/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/100802.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Monday, August 2, 2010, Vol. 12, No. 150 Headlines AMERICAN AIRLINES: To Pay $5 Million & Cooperate in Cartel Probe APPLE INC: Sued for Making False Representations About iPad AUDIO-RITE CORPORATION: Sued for Fraud and Breach of Contract BP PLC: Beasley Allen Files Class Action Lawsuit in Alabama COLORADO: 10th Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Sensabaugh Complaint CONSUMER PROGRAMS: Employees File Suit Over Back Wages DELAWARE STATE UNIV: Court Grants Class Status to Gender Suit EMMIS COMMS: Superior Court Rejects TRO Request on Merger EXOBOX TECHNOLOGIES: Engaged in Insider Trading, Tex. Suit Says FERRO CORP: Continues to Indirect Purchaser Suit in California FERRO CORP: Defends Five Indirect Purchaser Suits in Penn. FLORIDA: School Board to Join Suit Over Age Limit Penalties GENERAL MOTORS: Settles Class Suit on Defective Parking Brake GRAND FORKS: 8th Circuit Upholds Dismissal of Traffic Fines Suit HAWAII: Educ. Dept. Faces Suit Over Age Limit for SPED Services HOECHST CELANESE: Will Pay $1 Million to Settle Class Suit HURONIA REGIONAL: Court to Certify Suit Filed by Disabled People LOWER MERION: Faces Second Class Suit Over Webcam Snooping NBC UNIVERSAL: Faces Class Suit Over 'Zombie Cookies' PPG INDUSTRIES: Defends Consolidated Antitrust Suit in Penn. SCHOLASTIC CORP: Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Suit Pending SEA STAR: Agrees to $18.5 Million Antitrust Settlement SMITH & WOLLENSKY: Hourly Wage Suit Gets Class Certification SUPER VALU: Lawyers to Get $18K in Class Action Settlement UNITED LIFE: Preliminary Hearing on Settlement Held VALEANT PHARMACEUTICALS: 2nd Shareholder Suit Filed in Orange Cty * 71 Lawsuits Seeking Class Action Status Filed in 1st Half * Securities Class-Action Suits Fall 15% Through June ********* AMERICAN AIRLINES: To Pay $5 Million & Cooperate in Cartel Probe ---------------------------------------------------------------- Erik Larson at Bloomberg News reports that AMR Corp.'s American Airlines agreed to give evidence against other carriers and pay $5 million to a group of freight shippers to settle a New York class-action lawsuit over its role in a global price-fixing cartel. Under the deal, American will provide witnesses, documents and electronic data to help shippers in similar cases in Canada, Australia, South Korea and other countries, the group's lawyer, Michael Hausfeld, Esq., of Hausfeld & Co. LLP, said in a statement in London last week. The agreement, filed July 26 in federal court in Brooklyn, New York, is the first by an airline to help prosecute the cartel claims outside the U.S., he said. "It is an important step forward for shippers in Europe and around the world and demonstrates that companies can act responsibly to resolve competition disputes without resorting to excessive or protracted litigation," Mr. Hausfeld, who is co-lead counsel in the case, said in the statement. The industry's freight services have been probed by the U.S. and the European Union since 2006, leading to settlements, fines and plea deals by airlines and executives. Earlier this month, Air France-KLM Group agreed to pay $87 million to hundreds of freight shippers to settle a similar class-action lawsuit in the U.S. American, based in Fort Worth, Texas, didn't admit fault or liability and was only added as a defendant in the case in order to seek court approval of the proposed deal, spokesman Tim Wagner said in an e-mail last week. "American Airlines has done nothing wrong," Mr. Wagner said. "Litigation is an expensive and uncertain proposition and avoiding the cost and inconvenience of trial made paying the settlement the best financial decision for American." Settlement talks with American started after the EU in 2007 gave the carrier a so-called statement of objections related to the cartel, Mr. Hausfeld said in court papers. Mr. Hausfeld later concluded that "while AA did face some risk of liability, it would be difficult for plaintiffs to obtain a judgment against it, given the evidence," according to the court filing. The case is In re Air Cargo Shipping Services Antitrust Litigation, 1:06-md-01775, Eastern District of New York (Brooklyn). The Plaintiffs are represented by: Michael D. Hausfeld, Esq. HAUSFELD & CO LLP 1700 K Street, NW, Suite 650 Washington, DC 20006 Telephone: 202-540-7200 Facsimile: 202-540-7201 E-mail: mhausfeld@hausfeldllp.com APPLE INC: Sued for Making False Representations About iPad ----------------------------------------------------------- Jacob Baltazar, Claudia Keller, John N. Browning, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. Apple Inc., Case No. 10-cv-03231 (N.D. Calif. July 23, 2010), bring claims against Apple Inc. for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, deceptive advertising practices, breach of express and implied warranties, and violations of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act and the California Business & Professions Code, arising from Apple's false representations that its iPad tablet computer was a superior product to other tablet computers or e-readers. The Plaintiffs say that the iPad does not function for prolonged use either outdoors or in many other warm conditions. Further, the iPad overheats so quickly that it is "virtually unusable" in certain conditions such as in direct sunlight, since it turns offs even after just a few minutes of use. Apple Inc. is the designer of the iPod, the iPhone and the iPad. Plaintiffs allege that they purchased the iPad tablet computer during the relevant time period and used the iPad, but did not receive full value, as promised by Apple. The iPad uses the same operating system as the iPhone, and can run its own specific applications as well as those developed originally for the iPhone. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Scott Edward Cole, Esq. Matthew R. Bainer, Esq. Hannah R. Salassi, Esq. SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC 1970 Broadway, Ninth Floor Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 891-9800 E-mail: scole@scalaw.com mbainer@scalaw.com hsalassi@scalaw.com AUDIO-RITE CORPORATION: Sued for Fraud and Breach of Contract ------------------------------------------------------------- Sima Alter, et al., individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. Audio-Rite Corporation, et al., Case No. 150154/2010 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty. July 23, 2010), accuses Audio-Rite of making materially false and misleading representations (via an extensive advertising campaign) to induce prospective students to enroll in the school's voice writing program. Sima Alter says Audio-Rite promised prospective students, among other things, increased opportunity for employment, particularly in the court reporting industry, assistance in obtaining reporting employment during enrollment in and following graduation from defendant's voice writing program, and better and higher paying reporting jobs, none of which came to fruition. Audio-Rite also falsely represented that its voice writing program can be financed through student loans which defendant will arrange for the benefit of students, and that its voice writing program is a fully-accredited court reporting school. Sima Alter claims that contrary to Audio-Rite representations, the school's voice writing technique is not validly recognized in the States of New Jersey and New York, is not preferred to the traditional stenographic technique, particularly in the court reporting industry, and that student loans secured by Audio-Rite for students are at rates that are uncompetitive. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Charles Gershbaum, Esq. GERSHBAUM & WEISZ, PC 192 Lexington Avenue, Suite 802 New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 385-2121 BP PLC: Beasley Allen Files Class Action Lawsuit in Alabama ----------------------------------------------------------- Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles, P.C., has filed a class action lawsuit in the Southern District of Alabama against British Petroleum and Nalco Company. The firm represents class representatives Glynis Wright and Janille Turner, who claim personal injuries and property damage related to BP's oil spill remediation activities on the Gulf Coast. The Plaintiffs claim that BP was negligent and reckless in dumping toxic dispersant chemicals on and adjacent to their properties. Since the spill began, BP has dumped millions of gallons of dispersant chemicals, either underwater, by boat or by air, to sink the crude oil to the bottom of the ocean. One of the chemicals used, called Corexit(R) 9500, is considered 4 times more toxic than sweet crude oil. Because of its toxicity to humans and marine environments, the United Kingdom has banned its use. The Plaintiffs claim their breathing and gastrointestinal problems, as well as the widespread respiratory problems being experienced by people on the Gulf Coast, are directly related to BP's use of the toxic chemicals. "BP is using these dispersants at an unprecedented rate not seen in other oil disasters," says Rhon Jones, Esq., head of Beasley Allen's Toxic Torts division. "What you are seeing is a company that is doing anything to keep the oil out of sight and out of mind. They are using these chemicals close to the shore, and predictably, people are starting to feel the effects." While this case marks the first spill-related personal injury suit filed by the firm, Beasley Allen has filed a number of lawsuits in District Courts in Alabama, Florida and Louisiana to help protect businesses and individuals harmed by the oil spill. The first suits were filed on behalf of Plaintiffs in the commercial fishing and restaurant industries, as well as on behalf of Gulf Coast real estate management companies, a commercial charter fishing guide, a commercial fishing deckhand, and a SCUBA diving business. Recently, Beasley Allen also filed its first case in state court, on behalf of property owners whose investments have lost value as a result of the oil spill. This latest suit alleges the Defendants are liable to the Plaintiffs and the Class for negligence and wanton misconduct, as well as nuisance, trespass, battery and medical monitoring. About Beasley Allen Law Firm Headquartered in Montgomery, Alabama, Beasley Allen -- http://www.beasleyallen.com/-- is comprised of 44 attorneys and more than 200 support staff. Beasley Allen is a national leader in civil litigation, with verdicts and settlements of over $20 billion. Our environmental attorneys negotiated the largest environmental settlement in U.S. history. At $700 million for PCB contamination in Anniston, Alabama, involving Solutia, Monsanto and Pharmacia, it doubled the previous benchmark in this area of litigation. Also among the firm's successes is an $11.8 billion verdict against ExxonMobil Corp., for breach of contract and fraud. Contact: Rhon E. Jones, Esq., BEASLEY, ALLEN, CROW, METHVIN, PORTIS & MILES P.C. 218 Commerce Street Montgomery, AL 36104 Telephone: 800-898-2034 Facsimile: 334-954-7555 Email: rhon.jones@beasleyallen.com COLORADO: 10th Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Sensabaugh Complaint ---------------------------------------------------------------- The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the complaint filed by Gerald Sensabaugh, a prisoner in the custody of the Colorado Department of Corrections, in part and remanded the case with instructions to treat the remainder of the complaint as an attempt to initiate enforcement proceedings under a settlement agreement related to a class action. The district court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction since the allegations in the complaint challenge the implementation of settlement orders arising from a class action, Montez v. Owens, No. 92-cv-0870 (D. Colo.). Mr. Sensabaugh is a member of the class in Montez, an action brought in the District of Colorado against the Colorado Department of Corrections under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 on behalf of Colorado inmates suffering from particular disabilities. A settlement agreement in the Montez class action was approved in August 2003. The settlement agreement created a procedure by which special masters evaluate individual class members' claims for damages. The district court is overseeing the settlement agreement's implementation. A copy of the Decision is available for free at: http://www.leagle.com/unsecure/page.htm?shortname=infco20100727093 CONSUMER PROGRAMS: Employees File Suit Over Back Wages ------------------------------------------------------ Employees commenced a class action lawsuit against Consumer Programs Incorporated for back wages alleged to be owed to thousands of employees who work at Sears Portrait Studios and Wal- Mart Picture Me Portrait Studios. CPI states it is the largest portrait studio operator in North America, offering photography services in over 3,000 locations throughout the United States. The class action lawsuit, filed July 23 in federal court in Wisconsin, seeks to recover back wages for all current and former photographic-customer service agents, assistant managers and managers nationwide who worked at any time since 2007. The suit also seeks to change CPI's pay practices. Other portrait studios around the country have faced lawsuits for similar illegal pay practices, including one resulting in a multi-million dollar settlement. The lawsuit alleges that CPI fails to pay employees for all the time they work, including time spent preparing the studios for upcoming photography sessions and cleaning studios at the end of the day. In addition, the employees assert that CPI adjusts employees' time records if they clock in more than 10 minutes before the studios open; does not compensate them for participating in mandatory conference calls; attending mandatory meetings; and distributing CPI marketing materials to businesses, hospitals, daycare centers, nursing homes, and churches. Photographers are also required to use their own money to buy props and toys to use in photography sessions, and are not reimbursed for these purchases. The employees assert these pay practices violate federal and state wage laws, including the Fair Labor Standards Act. The portrait studio employees are represented by the law firms of Zimmerman Reed, PLLP, and Lockridge, Grindal, Nauen, PLLP both of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Anne Regan, an attorney for the employees, said that "Unfortunately, many employers continue to violate federal and state wage laws because they know that in this economy many employees are afraid to assert their rights. We hope to recover the money that is owed to all CPI portrait studio employees nationwide by providing the means for these employees to join this case, which will be covered by federal and state anti-retaliation laws." Contact: Anne T. Regan, Esq. ZIMMERMAN REED, P.L.L.P. 651 Nicollet Mall, Suite 501 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Telephone: 612-341-0400 Facsimile: 612-341-0844 E-mail: Anne.Regan@zimmreed.com DELAWARE STATE UNIV: Court Grants Class Status to Gender Suit ------------------------------------------------------------- Wade Malcolm, writing for The News Journal, reports that facing a gender discrimination lawsuit, Delaware State University needed to prove it was expanding access to women's athletics, despite cutting its equestrian team this year. The university argued it had an ideal solution to offer more opportunities to women without the strain of equestrian on its budget. "DSU intends to create a new women's varsity sport -- competitive cheerleading," the university argued in a March federal court filing. Last month, a federal judge in Connecticut had this to say about a similar argument: "[Cheerleading] is still too underdeveloped and disorganized to be treated as offering genuine varsity athletic participation opportunities for students." For DSU, it was the second blow in as many weeks to its plan to disband its equestrian team, raising the possibility it might be stuck with a sport it doesn't want. Last month, the judge presiding over its gender equity case, Leonard P. Stark, ruled in favor of granting class-action status - - meaning any past or present female DSU student could join the case. The plaintiffs want the court to preserve the equestrian program and force the school to comply with Title IX. Now the university's case sits on shaky ground, legal experts said. "It seems to be very similar to what's been ruled in [Connecticut]," said Lamar Daniel, a consultant for schools handling Title IX compliance issues. Enacted almost 40 years ago, Title IX demands institutions provide athletic opportunity proportional to its enrollment. If they don't, they must at least show a history of working toward that goal. DSU's female enrollment has hovered around 60 percent in recent years, but only about 44 percent of its athletes are women. Even if equestrian and cheerleading remained as varsity sports, DSU would need to add about 110 more female athletes to achieve the correct ratio, the plaintiffs argue. "That's a huge gap," said Nancy Hogshead Makar, a professor of law and the senior director of advocacy at the Women's Sports Foundation. "It's as big as you'll see anywhere." With those obstacles -- combined with the recent rulings on cheerleading and class-action status -- DSU's case finds itself in a bleak position, Daniel said, and it has little hope for success. "That's probably what I would advise them," said Mr. Daniel, who oversaw Title IX enforcement while working at the federal Office of Civil Rights for 30 years. "If you cut women's sports, you better be in proportionality." The Connecticut decision has not affected any of the university's immediate plans to develop a competitive cheerleading team. DSU has invested $100,000 in the program and hired a new coach. The team will compete as scheduled this school year, and for now the university will consider it a varsity sport, spokesman Carlos Holmes said. "Cheerleading has been a part of Delaware State for a long time, and nothing is going to change that," Mr. Holmes said. "Its status as to whether it continues as a varsity sport will be determined at some point." Mr. Holmes would not comment on the pending litigation. In court documents, DSU attorneys argue the competitive cheerleading team would add 40 athletic opportunities for women, a gain of 20 from those lost by disbanding equestrian. After cutting it in January, DSU pledged to honor the scholarships of the affected athletes. Fifteen of the 20 women -- including lead plaintiff Caroline Foltz of Dover -- decided to sue to save the team. The university later agreed to fund equestrian for one more season this coming academic year. That it will be its last is becoming more unlikely, experts said. By granting class-action status, Stark affirmed many of the riders' allegations have at least some merit. The cheerleading decision in Connecticut "makes [DSU's] argument more difficult," said Abbe Fletman, an attorney from Flaster Greenberg representing the plaintiffs along with the Women's Law Project. "We're sort of boxed in," said Sam Hoff, a distinguished professor of law studies at DSU who has studied gender equity at the university. "Equestrian could be around for the foreseeable future." For several reasons, that scenario would be a bitter pill for many in the DSU community. Created in 2005, many felt the sport didn't fit DSU's identity. The Dover school is the only one in its conference -- and the only historically black institution in the country -- with a Division I equestrian team. "I don't think you'd find five people on DSU's campus that weren't surprised when they announced the women's equestrian team," said Steve Newton, president of DSU's faculty union Many see the equestrian legal troubles as an unfortunate legacy of former president Allen Sessoms' administration. In 2005, a faculty steering committee, chaired by Hoff, recommended field hockey as a better way to expand sports for females, but Mr. Sessoms later sold the group on equestrian. The sport has proven to be more expensive than expected, costing close to $600,000 per year. "Of greatest concern to DSU is the fact that so little of this money goes to student welfare," DSU lawyers said in court documents. "On the contrary, most of the expenses are for the housing and care of the horses." Mr. Daniel, the Title IX consultant, said he would have advised against a school like DSU starting equestrian. Charlie Wilson, president of DSU's faculty senate, said he and other faculty found the creation of the team "curious" and regarded it as a "pet thing" of Sessoms' administration. Sessoms, now president of the University of the District of Columbia, did not respond to interview requests. Mr. Wilson said he's had several of the riders in his classes and has even enjoyed watching them compete, but from a practical standpoint keeping the team doesn't make budget sense. "They're good kids, they're good students and I've enjoyed going to watch them compete," Mr. Wilson said. "[But] I think there was a general curiosity as to why it was picked for this university." Plaintiffs' counsel may be reached at: Abbe F. Fletman, Esq. FLASTER/GREENBERG 1600 John F. Kennedy Blvd. Four Penn Center, Suite 200 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: 215-279-9388 Facsimile: 267-299-6865 E-mail: abbe.fletman@flastergreenberg.com EMMIS COMMS: Superior Court Rejects TRO Request on Merger --------------------------------------------------------- Radio Ink reports that a Marion County, Indiana, Superior Court judge has ruled against class action plaintiffs who sought a temporary restraining order to block the transaction that would take Emmis Communications private through a merger with Chairman/CEO Jeff Smulyan's JS Acquisition. Judge Robyn Moberly ruled that the plaintiffs -- several lawsuits over the transaction were consolidated last month -- "failed to show a likelihood of success on the merits of any of the claims." She also said the plaintiffs' allegations that Emmis shareholders weren't given information they needed to evaluate the offer were either inaccurate or not based on "information that a reasonable investor would consider in deciding how to vote." Additionally, the judge ruled that "there is no probative evidence that insolvency or bankruptcy was likely unless the proposed transaction is consummated or otherwise." Emmis -- which called the judge's decision a "sweeping victory" -- said, "Despite plaintiff's counsel's attempt to distort the deposition testimony, there is no evidence that Emmis faces an imminent threat of bankruptcy whether or not the proposed transaction is completed." In regard to the plaintiffs' claims that Emmis' directors breached of their fiduciary duties, the judge wrote that the plaintiffs "do not direct the court to any relevant Indiana law supporting their interpretation of the fiduciary responsibilities of directors in an Indiana corporation." Judge Moberly also rejected conflict-of- interest claims. The ruling concludes, "Simply put, the plaintiffs have failed to show that any harm they will suffer without injunctive relief outweighs the harm that granting an injunction will cause." EXOBOX TECHNOLOGIES: Engaged in Insider Trading, Tex. Suit Says --------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that Exobox Technologies Corp. engaged in insider trading and was "created . . . as a sham corporation designed to provide benefits to the attorneys, officers, directors and brokers that participated in . . . the reverse merger," a class claims in Harris County Court, Texas. FERRO CORP: Continues to Indirect Purchaser Suit in California -------------------------------------------------------------- Ferro Corporation continues to defend a suit captioned Competition Collision Center, LLC v. Crompton Corporation, et al., Case No. CGC-040431278, pending in the Superior Court of the State of California for the City and County of San Francisco On May 6, 2004, the company was named in an indirect purchaser class action in California seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief relating to alleged violations of the antitrust laws by the company and others participating in the plastics additives industry. The suit is currently in its early stages. No further updates were reported in the company's July 26, 2010, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2010. Ferro Corporation -- http://www.ferro.com/-- is a leading global supplier of technology-based performance materials for manufacturers. Ferro materials enhance the performance of products in a variety of end markets, including electronics, solar energy, telecommunications, pharmaceuticals, building and renovation, appliances, automotive, household furnishings, and industrial products. Headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio, Ferro has approximately 5,200 employees globally and reported 2009 sales of $1.7 billion. FERRO CORP: Defends Five Indirect Purchaser Suits in Penn. ---------------------------------------------------------- Ferro Corporation continues to defend five indirect purchaser class action lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. On Aug. 4, 2005, the company was named in an indirect purchaser class action lawsuit captioned In Re Indirect Purchaser, Plastic Additives Litigation, D.R. Ward Construction, et al., v. Rohm & Haas Company, et al., Case No. 2:05-CV-04157-LDD, MDL No. 1684, filed in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In June 2008, the Company was named in four more indirect purchaser class action lawsuits: (1) Defren v. Rohm & Haas Company, et al., Case No. 2:08-CV-03702-LDD, filed June 12, 2008; (2) Zebrowski v. Rohm & Haas Company, et al., Case No. 2:08-CV-04161-LDD, filed June 23, 2008; (3) Burg v. Rohm & Haas Company, et al., Case No. 2:08-CV-04162-LDD, filed June 30, 2008; and (4) Miller v. Rohm & Haas Company, et al., Case No. 2:08-CV-03701-LDD, filed June 18, 2008. The four indirect purchaser cases filed in 2008 have been transferred to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The suits allege violations of antitrust laws by the company and others participating in the plastics additives industry. The suits are currently in their early stages. No further updates were reported in the company's July 26, 2010, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2010. Ferro Corporation -- http://www.ferro.com/-- is a leading global supplier of technology-based performance materials for manufacturers. Ferro materials enhance the performance of products in a variety of end markets, including electronics, solar energy, telecommunications, pharmaceuticals, building and renovation, appliances, automotive, household furnishings, and industrial products. Headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio, Ferro has approximately 5,200 employees globally and reported 2009 sales of $1.7 billion. FLORIDA: School Board to Join Suit Over Age Limit Penalties ----------------------------------------------------------- Tony Marrero, St. Petersburg Times staff writer, reports that Hernando school district staffers had only just started a presentation on strategies to meet the impending stricter class size requirements when the School Board made a decision: We're joining a lawsuit to fight the state's plan to levy financial penalties against districts that don't meet the goal. "This is an issue I'm more than comfortable fighting," board member John Sweeney said during Tuesday's workshop. Mr. Sweeney's four fellow board members agreed, directing attorney Paul Carland to add a resolution onto Tuesday evening's regular meeting agenda. The district will pay a $1,500 retainer to a Tallahassee law firm hired by the Florida School Boards Association. At least three districts -- Dade, Palm Beach and Broward -- have done the same to join a class-action suit to challenge the state's plan to take money from districts that don't meet the stricter class size requirements set to take effect this fall, Mr. Carland told the board. The suit is not challenging the amendment itself. Rather, the complaint questions the legality of the penalty. "It's probably a strategic battle that they're taking at this point to attack the financial penalty rather than the lack of funding," Mr. Carland said. The requirements on core classes were placed in the state Constitution after an amendment approved by voters in 2002. The limits have been phased in since then, first by using district- wide averages and then by schoolwide averages. The calculations will be made at the classroom level at the start of the upcoming school year and cap pre-kindergarten to third-grade classes at 18 students; fourth- to eighth-grade classes at 22; and high school classes at 25. Based on last year's student data, Hernando has nearly 2,400 classes out of compliance, Heather Martin, executive director of business services, told the board. That could mean a penalty of more than $3.2 million, Ms. Martin said. Under the state's plan, money collected in penalties would go to districts which do meet the requirements. But Mr. Sweeney, reading a memo from FSBA director Wayne Blanton, noted that few districts expect to be able to do so. "Just from an equity and fairness perspective, how can you take money from one county and give it to another county?" superintendent Bryan Blavatt said. To meet the goal just by hiring more teachers, the district would have to add nearly 400 teachers at a cost of some $23.4 million, Ms. Martin said. Some districts that can't afford such increases in personnel costs are facing drastic measures such as eliminating non-core classes like music and art, cutting classes with small enrollments, and changing attendance zones. Hernando can't afford those new hires, either, but will likely be able to avoid painful measures through other strategies, Ms. Martin said. Teachers will receive an extra pay supplement to take on additional classes. Other staffers such as media specialists, guidance counselors and assessment teachers who have the proper certifications can also teach core classes. "Many, many teachers have stepped up and are willing to do that," Ms. Martin said. At the elementary grade level, classes over the cap would get a long-term substitute as a co-teacher. That way, if a proposed amendment on the November ballot to ease the class size restrictions passes, the district is not locked into full teacher contracts, she said. Hernando's new virtual school program also will help, Ms. Martin said. The district has set aside $4 million in the 2010-2011 budget to help meet the class caps. GENERAL MOTORS: Settles Class Suit on Defective Parking Brake ------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Rochelle at Bloomberg News reports that old General Motors Corp. agreed to settle a pre-bankruptcy class-action lawsuit based on an allegedly defective parking brake in some GM cars and trucks built between 1999 and 2002. If approved, the class will have an approved unsecured claim of $12 million. The suit began in 2005 and later was certified as a class action by a state court in Arkansas. After GM's bankruptcy, the class plaintiff filed a claim on behalf of the class for almost $1.5 billion. GM had the case switched from the Arkansas state court to bankruptcy court. The settlement ensued. The plaintiffs believe there are 4 million class members. Old GM sold the core business to new GM and in return received 10% of the stock of the new company plus warrants for 15%. The warrants will be worth something if the new company is profitable enough to raise the company's value to specified levels. New GM is 60.8%-owned by the U.S. government. Old GM began the largest manufacturing reorganization in history by filing under Chapter 11 on June 1, 2009. The sale was completed on July 10, 2009. GM listed assets of $82.3 billion against debt totaling $172.8 billion. The case is In re Motors Liquidation Co., Case No. 09-50026, (S.D.N.Y.) GRAND FORKS: 8th Circuit Upholds Dismissal of Traffic Fines Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dave Kolpack, writing for The Associated Press, reports that an appeals court on Tuesday upheld a federal judge's decision to throw out a traffic fines lawsuit in Grand Forks, North Dakota similar to a Fargo case that resulted a more than $1 million class-action settlement. Bruce Mills lodged his complaint against the city of Grand Forks after Stephanie Sauby filed -- and later won -- a lawsuit against the city of Fargo. Both Mills and Sauby argued that their traffic fines were higher than state law allowed. The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that the late U.S. District Judge Rodney Webb was correct when he said the Sauby case was different because Fargo ignored the opinions of three state court judges who said the fines were illegal. Mr. Mills' attorney, Jonathan Garaas, said he believes the issues are identical. "It's a curious result. Really curious," Mr. Garaas said of the ruling. Mr. Mills, of Northwood, was cited for careless driving in Grand Forks in 2004 and fined $164. He said state law allowed for only a $30 fine. He filed unsuccessful appeals in state district court and the state Supreme Court. Ms. Sauby, a West Fargo day care worker, filed her lawsuit in January 2007, after she was cited for five traffic violations. Judge Webb declared it a class action in December 2008. The city of Fargo was ordered to pay about 14,000 people who filed valid claims for reimbursement. Mr. Mills brought his complaint in April 2008. Judge Webb dismissed it in April 2009. A three-judge panel of the 8th Circuit backed Webb's opinion that Mr. Mills failed to raise any federal constitutional questions. The city of Grand Forks "reasonably and justifiably" relied on two state attorney general's opinions and shouldn't have been expected to apply the district court decisions in Fargo, Judge Webb said. The 8th Circuit agreed. "At the time the city cited Mills for careless driving, no binding legal precedent existed to show that the city's traffic fines violated state law, or that the city's conduct was 'truly irrational,'" wrote Judge Myron Bright, who lives in Fargo. Mr. Garaas said he hasn't been able to talk to Mr. Mills about the ruling because he's out of the country, but believes they're likely to bring a new case in state court. "I'm surprised that the federal constitution doesn't provide protection, but we're confident the state constitution will," Mr. Garaas said. HAWAII: Educ. Dept. Faces Suit Over Age Limit for SPED Services --------------------------------------------------------------- Mary Vorsino, writing for The Star Advertiser, reports that the Hawaii Disability Rights Center filed a class-action lawsuit on July 27 seeking to extend special-education services in public schools for students until they turn 22. The cutoff is now 20. "The concern is that disabled students in Hawaii are being deprived of an education after age 20," said John Dellera, executive director of the center. "Throughout most of the country, disabled students have the right to an education . . . until they're 21 or 22." The state Department of Education declined comment because officials had not yet reviewed the lawsuit. Mr. Dellera said the class action is about providing equitable educational opportunities to special-education students. General-education students who do not complete high school programs can enroll in adult education, he said, but that option is not open to special-education students seeking vocational or independent-living training. He also pointed out that only Hawaii and Maine set the cutoff for special education at 20 years old. Most other states set it at 21 or 22 years old. The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court, seeks to stop the state from enforcing a law passed in the last legislative session that formally puts the age limit for students in public school at 20. The law was passed following a federal court ruling in 2009, on a suit filed by the center, which said special-education students were being moved out of schools at 20 -- the state's age limit for public schools set in the 1960s -- but that general-education students were being given special permission by principals to stay longer (as allowed under the old law). "The court ordered Hawaii to treat everybody equally," Mr. Dellera said. The federal government says states should provide a free education to disabled students until they turn 22, unless the state lowers the maximum age for all students. Four students joined the center in the class-action suit. Mr. Dellera estimates that hundreds of special-education students each year could gain from the extra years of education. HOECHST CELANESE: Will Pay $1 Million to Settle Class Suit ---------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Siskinds LLP on July 28 disclosed the conditional settlement of a class action filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in February 1999 against certain defendants, including Hoechst Celanese Corporation. Celanese has agreed to pay up to $1 million to resolve the claims of class members related to the alleged unsuitability of pipes made from polybutylene, and pipe fittings made from acetal resin used in potable plumbing systems. The allegations have not been proven, and the court has not taken any position as to the truth or merits of the claims or defences asserted by either side. The Defendants deny the allegations and deny any wrongdoing or liability. The settlement finally resolves the action pending before the Ontario court. Commenting on the settlement, Siskinds partner Michael Peerless said, "This is an excellent result for class members, and we look forward to moving ahead with the administration process in order for class members to receive compensation. We would like to commend the Defendants for putting this compensation program in place for Canadians." The settlement remains conditional on approval by the Ontario Court of Justice. A formal hearing to approve the Settlement is currently scheduled for September 10, 2010 at 10 AM, at which time class members may, but are not required to, attend in court for the purposes of supporting or objecting to the proposed Settlement. Full details can be found on the Siskinds class action Web site at: http://www.classaction.ca/ The Settlement also provides for the formal provision of notice to those affected by the Settlement under the supervision of the Courts. On court approval of the Settlement that notice will provide specific instructions as to how class members can file claims. Contact: Mike Peerless, Esq. SISKINDS LLP 680 Waterloo Street P.O. Box 2520 London, Ontario, Canada N6A 3V8 Telephone: 519-660-7866 E-mail: mike.peerless@siskinds.com HURONIA REGIONAL: Court to Certify Suit Filed by Disabled People ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Canadian Press reports that a class-action lawsuit from developmentally disabled people alleging decades of abuse at an Ontario institution has been given the green light. Ontario Superior Court Justice Maurice Cullity told the court Wednesday there will be an order certifying the action involving former residents of Huronia Regional Centre and their family members. Mr. Justice Maurice Cullity says he will make adjustments to the order and give his written reasons in several days. The institution opened in 1876 under the name Orillia Asylum for Idiots, and when it closed in March 2009, Huronia was the oldest institution for people with a developmental disability. Former resident Marie Slark cried a little outside court Wednesday as she described alleged abuse, which she says consisted of putting people in straight jackets and drugging residents. The allegations have not been proven in court and the province says it will not file a statement of defense until it receives a written decision. LOWER MERION: Faces Second Class Suit Over Webcam Snooping ---------------------------------------------------------- Derrick Nunnally, staff writer at The Philadelphia Inquirer, relates another student filed on Tuesday a civil lawsuit for invasion of privacy against the Lower Merion School District and others. Fatima Hasan said she received a letter from Lower Merion school administrators that her son, Jalil, 18, had been secretly monitored by the webcam on his school-issued laptop. But only when Fatima Hasan saw the evidence did the scope of the spying on her son Jalil become apparent. There were more than 1,000 images surreptitiously captured by the computer -- 469 webcam photographs and 543 screen shots. All were evidence in the case against the Lower Merion School District and its now-abandoned electronic monitoring policy. "I was really shocked. I didn't know what I was walking into," Fatima Hasan said. "They were all pictures of Jalil, and all Web shots from his laptop, and that's not an easy feeling." The suit joins one filed in February by Blake Robbins, a student at Harriton High School, and for the first time draws in Lower Merion High School, where Jalil Hasan was a senior. For the high- achieving school district, the second civil suit raises the stakes in an already-costly legal fight. The cases are similar in their broad outlines. The electronic monitoring began after school-issued computers were reported missing. In both cases, the system was simply left on long after the laptops were recovered. Hundreds of photos and screen shots were captured on a predetermined schedule. The photos from Jalil Hasan's computer included shots of him in his bedroom and of other family members and friends. In a widely published photograph, Robbins, now 16, was shown sleeping on his bed. According to the suit, Hasan forgot his computer in cooking class on Dec. 18, a Friday. A teacher turned it in to the technology department that day. On Dec. 21, Hasan retrieved his computer from the technology office. At some point that day, school officials activated the security system. The system kept capturing images for nearly two months and was only deactivated after the first lawsuit was filed. "When I saw these pictures, it really freaked me out," said Jalil Hasan, who will attend culinary school in California in the fall. His mother said she could not understand why the tracking system was activated. "What was it turned on for if you had [the computer] in your possession?" she asked. "It never left the school, so you could have clearly seen it." Fatima Hasan, who owns a day-care center in the Overbrook section of the city, said she moved to Ardmore from Philadelphia so her son "would be in a safe environment" for high school. "But then, when I'm looking at these pictures," she said, "and I'm looking at these snapshots, I'm feeling like, 'Where did I send my child?'" The district commissioned its own investigation and admitted that the monitoring system was flawed. The two Lower Merion staffers authorized to activate remote monitoring are on administrative leave. The district's investigation revealed that the webcams had been activated 76 times in less than two years, producing more than 58,000 images. The district acknowledged that more than half the images were created because technicians failed to turn off tracking software after missing laptops were recovered. Suing the district over the surveillance has not proven popular, though the Robbins suit was filed as a potential class action and was designed to cover every student affected. The district has challenged the legal status, and parents of more than 500 students signed a petition saying they wanted no part of a legal action that would be paid for with their tax dollars. According to the most recent estimates, the combined legal bills and other case-related expenses from Robbins' suit have reached about $1.2 million. Mark S. Haltzman, who represents Hasan and the Robbins family, said class-action status was the most efficient course, though for the moment, both suits are filed separately. Asked if he expected more lawsuits, Mr. Haltzman said, "I think that each person has to decide for themselves whether they want to come forward." The district did not respond to the allegations in the suit, but in a statement said "continued litigation is clearly not the right way to proceed." It noted that new policies governing the use of technology had been drafted. "While the results of that investigation reveal that mistakes were made, there is no evidence that any students were individually targeted," the statement said. Plaintiff's counsel may be reached at: Mark Haltzman LAMM RUBENSTONE LLC 3600 Horizon Boulevard, Suite 200 Trevose, PA 19053 Telephone: (215) 638-9330 Facsimile: (215) 638-2867 E-mail: mhaltzman@lammrubenstone.com NBC UNIVERSAL: Faces Class Suit Over 'Zombie Cookies' ----------------------------------------------------- Eriq Gardner, writing for The Hollywood Reporter, relates some top entertainment companies are being accused of secretly spying on the online habits of their Web site users. A new class action lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in California targets NBC Universal, MTV Networks, Hulu, JibJab Media, MySpace, ABC, ESPN, and Scribd. The individual plaintiffs accuse the media companies of using Flash cookies to "respawn" deleted HTTP cookies. In other words, even if Internet users clear their Internet browsers of data files tracking a user's web surfing, the companies allegedly can harvest consumers' personal information anyway. Many Web sites place "cookies" on visitors' computers so as to gather information for advertising purposes. The class action asserts that the companies fail to disclose the use of so-called "zombie cookies" in their privacy policies. The 119-page complaint quotes George Orwell and demands unspecified monetary damages. The case is Edward Valdez, et al. v. Quantcast Corporation, et al., case no. 10-cv-05484 (Calif. C.D.), and the plaintiffs are represented by: Joseph H. Malley, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH H. MALLEY 1045 North Zang Blvd. Dallas, TX 75208 Telephone: 214-943-6100 Facsimile: 214-943-6170 E-mail: malleylaw@gmail.com - and - David C. Parisi, Esq. PARISI & HAVENS LLP 15233 Valleyheart Drive Sherman Oaks, California 91403 Telephone: 818-990-1299 Facsimile: 818-501-7852 E-mail: dparisi@parisihavens.com A copy of the complaint is available for free at http://is.gd/dQnea PPG INDUSTRIES: Defends Consolidated Antitrust Suit in Penn. ------------------------------------------------------------ PPG Industries, Inc., continues to defend a consolidated suit alleging that it conspired to fix the price and the terms and conditions of sale of flat glass in the United States. Several complaints were filed in late 2007 and early 2008 in different federal courts naming PPG and other flat glass producers as defendants in purported antitrust class actions. The complaints allege that the defendants conspired to fix, raise, maintain and stabilize the price and the terms and conditions of sale of flat glass in the United States in violation of federal antitrust laws. In June 2008, these cases were consolidated into one federal court class action in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. In the consolidated complaint, the plaintiffs seek a permanent injunction enjoining the defendants from future violations of the federal antitrust laws, unspecified compensatory damages, including treble damages, and the recovery of their litigation costs. No further information was disclosed in the company's July 26, 2010, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2010. PPG Industries, Inc. -- http://www.ppg.com/-- is a coatings and specialty products company. Founded in 1883, the company serves customers in industrial, transportation, consumer products, and construction markets and aftermarkets. With headquarters in Pittsburgh, PPG operates in more than 60 countries around the globe. Sales in 2009 were $12.2 billion. PPG shares are traded on the New York Stock Exchange (symbol: PPG). SCHOLASTIC CORP: Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Suit Pending -------------------------------------------------------------- Scholastic Corporation's motion to dismiss a second amended class action complaint remains pending. The company is party to certain actions filed by each of Alaska Laborers Employee Retirement Fund and Paul Baicu, which were consolidated on Nov. 8, 2007. On Sept. 26, 2008, the plaintiff sought leave of the Court to file a second amended class action complaint, in order to add allegations relating to the company's restatement announced in the company's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on July 30, 2008. The Court thereafter dismissed the company's pending motion to dismiss as moot. On Oct. 20, 2008, the plaintiff filed the second amended complaint, and on Oct. 31, 2008, the company filed a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint, which remains pending. The second amended class action complaint continues to allege securities fraud relating to statements made by the company concerning its operations and financial results between March 2005 and March 2006 and seeks unspecified compensatory damages. No updates on this matter were reported in the company's July 26, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2010. Scholastic Corporation -- http://www.scholastic.com/-- publishes and distributes children's books and is a leader in educational technology and related services and children's media. Scholastic creates quality books, print and technology-based learning materials and programs, magazines, multi-media and other products that help children learn both at school and at home. The company distributes its products and services worldwide through a variety of channels, including school-based book clubs and book fairs, retail stores, schools, libraries, on-air, and online. SEA STAR: Agrees to $18.5 Million Antitrust Settlement ------------------------------------------------------ Joseph Bonney, writing for The Journal of Commerce Online, reports that Sea Star Line is the third carrier to agree to a multimillion-dollar settlement of a class-action civil antitrust lawsuit alleging price-fixing in the U.S. mainland-Puerto Rico trade. The Jacksonville-based carrier agreed to pay $18.5 million to settle allegations that carriers colluded on prices between 2002 and early 2008, when federal agents raided offices of Sea Star, Horizon Lines and Crowley Maritime. Horizon Lines previously agreed to a $20 million settlement and Crowley Maritime has agreed to pay a reported $14 million. A fourth carrier, Trailer Bridge, was dismissed from the case in April. The settlement agreements aren't necessarily the last word in the case. Individual shippers still have the ability to opt out of the class action and pursue their own cases. Several large shippers have had lawyers monitoring the case in U.S. District Court in San Juan. Separately from the class-action civil antitrust lawsuit, the Justice Department is said to be continuing a criminal investigation that has already netted guilty pleas that have sent three former Horizon officials and two ex-Sea Star officials to prison for antitrust violations or obstructing justice. SMITH & WOLLENSKY: Hourly Wage Suit Gets Class Certification ------------------------------------------------------------ William McQuillen at Bloomberg News reports that Smith & Wollensky must face a class action lawsuit brought by a waiter who claims hourly workers at the steakhouse chain's Chicago restaurant are paid less than the minimum wage. Smith & Wollensky, a unit of closely held Patina Restaurant Group, is accused of failing to pay the minimum, now $8.25 an hour in Illinois, to employees who earn tips, including waitresses and bartenders. The lawsuit will cover those employees for earnings since March 25, 2006, U.S. District Judge Ruben Castillo in Chicago said July 27 in an order certifying the case as a class action. Also included are workers who worked more than 40 hours a week and were paid less than time-and-a-half. About 140 current and former employees may be represented by the suit, which seeks lost wages and unspecified further damages, said Douglas Werman, an attorney for the workers. "Class certification is more efficient than individual suits to deal with these common questions," Judge Castillo wrote. Smith & Wollensky, based in New York, violated a law allowing the payment of less than the minimum wage, or a so-called tip credit, if tips plus wages equal the minimum, according to the complaint filed by employee Gerald Schmidt. The Chicago restaurant required workers to perform non-tipped duties before opening and closing, while still paying them the lower tip-credit hourly wage, Mr. Schmidt claimed. The company also allowed non-tipped employees to share in the tip pool, violating Illinois minimum-wage laws, he said. Smith & Wollensky didn't immediately return a message seeking comment. The company, which has restaurants in nine cities, argued that the lawsuit was filled with "highly individualized" inquiries and shouldn't be a class action, according to Castillo's order. The case is Schmidt v. Smith & Wollensky LLC, Case No. 09-cv-2752 (N.D. Ill.). Contact: Douglas M. Werman, Esq. WERMAN LAW OFFICE 77 W. Washington, Ste. 1402 Chicago, Illinois Telephone: 312-419-1008 Facsimile: 312-419-1025 SUPER VALU: Lawyers to Get $18K in Class Action Settlement ---------------------------------------------------------- Amelia Flood, writing for The Madison/St. Clair Record, reports that Madison County Circuit Judge Andreas Matoesian is set to give the final nod to the settlement of a class action suit filed last year against the owners of the Shop n'Save grocery chain -- Super Valu Inc. Lead plaintiff Mary Voyles has led a class of people who were charged more than 50 cents in check cashing fees. The final approval hearing will be Aug. 6 at 9 a.m. Ms. Voyles and the class allege that Super Valu's stores illegally charged overly high fees for check cashing services. The class filed suit last year alleging claims of consumer fraud, unjust enrichment, violation of the Illinois Check Cashing Act, and other claims. The suit sought damages in excess of $50,000 per count and other relief. In a preliminary agreement, class members will receive $20 each and up to $75,000 in relief. In the event that part of the $75,000 is left over, half will go to local food banks and the remaining half will be returned to the defendants. Ms. Voyles will receive $500 as lead plaintiff. Thomas and Peter Maag, Brian Wendler, and Jeffrey Millar are designated class counsel. They will receive $18,000 in legal fees. Super Valu must also, under the settlement, amend its business practices, although it continues to deny the charges. The class is made up of those who used the service between Jan. 1, 2007 until June 10, 2009 at Super Valu's Illinois stores including Jewel-Osco stores and Shop n'Saves. The settlement only resolves the Illinois-based litigation against the defendant. Troy Bozarth, Esq., represents Super Valu. The case is Madison case number 09-L-542. UNITED LIFE: Preliminary Hearing on Settlement Held --------------------------------------------------- Amelia Flood at The Madison/St. Clair Record reports Circuit Judge David Hylla presided at the preliminary settlement approval hearing Thursday in a 2001 class action brought against United Life Insurance Company. The Madison County class action once encompassed a nationwide pool of car buyers who claim they unknowingly bought credit insurance. Lead plaintiff Christopher Booher of Wood River filed suit in 2001 alleging the insurance company committed sales fraud when it sold credit insurance to car buyers. The class was estimated at one point by plaintiff's counsel Daniel Cohen of LakinChapman to include at least 60,000 car buyers nationwide. Then-Madison County Circuit Judge Phillip Kardis certified a nationwide class in the case in 2003. Judge Kardis retired in 2005. The case then went to then-Madison County Circuit Judge Don Weber. Although United Life Insurance moved to decertify the class, Judge Weber allowed the suit to continue but dropped the 44 other states from it, leaving only an Illinois class. The case eventually found its way to Judge Hylla, who has refereed discovery and other disputes in the case. The case went through mediation in December 2009, according to case management orders in the case file. Two months later, parties in the suit indicated to Judge Hylla that mediation was successful, according to a Feb. 24 order. Settlement documents are not yet available in the case file. Richard Boyle, Esq., and others represent United Life Insurance. The case is Madison case number 01-L-1824. VALEANT PHARMACEUTICALS: 2nd Shareholder Suit Filed in Orange Cty ----------------------------------------------------------------- Alfred Haro, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. J. Michael Pearson, et al., Case No. 2010-00389773 (Calif. Super. Ct., Orange Cty. July 14, 2010), accuses the Chairman and CEO of Valeant and certain other Valeant officers and directors of self- dealing and breach of fiduciary duties, in connection with the individual defendants' agreement to sell Valeant to Biovail. Mr. Haro brings claims against Valeant, Biovail Corporation, Biovail Americas Corp. and Beach Merger Corp. for aiding and abetting the individual defendants' breaches of their fiduciary duties. On June 21, 2010, Valeant and Biovail jointly announced that the Board of directors of both companies had agreed to merge, pursuant to which Valeant will be sold to Biovail for 1.7809 shares of Biovail common stock and a one-time special cash dividend of $16.77 per share, and a $1.00 per share dividend after the consummation of the proposed acquisition. The combined company will be named Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc. Mr. Haro alleges that the proposed transaction was obtained via an unfair process and for inadequate consideration (based on the Company's solid performance and anticipated future growth). The proposed transaction values Valeant's shares at $42.77 per share, below Valeant's closing price of $45.87 on June 18, 2010, the last trading day before the announcement of the proposed acquisition. Additionally, the individual Defendants agreed to the proposed acquisition without negotiating a collar to protect itself against any fluctuation in the price of Biovail stock that would negatively affect Valeant's shareholders. The individual defendants also agreed on preclusive protection devices to discourage competing offers, including a no solicitation provision and a termination fee of $100 million payable to Biovail if Valeant accepted a superior unsolicited proposal, which adds "an additional $0.75 per share to the price tag for any successful third party bidder." Upon completion of the proposed acquisition, Valeant, which develops, manufactures and markets a broad range of pharmaceutical products, will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Biovail (a Canadian special pharmaceutical company focusing on products that address unmet medical needs in specialty central nervous systems orders). Biovail Americas Corporation is a wholly owned subsidiary of Biovail and is the parent company of Beach Merger Corp. BMC is operating as the "Merger Sub" in the proposed acquisition, and upon its completion, will merge with Valeant and cease its separate corporate existence. The Plaintiff is represented by: Brian J. Robbins, Esq. Stephen J. Oddo, Esq. Rebecca A. Peterson, Esq. ROBBINS UMEDA LLP 600 B Street, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 525-3990 Coverage of Martino v. J. Michael Pearson, et al., Case No. 2010- 00389330 (Calif. Super. Ct., Orange Cty.), appeared in the Class Action Reporter on Wednesday, July 28, 2010. * 71 Lawsuits Seeking Class Action Status Filed in 1st Half ----------------------------------------------------------- Joanna Chung at The Wall Street Journal reports that a decline in lawsuits related to the credit crisis has pushed the volume of new federal securities cases toward pre-turmoil lows, according to two reports. "The tide is going out . . . the securities fraud litigation wave stimulated by the credit crisis now appears to be history," said Joseph Grundfest, professor at Stanford Law School, which issued one of the reports jointly with Cornerstone Research on Tuesday. Plaintiffs filed a total of 71 lawsuits seeking class-action status in federal courts during the first half of the year, of which eight were related to the crisis. That compares with 84 filings during the same period last year, which included 37 crisis-related complaints. If this pace continues, there will be about 143 lawsuits by December, the lowest level since 2006, the year before the crisis hit. While the flood of litigation is receding, it likely will be years before many cases get resolved. In recent years, securities lawsuits, typically brought against companies by investors alleging fraud that led to stock losses, have taken an average of three to four years to settle. "Two-thirds of all credit-crisis-related cases are still pending," said Jordan Milev, senior consultant at NERA Economic Consulting, which on Tuesday produced another study that found the overall volume of lawsuits down to 2007 levels. As long as the current pace continues, the NERA study projects plaintiffs will file about 202 federal securities class-action cases by the end of the year, of which about 34 are expected to be related to the crisis compared with 57 last year and 103 in 2008, the recent peak year for such lawsuits, according to its study. Declines in crisis litigation were partly offset, the study said, by growth in other types of lawsuits, including those stemming from the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Recent judicial and legislative developments, including a Supreme Court ruling limiting the reach of U.S. securities laws, could have a greater role in shaping securities litigation in the future, according to the report. The average securities class-action settlement in the first half of 2010 was $209 million, higher than in any prior year, according to the NERA study, but that was largely influenced by a $7.2 billion Enron settlement that was finalized in February. Excluding the Enron settlement, the average settlement was $24 million, compared with the $42 million average in 2009 and slightly lower than the 2003-2010 average settlement of $28.7 million. Plaintiffs' attorneys earned a total of $902 million in fees and expenses, including fees in connection with the Enron settlement, during the first half of the year, the study said. * Securities Class-Action Suits Fall 15% Through June ----------------------------------------------------- Carlyn Kolker at Bloomberg News reports that securities-fraud class-action lawsuits fell 15% in the first half of the year from the same period a year earlier, according to study by Stanford University's Securities Class Action Clearinghouse and Cornerstone Research. "The securities fraud litigation wave stimulated by the credit crisis now appears to be history," Stanford Law School Professor Joseph Grundfest said in a statement. Eight of 71 U.S. cases filed in the first half of 2010 related to the credit crisis, the study showed. Such cases totaled 53 in all of 2009 and 100 in 2008. Overall, the 71 total cases so far in 2010 compared with 84 in each half of last year. Contributing to the drop this year is the lack of Ponzi scheme cases, according to the study. There were no securities- fraud filings stemming from such frauds like the one for which Bernard L. Madoff is serving a 150-year prison sentence. There were 18 Ponzi-related class action filings last year. All filings collected by the Clearinghouse and Cornerstone are in U.S. federal courts. New suits fell to the lowest semi-annual level since 2007. The decline in new filings this year follows a trend that started in 2009, when there were 169 new lawsuits, compared to 223 the year earlier. Except for 2008 each year since 2005 has seen a decrease, data from the Class Action Clearinghouse show. 'Real Shift' "It could be we are having a real shift," said John Gould, a senior vice president at Cornerstone. "Plaintiffs will say it's because court rulings have made it harder to file cases. Defendants will say it's because there's less fraud going on." He attributed the decrease in case filings in part to decreased stock market volatility. Four of the 71 new cases represented two-thirds of the disclosed losses, according to the study, which didn't identify the cases. Goldman Sachs Group Inc. was sued in April by investors for failing to disclose information about its true financial condition, including that it had received a notice from the Securities and Exchange Commission about an investigation into a mortgage investment, according to the Class Action Clearinghouse. The company fell 13 percent in a day after being sued by the SEC in April, according to a case summary on the clearinghouse's website. On July 15, Goldman announced it agreed to settle the SEC's lawsuit for $550 million. ********* 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. Gracele D. Canilao, Leah Felisilda, Rousel Elaine Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Ronald Sy and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 2010. 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 * * *