produced after April 3,
2009, the day that the KFDA launched an investigation into
consumer, cosmetics and medical goods.

Since the KFDA has not come up with policies for refunds or
exchanges, pharmacies have no choice but to ask consumers to
wait.

On April 10, 2009, the KFDA downgraded the number of banned
drugs from 1,122 to 1,080.

Meanwhile, the smaller pharmaceutical firm Wales Korea Pharm
said almost 30 percent of its products had been banned and that
it expects losses to amount to around KPW10 billion (US$7.51
million).


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: CSX Partial Summary Judgment Filed April 6
----------------------------------------------------------------
CSX Transportation Inc., on April 6, 2009, asked U.S. District
Judge Frederick Stamp for partial summary judgment against
Robert Gilkison and the firm of Peirce, Raimond and Coulter, The
West Virginia Record reports.

CSX pleaded in federal court that it has presented plenty of
proof for a claim that asbestos lawyers from Pittsburgh pulled a
fraud.

The motions would bring a quick conclusion to a single
sensational fraud claim within a suit alleging widespread fraud
in the Peirce firm's suits against CSX.

The single claim revolves around substitution of one man's body
for another in an X-ray screening session.

For CSX, Marc Williams, Esq., of Huntington argued that Mr.
Gilkison helped former railroad workers Ricky May and Daniel
Jayne produce a false claim. Mr. Gilkison ignored a duty to
report the fraud to the court and to CSX, Mr. Williams wrote.

A separate motion sought summary judgment against the Peirce
firm for proceeding with the claim in spite of the fraud.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Remand Motion in Foster Wheeler Case Denied
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, denied
Michael Curry's motion to remand an asbestos action (to the
Supreme Court of the State of New York) filed against Foster
Wheeler and other defendants.

The case is styled Michael Curry, Plaintiff v. American
Standard, Inc., et al., Defendants.

U.S. District Judge George B. Daniels entered judgment in Case
No. 08-cv-10228 (GBD) on Feb. 6, 2009.

Mr. Curry filed this action in the Supreme Court of the State of
New York. Foster Wheeler subsequently removed the case on the
basis of a federal officer defense. Mr. Curry moved to remand
this proceeding back to New York State court.

On Oct. 8, 2008, Mr. Curry sued Foster Wheeler and about 20
other defendants, alleging that he was exposed to asbestos-
containing products while he served in the U.S. Navy. He
maintained that he developed mesothelioma and that his illness
was caused by exposure to marine steam generators on the U.S.S.
Kitty Hawk from 1963-1965.

Foster Wheeler received service of the complaint on or about
Oct. 31, 2008 and filed a timely notice of removal on Nov. 24,
2008.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Crown Cork, DAP Favored in Vanaman's Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Superior Court of Pennsylvania upheld the ruling of the
Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, which granted
summary judgment in favor of Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc. and
DAP, Inc., in an asbestos lawsuit filed by Robert Vanaman.

The case is styled Robert Vanaman, Executor of the Estate of
Violet Vanaman, Deceased and Robert Vanaman, Widower in His Own
Right, Appellant v. DAP, Inc. and Crown Cork & Seal Company,
Inc., Appellee.

Judges Kate Ford Elliott, Correale F. Stevens, John L. Musmanno,
Joan Orie Melvin, Maureen Lally-Green, Richard B. Klein, Susan
P. Gantman, Jack A. Panella, and Christine L. Donohue entered
judgment in Case No. 2849 EDA 2006 on Feb. 11, 2009. Judge Klein
filed concurring and dissenting opinions in which Judges
Musmanno, Panella, and Donohue joined.

Following settlement and the entry of judgment on Sept. 13,
2006, Mr. Vanaman, as Executor of the Estate of his wife, Violet
Vanaman, and in his own right, presented challenges to the
orders entered in the trial court granting summary judgment in
favor of two manufacturers, Crown Cork and DAP.

On Nov. 29, 2004, the Vanamans sued Crown Cork and DAP, alleging
Mrs. Vanaman contracted mesothelioma as a result of exposure to
asbestos products, which were manufactured by Crown Cork and
DAP.

Specifically, the Vanamans contended that Mr. Vanaman worked at
Atlantic Refinery from 1948 to 1961 and Sun Oil from 1961 to
1987, and Mrs. Vanaman inhaled fibers from Mr. Vanaman's work
clothes. They alleged Mrs. Vanaman was also exposed to asbestos
when the Vanamans conducted home repairs. However, they admitted
that, from 1949 to 1993, Mrs. Vanaman smoked one pack of
cigarettes per day.

On July 19, 2006, Crown Cork and DAP filed motions for summary
judgment. On Feb. 7, 2002, Crown Cork filed a global summary
judgment motion in the trial court requesting dismissal as to
all cases then pending in which the Vanamans sought damages for
asbestos-related injuries due to exposure from Mundet Cork
products.

The Vanamans filed responses to the motions for summary
judgment, and the trial court entered summary judgment orders in
favor of Crown Cork and DAP.

This timely appeal followed.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court Favors 4 Manufacturers in Burger Case
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Superior Court of Pennsylvania upheld the ruling of the
Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, which granted
summary judgment in favor of Owens-Illinois, Inc; Crown Cork &
Seal Company, Inc.; DAP, Inc.; and Pneumo Abex LLC in an
asbestos lawsuit filed by Jon and Lois Burger.

The case is styled Jon Burger and Lois Burger, H/W, Appellant v.
Owens-Illinois, Inc., Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc., DAP, Inc.
and Pneumo Abex LLC, Appellee.

Judges Kate Ford Elliott, Correale F. Stevens, John L. Musmanno,
Joan Orie Melvin, Maureen Lally-Green, Richard B. Klein, Susan
P. Gantman, Jack A. Panella, and Christine L. Donohue entered
judgment in Case No. 2836 EDA 2006 on Feb. 11, 2009. Judge Klein
filed concurring and dissenting opinions in which Judges
Musmanno, Panella, and Donohue joined.

Following settlement and the entry of judgment on Sept. 13,
2006, with regard to the last remaining defendant in a mass
asbestos products liability action, Mr. and Mrs. Burger
challenged the orders entered in the trial court in favor of
Crown Cork, DAP, Pneumo Abex, and Owens-Illinois.

On Feb. 3, 2006, the Burgers filed a complaint against the four
companies alleging Mr. Burger suffers from mesothelioma from the
inhalation of asbestos fibers. Mr. Burger alleged he was exposed
to asbestos from Jan. 1, 1954 to Jan. 1, 1956 when he worked at
New York Shipyard in Camden, N.J., as an electrician, from Jan.
1, 1956 to Jan. 1, 1997 when he worked at Public Service
Electric & Gas Company as an engineer plant supervisor, and from
1956 to 1997 when he performed brake repairs at Bill Boll's
Auto Repair in Sewell, N.J.

On July 19, 2006, the four companies filed motions for summary
judgment. The Burgers filed responses to the motions for summary
judgment, and the trial court entered summary judgment orders in
favor of the four companies.

The Burgers filed timely notices of appeal to this Court after
the claims against the remaining defendants were settled.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Bid for Attorney's Fees OK'd in Harvey Case
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court, Middle District of Louisiana, granted
Robert Harvey's motion for attorney's fees in an asbestos
lawsuit filed against Baton Rouge Marine Contractors and
Louisiana Guarantee Association.

The case is styled Robert Harvey v. Baton Rouge Marine
Contractors and Louisiana Insurance Guarantee Association.

U.S. District Judge John V. Parker entered judgment in Civil
Action No. 08-459-JVP-CN on Feb. 10, 2009.

The court, having carefully considered the complaint, the
record, the law applicable to this action, and the Report and
Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge Christine Noland dated
Jan. 8, 2009, approved the report and recommendation of the
magistrate judge and adopted it as the court's opinion.

The Motion for Award of Attorney's Fees filed by Mr. Harvey was
granted and Mr. Harvey's counsel shall receive a lump sum award
in the amount of US$1,410.63 in attorney's fees.

On July 23, 2008, Mr. Harvey filed this suit to enforce payment
of disability benefits allegedly due to him under a Decision and
Order of the Office of Administrative Law Judges, Longshore
Division, U.S. Department of Labor, issued on April 30, 2008,
and filed with the Office of the District Director on May 1,
2008.

According to the Decision and Order of the ALJ on April 30,
2008, Mr. Harvey testified that Baton Rouge Marine Contractors
(BRMC) was his primary longshore employer from 1965 when he
commenced work at the Port of Baton Rouge until he left that
employment in 1977 to work for the State of Louisiana.

During his employment with BRMC, Mr. Harvey was exposed to
asbestos and began to experience breathing problems in 2002,
which were subsequently diagnosed as pulmonary asbestosis.

The ALJ concluded that Mr. Harvey was disabled as a result of
his exposure to asbestos during his employment with BRMC and
that, under the "last exposure rule," BRMC was liable for the
claim and that BRMC's liability carrier from 1972 to 1982,
Employer's National Corporation, was also liable, but for the
fact that the carrier was insolvent and placed in permanent
receivership on Feb. 11, 1994.

The ALJ further concluded that, as a result of the insolvency of
Employer's National Insurance Corporation (LIGA), an entity
created by the Louisiana legislature to pay workers'
compensation claims when the primary carrier is insolvent, was
liable for Harvey's claim under Louisiana law.

Mr. Harvey subsequently alleged that neither BRMC nor LIGA
timely paid any of the benefits awarded to him in the ALJ's
April 30, 2008 Decision and Order.

Mr. Harvey and BRMC filed motions for summary judgment, both of
which were opposed by LIGA. Mr. Harvey filed the present motion
for attorney's fees.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: James Hardie Awards AUD500T to Sydney Local
----------------------------------------------------------------
Margaret Lawson of Sydney, Australia, on April 13, 2009, was
posthumously awarded AUD500,000 from James Hardie Industries
N.V. after the Court of Appeal upheld an award by the Dust
Diseases Tribunal for AUD350,000 in compensation and nearly
AUD200,000 as a carer, ABC News reports.

Barry Robson from the Asbestos Diseases Foundation says the
ruling is a huge landmark.

Mrs. Dawson sued Hardie in 2007, claiming that spending more
than two decades washing the asbestos-contaminated clothes of
her father and husband had led to her disease.

However, after her death over a year ago, Mrs. Dawson's claim
for compensation was continued by her family, not just for
herself as a victim but for loss of unpaid earnings as a carer
of her grandchildren.

Mrs. Dawson is survived by her daughter and two grandchildren.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Galuten Orders LCMC to Dispose of Asbestos
----------------------------------------------------------------
Manalo B. Galuten, the mayor of Mankayan, Benguet, Philippines,
ordered Lepanto Consolidated Mining Corporation's (LCMC)
management to dispose of all dumped asbestos materials, the
Manila Bulletin reports.

Mr. Galuten explained that allowing LCMC to clear their dumped
waste is without prejudice to the filing of appropriate
administrative and criminal charges which is being prepared by
his lawyers and under consultation with barangay leaders.

The municipal council has already passed a resolution
authorizing Mr. Galuten to file appropriate charges against LCMC
for the dispose of asbestos waste materials in Sitio Sapid.

Lepanto, one of the country's biggest gold producers, allegedly
and discreetly dumped over six truckloads of asbestos
construction debris allegedly coming from their Makati office
more than two years ago. The waste materials were tested and
found to contain 10 percent amosite.

Mr. Galuten personally went to the dump early in April 2009
accompanied by a toxic waste management consultant to ensure
that agreed guidelines in the extraction are followed, but
specialized workers hired by LCMC to recover the toxic wastes
were not present.

Only LCMC's resident manager, Engr. Magellan Bagayao, appeared
after being called by Mr. Galuten. Engr. Bagayao said they
already contracted out the recovery and disposal of the waste to
Clearway Technology Corporation, a DENR (Department of Energy
and Natural Resources) registered toxic wastes handler.

In April 3, 2009, Mr. Galuten learned that Clearway started
manually repacking asbestos infected materials in one-tonner
sacks. The mayor ordered LCMC to stop after barangay officials
complained that earlier agreements like proper coordination and
safe handling were not followed.

Mine officials earlier denied that the materials were toxic but
they failed to convince the 74-year-old Mr. Galuten, who
reasoned that if indeed these were ordinary construction wastes
then why will the mining company travel 400 kilometers to
Manakayan and discreetly bury the materials?


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Discovered at Weston Creek Center
----------------------------------------------------------------
Asbestos was found on April 8, 2009 at the Cooleman Court
shopping center in Weston Creek, Canberra, Australia, The
Canberra Times reports.

Four businesses are being decontaminated at Cooleman Court after
asbestos or asbestos-like particles were found in an air-
conditioning duct and possibly blown into the outlets.

Both ACT WorkCover and the center's owner Mirvac Real Estate
Investment Trust have suggested the risk to the public is
minimal. Attorney-General Simon Corbell, the minister
responsible for WorkCover, says the substance is asbestos;
Mirvac describes it as "potentially asbestos-related material."

Mirvac said the contamination was discovered on the evening of
April 8, 2009. It denied allegations by a trader that the
substance was found three days earlier. It is understood the
shops were shut about 11:00 a.m. on April 9, 2009.

Mr Corbell said the Office of Regulatory Services was alerted on
April 9, 2009 by the contractor doing building work at the
center.

Cooleman Court, which was built in 1978, is undergoing an
AUD12.4 million refurbishment, the construction work uncovering
the material.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Aussie Home Renovators Facing Exposure Risk
----------------------------------------------------------------
Barry Robson says that Australian home renovators could be at
high-risk for asbestos exposure, AHN reports.

For over 30 years, thousands of Australian house renovators have
risked contracting mesothelioma since the early 1980s,
potentially making up a "third wave" of victims of asbestos-
related diseases.

Mr. Robson said, "What we're seeing now are thousands and
thousands of mums and dads who didn't know the danger of
asbestos and were exposed to it when doing their home
renovations and DIY projects. [We are also seeing] the kids who
were hanging around when dad put up a new carport, a chook pen,
or BBQ area."

Asbestos was in the cement sheeting used in the construction of
nearly all fibro houses in Australia until it was banned in
1984.

Despite that ban, Mr. Robson said the popularity over the past
two decades of do-it-yourself home renovation had made exposure
risk more common. He added "The first wave of asbestos-related
diseases took place from the 1930s, when asbestos was first
manufactured. The second wave began in the 1950s, when the likes
of Bernie Banton and his colleagues at Hardies were exposed to
asbestos particles, as were thousands of wharfies, electricians,
carpenters and mechanics. The third wave is the home
renovators."

Mr. Robson said the third-wave incidence of mesothelioma is
expected to rise dramatically from now until 2030, and unlike
the previous waves, is expected to affect women as well as men.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Poses Threat to Vietnamese Workers
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Vietnam News Agency said that a lack of research facilities
is hampering the Health Ministry's efforts to provide evidence
to show that asbestos is a threat to workers, BERNAMA.com
reports.

The Preventive Medicine Department's Occupational Health and
Injuries Division deputy director Nguyen Thi Lien Huong says the
World Health Organization has concluded that asbestos is toxic.

The Health Ministry has two hospitals equipped to count the
amount of asbestos at a work site; the construction industry has
just one.

Medical records are needed to show a patient's work record and
place of residence to provide evidence of the link between
asbestos and lung disease but the Viet Nam National Cancer
Institute does not keep such histories of its patients.

In Vietnam, manufacturers are allowed to make roofing and other
products from chrysotile asbestos with the strict implementation
of national environmental and health safety standards and
regulations.

The Construction Ministry's Construction Materials Department
deputy director Vo Quang Diem values asbestos for its usefulness
in parts of Vietnam prone to storm and floods.

Environment and Sustainable Development Centre director Pham Van
Hai says it takes 10 to 15 years for people exposed to asbestos
to fall ill. Many workers had changed their jobs or moved by
then.

Monitoring those indirectly-infected - a husband, a wife,
children, parents and relatives of workers and people living
exposed to asbestos - is also very difficult. Although many
workers are aware of the danger of asbestos, it is not enough to
make them fear it.

Vietnam imports about 60,000 tons of chrysolite - one of six
minerals defined as asbestos - each year to produce about 80
million square meters of roofing sheets.

More than 10,000 Vietnamese work with asbestos.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: U.S. Gov't. Suit v. BPXA Filed on March 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Federal Government, on March 31, 2009, filed an
asbestos-related civil complaint against BP Exploration Inc.,
JusticeNewsFlash.com reports.

The legal action was filed by lawyers with the U.S. Department
of Justice, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S.
Department of Transportation. The suit alleges that BP
Exploration Inc. violated the Clean Air Act by failing to comply
with federal regulations when workers removed asbestos
containing materials from its pipelines.

BPXA, a subsidiary of BP America, is an oil production company.
The company explores oil sites, drills for oil, and produces oil
for refinement in the largest North American oil field in
Prudhoe Bay, Alaska.

Federal court documents filed by U.S. attorneys claim BPXA
failed to comply with a Corrective Action Order the Department
of Transportation-Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) previously issued. Federal investigators
found BPXA and its oil workers had violated federal pipeline
safety laws and were not properly handling and disposing of
asbestos containing materials.

The asbestos abatement project by BPXA was determined to be
causing direct and secondary exposure of toxic asbestos fibers
to oil pipeline workers, Alaskan consumers, and the environment.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Monmouth School Cleanup to Begin in Summer
----------------------------------------------------------------
Asbestos cleanup at the Monmouth Regional High School in Tinton
Falls, N.J., is set to begin in the summer of 2009, the hub
reports.

According to Monmouth Regional Business Administrator Maria Anne
Parry and Superintendent James Cleary, the asbestos is harmless
and does not necessarily need to be removed.

The asbestos removal project was introduced during the public
hearing on the Monmouth Regional School District on March 31,
2009 at which Ms. Parry presented a slide show on the project.

According to Ms. Parry, it is not unusual for a building that
opened in 1961 to have been built with asbestos, she said in an
interview.

According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry website,
asbestos fibers are only dangerous if they are disturbed,
causing fibers to float in the air and allowing them to be
inhaled.

According to Ms. Parry, the asbestos removal has not been
mandated but is being remediated because work is being done to
some ceilings in the building.

The asbestos being removed is in the 300 wing of the building,
which includes administrative offices and classrooms, Ms. Parry
explained. Asbestos in the technology room will also be removed
this summer.

The project will cost the school US$94,500 for the 300 wing and
US$25,000 for technology wing. That will include contractors'
fees, which, according to Mr. Cleary and Ms. Parry, account for
roughly 20 percent of the total cost.

Monmouth Regional currently educates 1,140 students in grades
nine through 12 who reside in Tinton Falls, Eatontown and
Shrewsbury Township.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cleanup at Wis. High School to Cost $100T
----------------------------------------------------------------
The removal of asbestos found at the gym floor of the Superior
High School in Superior, Wis., could add about US$100,000 to the
estimated cost of replacing the floor, the Supierior Telegram
reports.

With the current asbestos abatement estimate, the total cost to
replace the floor is about US$228,285.

The Superior School District ran into a snag in replacing the
gym floor at the school when asbestos was found in the adhesive
between the maple floorboards and the cork underneath.

Gary Niemi, director of buildings and grounds, said, "We did not
anticipate asbestos." Contractors Mr. Niemi spoke with had
rarely found asbestos in similar floors of the same age.

The presence of asbestos increases the work required to remove
the old flooring. Before beginning, the gym must be sealed off
and everything inside but the floor must be covered in plastic,
including the ceiling and walls.

Workers will then use a negative air machine with a HEPA filter
as the flooring is put in bags for removal. Once all of the
asbestos is gone, the gym will be cleaned and the air will be
tested for asbestos to make sure it is safe.

The district has received and reviewed bids for the floor
replacement work and is getting bids for asbestos removal.

At an April 13, 2009 meeting, the board was asked to move
forward the approval of a bid from Stalker Flooring, Inc. for
US$123,150 to replace the gym floor. After considering two other
bids, Mr. Niemi said Stalker Flooring provided the best product
for the cost and had positive reviews from past clients.

The current estimate is US$86,000 for the asbestos removal
contract and an additional US$13,695 for required planning,
monitoring and reporting services.

If approved, replacement of the floor would take place on a
tight schedule during summer break. The gym will be sealed off
once classes end, and the work must be finished for the first
day of volleyball practice Aug. 17, 2009.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazards Discovered in Morgens Hall in Ohio
----------------------------------------------------------------
Electricians found asbestos, mold, and lead-based paint during
renovations at the Morgens Hall in the University of Cincinnati
in Ohio, The News record reports.

Students who have applied for residence in Morgens Hall for fall
2009 may have to resort to a "Plan B" if potential health issues
the university has encountered during the renovation are not
remedied in time.

An unnamed employee of OK Interiors Corp. said, "Oh there's
mold, asbestos, lead paint. [Supervisors] just tell you to be
careful."

The employee has been working on renovating the ceilings in
Morgens Hall for about two weeks, putting in acoustical-type
ceilings to accommodate new sprinkler systems.

The electricians working in Morgens discovered mold in the
basement the location of their break room and began getting
sick because of prolonged exposure, the employee said. He said
he is unsure how much mold there is, but there is asbestos on
the balconies and mold "in the basement and most of the tubs
that don't look too inviting either."

The university has not yet notified the public or former
residents of Morgens, and it is not known whether removal of the
mold and asbestos is planned before the scheduled reopening of
the residence hall in fall 2009.

Greg Hand, university spokesman, said he is not shocked by the
discovery of the issues. He said, "As the renovation was taking
place, [the university] discovered some issues and is assessing
the schedule [of the reopening of the residence hall].
Renovation always seems to come with surprises."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Knight-Celotex Files for Ch. 11 Protection
----------------------------------------------------------------
Knight-Celotex, Llc, said on April 8, 2009, that it has filed
for protection from creditors under Chapter 11 of the U.S.
Bankruptcy Code, the Chicago Tribune reports.

Based in Northfield, Ill., the Company makes fiberboard products
used in construction applications. The Company noted that the
filing was sparked when lender Bank of America froze the
Company's accounts.

During 2008, the Company said, Knight-Celotex took steps to
"ensure the viability of its operations." The Company closed a
125-employee plant in Louisiana in October 2008.

Knight-Celotex, which is owned by investor James A. Knight's
Knight Industries LLC, has been in bankruptcy before.

Celotex Corp. was once a much larger building-products concern
based in Tampa, Fla., but it was crushed by a wave of asbestos
litigation and filed for Chapter 11 in the 1990s. Following that
bankruptcy, ownership of the Florida company went to a trust
that administered asbestos claims, and the trust then sold off
various operations to different buyers.

Dow Chemical Co. bought some of the Company's assets from the
trust, and Knight Industries acquired the fiberboard operation
in late 2002.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazard Slows Sale of Old Tecumseh Facility
----------------------------------------------------------------
The presence of asbestos and lead-based paint poses problems in
the sale of the former Tecumseh Products Company plant in
Tecumseh, Mich., to Consolidated Biscuit Company, The Daily
Telegram reports.

Tecumseh Economic Development Director Paula Holtz said at the
April 6, 2009 Tecumseh City Council Meeting said that the
asbestos and lead paint are found in the former refrigeration
compressor manufacturing facility.

Tecumseh City Manager Kevin Welch said that the two companies
are nearing completion of negotiations to sell Products' former
factory to CBC.

Mr. Welch and Mr. Holtz detailed the Brownfield Redevelopment
Authority project that will be needed to bring the facility up
to the level that CBC needs.

The council approved resolutions allowing the city to apply for
a US$1 million grant from the Michigan Department of
Environmental Quality and begin negotiations with CBC to capture
up to US$600,000 in Tax Increment Finance (TIF) funds over 20
years to pay for the cleanup.

The city will use the services of James Harless of Soils and
Materials Engineers Inc. of Plymouth in securing the financing
for the brownfield project. The cost will be capped at US$2,500
for each.

Tecumseh is part of the Downriver Community Conference, a
brownfield consortium representing 20 communities in Wayne
County and all of Monroe County. The city and the Tecumseh
Products site are part of the group's application to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency for future brownfield grants and
loans.

The application process takes about 90 days, Mr. Welch and Mr.
Holtz explained. The council's action on April 6, 2009 brings
the project one step closer to completion.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: U.K. Study Says Welsh Teachers at High Risk
----------------------------------------------------------------
An occupational health conference held in Cardiff, Wales,
indicated that teachers in Welsh schools were 10 times more
likely to contract asbestos-related disease than members of the
general population, Mesothelioma reports.

Speakers at the conference said that, for years, official
government studies on asbestos-related disease had failed to
take into account the high levels of exposures that could be
expected in workers such as builders, shipbuilders, furnace
workers, etc. Because of this, government studies failed to
detect a virtual epidemic of asbestos-caused disease among
school teachers.

Nearly all Welsh schools have some level of asbestos
contamination, and conference attendees say the health risks
amongst teachers may very well be a small part of a much larger
problem.

The Chief Medical Director for the Health and Safety Executive,
Dr. John Osman, was at the conference when he announced that
90,000 Welsh citizens were expected to die from asbestos-related
disease by the year 2050, an unacceptable situation that he,
too, called an "epidemic."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Canada Charged for Exporting to Third World
----------------------------------------------------------------
Pat Martin, a Member of Parliament of the New Democratic Party
in Manitoba, Canada, accused Canada's federal government of
exporting asbestos to Third World countries, AHN reports.

Mr. Martin cites data that Ottawa approves over 200,000 tons of
asbestos exports annually.

Mr. Martin filed a motion before the Canadian House of Commons
to declare April 1 every year as Asbestos Disease Awareness Day.
The motion included an improvement of health services for
asbestos-related ailments, including better treatment and
diagnosis.

Mr. Martin has been at the forefront of the battle against
asbestos after he found out he worked for two years in a fiber
mining operations in the Yukon which could have exposed him to
asbestos. In 2006, he pushed for the ban on chrysolite asbestos
export, which is not on the United Nations watch list of
perilous chemicals by attending the UN discussions on its ban in
Rome.

The Canadian Cancer Society is supporting Mr. Martin's call.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: N.H. Supreme Court OKs Ruling in SSGC Case
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Supreme Court of New Hampshire affirmed a trial court's
ruling, which sustained an assignment of pre-liquidation legal
fees in a case filed by (SSGC) Sheiness, Scott, Grossman & Cohn,
L.L.P.

The case is styled In the Matter of the Liquidation of the Home
Insurance Company.

Judges Gary E. Hicks, John T. Broderick Jr., Linda S. Dalianis,
and James E. Duggan entered judgment in Case No. 2008-440 on
Feb. 20, 2009.

The appellant, SSGC, challenged a ruling of the Trial Court
sustaining the assignment of pre-liquidation legal fees to Class
V Residual Classification, RSA 402- C:44, V (2006), for priority
of payment under the Insurers Rehabilitation and Liquidation
Act, RSA ch. 402-C (2006).

SSGC rendered legal services between October 2002 and January
2003 to The Home Insurance Company in connection with certain
asbestos-related litigation. Home subsequently entered
receivership upon becoming insolvent. The superior court ordered
Home liquidated in June 2003 and appointed the respondent
Commissioner of Insurance as liquidator of its estate.

SSGC filed a proof of claim for US$74,784.89 for its pre-
liquidation legal fees and expenses. The liquidator allowed the
claim in full and designated it a Class V residual priority,
finding that the "services provided were reasonable and
necessary for the defense of Home in the referenced ...
litigation."

SSGC appealed the Class V declaration, asserting that its claim
was properly categorized as Class I Administration Costs. Upon
review, the court-appointed referee affirmed. SSGC moved to
recommit. The trial court denied this motion and sustained the
referee's finding.

On appeal, the parties disputed whether the pre-liquidation
legal services expended in protecting Home's financial interests
constituted costs of "administration."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Remand Motion Denied in Beamis Case in R.I.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court, District of Rhode Island, denied
Michael D. Beamis' Motion to Remand in an asbestos lawsuit filed
against General Electric Company (GE).

The case is styled Michael D. Beamis, Plaintiff v. Buffalo
Pumps, Inc., et al., Defendant.

U.S. District Judge William E. Smith entered judgment in Civil
Action No. 08-472S on Feb. 23, 2009, upon recommendation of U.S.
Magistrates Judge Lincoln D. Almond filed on Jan. 26, 2009.

Mr. Beamis filed suit in Superior Court on Oct. 6, 2008 against
GE and four other defendants. He alleged that he "contracted
asbestos-related mesothelioma and/or other asbestos-related
pathologies" due to exposure to the defendants' asbestos-related
products.

The Complaint alleged that Mr. Beamis "was exposed to various
asbestos containing products beginning in the 1970s through his
use of products manufactured, sold or distributed by the named
defendants, including but not limited to exposure occurring
through his work as a lagger and rigger at Portsmouth Naval
Shipyard."

On Nov. 5, 2008, Mr. Beamis served GE with discovery responses.
On Dec. 3, 2008, GE removed Mr. Beamis' Complaint to the
District Court based on the so-called federal officer removal
statute.

Brian P. Kenney, Esq., and Robert J. Sweeney, Esq., of Early,
Ludwick & Sweeney, L.L.C. in New Haven, Conn., represented Mr.
Beamis.

Jeffrey M. Thomen, Esq., of McCarter & English LLP in Hartford,
Conn., Danielle T. Jenkins, Esq., and Mark T. Nugent, Esq., of
Morrison Mahoney LLP in Providence, R.I., represented General
Electric Company.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Court Upholds Board Ruling in McLaurin Case
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims upheld the Nov.
28, 2006 ruling of the Board of Veterans' Appeals, which denied
service William A. McLaurin service connection for residuals of
asbestos exposure.

The case is styled William A. Mclaurin, Appellant v. Eric K.
Shinseki, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Appellee.

Judge Robert N. Davis entered judgment in Case No. 07-0177 on
Feb. 25, 2009.

A U.S. Army veteran, Mr. McLaurin served on active duty from
July 1943 to January 1946 and from January 1949 to January 1950.
He alleged exposure to asbestos while serving as a gunner aboard
an Army transport ship between October 1944 and December 1945.

In May 1994, Mr. McLaurin received a settlement for an
asbestosis claim against the Babcock and Wilcox Company, a
manufacturer of asbestos-containing products, in what may have
been a class action lawsuit. In June 2002, he filed a claim for
service connection for residuals of exposure to asbestosis
during service.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: White Mountains Cites $173.3Mil Losses, LAE
----------------------------------------------------------------
White Mountains Re Group, Ltd.'s asbestos-related loss and loss
adjustment expense reserve were a gross of US$173.3 million
during the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, compared with a gross of
US$181.9 million during the year ended Dec. 31, 2007.

The Company's asbestos-related loss and LAE reserve were a net
of US$138.5 million during the year ended Dec. 31, 2008,
compared with US$142.2 million during the year ended Dec. 31,
2007.

White Mountains Re Group, Ltd.'s subsidiaries provide
reinsurance on a worldwide basis. The Company is a subsidiary of
Hanover, N.H.-based White Mountains Insurance Group, Ltd.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Grace Engineer Testimony Heard on April 13
----------------------------------------------------------------
Randy Geiger, a former environmental engineer for W. R. Grace &
Co., on April 13, 2009, testified in the Company's environmental
crimes trial in Missoula, Mont., The Salt Lake Tribune reports.

Mr. Geiger says he collected asbestos-tainted air samples at
Libby, Mont.'s high school track by running laps for half an
hour while wearing a monitoring device.

Mr. Geiger told jurors he enlisted the help of his wife to
assist with the impromptu sampling project, which he undertook
because the Company had donated waste from its Libby vermiculite
mine for the base layer of the running track.

Mr. Geiger then submitted the results to a lab, where
researchers discovered high concentrations of harmful asbestos
fibers. Based on those results, Grace supervisors asked Mr.
Geiger to assess the cost of removing the asbestos or replacing
the track, which was ultimately paved over with blacktop in
1981.

Grace and five of its former company executives are charged with
a federal conspiracy involving Clean Air Act violations and
obstruction of justice.

U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy told jurors not to consider
Mr. Geiger's testimony as proof of an asbestos release, or as
proof of whether the release caused endangerment.

Because the CAA's criminal provision did not exist prior to
1990, Judge Molloy said the evidence could only speak to whether
or not Grace lied about the extent of its knowledge about the
asbestos hazards in Libby.

Jurors also heard from former mine worker Leroy Thom, who went
to work for the Company in 1974 when he was 19 years old. After
the mine closed in 1990, he joined a crew that tore down various
mine sites in 1991 and 1992 -- after the CAA added its criminal
law.

Mr. Thom said that even in those years he and the other workers
went home to their families every day covered in asbestos dust.
He also testified that he hauled loads of vermiculite to his
home and used the material in his garden. Piles of the
contaminated substance were available to the public.

Mary Goldade, an EPA chemist who was part of the initial cleanup
team that arrived in Libby in 1999, testified about the tens of
thousands of contaminated soil samples that were collected in
Libby.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Demolition of 2 Conn. Buildings Set for May
----------------------------------------------------------------
Two buildings contaminated with asbestos at the Riverside
Apartments in Ansonia, Conn., are expected to be demolished in
May 2008, Mesothelioma.com reports.

Both buildings will be torn over the course of a month.

The Housing Authority Board of Commissioners will hold a
meeting, where it is expected that a contract will be signed
with Industrial Wrecking Co., which submitted a US$348,000 bid.

The buildings, which have been vacant for nearly two years, must
be cleared of toxic materials in order to prepare for the
demolition. The building will have to undergo asbestos
abatement. Once the buildings have been rendered environmentally
safe, they will be ready to be taken down.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development gave permission
to tear down Buildings 1, 2, and 6 in 2007.

The Connecticut Department of Housing and Community Development
gave further permission in 2008 to take down two of the
buildings, leaving Building 6 in place.

Building 6, often called "the boiler room," will be left
standing because it houses utilities for the entire 11-building
housing complex.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Alameda's Residents Raise Exposure Concerns
----------------------------------------------------------------
The city of Alameda, Calif., agreed to check tests results that
show if residents may have been exposed to asbestos from a March
29, 2009 fire, KCBS reports.

According to resident Denise Lai, the Fleet Industrial Supply
Center at the old Navy base caught fire, producing thick, black
smoke and sending chunks of debris flying into a nearby
neighborhood.

Fire officials insisted the fire posed no health risk, that the
danger from 19 hours of thick black smoke was no worse than
driving behind a bus.

However, Ms. Lai and her neighbors had the debris tested and it
came back positive for asbestos, she said.

Alameda Fire Chief David Kapler says officials will take a look
at the results and decide on a course of action.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Santa Fe Building to be Checked for Hazards
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Santa Fe College announced on its Web site that the Health
Sciences Building W at the College's campus in Gainesville,
Fla., has been closed for asbestos testing since April 10, 2009,
the college announced on its Web site.

Santa Fe officials ordered air tests and halted work to replace
tiles in the building because of concerns that some of the
adhesive used to attach older tile might contain asbestos. On
April 10, 2009, the building was closed because testing showed a
"small amount" of asbestos.

Subsequent test results that the College received on April 11,
2009 came back below detectable limits, according to the
announcement posted on the Santa Fe College Web site.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Fitzpatricks to Pay $1T for Cleanup Breach
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has issued
a US$1,000 civil penalty to Timothy John Fitzpatrick and Kelli
Ellena Fitzpatrick for allowing unlicensed workers to perform an
asbestos abatement project in a commercial building they own in
Albany, Ore., according to a DEQ press release dated April 9,
2009.

The unlicensed workers removed friable asbestos-containing sheet
vinyl from the building, potentially releasing asbestos fibers
into the air.

The workers also failed to properly package and label the
asbestos-containing waste material generated by the project, and
the owners allowed the workers to dispose a portion of the waste
into an open dumpster. The open accumulation of the asbestos
waste is an additional violation of Oregon's environmental laws.

An Oregon-licensed asbestos abatement contractor must handle
asbestos-containing materials that can easily release asbestos
fibers. Oregon rules require that only specially trained and
licensed contractors perform friable asbestos abatement
projects.

Appeal procedures allow the Fitzpatricks 20 days to appeal or
pay the penalty.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Bradford Firm to Train Teachers on Hazards
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fibre Environmental Services, a Drighlington, Bradford, England-
based firm, is offering free asbestos awareness training to head
teachers in Bradford Council-owned schools, the Telegraph &
Argus reports.

More than 270 teachers have died as a result of asbestos-related
cancers caused by exposure to the lethal substance in Britain.
In March 2009, he Telegraph & Argus reported that more than 500
Bradford Council-owned buildings, including 205 schools, are
known to contain asbestos.

The Company has previously completed asbestos removal work at
Tong High School, Buttershaw High School and Salt Grammar School
in Baildon.

Linda Softley, marketing manager at Fibre, said, "As part of our
new local community school initiative all schools in the area
will be offered specifically tailored asbestos awareness
training for head teachers and key asbestos management personnel
within their schools.

"As experts in our field, we are offering this training to help
reduce any unnecessary asbestos exposure to both children and
teachers."

Ms. Softley said research suggested that for every drawing pin
stuck in a classroom ceiling containing asbestos, up to 6,000
asbestos fibers could be released into the atmosphere.

The Council, which has its own asbestos management unit, said it
had a "proactive and robust" approach to managing asbestos to
"minimize risk to all building users."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Mitigation Ongoing in Mass. Site
----------------------------------------------------------------
A US$200,000 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency grant is being
used to continue asbestos mitigation at the North Brookfield
Downtown Development Brownfield site in North Brookfield, Mass.,
the Telegram & Gazette reports.

Town and state officials, Police Chief Aram Thomasian and
environmental consultants gathered at the site for an update on
the cleanup and reuse of what was known as the Aztec property,
which was once used for the manufacture of asbestos textile and
other asbestos-based products. The plant closed in the mid-
1980s.

Selectman James J. Foyle said US$200,000 in EPA grant money was
being used to get the School and Grove street corner of the 5.3
acres ready for construction of a US$3.1 million police station.

Chief Thomasian said he was optimistic that a general contractor
would be on board by June 1, 2009, and that work would begin on
the 8,000-square-foot building soon after.

Neil Thurber, senior project manager for AECOM, the town's
consultant, said the entire site would be encapsulated
eventually by asphalt parking, concrete building foundations,
and a high-grade garden cloth, or textile barrier that would be
used beneath landscaped areas.

Mr. Foyle said the town was proceeding with a lease agreement
with Quabaug Corp. to use that portion of the site not used by
the police station for parking and warehouse space.

Mr. Thurber said the site is not level and the area where the
police station is to be located would be raised slightly with
fill and capped with a geosynthetic barrier and either the
asphalt, concrete or landscaping textile.

Mr. Thurber added that as little soil as possible would be
disturbed, and that because of cost, no additional asbestos-
contaminated soil would be removed from the site.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Nevada Site Cleanup to Create More Jobs
----------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu said that new jobs will be
created over the next three years to perform asbestos and
environmental cleanup at a Nevada test site, Mesothelioma.com
reports.

The cleanup is part ofUS $6 billion in funding under the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which is designed to
focus on environmental cleanup work.

The initiative aims to create thousands of jobs across 12
states. The program awarded US$44 million to the Nevada Test
Site.

The funding will be allocated to identify waste characteristics
within the soil at three corrective action sites. In addition,
workers will install groundwater monitoring wells to provide
additional data on groundwater contamination.

Three large facilities and two smaller structures will also be
removed.

Those areas are filled with contaminants, which include
asbestos, lead, mercury, cadmium, oil, PCBs, batteries, light
bulbs and low-level radioactive waste.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 50 Ottawa Firefighters Exposed to Asbestos
----------------------------------------------------------------
Around 50 firefighters from Ottawa, Canada, were told they could
be exposed to asbestos after a fire at a mall in Ottawa South
last March 2009, CBC News reports.

Ottawa firefighters tended to a two-alarm fire at the Southvale
Mall during March 2009, but they did not find out until April 7,
2009 that there had been asbestos in the building.

Erik Leicht, a spokesperson for the Ottawa Professional
Firefighters' Association, said, "Once the asbestos is
disturbed, the particles of asbestos will stick to your
clothing." He said that it is important that firefighters be
notified of a potential contamination as soon as possible.

For the past two decades, Canada has been working to reduce the
presence of asbestos, a loosely sprayed dust that is still found
as insulation in some buildings.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Found at Fort Carson Site in Colo.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Asbestos was found at Fort Carson near Colorado Springs, Colo.,
at a site where a housing development and elementary school are
planned, KOAA reports.

Karen Connelly, Fort Carson Public Affairs, said, "A 39-acre
parcel of land east of Gate 1, as a precautionary measure, has
been fenced off with 'Caution Do Not Enter' signs. Some debris
containing asbestos was found in March by the posts' Directorate
of Public Works employees during a routine environmental
inspection."

Several World War II-era buildings were torn down on the site
between 1971 and 1998.

Ms. Connelly said Colorado Department of Environmental Health
and Environment regulations do not require removal and disposal
of asbestos-containing materials until construction begins.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Areyonga Locals Likely Exposed to Asbestos
----------------------------------------------------------------
Residents of Areyonga, an aboriginal community about 200
kilometers southwest of Alice Springs, Australia, raised health
concerns about exposed asbestos, ABC News reports.

Jenny Macklin, the Federal Minister for Indigenous Affairs, says
that an environmental assessment of the danger posed by exposed
asbestos in the Central Australian Aboriginal community will
take place.

The residents told the ABC the Commonwealth has known about
asbestos in the partially demolished buildings for more than a
year but has failed to act to remove the toxic substance. They
said children played in the rubble and used asbestos as chalk
sticks up until it was found to contain asbestos.

Government tests in 2008 confirmed asbestos was present in 62 of
73 communities. However, it was removed from three communities
where it was deemed high risk.

Ms. Macklin says the Government has budgeted AUD17 million to
remove asbestos from remote communities.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazard Found at HMAS Albatross on March 27
----------------------------------------------------------------
A substance believed to contain asbestos was found at the HMAS
Albatross in Australia, on March 27, 2009, preventing Australian
Defence Force cadets from using the building, the South Coast
Register reports.

The substance, found underneath the cadets' building, was
believed to have been used as packing between pillars and floor
beams.

The building is regularly used by more than 60 Air Force and
Navy cadets, who have had their weekly activities stopped while
remediation work is carried out.

The building currently used by the two cadet units has been on
site since the 1960s.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: CSX Still Subject to Hazard Exposure Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
CSX Corporation continues to be subject to occupational claims,
including asbestos-related claims, according to the Company's
quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on April 15, 2009.

Occupational claims arise from allegations of exposure to
certain materials in the workplace like asbestos, solvents and
diesel fuels or allegations of chronic physical injuries
resulting from work conditions, such as repetitive stress
injuries, carpal tunnel syndrome and hearing loss.

Based in Jacksonville, Fla., CSX Corporation's rail-based
transportation services include traditional rail service and the
transport of intermodal containers and trailers. The Company's
principal operating company, CSX Transportation, Inc., provides
a link to the transportation supply chain through about 21,000
route mile rail network.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Global Energy Finds Hazard in N.C. Facility
----------------------------------------------------------------
Global Energy Holdings Group, Inc. says that the asbestos within
its facility in Spring Hope, N.C., has been contained as long as
there is no further disturbance of the structures, according to
the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on April 15, 2009.

On Nov. 7, 2006, the Company purchased all of the fixed assets
of a former fiberboard manufacturing facility in Spring Hope
from Carolina Fiberboard Corporation LLC. The assets included
212 acres of land, manufacturing and office space, and machinery
and equipment. Total consideration paid for the facility was
US$7.9 million.

Before the Company sells the property (or as a term of its
sale), the Company expects that it will have to resolve certain
liens on the property filed by companies that performed, or have
claimed to have performed, environmental remediation and
demolition work on the property. The Company has accrued
US$500,000 to settle claims and US$450,000 for environmental
clean-up at Dec. 31, 2008 and 2007.

During 2008, the Company completed an environmental study. The
contaminated soils at the site were remediated.

Based in Atlanta, Global Energy Holdings Group, Inc. is a
diversified renewable energy company. The Company's principal
operating division is Global Energy Systems, Inc., which is
developing renewable energy projects, including biomass
projects, such as gasification, and landfill-gas-to-energy
projects.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: EPA Adds Nine Waste Sites to Superfund NPL
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is adding nine new
hazardous waste sites that pose risks to human health and the
environment to the National Priorities List of Superfund sites,
according to an EPA press releases dated April 8, 2009.

Also, EPA is proposing to add 13 other sites to the list.
Superfund is the federal program that investigates and cleans up
the most complex, uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste
sites in the country.

To date, there have been 1,596 sites listed on the NPL. Of these
sites, 332 sites have been deleted resulting in 1,264 final
sites currently on the NPL.

With the proposal of the 13 new sites, there are 67 proposed
sites awaiting final agency action: 62 in the general Superfund
section and five in the federal facilities section. There are a
total of 1,331 final and proposed sites.

Contaminants found at the final and proposed sites include
arsenic, asbestos, barium, cadmium, carbon tetrachloride,
chloromethane, chromium, copper, dichloroethene (DCE), lead,
mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs), selenium, silver, sulfuric acid,
tetrachloroethene (PCE), trichloroethane (TCA), trichloroethene
(TCE), vinyl chloride, and zinc.

With all Superfund sites, EPA tries to identify and locate the
parties potentially responsible for the contamination. For the
newly listed sites without viable potentially responsible
parties, EPA will investigate the full extent of the
contamination before starting significant cleanup at the site.
Therefore, it may be several years before significant cleanup
funding is required for these sites.

The following nine sites have been added to the National
Priorities List:

-- Raleigh Street Dump (Tampa, Fla.)
-- Arkla Terra Property (Thonotosassa, Fla.)
-- U.S. Smelter and Lead Refinery, Inc. (East Chicago, Ind.)
-- Fort Detrick Area B Ground Water (Frederick, Md.)
-- Behr Dayton Thermal System VOC Plume (Dayton, Ohio)
-- New Carlisle Landfill (New Carlisle, Ohio)
-- BoRit Asbestos (Ambler, Pa.)
-- Barite Hill/Nevada Goldfields (McCormick, S.C.)
-- Attebury Grain Storage Facility (Happy, Texas)

The following 13 sites have been proposed to the National
Priorities List:

-- General Dynamics Longwood (Longwood, Fla.)
-- Lane Street Ground Water Contamination (Elkhart, Ind.)
-- Southwest Jefferson County Mining (Jefferson County, Mo.)
-- Flat Creek IMM (Superior, Mont.)
-- Ore Knob Mine (Ashe County, N.C.)
-- GMH Electronics (Roxboro, N.C.)
-- Raritan Bay Slag (Old Bridge/Sayreville, N.J.)
-- Gowanus Canal (Brooklyn, N.Y.)
-- Little Scioto River (Marion County, Ohio)
-- Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation/Church Road TCE (Mountain
Top, Pa.)
-- Papelera Puertorriquena, Inc. (Utuado, Puerto Rico)
-- Peck Iron and Metal (Portsmouth, Va.)
-- Amcast Industrial Corporation (Cedarburg, Wis.)


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Youngstown School Cleanup Estimated at $1M
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cleanup at the old West Elementary School building in
Youngstown, Ohio, could cost up to US$1 million, Mesothelioma &
Asbestos Awareness Center reports.

All asbestos removed from the building will need to be specially
disposed of in designated landfills as part of the demolition
process for the building, which is 81 years old.

The US$1 million estimate is actually much lower than the
initial estimate, which came in around US$2.2 million, according
to Tony DeNiro, the assistant superintendent for school business
affairs.

The original survey of the building indicated significant
amounts of asbestos in the plaster on the walls of the building.
However, the newest survey shows that the amount of asbestos in
some of the walls is within acceptable limits, and therefore the
cost of the removal will be much less than previously estimated.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Lo Presti Says Ford Should Pay Legal Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------
Tony Lo Presti's lawyers argue that the Ford Motor Company
should pay the legal costs for Mr. Lo Presti's trial, ABC News
reports.

In 2008, Mr. Lo Presti was awarded AUD840,000 after a judge
found that the Company's negligence caused his asbestosis. Mr.
Lo Presti had been exposed to asbestos fibers when he worked as
a brake mechanic at Ford dealerships in the 1970s and 1980s.

The damages payout followed a three week trial and came after
the Company rejected an offer by Mr. Lo Presti to settle the
case for AUD450,000.

On April 15, 2009, Mr. Lo Presti's lawyers argued that the
Company's rejection of the offer was unreasonable and it should
therefore have to pay his legal bills for the trial.

The Court of Appeal in Perth, Australia, has reserved its
decision.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Korea Consumers Sue Makers of Talc Products
----------------------------------------------------------------
A lawsuit was filed in Korean court against manufacturers of
domestically-produced cosmetics that allegedly used asbestos-
tainted talc, The Dong-A Ilbo reports.

A civic group called "A Gathering of Victims for a Class-action
Lawsuit against Asbestos Baby Powder" appeared on the Internet
portal site Naver on April 14, 2009. It said it has filed a
lawsuit against the Korean government, powder manufacturers and
talc suppliers to the Seoul Central District Court after
recruiting 46 victims as a first step.

A combined 23 households are party to the lawsuit and seek
KPW600,000 (US$453) in damages per household.

Kim Hyo-eun, the attorney for the group said, "We decided on the
amount considering that the manufacturers said nothing of the
asbestos-tainted talc, the government neglected its
responsibility to supervise it, and consumers suffered emotional
distress."

The Korean Federation for Environmental Movement held its first
meeting with some 10 victims on April 8, 2009. After collecting
reports of damage on its homepage, the federation filed a
lawsuit against the powder maker and talc supplier.

However, manufacturers affected by the talc ban are fighting the
government. The Korea Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association
said it has a list of manufacturers wanting to join a class-
action lawsuit against the Korean Food and Drug Administration,
along with 24 companies taking part in the movement.

The manufacturers plan to ask for a preliminary injunction to
lift the recall and disposal orders for asbestos-tainted
products against the government watchdog.

Han Lim Pharmaceuticals is suing to lift the sales ban and
recall orders with the Seoul Administrative Court. Han Lim
assumes the damage it suffered including losses from the sales
ban, suspension of insurance benefits, and tainting of its image
will exceed KPW1 trillion (US$755 million).


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazard Found at Redmond High School in Ore.
----------------------------------------------------------------
A tennis ball struck the ceiling of the gymnasium of Redmond
High School in Redmond, Ore., exposing asbestos, Mesothelioma &
Asbestos Awareness Center reports.

Officials sealed off the gymnasium on April 3, 3009. The
asbestos rained from the ceiling when the tennis ball hit it
just right.

Workers in full protective suits have been combing the gymnasium
with vacuums, and have missed virtually no nooks or crannies in
their meticulous sweep of the gymnasium

With the use of industrial size HEPA-filter vacuums, workers are
taking in a great deal of asbestos fibers. The dusty, foam-like
material covers the entire ceiling.

Steven Paulsen of Paulsen Environmental Consulting, the firm
conducting the cleanup, said, "[The fibers] are stronger than
steel for their size, so they're like breathing microscopic
needles.

"You can find asbestos in just about any building, even brand-
new construction. Most of our work is in buildings built between
1960 and 1990."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Schools Reminded to Comply With TSCA, AHERA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections over the past year of schools in New England by EPA
underscore the need for school districts to be vigilant in
protecting students' health by following asbestos management
requirements, according to an EPA press release dated April 2,
2009.

In 2008, EPA issued "Notices of Non-compliance" to nearly two
dozen school districts in New Hampshire and Vermont regarding
violations of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and the
Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA).

Typical violations of AHERA included failure to maintain
updated, complete asbestos management plans; failure to conduct
periodic inspections; and failure to train custodial and
maintenance personnel. When EPA has taken action, the "Notices
of Non-compliance" have required the schools to submit
corrective action plans within 30 days.

EPA conducted 41 AHERA inspections at schools throughout New
England in 2008, and expects to continue those efforts in 2009.
These inspections, and subsequent penalties and Notices of Non-
compliance, serve as reminders to all school districts that
keeping children and school employees safe is a priority to EPA.

One example of an action EPA has taken recently involved the
public school district in Barre, Vt. In this instance, EPA
discovered in 2006 that the Washington Central Supervisory Union
had violated AHERA by failing to maintain a complete, updated
copy of its Asbestos Management Plan (AMP) in the local
education agency's central administrative offices; maintain a
complete, updated copy of the AMP for each school in the
respective school's administrative offices; provide written
annual notifications to parents, teachers, and employee
organizations of the availability of the AMP; and have the AMP
available for EPA at the time of inspection.

Washington Central has reached an agreement with EPA to resolve
the violations of TSCA and AHERA. EPA determined that US$17,145
was an appropriate penalty for the violations. Under the terms
of the settlement, Washington Central will not be assessed a
monetary penalty after providing proof that the costs of their
compliance efforts following EPA's 2006 inspection exceeded that
amount. AHERA allows EPA to deduct the cost of compliance from
the penalty.

Violations of AHERA are serious because people attending,
working at and visiting public buildings should be protected
from the hazards of asbestos. AHERA requires local education
agencies to identify asbestos-containing materials in public and
private elementary and secondary schools.

The local agencies must develop asbestos management plans and
implement those plans in a timely manner, taking preventative
measures against the release of asbestos fibers.

The law also requires schools to survey asbestos-containing
materials, conduct periodic inspections of these materials,
train personnel on AHERA compliance, and make the plans
available to the public on a yearly basis so that teachers and
families can be kept informed about the location and condition
of asbestos in their schools.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Deleon Added to EPA's "Fugitives" Web Site
----------------------------------------------------------------
Albania Deleon, former president of Massachusetts' largest
asbestos removal training school, has been added to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's "environmental fugitives" Web
site, according to an EPA press release dated April 2, 2009.

Ms. Deleon failed to appear for her sentencing on March 23, 2009
at the Federal District Court, District of Massachusetts, and a
warrant has been issued for her arrest.

In November 2008, a federal jury convicted Ms. Deleon, a
resident of Andover, Mass., of selling certificates from
Environmental Compliance Training of Metheun, Mass., to hundreds
of illegal immigrants who had not taken the mandatory training
course.

The individuals who purchased the training certificates without
the training filed them with the Massachusetts Division of
Occupational Safety so they could work in the asbestos removal
industry. Hundreds of these individuals were sent to asbestos
demolition sites in Massachusetts and other New England states.

Ms. Deleon sent the individuals to perform removal work at job
sites through her temporary employment agency that specialized
in asbestos demolition and paid them "under the table" for their
work. She did not report these employees to the IRS and workers
compensation organizations, allowing her to save more than US$1
million dollars in tax and insurance payments. The Company shut
down in May 2007.

In November 2008, a federal jury convicted Ms. Deleon on 28
felony counts, including one count of conspiracy in making false
statements, encouraging illegal aliens to reside in the U.S.,
and hiring illegal aliens; five counts of making false
statements; sixteen counts of procuring false payroll tax
returns, and six counts of mail fraud.

Evidence presented at trial indicated that more than half of the
individuals receiving certificates had not taken the necessary
training, posing health risks to the individuals and to those
near the asbestos work sites.

Ms. Deleon is a naturalized U.S. citizen originally from the
Dominican Republic. Anyone sighting her should not attempt to
apprehend her but should report the sighting through the EPA
Fugitives Web site listed below or contact the EPA Criminal
Investigation Division office in Boston at (617) 918-2300.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Bond Sues N.C. Town for Cleanup Violations
----------------------------------------------------------------
Katherine Bond, an architect, filed a complaint with the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration alleging that the
town of Marshall, N.C., may have improperly removed asbestos
from a city building, Mesothelioma & Asbestos Awareness Center
reports.

Ms. Bond had volunteered to lend her expertise on renovations
for the Marshall's new town hall. She wrote, "What started as a
concern over a potential fire hazard with new insulation being
placed on an existing ceiling has resulted in the improper
removal of material which I believe contains asbestos. This
material was removed by town employees without proper equipment
and job site safety procedures."

North Carolina state law requires that asbestos-containing
materials to be removed prior to any activity that will disturb
the material, such as renovations or demolition. This is to
prevent the asbestos from becoming airborne.

The North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services said,
"Only North Carolina accredited asbestos professionals can
perform these activities."

On April 2, 2009, town Alderman Luther Nix said that he felt the
renovations for the town hall were OSHA compliant, but he would
invite OSHA to inspect the work to assure that it was being done
correctly.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Appeal Court Revives Smith Action in Kansas
----------------------------------------------------------------
The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, on March 31, 2009, revived an
asbestos lawsuit filed by former inmate Byron Smith who alleges
exposure to asbestos at the federal penitentiary in Leavenworth,
Kans., The Topeka Capital-Journal reports.

The Appeals Court sent Mr. Smith's lawsuit back to federal court
in Wichita, Kans.

Mr. Smith claimed he was exposed in 2003 to asbestos while
installing an electrical fixture in a closet in the prison's
education department. He said prison officials knew the closet
contained asbestos because a 1994 survey done by a consulting
firm found asbestos in the building. He claimed prison officials
violated his Eighth Amendment rights against cruel and unusual
punishment by being deliberately indifferent to his safety.

Mr. Smith said he developed a cough, shortness of breath and
trouble with his throat and eyes, and suffered emotional
distress. He sought US$100,000 in compensatory and punitive
damages, US$2 million for negligence, US$100,000 for the loss of
his medical records and an unspecified amount for future medical
expenses.

In 2007, U.S. District Judge J. Thomas Marten dismissed the
lawsuit, ruling Mr. Smith failed to show the defendants were
aware of a substantial risk of asbestos exposure and acted with
deliberate indifference.

In the March 31, 2009 decision, the appeals court upheld much of
Judge Marten's ruling but said that "although there was no
guarantee of ultimate success on the merits" the inmate's
allegations were legally sufficient to seek relief.

The appeals judges ruled the district court erred when it
dismissed the case against prison officials who were sued in
their individual capacities.


ASBESTOS ALERT: Kuhles Sued for Hazards at Dewey-Humboldt Plant
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) and the
Arizona Attorney General's Office have filed a civil complaint
in Maricopa County Superior Court against Kuhles Capital, LLC
for alleged violations that occurred at its landfill located
near Dewey-Humboldt in Yavapai County, according to an ADEQ
press release dated April 6, 2009.

The 10 counts against the Company include failure to perform a
thorough asbestos survey before beginning demolition activities;
handling regulated asbestos-containing materials improperly,
such as not removing them from structures before demolition or
disposing of the materials as soon as practical; and failure to
have at least one on-site employee trained in asbestos removal
regulations.

In July 2007, the Company began to close its landfill and
demolish structures on its site. ADEQ issued an Order of
Abatement in February 2008 to stop the demolition because
samples taken by ADEQ inspectors tested positive for asbestos-
containing material in siding material, roofing paint, and floor
tile at the facility.

Federal law requires regulated asbestos-containing material to
be wet and covered, which inspectors did not observe during two
subsequent visits. The Company has not fully complied with the
Abatement Order.

ADEQ's complaint addresses other violations by the Company,
including accepting unpermitted wastes such as household waste
and tires into its landfill; and failure to monitor groundwater
and landfill gas, to submit a landfill closure plan to ADEQ, or
to maintain financial assurance for monitoring the landfill
after closure.

Patrick J. Cunningham, ADEQ's acting director, said, "For years
ADEQ has tried to work with the company to bring it into
compliance with the standards that protect human health and the
environment in Arizona. We are left with no choice but to pursue
this action."

Attorney General Terry Goddard said, "The violations alleged in
this complaint represent an unnecessary and highly dangerous
disregard for the health of the Dewey-Humboldt community. I am
committed to working with ADEQ and local environmental
enforcement agencies to maintain the healthy environment and
quality outdoor lifestyle that attract so many to Arizona."

ADEQ issued a Compliance Order in 2005 to stop the Company from
accepting unpermitted waste, and a Notice of Violation in 2006
because the Company failed to conduct waste screening and
removal as required by the Compliance Order.

An Order of Abatement was issued to Kuhles Capital in 2008
regarding failure to comply with asbestos regulations.


                            *********

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  * * *