/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/100813.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Friday, August 13, 2010, Vol. 12, No. 159
Headlines
AK STEEL: Continues to Defend Suit Over Health Benefits
AK STEEL: "Schumacher" Lawsuit Still Ongoing in Ohio
AK STEEL: Subsidiary Continues to Defend Suit Over Pension Plan
AK STEEL: Continues to Defend Suit by Steel Purchasers in Ill.
AMERICREDIT CORP: Being Sold for Too Little, Tex. Suit Claims
ASURION: Recalls 470,000 Counterfeit BlackBerry-Branded Batteries
CARTER'S INC: Motion to Dismiss Consolidated Suit Still Pending
CHESAPEAKE ENERGY: Motion to Dismiss Suit Remains Pending
GENERAL DYNAMICS: To Pay $15MM to Settle Suit Over 401(k) Plans
GROUP HEALTH: Accused of Violating Mental Health Parity Act
JPMORGAN CHASE: Sued for Circumventing Intent of Regulation E
KINDER MORGAN: Various Affiliates Face "Lugliani" Suit in Calif.
INTUITIVE SURGICAL: Accused in Calif. of Misleading Shareholders
LANDSTAR SYSTEM: Bid for Rehearing of OOIDA Ruling Still Pending
LOCKHEED MARTIN: Sued for Discriminating Against Women Employees
MENZIES AVIATION: Removes "Jimenez" Labor Complaint to N.D. Calif.
MOODY'S CORP: Consolidated Suit in New York Ongoing
RICHMOND AMERICAN: Accused in Calif. of Building Defective Homes
SERVICE CORPORATION: Continues to Defend "Garcia" Suit in Fla.
SERVICE CORPORATION: Continues to Defend "Sands" Suit in Calif.
SERVICE CORPORATION: Defends "Prise" Suit in Pennsylvania
SERVICE CORPORATION: Continues to Defend "Bryant" in California
SERVICE CORPORATION: Continues to Defend "Stickle" in Arizona
SERVICE CORPORATION: Defends "Conley" Suit in Texas
TIANJIN APPLIANCE: Recalls 98,000 Portable Dehumidifiers
Asbestos Litigation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Foster Wheeler Cites $323.95M June 30 Liability
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Eastman Chem. Still Party to Exposure Lawsuits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 1,534 Open Actions v. Standard Motor at June 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: TriMas Party to 1,019 Pending Cases at June 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Kaiser Aluminum Records $3.7MM CAROs at June 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fresenius Still Party to Sealed Air Cases
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Anadarko Petroleum Involved in Exposure Actions
ASBESTOS UPDATE: CNA Fin'l. Has $1.062B Net Reserves at June 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: No Date Set for Rehearing of A.P. Green Case
ASBESTOS UPDATE: CNA Still Involved in W.R. Grace Case in Mont.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Supreme Court Affirms Judgment in Rhodes Action
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Sensus USA Inc. Still Party to Exposure Actions
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Graham Remains a Defendant in Injury Claims
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Rogers Corp. Has 181 Pending Claims at June 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: FirstEnergy Remains Involved in Exposure Suits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: ArvinMeritor Has $61MM Liability at June 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Maremont Still Facing 26,000 Claims at June 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: ArvinMeritor Still Facing Rockwell Legacy Cases
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hartford Liability at $1.94-Bil. at June 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 3M Company Still Involved in Respirator Actions
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 3M Company Records $33M June 30 Aearo Liability
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 3M Company Records $127M Liabilities at June 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Continental Action v. 3M Company Still Pending
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Allstate Reserves $1.14B for Claims at June 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Exposure Lawsuits Ongoing v. CenterPoint Energy
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Tasty Baking Has $100,000 Interest at June 26
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Wilkinson Case v. 9 Firms Filed in Kanawha Co.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Oregon DEQ to OK Plan for Sunriver Amphitheater
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cleanup at Old West End Academy to Cost $52,000
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Bankruptcy Judge OKs Creditors' Bid in GM Case
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Appleton Pensioner's Death Related to Exposure
ASBESTOS UPDATE: U.K. Horticulturalist's Death Linked to Hazard
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Sunriver Homeowners' Case v. U.S. Govt. Ongoing
ASBESTOS UPDATE: St. Joseph's Hospice to Get GBP10,000 in Payout
ASBESTOS UPDATE: N.J. Court Denies Motion to Amend Gurvey Action
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ohio Court OKs Judge's Ruling in Leonard Action
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Split Ruling Issued in Russell's Action v. Ford
ASBESTOS UPDATE: RBS Global's Stearns Unit Still Has 1,425 Cases
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 2 Lawsuits Ongoing v. RBS Global's Prager Unit
ASBESTOS UPDATE: RBS Global's Falk Unit Faces 180 Exposure Cases
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Zurn Still Facing 6,000 Injury Cases at July 3
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Vector Group Facing Burik Lawsuit in Md. Court
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Liggett Group Party to Love Action in Md. Court
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Vector Group Involved in Parsons Case in W.Va.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide Has 66,099 Open Claims at June 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide Cites $36MM June 30 Defense Costs
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide's Insurance Case Ongoing in N.Y.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide Still Has $84M June 30 Receivable
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Transocean's Units Still Face Lawsuits in Miss.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Transocean Unit Facing 1,062 Actions at June 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Odyssey Records $386.44M Losses, LAE at June 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Gardner Denver Still Party to Exposure Lawsuits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 122,490 U.S. Claims Ongoing v. Foster Wheeler
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Foster Wheeler Still Has $3.7MM Insurance Asset
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 289 Claims Remain v. Foster Wheeler U.K. Units
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Midwest Generation Cites $49M June 30 Liability
*********
AK STEEL: Continues to Defend Suit Over Health Benefits
-------------------------------------------------------
AK Steel Corporation continues to defend a purported class action
alleging that AK Steel did not have a right to make changes to
their healthcare benefits.
AK Steel is a wholly owned subsidiary of AK Steel Holding Corp.
On June 18, 2009, three former hourly members of the Butler Armco
Independent Union filed a purported class action against AK Steel
in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Case
No. 1-09CV00423, alleging that AK Steel did not have a right to
make changes to their healthcare benefits.
On June 29, 2009, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint.
The named plaintiffs in the 2009 Retiree Action seek, among other
things, injunctive relief for themselves and the other members of
a proposed class, including an order retroactively rescinding
certain changes to retiree healthcare benefits negotiated by AK
Steel with its unions. The proposed class the plaintiffs seek to
represent would consist of all union-represented retirees of AK
Steel other than those retirees who were included in the class
covered by the Middletown Works Retiree Healthcare Benefits
Litigation.
On Aug. 21, 2009, the company filed an answer to the amended
complaint and filed a motion for summary judgment which, if
granted in full, would end the litigation. On Sept. 14, 2009,
plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment and
responded to defendant's motion.
On Oct. 14, 2009, plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary
injunction, seeking to prevent certain scheduled January 2010
changes to retiree healthcare from taking effect. On Nov. 25,
2009, AK Steel filed its opposition to the motion for a
preliminary injunction, opposition to plaintiffs' motion for
partial summary judgment, and reply in support of its motion for
summary judgment.
A hearing on the pending motions was held on Dec. 8, 2009.
During the course of the hearing, plaintiffs' counsel notified the
court that the pending motion for a preliminary injunction was
limited to retirees from the company's Butler Works in Butler,
Pennsylvania.
On Jan. 29, 2010, the trial court issued an opinion and order
granting plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction and
barring the Company from effecting any further benefit reductions
or new healthcare charges for Butler Works retirees until final
judgment in the case.
On Feb. 2, 2010, AK Steel filed a notice of appeal to the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit seeking a reversal of the
decision to grant the preliminary injunction. That appeal remains
pending.
Discovery in the underlying case has commenced.
If AK Steel is unable to obtain a reversal of the decision to
impose the preliminary injunction, either in connection with the
final judgment by the trial court or through appeal, then the
negotiated changes to retiree healthcare for the Company's Butler
Works retirees would be rescinded and the company's other
postretirement benefit obligation would increase by approximately
$145.9 million based upon current valuation assumptions. This
amount reflects the current value of the estimated amount of the
additional healthcare costs the company will pay out with respect
to the Butler retirees. A pro-rata portion of this amount,
currently approximately ten percent, would be recognized as a one-
time charge at the time of the final judgment and the rest would
be amortized over a period of approximately ten years.
No further updates were reported in the company's July 30, 2010,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
AK Steel Holding Corporation -- http://www.aksteel.com/-- is a
producer of flat-rolled carbon, stainless and electrical steels,
and tubular products through its wholly owned subsidiary, AK Steel
Corporation (AK Steel). The company's operations consist of seven
steelmaking and finishing plants located in Indiana, Kentucky,
Ohio and Pennsylvania that produce flat-rolled carbon steels,
including coated, cold-rolled and hot-rolled products, and
specialty stainless and electrical steels that are sold in hot
band, and sheet and strip form. The company's operations also
include AK Tube LLC (AK Tube), which finishes flat-rolled carbon
and stainless steel at two tube plants, one located in Ohio and
one located in Indiana, into welded steel tubing used in the
automotive, large truck and construction markets. In addition,
the company's operations include European trading companies that
buy and sell steel and steel products and other materials.
AK STEEL: "Schumacher" Lawsuit Still Ongoing in Ohio
----------------------------------------------------
The AK Steel Corporation Retirement Accumulation Pension Plan (AK
RAPP) and the AK Steel Corporation Benefit Plans Administrative
Committee continue to defend a purported class action filed by
William Schumacher, according to the company's July 30, 2010, Form
10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for
the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
On Oct. 20, 2009, William Schumacher filed a purported class
action against the AK RAPP and AK BPAC in the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of Ohio, Case No. 1:09cv794.
The complaint alleges that the method used under the AK RAPP to
determine lump sum distributions does not comply with the
Employment Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and the
Internal Revenue Code and resulted in underpayment of benefits to
him and the other class members.
Plaintiff and the other purportedly similarly situated
individuals on whose behalf plaintiff filed suit were excluded by
the Court in 2005 from the suit filed by John D. West, a former
employee of AK Steel Holding Corp., based on previous releases of
claims they had executed in favor of the company.
On Jan. 11, 2010, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the
Complaint based upon a statute of limitations ground.
That motion was denied on March 8, 2010, and defendants filed
their answer to the complaint on March 22, 2010. No trial date
has yet been set.
AK Steel Holding Corporation -- http://www.aksteel.com/-- is a
producer of flat-rolled carbon, stainless and electrical steels,
and tubular products through its wholly owned subsidiary, AK Steel
Corporation (AK Steel). The company's operations consist of seven
steelmaking and finishing plants located in Indiana, Kentucky,
Ohio and Pennsylvania that produce flat-rolled carbon steels,
including coated, cold-rolled and hot-rolled products, and
specialty stainless and electrical steels that are sold in hot
band, and sheet and strip form. The company's operations also
include AK Tube LLC (AK Tube), which finishes flat-rolled carbon
and stainless steel at two tube plants, one located in Ohio and
one located in Indiana, into welded steel tubing used in the
automotive, large truck and construction markets. In addition,
the company's operations include European trading companies that
buy and sell steel and steel products and other materials.
AK STEEL: Subsidiary Continues to Defend Suit Over Pension Plan
---------------------------------------------------------------
AK Steel Holding Corp.'s wholly owned subsidiary, AK Steel
Corporation, continues to defend a class action relating to the
benefits of its pension plan.
On Oct. 20, 2005, two individuals filed a purported class action
against AK Steel and the AK Steel Corporation Benefit Plans
Administrative Committee in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Ohio, Case No. 1:05-cv-681.
The complaint alleges that the defendants incorrectly calculated
the amount of surviving spouse benefits due to be paid to the
plaintiffs under the applicable pension plan. On Dec. 19, 2005,
the defendants filed their answer to the complaint.
The parties subsequently filed cross-motions for summary judgment
on the issue of whether the applicable plan language had been
properly interpreted.
On Sept. 28, 2007, the United States Magistrate Judge assigned to
the case issued a Report and Recommendation in which he
recommended that the plaintiffs' motion for partial summary
judgment be granted and that the defendants' motion be denied.
The defendants filed timely objections to the Magistrate's Report
and Recommendation. On March 31, 2008, the court issued an order
adopting the Magistrate's recommendation and granting partial
summary judgment to the plaintiffs on the issue of plan
interpretation.
The plaintiffs' motion for class certification was granted by the
Court on October 27, 2008.
The case is proceeding with respect to discovery on the issue of
damages. No trial date has been set.
No further updates were reported in the company's July 30, 2010,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
AK Steel Holding Corporation -- http://www.aksteel.com/-- is a
producer of flat-rolled carbon, stainless and electrical steels,
and tubular products through its wholly owned subsidiary, AK Steel
Corporation (AK Steel). The company's operations consist of seven
steelmaking and finishing plants located in Indiana, Kentucky,
Ohio and Pennsylvania that produce flat-rolled carbon steels,
including coated, cold-rolled and hot-rolled products, and
specialty stainless and electrical steels that are sold in hot
band, and sheet and strip form. The company's operations also
include AK Tube LLC (AK Tube), which finishes flat-rolled carbon
and stainless steel at two tube plants, one located in Ohio and
one located in Indiana, into welded steel tubing used in the
automotive, large truck and construction markets. In addition,
the company's operations include European trading companies that
buy and sell steel and steel products and other materials.
AK STEEL: Continues to Defend Suit by Steel Purchasers in Ill.
--------------------------------------------------------------
AK Steel Holding Corp., along with other steel manufacturers,
continues to defend purported class actions filed by companies who
purchased steel products.
In September and October, 2008, several companies filed purported
class actions in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of Illinois, against nine steel manufacturers, including AK
Holding.
The case numbers for these actions are 08-CV-5214, 08-CV-5371,
08-CV-5468, 08-CV-5633, 08-CV-5700, 08-CV-5942 and 08-CV-6197.
The plaintiffs are companies which claim to have purchased steel
products, directly or indirectly, from one or more of the
defendants and they purport to file the actions on behalf of all
persons and entities who purchased steel products for delivery or
pickup in the United States from any of the named defendants at
any time from at least as early as January 2005 to the present.
The complaints allege that the defendant steel producers have
conspired to restrict output and to fix, raise, stabilize and
maintain artificially high prices with respect to steel products
in the United States.
On Jan. 2, 2009, the defendants filed motions to dismiss all of
the claims set forth in the Complaints.
On June 12, 2009, the court issued an Order denying the
defendants' motions to dismiss.
Discovery has recently commenced. No trial date has been set.
No further updates were reported in the company's July 30, 2010,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
AK Steel Holding Corporation -- http://www.aksteel.com/-- is a
producer of flat-rolled carbon, stainless and electrical steels,
and tubular products through its wholly owned subsidiary, AK Steel
Corporation (AK Steel). The company's operations consist of seven
steelmaking and finishing plants located in Indiana, Kentucky,
Ohio and Pennsylvania that produce flat-rolled carbon steels,
including coated, cold-rolled and hot-rolled products, and
specialty stainless and electrical steels that are sold in hot
band, and sheet and strip form. The company's operations also
include AK Tube LLC (AK Tube), which finishes flat-rolled carbon
and stainless steel at two tube plants, one located in Ohio and
one located in Indiana, into welded steel tubing used in the
automotive, large truck and construction markets. In addition,
the company's operations include European trading companies that
buy and sell steel and steel products and other materials.
AMERICREDIT CORP: Being Sold for Too Little, Tex. Suit Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that AmeriCredit is selling itself
too cheaply through an unfair process to General Motors, for
$24.50 a share or $3.5 billion, shareholders claim in Tarrant
County Court, Fort Worth.
A copy of the Complaint in Butler v. Morris, et al., Case No.
67-247227-10 (Tex. Dist. Ct., Tarrant Cty.), is available at:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/08/09/SCA.pdf
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Willie C. Briscoe, Esq.
THE BRISCOE LAW FIRM, PLLC
8117 Preston Rd., Suite 300
Dallas, TX 75225
Telephone: 214-706-9314
- and -
Patrick Powers, Esq.
Mark Taylor, Esq.
CASH, POWERS, TAYLOR, LLC
8150 North Central Expy., Suite 15751
Dallas, TX 175206
Telephone: 214-239-8900
ASURION: Recalls 470,000 Counterfeit BlackBerry-Branded Batteries
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Asurion, of Smyrna, Tenn., announced a voluntary recall of about
470,000 Counterfeit BlackBerry(R)-branded cell phone batteries in
refurbished devices. Consumers should stop using recalled
products immediately unless otherwise instructed.
Asurion has received two reports of counterfeit BlackBerry(R)-
branded batteries overheating, causing minor burns to a consumer's
finger and minor property damage to a sofa and car seat.
This recall involves only BlackBerry(R)-branded batteries provided
with refurbished Blackberry(R)-branded devices. The refurbished
devices were sent to consumers by Asurion through a handset
protection program. The batteries were used across virtually all
models of refurbished BlackBerry devices distributed by Asurion
prior to November 1, 2009. Genuine Blackberry-branded batteries
are not included in this recall. N o other Asurion or BlackBerry
products are involved in this recall. Pictures of the recalled
products are available at:
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml10/10752.html
The recalled products were sold through Asurion as part of their
handset protection claim program nationwide from March 2004
through October 2009.
Consumers who received refurbished BlackBerry devices through
Asurion prior to November 1, 2009 should immediately stop using
the product and contact Asurion for a replacement product.
Asurion is directly contacting known consumers with the affected
batteries to notify them of this recall. For more information,
contact Asurion toll-free at (866) 384-9175 between 8:00 a.m. and
7:00 p.m., Central Time, Monday through Friday, or visit the
firm's Web site at http://www.001batex.com/
CARTER'S INC: Motion to Dismiss Consolidated Suit Still Pending
---------------------------------------------------------------
Carter's, Inc.'s motion to dismiss an amended and consolidated
complaint remains pending in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Georgia, according to the company's Aug. 2,
2010, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended July 3, 2010.
Plymouth Action
A shareholder class action lawsuit was filed on Sept. 19, 2008 in
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
entitled Plymouth Country Retirement System v. Carter's, Inc.,
No. 1:08-CV-02940-JOF.
The Amended Complaint filed on May 12, 2009 in the Plymouth
Action asserts claims under Sections 10(b), 20(a), and 20A of the
1934 Securities Exchange Act, and alleges that between
Feb. 1, 2006 and July 24, 2007, the company and certain current
and former executives made misrepresentations to investors
regarding the successful integration of OshKosh into the company's
business, and that the share price of the company's stock later
fell when the market learned that the integration had not been as
successful as represented.
Defendants in the Plymouth Action filed a motion to dismiss the
Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim under the federal
securities laws on July 17, 2009, and briefing of that motion was
complete on Oct. 22, 2009.
Mylroie Action
A shareholder class action lawsuit was filed on Nov. 17, 2009 in
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
entitled Mylroie v. Carter's, Inc., No. 1:09-CV-3196-JOF.
The Complaint in the Mylroie Action asserts claims under Sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act, and alleges
that between April 27, 2004 and Nov. 10, 2009, the company and
certain current and former executives made misstatements to
investors regarding the company's accounting for discounts offered
to some wholesale customers.
Consolidated Action
The Court consolidated the Plymouth Action and the Mylroie Action
on Nov. 24, 2009.
On March 15, 2010, the plaintiffs in the Consolidated Action
filed their amended and consolidated complaint.
The company filed a motion to dismiss on April 30, 2010, and
briefing of the motion was complete on July 23, 2010.
Carter's, Inc. -- http://www.carters.com/-- markets apparel for
babies and young children in the United States. The company owns
two brand names in the children's apparel industry, Carter's and
OshKosh. Carter's offers multiple product categories, including
baby, sleepwear, playclothes and other accessories. The company
sells its products to national department stores, chain and
specialty stores, discount retailers, and as of Dec. 29, 2007,
through 228 Carter's and 163 OshKosh outlet and brand retail
stores. Under its Carter's brand, the company designs, sources
and markets an array of products, primarily for sizes newborn to
seven. Its Carter's brand is sold in department stores, national
chains, specialty stores, off-price sales channels, and through
its Carter's retail stores. Carter's sells its Just One Year and
Child of Mine brands through the mass channel at Target and Wal-
Mart, respectively.
CHESAPEAKE ENERGY: Motion to Dismiss Suit Remains Pending
---------------------------------------------------------
Chesapeake Energy Corporation's motion to dismiss a putative class
action remains pending in the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of Oklahoma, according to the company's July 30, 2010,
Form 10-Q/A filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended March 31, 2010.
On Feb. 25, 2009, a putative class action was filed in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York against the
company and certain of its officers and directors along with
certain underwriters of the company's July 2008 common stock
offering. Following the appointment of a lead plaintiff and
counsel, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint on Sept. 11,
2009, alleging that the registration statement for the offering
contained material misstatements and omissions and seeking damages
under Sections 11, 12 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 of an
unspecified amount and rescission.
The action was transferred to the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Oklahoma on Oct. 13, 2009.
The company has filed a motion to dismiss which has been fully
briefed.
Chesapeake Energy Corporation -- http://www.chkenergy.com/--
produces natural gas in the U.S. The company's operations are
focused on exploratory and developmental drilling and corporate
and property acquisitions in the Mid-Continent, Fort Worth Barnett
Shale, Fayetteville Shale, Permian Basin, Delaware Basin, South
Texas, Texas Gulf Coast, Ark-La-Tex and Appalachian Basin regions
of the United States.
GENERAL DYNAMICS: To Pay $15MM to Settle Suit Over 401(k) Plans
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Harris at Courthouse News Service reports that General
Dynamics and Fiduciary Asset Management will pay $15 million to
settle a class action that claimed thousands of participants in
two 401(k) plans were charged excessive fees. Employees and
retirees filed the federal class action in 2001.
The class claimed billions of dollars in 401(k) business was
handed to Fiduciary Asset Management without a competitive bidding
process and that costs and fees for plan participants were
inflated.
General Dynamics has agreed to use an outside consultant to review
parts of the 401(k) plans and will have institute enhanced
disclosure of fees and expenses for accounts, according to the
settlement.
Fiduciary Asset Management is prohibited from recommending itself
as an investment manager for the accounts.
General Dynamics and Fiduciary Asset Management said in a
statement that they complied with the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974, but said the settlement was in the best
interests of all parties.
The payout will come from insurance, and will be deposited into
the 401(k) accounts after costs and attorneys' fees are
subtracted, according to the statement.
The settlement requires approval from a federal judge and a
representative of the accountholders.
GROUP HEALTH: Accused of Violating Mental Health Parity Act
-----------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that The Group Health Cooperative
shorts policyholders for coverage of autism, pervasive
developmental disorder, and mental retardation, in violation of
the Mental Health Parity Act, a class action claims in King County
Court, Seattle.
A copy of the Complaint in D.M. v. Group Health Cooperative, Case
No. 10-2-28618-7 (Wash. Super. Ct., King Cty.), is available at:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/08/09/Insure.pdf
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Eleanor Hamburger, Esq.
Richard E. Spoonemore, Esq.
Stephen J. Sirianni, Esq.
SIRIANNI YOUTZ MEIER & SPOONEMORE
719 Second Ave., Suite 1100
Seattle, WA 98104
Telephone: 206-223-0303
JPMORGAN CHASE: Sued for Circumventing Intent of Regulation E
-------------------------------------------------------------
Victor Espinosa, et al., individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., et al., Case No.
10-cv-03463 (N.D. Calif. August 6, 2010)), accuses the bank of
providing inaccurate balance information, providing misleading
information as to the benefits of its "overdraft coverage"
program, and using scare tactics (of massive declined debit card
transactions) to force customers to "opt-in" to the overdraft
coverage program, in direct circumvention of the intent of
Regulation E.
Regulation E, which was enacted to protect customers from
unnecessary and improper overdraft fees, goes into effect on
August 15, 2010. Under Regulation E, before a bank may charge an
overdraft fee, it must first secure from its customers a specific
request -- an "opt-in agreement" -- to approve debit card and ATM
transactions into overdraft.
Mr. Espinosa says that the bank also breached its deposit account
agreement with its customers by altering its available funds
policy (only for those who have not opted-in), in order to force
those customers into opting-in to accept debit card charges.
Specifically, Mr. Espinosa explains, despite the account agreement
that states employee direct deposit checks and electronic deposits
are available on the day the funds are received, the bank will not
make those funds available for debit card purchases for those who
have not opted-in.
Mr. Espinosa is a resident of county of Riverside, California, and
was originally a customer of Washington Mutual, before it was
acquired by JPMorgan Chase.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard D. McCune, Esq.
David C. Wright, Esq.
Kristy M. Arevalo, Esq.
Jae (Eddie) K. Kim, Esq.
MCCUNEWRIGHT LLP
2068 Orange Tree Lane, Suite 216
Redlands, CA 92374
Telephone: (909) 557-1250
E-mail: rdm@mccunewright.com
dcw@mccunewright.com
kma@mccunewright.com
jkk@mccunewright.com
KINDER MORGAN: Various Affiliates Face "Lugliani" Suit in Calif.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Various affiliates of Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P., defends
a suit captioned James Lugliani vs. Kinder Morgan G.P., Inc. et
al., in the Superior Court of California, Orange County, according
to the company's July 30, 2010, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30,
2010.
James Lugliani, a former Kinder Morgan employee, filed suit in
January 2010 against various Kinder Morgan affiliates.
On behalf of himself and other similarly situated current and
former employees, Mr. Lugliani claims that the Kinder Morgan
defendants have violated the wage and hour provisions of the
California Labor Code and Business & Professions Code by:
(1) failing to provide meal and rest periods;
(2) failing to pay meal and rest period premiums;
(2) failing to pay all overtime wages due;
(3) failing to timely pay wages;
(4) failing to pay wages for vacation, holidays and other
paid time off; and
(5) failing to keep proper payroll records.
Houston-based Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P. owns or operates
approximately 26,000 miles of pipelines and 150 terminals. The
company's pipelines transport more than two million barrels per
day of gasoline and other petroleum products, and up to seven
billion cubic feet per day of natural gas. The company operates
through four segments: Products Pipelines, Natural Gas Pipelines,
CO2 and Terminals.
INTUITIVE SURGICAL: Accused in Calif. of Misleading Shareholders
----------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that Intuitive Surgical Inc.
inflated its share price through misleading statements about the
prospects for its Da Vinci robot, a surgical device, shareholders
claim in San Jose Federal Court.
A copy of the Complaint in Perlmutter v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc.,
et al., Case No. 10-cv-03451 (N.D. Calif.), is available at:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/08/09/RobotClassAct.pdf
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Michael D. Braun, Esq.
BRAUN LAW GROUP, P.C.
10680 W. Pico Blvd., Suite 280
Los Angeles, CA 90064
Telephone: 310-836-6000
E-mail: service@braunlawgroup.com
- and -
Brian P. Murray, Esq.
MURRAY, FRANK & SAILER LLP
275 Madison Ave., Suite 801
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: 212-682-1818
E-mail: bmurray@murrayfrank.com
LANDSTAR SYSTEM: Bid for Rehearing of OOIDA Ruling Still Pending
----------------------------------------------------------------
The petition for rehearing filed by each of the parties to the
class-action lawsuit, Owner-Operator Independent Drivers
Association Inc. et al. v. Landstar System Inc., et al., Case No.
3:02-cv-01005-HLA-MCR, is pending with the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Eleventh Circuit.
The putative class-action complaint was filed on Nov. 1, 2002, by
the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, Inc., and
certain BCO Independent Contractors on behalf of independent
contractors who provide truck capacity to the company and its
subsidiaries under exclusive lease arrangements before the U.S.
District Court for the Middle District of Florida against the
company and certain of its subsidiaries.
The complaint was amended on April 7, 2005. The Amended
Complaint alleged that certain aspects of the company's motor
carrier leases and related practices with its BCO Independent
Contractors violate certain federal leasing regulations and
sought injunctive relief, an unspecified amount of damages and
attorney's fees.
On Aug. 30, 2005, the District Court granted a motion by the
plaintiffs to certify the case as a class-action.
On Jan. 16, 2007, the District Court ordered the decertification
of the class of BCO Independent Contractors for purposes of
determining remedies.
Immediately thereafter, trial commenced for purposes of
determining what remedies, if any, would be awarded to the
remaining named BCO Independent Contractor Plaintiffs against
these Landstar subsidiaries:
-- Landstar Inway, Inc.,
-- Landstar Ligon, Inc., and
-- Landstar Ranger, Inc.
On March 29, 2007, the District Court denied the plaintiffs'
request for injunctive relief, entered a judgment in favor of the
defendants and issued written orders setting forth its rulings
related to the decertification of the class and the denial of the
plaintiffs' requests for damages and injunctive relief.
On March 29, 2007, the District Court denied the request by
Plaintiffs for injunctive relief, entered a judgment in favor of
the Defendants and issued written orders setting forth its
rulings related to the decertification of the plaintiff class and
other important elements of the Litigation relating to liability,
injunctive relief and monetary relief.
The Plaintiffs filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Eleventh Circuit of certain of the District Court's rulings in
favor of the Defendants. The Defendants asked the Appellate Court
to affirm such rulings and filed a cross-appeal with the Appellate
Court with respect to certain other rulings of the District Court.
On Sept. 3, 2008, the Appellate Court issued its ruling, which,
among other things, affirmed the District Court's rulings that:
-- the Defendants are not prohibited by the applicable
federal leasing regulations from charging
administrative or other fees to BCO Independent
Contractors in connection with voluntary programs
offered by the Defendants through which a BCO
Independent Contractor may purchase discounted
products and services for a charge that is deducted
against the compensation payable to the BCO
Independent Contractor -- Charge-back Deduction,
-- the Plaintiffs are not entitled to restitution or
disgorgement with respect to violations by Defendants
of the applicable federal leasing regulations but
instead may recover only actual damages, if any, which
they sustained as a result of any such violations, and
-- the claims of BCO Independent Contractors may not be
handled on a class action basis for purposes of
determining the amount of actual damages, if any, they
sustained as a result of any violations.
Further, the analysis of the Appellate Court confirmed the
absence of any violations alleged by the Plaintiffs of the
federal leasing regulations with respect to the written terms of
all leases currently in use between the Defendants and BCO
Independent Contractors.
However, the ruling of the Appellate Court reversed the District
Court's rulings:
-- that an old version of the lease formerly used by
Defendants but not in use with any current BCO
Independent Contractor complied with applicable
disclosure requirements under the federal leasing
regulations with respect to adjustments to
compensation payable to BCO Independent Contractors on
certain loads sourced from the U. S. Dept. of Defense,
and
-- that the Defendants had provided sufficient
documentation to BCO Independent Contractors under the
applicable federal leasing regulations relating to how
the component elements of Charge-back Deductions were
computed.
The Appellate Court then remanded the case to the District Court
to permit the Plaintiffs to seek injunctive relief with respect
to these violations of the federal leasing regulations and to
hold an evidentiary hearing to give the Named Plaintiffs an
opportunity to produce evidence of any damages they actually
sustained as a result of such violations.
Each of the parties to the Litigation has filed a petition with
the Appellate Court seeking rehearing of the Appellate Court's
ruling.
No further updates were reported in the company's July 30, 2010,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 26, 2010.
The suit is Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association Inc. et
al. v. Landstar System Inc., et al., Case No. 02-cv-01005 (Fla.)
(Adams, J).
Representing the plaintiffs are:
Daniel E. Cohen, Esq.
Daniel R. Unumb, Esq.
Paul D. Cullen, Esq.
Mary Craine Lombardo, Esq.
Joseph A. Black, Esq.
Susan Van Bell, Esq.
THE CULLEN LAW FIRM, PLLC
1101 30th St., N.W., Suite 300
Washington, DC 20007-3770
Telephone: 202-944-8600
- and -
Michael R. Freed, Esq.
BRENNAN, MANNA & DIAMOND, PL
Humana Centre Building
76 S. Laura Street, Ste. 2110
Jacksonville, FL 32202
Telephone: 904-366-1500
Representing the defendants are:
Daniel R. Barney, Esq.
SCOPELITIS, GARVIN, LIGHT & HANSON, P.C.
1850 M St., NW, Suite 280
Washington, DC 20036-5804
Telephone: 202-783-5485
- and -
Timothy W. Wiseman, Esq.
Robert L. Browning, Esq.
Gregory M. Feary, Esq.
SCOPELITIS, GARVEN, LIGHT & HANSON, P.C.
10 W. Market St., Suite 1500
Indianapolis, IN 46204-2968
Telephone: 317-637-1777
Facsimile: 317-687-2414
- and -
Andrew Tysen Duva, Esq.
Lawrence Joseph Hamilton, II, Esq.
HOLLAND & KNIGHT
50 North Laura St., Suite 3900
Jacksonville, FL 32202
Telephone: 904-353-2000
LOCKHEED MARTIN: Sued for Discriminating Against Women Employees
----------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that Lockheed Martin discriminates
against women in promotions to and within management, a class
action claims in Camden, N.J., Federal Court
A copy of the Complaint in Goffney v. Lockheed Martin Corporation,
Case No. 10-cv-_____, docketed as Doc. 676 in Case No. 33-av-00001
on Aug. 6, 2010 (D. N.J.), is available at:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/08/09/Employ.pdf
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew L. Mackerer, Esq.
Carol A. Mager, Esq.
Stephen G. Console, Esq.
Laura C. Mattiacci, Esq.
CONSOLE LAW OFFICES LLC
1525 Locust St., 9th Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19102
Telephone: 215-545-7676
E-mail: mackerer@consolelaw.com
mager@consolelaw.com
console@consolelaw.com
mattiacci@consolelaw.com
- and -
Martha J. Fessenden, Esq.
DOFFERMYRE SHIELDS CANFIELD & KNOWLES, LLC
1355 Peachtree St., Suit 1600
Atlanta, GA 30309
Telephone: 404-881-3008
E-mail: mfessenden@dsckd.com
- and -
Darnley D. Stewart, Esq.
GISKAN SOLOTAROFF ANDERSON & STEWART LLP
11 Broadway, Suite 2150
New York, NY 1004
Telephone: 212-500-5106
E-mail: dstewart@gslawny.com
MENZIES AVIATION: Removes "Jimenez" Labor Complaint to N.D. Calif.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jessica Jimenez, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. Menzies Aviation, Inc., et al., Case No. 10-500367
(Calif. Super. Ct., San Francisco Cty.), was filed on June 2,
2010. The plaintiff accuses the aviation service company (based
in the United Kingdom) of engaging in "a systematic pattern of
wage and hour violations under California Labor Code and
Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) wage orders", including
failing to pay for minimum, regular and overtime wages for any
off-the-clock work, failing to timely pay all wages, failing to
timely pay all wages upon separation of employment, failing to
provide accurate itemized wage statements, and failing to provide
reimbursement for work-related expenses.
Ms. Jimenez worked as a non-exempt employee for the defendants
until termination of her employment on February 22, 2010.
On the basis of diversity jurisdiction, on August 9, 2010, Menzies
Aviation removed the lawsuit to the Northern District of
California, and the Clerk assigned Case No. 10-cv-03477 to the
proceeding.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael J. Grace, Esq.
Vilmarie Cordero, Esq.
GRACEHOLLIS LLP
3555 Fifth Avenue
San Diego, CA 92103
Telephone: (619) 692-0800
The Defendants are represented by:
John G. Yslas, Esq
Christopher G. Ward, Esq.
FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
555 South Flower Street, Suite 3500
Los Angeles, CA 90071-2411
Telephone: (213) 972-4500
E-mail: jyslas@foley.com
cward@foley.com
- and -
Kristy Kunisaki Marino, Esq.
FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
555 California Street, Suite 1700
San Francisco, CA 94104-1520
Telephone: (415) 434-4484
E-mail: kmarino@foley.com
MOODY'S CORP: Consolidated Suit in New York Ongoing
---------------------------------------------------
A consolidated suit against Moody's Corporation pending in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York is
ongoing.
Two purported class action complaints have been filed by purported
purchasers of the company's securities against the company and
certain of its senior officers, asserting claims under the federal
securities laws.
The first was filed by Raphael Nach in the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of Illinois on July 19, 2007. The second
was filed by Teamsters Local 282 Pension Trust Fund in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York on Sept. 26,
2007. Both actions have been consolidated into a single
proceeding entitled In re Moody's Corporation Securities
Litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
New York.
On June 27, 2008, a consolidated amended complaint was filed,
purportedly on behalf of all purchasers of the company's
securities during the period Feb. 3, 2006 through Oct. 24, 2007.
Plaintiffs allege that the defendants issued false and/or
misleading statements concerning the Company's business conduct,
business prospects, business conditions and financial results
relating primarily to MIS's ratings of structured finance products
including RMBS, CDO and constant-proportion debt obligations. The
plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of compensatory damages and
their reasonable costs and expenses incurred in connection with
the case.
The company moved for dismissal of the consolidated amended
complaint in September 2008. On Feb. 23, 2009, the court issued
an opinion dismissing certain claims and sustaining others.
No further updates were reported in the company's Aug. 2, 2010,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
Moody's Corporation -- http://www.moodys.com/-- is the parent
company of Moody's Investors Service, which provides credit
ratings and research covering debt instruments and securities, and
Moody's Analytics, which encompasses the growing array of Moody's
non-ratings businesses including risk management software for
financial institutions, quantitative credit analysis tools,
economic research and data services, data and analytical tools for
the structured finance market, and training and other professional
services. The Corporation, which reported revenue of $1.8 billion
in 2009, employs approximately 4,100 people worldwide and
maintains a presence in 26 countries.
RICHMOND AMERICAN: Accused in Calif. of Building Defective Homes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that Richmond American Homes of
Maryland built 147 defective homes in the Courtside/The Alameda
subdivisions in Santa Rosa, Calif., according to a class action in
Sonoma County Court.
A copy of the Complaint in Campbell, et al. v. Richmond American
Homes of Maryland, Inc., et al., Case No. SCV247917 (Calif. Super.
Ct., Sonoma Cty.), is available at:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/08/09/ConstructCA.pdf
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Luke P. Ryan, Esq.
Lori J. Guthrie, Esq.
SHINNICK & RYAN LLP
1810 State St.
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: 619-239-5900
SERVICE CORPORATION: Continues to Defend "Garcia" Suit in Fla.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Service Corporation International continues to defend the matter
Reyvis Garcia and Alicia Garcia v. Alderwoods Group, Inc., Osiris
Holding of Florida, Inc, a Florida corporation, d/b/a Graceland
Memorial Park South, f/k/a Paradise Memorial Gardens, Inc., Case
No.; 04-25646 CA 32, pending in the Circuit Court of the Eleventh
Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida.
The suit was filed in December 2004, in the Circuit Court of the
Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida.
Plaintiffs are the son and sister of the decedent, Eloisa Garcia,
who was buried at Graceland Memorial Park South in March 1986,
when the cemetery was owned by Paradise Memorial Gardens, Inc.
Initially, the suit sought damages on the individual claims of the
plaintiffs relating to the burial of Eloisa Garcia.
Plaintiffs claimed that due to poor record keeping, spacing issues
and maps, and the fact that the family could not afford to
purchase a marker for the grave, the burial location of the
decedent could not be readily located. Subsequently, the
decedent's grave was located and verified.
In July 2006, plaintiffs amended their complaint, seeking to
certify a class of all persons buried at this cemetery whose
burial sites cannot be located, claiming that this was due to poor
record keeping, maps, and surveys at the cemetery. Plaintiffs
subsequently filed a third amended class action complaint and
added two additional named plaintiffs.
The plaintiffs are seeking unspecified monetary damages, as well
as equitable and injunctive relief.
No class has been certified in this matter.
No further updates were reported in the company's July 30, 2010,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
Service Corporation International -- http://www.sci-corp.com/--
headquartered in Houston, Texas, is North America's leading
provider of deathcare products and services. At March 31, 2010,
the company owned and operated 1,441 funeral homes and 387
cemeteries (of which 221 are combination locations) in 44 states,
eight Canadian provinces, the District of Columbia and Puerto
Rico. Through its businesses, the company markets the Dignity
Memorial(R) brand which offers assurance of quality, value, caring
service, and exceptional customer satisfaction.
SERVICE CORPORATION: Continues to Defend "Sands" Suit in Calif.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Service Corporation International continues to defend the matter
F. Charles Sands, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, v. Eden Memorial Park, et al., Case No.
BC421528, pending in the Superior Court of the State of California
for the County of Los Angeles, Central District.
The suit was filed in September 2009 against SCI and certain
subsidiaries regarding its Eden Memorial Park cemetery in Mission
Hills, California.
The plaintiff seeks to certify a class of cemetery plot owners and
their families. The plaintiff also seeks the appointment of a
receiver to oversee cemetery operations.
The plaintiff claims the cemetery damaged and desecrated burials
in order to make room for subsequent burials. Since the case is
in its preliminary stages, the company cannot quantify its
ultimate liability, if any, for the payment of any damages.
No further updates were reported in the company's July 30, 2010,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
Service Corporation International -- http://www.sci-corp.com/--
headquartered in Houston, Texas, is North America's leading
provider of deathcare products and services. At March 31, 2010,
the company owned and operated 1,441 funeral homes and 387
cemeteries (of which 221 are combination locations) in 44 states,
eight Canadian provinces, the District of Columbia and Puerto
Rico. Through its businesses, the company markets the Dignity
Memorial(R) brand which offers assurance of quality, value, caring
service, and exceptional customer satisfaction.
SERVICE CORPORATION: Defends "Prise" Suit in Pennsylvania
---------------------------------------------------------
Service Corporation International continues to defend the matter
Prise, et al., v. Alderwoods Group, Inc., and Service Corporation
International, Cause No. 06-164, pending in the U.S. District
Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.
The suit was filed by two former Alderwoods (Pennsylvania), Inc.,
employees in December 2006 and purports to have been brought under
the Fair Labor Standards Act on behalf of all Alderwoods and SCI-
affiliated employees who performed work for which they were not
fully compensated, including work for which overtime pay was owed.
The court has conditionally certified a class of claims as to
certain job positions for Alderwoods employees.
Plaintiffs allege causes of action for violations of the FLSA,
failure to maintain proper records, breach of contract, violations
of state wage and hour laws, unjust enrichment, fraud and deceit,
quantum meruit, negligent misrepresentation, and negligence.
Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief, unpaid wages, liquidated,
compensatory, consequential and punitive damages, attorneys' fees
and costs, and pre- and post-judgment interest.
No further updates were reported in the company's July 30, 2010,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
Service Corporation International -- http://www.sci-corp.com/--
headquartered in Houston, Texas, is North America's leading
provider of deathcare products and services. At March 31, 2010,
the company owned and operated 1,441 funeral homes and 387
cemeteries (of which 221 are combination locations) in 44 states,
eight Canadian provinces, the District of Columbia and Puerto
Rico. Through its businesses, the company markets the Dignity
Memorial(R) brand which offers assurance of quality, value, caring
service, and exceptional customer satisfaction.
SERVICE CORPORATION: Continues to Defend "Bryant" in California
---------------------------------------------------------------
Service Corporation International continues to defend the matter
Bryant, et al. v. Service Corporation International, et al.,
3:08-CV-01190-SI, pending in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California, according to the company's
July 30, 2010, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
The suit was filed on Dec. 5, 2007, as Bryant, et al. v. Service
Corporation International, et al., Case No. RG-07359593, by
counsel for plaintiffs in the matter Prise, et al., v. Alderwoods
Group, Inc., and Service Corporation International, Cause No. 06-
164, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of
Almeda.
The suit asserts state law claims similar to the federal claims
asserted in the "Prise" suit. The suit was removed to federal
court in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California, San Francisco Division.
The Bryant case is now Case No. 3:08-CV-01190-SI
A similar suit captioned Helm, et al. v. AWGI & SCI, was also
filed against the company. However on Dec. 29, 2009, the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California, Oakland
Division, denied the plaintiffs' motion to certify the case as a
class action.
Service Corporation International -- http://www.sci-corp.com/--
headquartered in Houston, Texas, is North America's leading
provider of deathcare products and services. At March 31, 2010,
the company owned and operated 1,441 funeral homes and 387
cemeteries (of which 221 are combination locations) in 44 states,
eight Canadian provinces, the District of Columbia and Puerto
Rico. Through its businesses, the company markets the Dignity
Memorial(R) brand which offers assurance of quality, value, caring
service, and exceptional customer satisfaction.
SERVICE CORPORATION: Continues to Defend "Stickle" in Arizona
-------------------------------------------------------------
Service Corporation International continues to defend the matter
Stickle, et al. v. Service Corporation International, et al., Case
No. 08-CV-83, pending in the U.S. District Court for Arizona,
Phoenix Division.
Counsel for plaintiffs in the matter Prise, et al., v. Alderwoods
Group, Inc., and Service Corporation International, Cause No.
06-164, filed this case on Jan. 17, 2008, against SCI and various
related entities and individuals asserting Fair Labor Standards
Act and other ancillary claims based on the alleged failure to pay
for overtime.
In September 2009, the Court conditionally certified a class of
claims as to certain job positions of SCI affiliated employees.
No further updates were reported in the company's July 30, 2010,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
Service Corporation International -- http://www.sci-corp.com/--
headquartered in Houston, Texas, is North America's leading
provider of deathcare products and services. At March 31, 2010,
the company owned and operated 1,441 funeral homes and 387
cemeteries (of which 221 are combination locations) in 44 states,
eight Canadian provinces, the District of Columbia and Puerto
Rico. Through its businesses, the company markets the Dignity
Memorial(R) brand which offers assurance of quality, value, caring
service, and exceptional customer satisfaction.
SERVICE CORPORATION: Defends "Conley" Suit in Texas
---------------------------------------------------
Service Corporation International continues to defend the
securities suit captioned Conley Investment Counsel v. Service
Corporation International, et al., Civil Action 04-MD-1609,
pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
Texas, Houston Division.
The Securities Lawsuit resulted from the transfer and
consolidation by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation of
three lawsuits:
(1) Edgar Neufeld v. Service Corporation International,
et al.; Cause No. CV-S-03-1561-HDM-PAL; in the U.S.
District Court for the District of Nevada;
(2) Rujira Srisythemp v. Service Corporation International,
et al .; Cause No. CV-S-03-1392-LDG-LRL; in the U.S.
District Court for the District of Nevada; and
(3) Joshua Ackerman v. Service Corporation International,
et al.; Cause No. 04-CV-20114; in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of Florida.
The Securities Lawsuit names as defendants SCI and several of
SCI's current and former executive officers or directors.
The Securities Lawsuit is a purported class action alleging that
the defendants failed to disclose the unlawful treatment of human
remains and burial sites at two cemeteries in Fort Lauderdale and
West Palm Beach, Florida. No discovery has occurred.
No further updates were reported in the company's July 30, 2010,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
Service Corporation International -- http://www.sci-corp.com/--
headquartered in Houston, Texas, is North America's leading
provider of deathcare products and services. At March 31, 2010,
the company owned and operated 1,441 funeral homes and 387
cemeteries (of which 221 are combination locations) in 44 states,
eight Canadian provinces, the District of Columbia and Puerto
Rico. Through its businesses, the company markets the Dignity
Memorial(R) brand which offers assurance of quality, value, caring
service, and exceptional customer satisfaction.
TIANJIN APPLIANCE: Recalls 98,000 Portable Dehumidifiers
--------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
LG Electronics Tianjin Appliance Co., of China, reannounced a
voluntary recall of about 98,000 (previously recalled in December
2009) Portable Dehumidifiers. Consumers should stop using
recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed.
The power connector for the dehumidifier's compressor can short
circuit, posing fire and burn hazards to consumers.
LG has received four additional reports of fires involving the
recalled dehumidifiers, including one that resulted in significant
damage to a home. No injuries have been reported.
This recall involves 30-pint portable dehumidifiers sold under the
brand names in the chart below. The dehumidifiers are white with
a red shut-off button, controls for fan speed and humidity control
and a front-loading water bucket. "Goldstar" or "Comfort-Aire" is
printed on the front. The model and serial numbers are printed on
the interior of the dehumidifiers and can be viewed after the
water bucket is removed.
Brand Model No. Serial Number Range Sold at
------ --------- ------------------- --------
Goldstar GHD30Y7 611TAxx00001~08400
611TAxx08401~40600 Home Depot
612TAxx00001~20400
612TAxx21001~30600
Goldstar DH305Y7 612TAxx00001~00600
701TAxx00001~16800 Walmart
702TAxx00001~03000
Comfort-Aire BHD-301-C 611TA000001~001697
612TA000001~004200 Heat
701TA000001~000578 Controller
710TA000001~000599 Inc.
Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml10/10316.html
The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold through
The Home Depot, Walmart and Heat Controller Inc. nationwide from
January 2007 through June 2008 for between $140 and $150.
Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled dehumidifier,
contact LG to determine if it is included in the recall and return
it to an authorized LG service center for a free repair. For
additional information, contact LG toll-free at (877) 220-0479
between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Central Time, Monday through
Friday and between 8:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m., Central Time, on
Saturday for the location of an authorized LG service center for
the repair, or visit the firm's Web site at
http://www.30pintdehumidifierrecall.com/
Asbestos Litigation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Foster Wheeler Cites $323.95M June 30 Liability
----------------------------------------------------------------
Foster Wheeler AG's long-term asbestos-related liability was
US$323,947,000 as of June 30, 2010, compared with US$352,537,000
as of Dec. 31, 2009, according to a Company press release dated
Aug. 5, 2010.
The Company's long-term asbestos-related liability was
US$338,273,000 as of March 31, 2010. (Class Action Reporter,
May 7, 2010)
The Company's long-term asbestos-related insurance recovery
receivable was US$230,112,000 as of June 30, 2010, compared with
US$244,265,000 as of Dec. 31, 2009.
The Company's long-term asbestos-related insurance recovery
receivable was US$236,159,000 as of March 31, 2010. (Class Action
Reporter, May 7, 2010)
Net asbestos-related provision was US$2,344,000 during the fiscal
quarter ended June 30, 2010, compared with US$1,756,000 during the
fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2009.
Net asbestos-related provision was US$1,597,000 during the fiscal
six months ended June 30, 2010, compared with US$3,506,000 during
the fiscal six months ended June 30, 2009.
Geneva, Switzerland-based Foster Wheeler AG is an engineering and
construction contractor and power equipment supplier delivering
technically advanced, reliable facilities and equipment. The
Company employs about 13,000 professionals.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Eastman Chem. Still Party to Exposure Lawsuits
---------------------------------------------------------------
From time to time, Eastman Chemical Company and its operations are
parties to, or targets of, lawsuits and claims involving asbestos-
related matters.
No other asbestos-related issues were disclosed in the Company's
quarterly report filed on Aug. 3, 2010 with the Securities and
Exchange Commission.
Kingsport, Tenn.-based Eastman Chemical Company produces
chemicals, fibers, and plastics. Among the Company's operating
segments are its CASPI (coatings, adhesives, specialty polymers,
and inks), Specialty Plastics (engineering polymers), and Fibers
(acetate tow and textile fibers) units.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 1,534 Open Actions v. Standard Motor at June 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard Motor Products, Inc., at June 30, 2010, says that 1,534
asbestos cases were outstanding for which it was responsible for
any related liabilities, according to the Company's quarterly
report filed on Aug. 3, 2010 with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.
At March 31, 2010, about 1,525 asbestos-related cases were
outstanding for which the Company was responsible for any related
liabilities. (Class Action Reporter, May 21, 2010)
In 1986, the Company acquired a brake business, which it
subsequently sold in March 1998 and which is accounted for as a
discontinued operation.
When it originally acquired this brake business, the Company
assumed future liabilities relating to any alleged exposure to
asbestos-containing products manufactured by the seller of the
acquired brake business. In accordance with the related purchase
agreement, the Company agreed to assume the liabilities for all
new claims filed on or after Sept. 1, 2001.
Since inception in September 2001 through June 30, 2010, the
amounts paid for settled claims are about US$9.7 million. In
September 2007, the Company entered into an agreement with an
insurance carrier to provide it with limited insurance coverage
for the defense and indemnity costs associated with certain
asbestos-related claims.
The Company has submitted various asbestos-related claims for
coverage under this agreement, and received about US$2.3 million
in reimbursement for settlement claims and defense costs. The
Company has submitted additional asbestos-related claims to such
insurance carrier for coverage.
In addition, in May 2010, the Company entered into an agreement
with an excess insurance carrier to provide it with limited
insurance coverage for defense and indemnity costs associated with
asbestos-related claims. The Company will submit claims to this
carrier after it has exhausted its coverage under the agreement
with the primary insurance carrier.
Long Island City, N.Y.-based Standard Motor Products, Inc.
manufactures engine management and air conditioning replacement
parts for the automotive aftermarket. Customers are auto parts
warehouse distributors (CARQUEST and NAPA) and auto parts
retailers (Advance Auto Parts and AutoZone).
ASBESTOS UPDATE: TriMas Party to 1,019 Pending Cases at June 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
TriMas Corporation, as of June 30, 2010, was a party to about
1,019 pending cases involving an aggregate of about 8,071
claimants alleging personal injury from exposure to asbestos
containing materials, according to the Company's quarterly report
filed on Aug. 3, 2010 with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
As of March 31, 2010, the Company was a party to about 989 pending
cases involving an aggregate of about 8,044 claimants alleging
personal injury from exposure to asbestos containing materials.
(Class Action Reporter, May 7, 2010)
The asbestos was formerly used in gaskets (both encapsulated and
otherwise) manufactured or distributed by certain of the Company's
subsidiaries for use primarily in the petrochemical refining and
exploration industries.
During the six months ended June 30, 2010, the Company recorded
524 claims filed, 246 claims dismissed, and 23 claims settled. The
average settlement amount per claim was US$11,283 and total
defense costs during period were US$1,514,000.
During the year ended Dec. 31, 2009, the Company recorded 586
claims filed, 254 claims dismissed, and 40 claims settled. The
average settlement amount per claim was US$11,283 and the total
defense costs were US$2,652,000.
In addition, the Company acquired various companies to distribute
its products that had distributed gaskets of other manufacturers
prior to acquisition.
Of the 8,071 claims pending at June 30, 2010, 64 set forth
specific amounts of damages (other than those stating the
statutory minimum or maximum). About 47 of the 64 claims sought
between US$1 million and US$5 million in total damages (which
includes compensatory and punitive damages), about 13 sought
between US$5 million and US$10 million in total damages (which
includes compensatory and punitive damages) and four sought over
US$10 million (which includes compensatory and punitive damages).
Solely with respect to compensatory damages, about 48 of the 64
claims sought between US$50,000 and US$600,000, about 13 sought
between US$1 million and US$5 million and three sought over US$5
million.
Solely with respect to punitive damages, about 47 of the 64 claims
sought between US$1 million and US$2.5 million, 13 sought between
US$2.5 million and US$5.0 million and four sought over US$5
million.
In addition, relatively few of the claims have reached the
discovery stage and even fewer claims have gone past the discovery
stage.
Total settlement costs (exclusive of defense costs) for all such
cases, some of which were filed over 20 years ago, have been about
US$5.7 million.
Effective Feb. 14, 2006, the Company entered into a coverage-in-
place agreement with its first level excess carriers regarding the
coverage to be provided to the Company for asbestos-related claims
when the primary insurance is exhausted.
Bloomfield Hills, Mich.-based TriMas Corporation is a global
manufacturer and distributor of products for commercial,
industrial and consumer markets. The Company is engaged in five
reportable segments with diverse products and market channels:
Packaging, Energy, Aerospace & Defense, Engineered Components and
Cequent.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Kaiser Aluminum Records $3.7MM CAROs at June 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kaiser Aluminum Corporation says the estimated fair value of
conditional asset retirement obligation liabilities was US$3.7
million at June 30, 2010 and US$3.5 million at Dec. 31, 2009.
The Company's estimated fair value of CARO liabilities was US$3.6
million at March 31, 2010. (Class Action Reporter, May 7, 2010)
The Company has CAROs at several of its fabricated products
facilities. These CAROs consist of incremental costs that would be
associated with the removal and disposal of asbestos (all of which
is believed to be fully contained and encapsulated within walls,
floors, roofs, ceilings or piping) at certain of the older
facilities if such facilities were to undergo major renovation or
be demolished.
For both quarters ended June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2009, accretion
of CARO liabilities (recorded in Cost of products sold) was
US$100,000.
In addition, the Company's results for each of the six month
periods ended June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2009 reflected an
accretion of the estimated liability of US$200,000 (recorded in
Cost of products sold).
Foothill Ranch, Calif.-based Kaiser Aluminum Corporation's primary
line of business is the production of semi-fabricated specialty
aluminum products. In addition, the Company also owns a 49%
interest in Anglesey, which operated an aluminum smelter in
Holyhead, Wales until September 2009. The Company has one
reportable segment, Fabricated Products.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fresenius Still Party to Sealed Air Cases
----------------------------------------------------------
Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA is involved in litigation
with Sealed Air Corporation to confirm entitlement to
indemnification from Sealed Air for losses and expenses incurred
by the Company on pre-Merger tax liabilities and Merger-related
claims.
The Company was originally formed as a result of a series of
transactions it completed under the Agreement and Plan of
Reorganization dated as of Feb. 4, 1996, by and between W. R.
Grace & Co. and Fresenius SE (Merger).
At the time of the Merger, a Grace subsidiary known as W. R. Grace
& Co.-Conn. had, and continues to have, significant liabilities
arising out of product-liability related litigation (including
asbestos-related actions), pre-Merger tax claims and other claims
unrelated to National Medical Care, Inc. (NMC), which was Grace's
dialysis business prior to the Merger.
In connection with the Merger, W. R. Grace & Co.-Conn. agreed to
indemnify the Company, FMCH, and NMC against all liabilities of
Grace, whether relating to events occurring before or after the
Merger, other than liabilities arising from or relating to NMC's
operations.
Grace and certain of its subsidiaries filed for reorganization
under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code on April 2, 2001.
Prior to and after the commencement of the Grace Chapter 11
Proceedings, class action complaints were filed against Grace and
FMCH by plaintiffs claiming to be creditors of W. R. Grace & Co.-
Conn., and by the asbestos creditors' committees on behalf of the
Grace bankruptcy estate in the Grace Chapter 11 Proceedings,
alleging that the Merger was a fraudulent conveyance, violated the
uniform fraudulent transfer act and constituted a conspiracy.
All such cases have been stayed and transferred to or are pending
before the U.S. District Court as part of the Grace Chapter 11
Proceedings.
In 2003, the Company reached agreement with the asbestos
creditors' committees on behalf of the Grace bankruptcy estate and
Grace in the matters pending in the Grace Chapter 11 Proceedings
for the settlement of all fraudulent conveyance and tax claims
against it and other claims related to the Company that arise out
of the bankruptcy of Grace.
Under the terms of the settlement agreement as amended (Settlement
Agreement), fraudulent conveyance and other claims raised on
behalf of asbestos claimants will be dismissed with prejudice and
the Company will receive protection against existing and potential
future Grace related claims, including fraudulent conveyance and
asbestos claims, and indemnification against income tax claims
related to the non-NMC members of the Grace consolidated tax group
upon confirmation of a Grace bankruptcy reorganization plan that
contains such provisions.
Under the Settlement Agreement, the Company will pay a total of
US$115 million without interest to the Grace bankruptcy estate, or
as otherwise directed by the Court, upon plan confirmation. No
admission of liability has been or will be made. The Settlement
Agreement has been approved by the U.S. District Court.
Subsequent to the Merger, Grace was involved in a multi-step
transaction involving Sealed Air Corporation (f/k/a Grace Holding,
Inc.).
The Company is engaged in litigation with Sealed Air to confirm
its entitlement to indemnification from Sealed Air for all losses
and expenses incurred by the Company relating to pre-Merger tax
liabilities and Merger-related claims.
Under the Settlement Agreement, upon confirmation of a plan that
satisfies the conditions of the Company's payment obligation, this
litigation will be dismissed with prejudice.
Bad Homburg, Germany-based Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA is
a dialysis provider. Its staff treats about 190,000 patients a
year at some 2,500 dialysis clinics worldwide, 1,700 of which are
based in the United States.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Anadarko Petroleum Involved in Exposure Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation remains a defendant in various
personal injury claims, including claims by employees of third-
party contractors alleging exposure to asbestos, silica and
benzene.
These employees were allegedly exposed to such hazards while
working at refineries (previously owned by predecessors of
acquired companies) located in Texas, California and Oklahoma.
The Woodlands, Tex.-based Anadarko Petroleum Corporation is an
independent oil and gas exploration and production company, with
2.3 billion barrels of oil equivalent (BOE) of proved reserves as
of Dec. 31, 2009.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: CNA Fin'l. Has $1.062B Net Reserves at June 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
CNA Financial Corporation's net asbestos reserves amounted to
US$1.062 billion during the six months ended June 30, 2010,
compared with US$1.113 billion during the six months ended
June 30, 2009.
The Company's net asbestos reserves amounted to US$1.096 billion
during the three months ended March 31, 2010, compared with
US$1.151 billion during the three months ended March 31, 2009.
(Class Action Reporter, May 14, 2010)
Chicago-based CNA Financial Corporation is a commercial insurance
underwriter and property and casualty company. Its insurance
products include standard commercial lines, specialty lines,
surety, marine and other property and casualty coverages. The
Company's services include risk management, information services,
underwriting, risk control and claims administration.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: No Date Set for Rehearing of A.P. Green Case
-------------------------------------------------------------
CNA Financial Corporation says that no date has been set for
rehearing over asbestos litigation involving A.P. Green
Industries, A.P. Green Services and Bigelow-Liptak Corporation.
In February 2003, the Company said it had resolved asbestos-
related coverage litigation and claims involving A.P. Green
Industries, A.P. Green Services and Bigelow-Liptak Corporation.
Under the agreement, the Company is required to pay US$70 million,
net of reinsurance recoveries, over a 10-year period commencing
after the final approval of a bankruptcy plan of reorganization.
The settlement received initial bankruptcy court approval in
August 2003.
The debtor's plan of reorganization includes an injunction to
protect the Company from any future claims. The bankruptcy court
issued an opinion in September 2007 recommending confirmation of
that plan. In July 2008, the District Court affirmed the
Bankruptcy Court's ruling.
Several insurers have appealed that ruling to the Third Circuit
Court of Appeals; that appeal was argued in May 2009. On June 15,
2010, the Court of Appeals entered an order to list the case for
rehearing.
Chicago-based CNA Financial Corporation is a commercial insurance
underwriter and property and casualty company. Its insurance
products include standard commercial lines, specialty lines,
surety, marine and other property and casualty coverages. The
Company's services include risk management, information services,
underwriting, risk control and claims administration.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: CNA Still Involved in W.R. Grace Case in Mont.
---------------------------------------------------------------
CNA Financial Corporation continues to be party to litigation
involving W. R. Grace & Co. styled Pennock, et al. v. Maryland
Casualty, et al., filed in the First Judicial District Court of
Lewis & Clark County, Mont.
In March 2002, the direct action was filed in Montana by eight
individual plaintiffs (all employees of Grace) and their spouses
against the Company, Maryland Casualty and the State of Montana.
This action alleges that the carriers failed to warn of or
otherwise protect Grace employees from the dangers of asbestos at
a W. R. Grace vermiculite mining facility in Libby, Mont. The
Montana direct action is currently stayed because of W. R. Grace's
pending bankruptcy.
In April 2008, Grace announced a settlement in principle with the
asbestos personal injury claimants committee subject to
confirmation of a plan of reorganization by the bankruptcy court.
The confirmation hearing was held in two phases.
The first phase was held in June 2009. The second phase concluded
in January 2010 and the bankruptcy court has taken the matter
under advisement.
Chicago-based CNA Financial Corporation is a commercial insurance
underwriter and property and casualty company. Its insurance
products include standard commercial lines, specialty lines,
surety, marine and other property and casualty coverages. The
Company's services include risk management, information services,
underwriting, risk control and claims administration.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Supreme Court Affirms Judgment in Rhodes Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Supreme Court of Delaware upheld the ruling of the Superior
Court of the State of Delaware In and for New Castle County, which
affirmed the Delaware Industrial Accident Board's denial of
William Rhodes' Petition to Determine Compensation Due.
The case is styled William Rhodes, Claimant-Appellant v. Diamond
State Port Corporation, Employer-Appellee.
Judges Myron T. Steele, Zack B. Jacobs, and Henry duPont Ridgely
entered judgment in Case No. 79-2010 on July 29, 2010.
Mr. Rhodes worked as a forklift operator at the Port of Wilmington
from 1987 until October 19, 2006. The City of Wilmington owned the
Port until late 1995, when it was sold to Diamond State Port Corp.
The North American Smelting Company (NASCO) site, which was
located within the Port, was owned and operated by DSPC.
A Work Plan for the Remediation & Demolition of the NASCO site was
prepared by RMI Environmental, a company retained to remove
asbestos from the site. From 1984 to 1996, "the [NASCO site] was
leased to Port tenants for vehicle maintenance and bulk storage of
sodium nitrate and urea." In 1996, the NASCO site was found to be
unsuitable for any use, and in 1997 the building was demolished.
Mr. Rhodes was diagnosed with lung cancer in December 2006. He
died from the disease later that month. A Petition to Determine
Compensation Due was filed on Mr. Rhodes' behalf, alleging that he
developed lung cancer as a result of being exposed to asbestos
during his employment with DSPC. The IAB held a hearing on the
petition.
At that hearing, Mr. Rhodes' widow, Linda Peterson-Rhodes,
testified that she brought lunch to her husband at work daily from
1987 until 2006, and that she believed Mr. Rhodes worked in all
the warehouses, including the NASCO site.
DSPC's expert witness, Dr. Albert Rizzo, opined that Mr. Rhodes'
lung cancer was caused exclusively by cigarette smoking. Dr. Rizzo
testified that there were no findings indicating to a reasonable
degree of medical probability that asbestos exposure had
contributed to Mr. Rhodes' lung cancer.
The IAB denied Mrs. Rhodes' petition. Mrs. Rhodes appealed to the
Superior Court, contending that the IAB had abused its discretion
by ignoring relevant evidence, and had committed legal error by
misapplying the "last injurious exposure" rule.
The Superior Court affirmed the IAB's decision, and this appeal
followed.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Sensus USA Inc. Still Party to Exposure Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sensus USA Inc. and other third parties continue to be defendants
in several lawsuits filed related to illnesses from exposure to
asbestos or asbestos-containing products, according to the
Company's quarterly report filed on Aug. 3, 2010 with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
The plaintiffs claim unspecified damages.
The complaints filed in connection with these proceedings do not
specify which plaintiffs allegedly were involved with the
Company's products, and it is uncertain whether any plaintiffs
have asbestos-related illnesses or dealt with the Company's
products, much less whether any plaintiffs were exposed to an
asbestos-containing component part of the Company's product or
whether such part could have been a substantial contributing
factor to the alleged illness.
Although the Company is entitled to indemnification for legal and
indemnity costs for asbestos claims related to these products from
certain subsidiaries of Invensys, under the stock purchase
agreement under which the Company acquired Invensys Metering
Systems, such indemnities, when aggregated with all other
indemnity claims, are limited to the purchase price paid by the
Company in connection with the acquisition of Invensys Metering
Systems.
Raleigh, N.C.-based Sensus USA Inc. provides advanced metering and
related communications solutions to the worldwide utility
industry. The Company makes water, gas, heat and electric meters,
as well as provides comprehensive metering communications system
solutions that include automatic meter reading and installation
and maintenance of advanced metering infrastructure systems.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Graham Remains a Defendant in Injury Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Corporation continues to be named as a defendant in certain
lawsuits alleging personal injury from exposure to asbestos
contained in products made by the Company.
The Company is a co-defendant with numerous other defendants in
these lawsuits, according to the Company's quarterly report filed
on Aug. 3, 2010 with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The claims are similar to previous asbestos suits that named the
Company as defendant, which either were dismissed when it was
shown that the Company had not supplied products to the
plaintiffs' places of work or were settled for amounts below the
expected defense costs.
Batavia, N.Y.-based Graham Corporation designs and manufactures
custom-engineered ejectors, vacuum systems, condensers, liquid
ring pump packages and heat exchangers. Its equipment is used in
critical applications in the petrochemical, oil refinery and
electric power generation industries, including cogeneration and
geothermal plants.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Rogers Corp. Has 181 Pending Claims at June 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
Rogers Corporation faced about 181 pending asbestos-related claims
at June 30, 2010, compared with about 167 pending claims at Dec.
31, 2009, according to the Company's quarterly report filed on
Aug. 3, 2010 with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
There were about 168 pending claims against the Company as of
March 31, 2010. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 3, 2010)
The Company has been named in asbestos litigation primarily in
Illinois, Pennsylvania and Mississippi.
Of the 181 claims pending as of June 30, 2010, about 57 claims do
not specify the amount of damages sought, about 121 claims cite
jurisdictional amounts, and three claims (less than 2% of the
total pending claims) specify the amount of damages sought not
based on jurisdictional requirements.
These three claims allege compensatory and punitive damages of
US$20 million each. These three claims name between 10 and 76
defendants.
Cases involving the Company typically name 50-300 defendants,
although some cases have had as few as one and as many as 833
defendants. The Company has obtained dismissals of many of these
claims.
For the six month period ended June 30, 2010, the Company was able
to have 63 claims dismissed and settled eight claims. For the
fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009, about 96 claims were dismissed
and 22 were settled.
The majority of costs have been paid by the Company's insurance
carriers, including the costs associated with the small number of
cases that have been settled. Such settlements totaled about
US$1.9 million for the first half of 2010, compared with US$2.1
million during the first half of 2009 and about US$7.6 million for
the full year 2009.
Rogers, Conn.-based Rogers Corporation develops and manufactures
high performance, specialty-material-based products for
applications in diverse markets including: portable
communications, communications infrastructure, computer and office
equipment, consumer products, ground transportation, aerospace and
defense.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: FirstEnergy Remains Involved in Exposure Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------
There are various lawsuits, claims (including claims for asbestos
exposure) and proceedings related to FirstEnergy Corp.'s normal
business operations pending against it and its subsidiaries.
No further asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the
Company's quarterly report filed on Aug. 3, 2010 with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
Akron, Ohio-based FirstEnergy Corp.'s utilities provide
electricity to 4.5 million customers in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and
New Jersey. The Company's domestic power plants have a total
generating capacity of more than 14,170 MW, most generated by
coal-fired plants.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: ArvinMeritor Has $61MM Liability at June 30
------------------------------------------------------------
ArvinMeritor, Inc.'s long-term asbestos-related liabilities
amounted to US$61 million as of both June 30, 2010 and
Sept. 30, 2009, according to the Company's quarterly report filed
on Aug. 4, 2010 with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company's long-term asbestos-related liabilities were US$61
million as of both March 31, 2010. (Class Action Reporter, May 21,
2010)
Current asbestos-related liabilities were US$16 million as of both
June 30, 2010 and Sept. 30, 2009.
The Company's long-term asbestos-related recoveries were US$47
million as of both June 30, 2010 and Sept. 30, 2009. Current long-
term asbestos-related recoveries were US$8 million as of June 30,
2010 and Sept. 30, 2009.
Troy, Mich.-based ArvinMeritor, Inc. supplies integrated systems,
modules and components to original equipment manufacturers and the
aftermarket for the commercial vehicle, transportation and
industrial sectors.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Maremont Still Facing 26,000 Claims at June 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
ArvinMeritor, Inc.'s subsidiary, Maremont Corporation, faced about
26,000 pending asbestos-related claims at both June 30, 2010 and
Sept. 30, 2009, according to the Company's quarterly report filed
on Aug. 4, 2010 with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Maremont faced 26,000 pending asbestos-related claims at
March 31, 2010. (Class Action Reporter, May 21, 2010)
Maremont manufactured friction products containing asbestos from
1953 through 1977, when it sold its friction product business.
Arvin Industries, Inc., a predecessor of the Company, acquired
Maremont in 1986.
Maremont and many other companies are defendants in suits brought
by individuals claiming personal injuries as a result of exposure
to asbestos-containing products.
Prior to February 2001, Maremont participated in the Center for
Claims Resolution (CCR) and shared with other CCR members in the
payment of defense and indemnity costs for asbestos-related
claims. The CCR handled the resolution and processing of asbestos
claims on behalf of its members until February 2001, when it was
reorganized and discontinued negotiating shared settlements.
Since the CCR was reorganized in 2001, Maremont has handled
asbestos-related claims through its own defense counsel and has
taken a more aggressive defensive approach that involves examining
the merits of each asbestos-related claim.
Maremont determined that as of March 31, 2010 the most likely and
probable liability for pending and future claims over the next 10
years is US$57 million.
The insurance receivable related to asbestos-related liabilities
is US$43 million as of June 30, 2010 and Sept. 30, 2009.
Troy, Mich.-based ArvinMeritor, Inc. supplies integrated systems,
modules and components to original equipment manufacturers and the
aftermarket for the commercial vehicle, transportation and
industrial sectors.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: ArvinMeritor Still Facing Rockwell Legacy Cases
----------------------------------------------------------------
ArvinMeritor, Inc., along with many other companies, is named as a
defendant in lawsuits alleging personal injury as a result of
exposure to asbestos used in certain components of Rockwell
Automation, Inc. products many years ago.
Liability for these claims was transferred to the Company at the
time of the spin-off of the automotive business to Meritor from
Rockwell in 1997. Currently there are thousands of claimants in
lawsuits that name the Company, together with many other
companies, as defendants.
Historically, the Company has been dismissed from the vast
majority of similar claims filed in the past with no payment to
claimants.
The Company has recorded a US$16 million liability for defense and
indemnity costs associated with Rockwell claims at both
June 30, 2010 and Sept. 30, 2009.
The Company has recorded an insurance receivable related to
Rockwell legacy asbestos-related liabilities of US$12 million at
June 30, 2010 and Sept. 30, 2009.
Troy, Mich.-based ArvinMeritor, Inc. supplies integrated systems,
modules and components to original equipment manufacturers and the
aftermarket for the commercial vehicle, transportation and
industrial sectors.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hartford Liability at $1.94-Bil. at June 30
------------------------------------------------------------
The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc.'s net asbestos
liability was US$1.944 billion for the three and six months ended
June 30, 2010, according to the Company's quarterly report filed
on Aug. 4, 2010 with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company's net asbestos liability was US$1.822 billion for the
three months ended March 31, 2010. (Class Action Reporter, May 7,
2010)
Net asbestos-related paid losses and loss adjustment expenses were
US$48 million during the three months ended June 30, 2010. Net
incurred losses and LAE were US$170 million during the three
months ended June 30, 2010.
Net asbestos-related paid losses and LAE were US$120 million
during the six months ended June 30, 2010, compared with US$172
million during the six months ended June 30, 2010.
The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. offers personal and
commercial life and property/casualty insurance products. Through
its Hartford Life subsidiary, the Company offers individual and
group life insurance and annuities, as well as the financial
services mentioned in its name (asset management, retirement
plans, and mutual funds). The Company is based in Hartford, Conn.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 3M Company Still Involved in Respirator Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------
3M Company, as of June 30, 2010, is a named defendant in numerous
lawsuits (including asbestos-related) in various courts that
purport to represent 2,278 individual claimants, down from the
2,510 individual claimants with actions pending at Dec. 31, 2009.
Most of the lawsuits and claims resolved by and currently pending
against the Company allege use of some of the Company's mask and
respirator products and seek damages from the Company and other
defendants for alleged personal injury from workplace exposures to
asbestos, silica, coal mine dust or other occupational dusts found
in products manufactured by other defendants or generally in the
workplace.
A minority of claimants generally allege personal injury from
occupational exposure to asbestos from products previously
manufactured by the Company, which are often unspecified, as well
as products manufactured by other defendants, or occasionally at
Company premises.
St. Paul, Minn.-based 3M Company manages its operations in six
operating business segments: Industrial and Transportation; Health
Care; Consumer and Office; Display and Graphics; Safety, Security
and Protection Services; and Electro and Communications.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 3M Company Records $33M June 30 Aearo Liability
----------------------------------------------------------------
As of June 30, 2010, 3M Company, through its Aearo subsidiary, has
recorded US$33 million as an estimate of the probable liabilities
for product liabilities and defense costs related to current and
future Aearo-related asbestos and silica-related claims.
On April 1, 2008, a subsidiary of the Company purchased the stock
of Aearo Holding Corp., the parent of Aearo Technologies. Aearo
manufactures and sells various products, including personal
protection equipment, such as eye, ear, head, face, fall and
certain respiratory protection products.
As of June 30, 2010, Aearo and/or other companies that previously
owned and operated Aearo's respirator business (American Optical
Corporation, Warner-Lambert LLC, AO Corp. and Cabot Corporation)
are named defendants, with multiple co-defendants, sometimes
including the Company, in numerous lawsuits in various courts.
The plaintiffs allege use of mask and respirator products and seek
damages from Aearo and other defendants for alleged personal
injury from workplace exposures to asbestos, silica-related, or
other occupational dusts found in products manufactured by other
defendants or generally in the workplace.
Responsibility for legal costs, as well as for settlements and
judgments, is currently shared in an informal arrangement among
Aearo, Cabot, American Optical Corporation and a subsidiary of
Warner Lambert and their insurers (Payor Group).
Liability is allocated among the parties based on the number of
years each company sold respiratory products under the "AO Safety"
brand and/or owned the AO Safety Division of American Optical
Corporation and the alleged years of exposure of the individual
plaintiff. Aearo's share of the contingent liability is further
limited by an agreement entered into between Aearo and Cabot on
July 11, 1995.
This agreement provides that, so long as Aearo pays to Cabot an
annual fee of US$400,000, Cabot will retain responsibility and
liability for, and indemnify Aearo against, asbestos and silica-
related product liability claims for respirators manufactured
prior to July 11, 1995.
Because the date of manufacture for a particular respirator
allegedly used in the past is often difficult to determine, Aearo
and Cabot have applied the agreement to claims arising
out of the alleged use of respirators while exposed to asbestos or
silica or products containing asbestos or silica prior to Jan. 1,
1997.
With these arrangements in place, Aearo's potential liability is
limited to exposures alleged to have arisen from the use of
respirators while exposed to asbestos, silica or other
occupational dusts on or after Jan. 1, 1997.
To date, Aearo has elected to pay the annual fee. Aearo could
potentially be exposed to additional claims for some part of the
pre-July 11, 1995 period covered by its agreement with Cabot if
Aearo elects to discontinue its participation in this arrangement,
or if Cabot is no longer able to meet its obligations in these
matters.
St. Paul, Minn.-based 3M Company manages its operations in six
operating business segments: Industrial and Transportation; Health
Care; Consumer and Office; Display and Graphics; Safety, Security
and Protection Services; and Electro and Communications.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 3M Company Records $127M Liabilities at June 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
3M Company recorded respirator mask/asbestos liabilities of US$127
million as of June 30, 2010, compared with US$138 million as of
Dec. 31, 2009, according to the Company's quarterly report filed
on Aug. 4, 2010 with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company's liabilities for asbestos or respirator mask claims
were US$133 million as of March 31, 2010. (Class Action Reporter,
May 21, 2010)
Respirator mask/asbestos insurance receivables amounted to US$118
million as of June 30, 2010, compared with US$143 million as of
Dec. 31, 2009.
The Company's insurance receivables for asbestos or respirator
mask claims were US$118 million as of March 31, 2010. (Class
Action Reporter, May 21, 2010)
St. Paul, Minn.-based 3M Company manages its operations in six
operating business segments: Industrial and Transportation; Health
Care; Consumer and Office; Display and Graphics; Safety, Security
and Protection Services; and Electro and Communications.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Continental Action v. 3M Company Still Pending
---------------------------------------------------------------
3M Company continues to face an asbestos insurance lawsuit filed
on behalf of Continental Casualty and Continental Insurance Co.
On Jan. 5, 2007 the Company was served with a declaratory judgment
action filed on behalf of two of its insurers (Continental
Casualty and Continental Insurance Co. - both part of the
Continental Casualty Group) disclaiming coverage for respirator
mask/asbestos claims.
These insurers represent about US$14 million of a US$118 million
insurance recovery receivable.
The action, pending in the District Court in Ramsey County, Minn.,
seeks declaratory judgment regarding the allocation of covered
costs among the policies issued by the various insurers. The
action named, in addition to the Company, over 60 of the Company's
insurers.
This action is similar in nature to an action filed in 1994 with
respect to breast implant coverage, which ultimately resulted in
the Minnesota Supreme Court's ruling of 2003 that was largely in
the Company's favor. The plaintiff insurers have served an amended
complaint that names some additional insurers and deletes others.
Several of the insurer defendants named in the amended complaint
have been dismissed because of settlements they have reached with
the Company regarding the matters at issue in the lawsuit.
The case remains in its early stages with a trial scheduled to
begin in June 2012.
St. Paul, Minn.-based 3M Company manages its operations in six
operating business segments: Industrial and Transportation; Health
Care; Consumer and Office; Display and Graphics; Safety, Security
and Protection Services; and Electro and Communications.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Allstate Reserves $1.14B for Claims at June 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Allstate Corporation's reserves for asbestos claims were
US$1.14 billion at June 30, 2010 and US$1.18 billion at
Dec. 31, 2009, according to the Company's quarterly report filed
on Aug. 4, 2010 with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company's reserves for asbestos claims were US$1.16 billion at
March 31, 2010. (Class Action Reporter, May 7, 2010)
Net of reinsurance recoverables, the reserves for asbestos claims
were US$582 million at June 30, 2010 and US$600 million at Dec.
31, 2009.
The Allstate Corporation is a personal lines insurer. The
Company's Allstate Protection segment sells auto, homeowners,
property/casualty, and life insurance products in Canada and the
United States. The Company is based in Northbrook, Ill.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Exposure Lawsuits Ongoing v. CenterPoint Energy
----------------------------------------------------------------
CenterPoint Energy, Inc. (or its subsidiaries) has been named as a
defendant in lawsuits filed by a number of individuals who claim
injury due to exposure to asbestos.
Some facilities owned by the Company contain or have contained
asbestos insulation and other asbestos-containing materials. Some
of the claimants have worked at locations owned by the Company,
but most existing claims relate to facilities previously owned by
the Company's subsidiaries.
The Company anticipates that additional claims like those received
may be asserted in the future.
In 2004, the Company sold its generating business, to which most
of these claims relate, to Texas Genco LLC, which is now known as
NRG Texas LP.
Houston-based CenterPoint Energy, Inc.'s regulated utilities
distribute natural gas to 3.2 million customers in six U.S. states
and electricity to two million customers on the Texas Gulf Coast.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Tasty Baking Has $100,000 Interest at June 26
--------------------------------------------------------------
Tasty Baking Company recorded US$100,000 during the 13 weeks ended
June 26, 2010 and US$200,000 during the 26 weeks ended June 26,
2010 in interest associated with the asset retirement obligation,
according to the Company's quarterly report filed on Aug. 4, 2010
with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company has a conditional asset retirement obligation related
to asbestos in its Hunting Park, Pa., facility.
This liability has accreted to the full value of the obligation
while the capitalized asset retirement cost is depreciated over
the remaining useful life of the Hunting Park, Pa., facility.
Philadelphia-based Tasty Baking Company produces sweet baked
goods. It has three manufacturing facilities, two in Philadelphia,
and a third facility in Oxford, Pa.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Wilkinson Case v. 9 Firms Filed in Kanawha Co.
---------------------------------------------------------------
An asbestos case styled Carolyn Sue Wilkinson and Richard
Wilkinson vs. A.W. Chesterton Company, Certainteed Corporation,
FMC Corporation et al was filed on July 28, 2010 in Kanawha County
Circuit Court, W.Va., The West Virginia Record reports.
The Wilkinsons claim the nine defendants are responsible for Mrs.
Wilkinson's mesothelioma, of which she was diagnosed in June 2010.
Mr. Wilkinson was employed by the defendants and was exposed to
asbestos fibers, which caused Mrs. Wilkinson to be exposed to
asbestos fibers.
The couple seeks compensatory and punitive damages. Stuart
Calwell, Esq., represents the Wilkinsons.
Case No. 10-C-1348 is assigned to visiting judge John H. Skaggs.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Oregon DEQ to OK Plan for Sunriver Amphitheater
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality proposes to approve
a plan to cap soil contaminated with asbestos at the Sunriver
Owners Association Amphitheater Site, according to an Ore. DEQ
press release dated Aug. 10, 2010.
DEQ has determined that this action will meet requirements to
protect human health and the environment.
The current recommended plan consists of capping the asbestos
containing soil with clean soil, asphalt, or concrete, and
institutional controls to maintain and monitor the cap. The area
to be capped consists of open forested land and is used as a
sledding area in the winter and occasionally used for walking and
bike riding in the summer.
Sunriver Owners Association is considering redeveloping the site
into an aquatics and multi-use park. The proposed action will be
compatible with redevelopment.
The project file may be reviewed by appointment at DEQ's Bend
office located at 475 NE Bellevue Drive, Suite 110 in Bend.
To schedule an appointment to review the file or ask questions,
please contact Marcy Kirk at (541) 633-2009.
To access site summary information and the staff report in DEQ's
Environmental Cleanup Site Information (ECSI) database on the
Internet, go to http://www.deq.state.or.us/lq/ECSI/ecsiquery.asp
then enter 4179 in the Site ID box and click "Submit" at the
bottom of the page. Next, click the link labeled 4179 in the Site
ID/Info column.
Send written comments by 5 p.m., Sept. 1, 2010 to Marcy Kirk,
Project Manager via email at kirk.marcy@deq.state.or.us You may
also mail comments to:
Oregon DEQ - Bend Office
Attn: Marcy Kirk
475 N.E. Bellevue Dr., Ste. 110
Bend, Ore. 97701
DEQ will consider all public comments received by the close of the
comment period before making a final decision regarding the
recommended action.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cleanup at Old West End Academy to Cost $52,000
----------------------------------------------------------------
The removal of asbestos from the Old West End Academy in Toledo,
Ohio, will cost the Toledo Public Schools US$52,000, The Toledo
Blade reports.
The Board of Education voted 4-0 to hire a firm to remove the
substance from the building before school begins on Aug. 26, 2010.
The asbestos was knocked loose by a crew from Wolfe's Roofing Inc.
of Walbridge that was working in the school at Collingwood
Boulevard and Central Avenue.
The asbestos was scattered on the floor, leading to the building's
evacuation and cessation of work until it could be cleaned,
Superintendent Jerome Pecko said.
Board member Larry Sykes instructed the administration to pursue
reimbursement for the cleanup from Wolfe's Roofing.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Bankruptcy Judge OKs Creditors' Bid in GM Case
---------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Robert Gerber in New York, on Aug. 9, 2010,
granted permission to unsecured creditors of General Motors
Corporation's bankruptcy estate to request documents, after they
agreed to keep sensitive information confidential, Bloomberg
reports.
The case is styled In re Motors Liquidation Co., 09-50026, U.S.
Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).
The creditors won permission to seek data from new General Motors
and other parties to estimate what could be billions of dollars in
asbestos claims.
Motors Liquidation Co., the remains of General Motors still in
bankruptcy, plans to create a trust, allowing it to exit
bankruptcy with some funds set aside to pay future tort claims.
While the estate recorded an estimate of US$648 million for
asbestos liability, a committee of creditors said in a court
filing the estate may face claims for five to 10 times as much.
Brake linings used in Old GM's automobiles incorporated small
amounts of encapsulated asbestos, creditors said in court
documents. Under Judge Gerber's order, the creditors can demand
documents from trusts that are processing asbestos claims on
behalf of other bankrupt companies.
A committee of holders of asbestos claims had objected to the
release of the data. The committee said it would complicate the
estimation process, by requiring information about more than 7,000
individuals, including medical records and parts of Social
Security numbers.
GM's asbestos liability increased because "all of the traditional
asbestos defendants that had not previously filed for bankruptcy
did so in the years 2000 through 2003," turning GM into a "target"
defendant, lawyers for creditors wrote.
Those traditional defendants "returned to the scene" from 2004 to
2009, in the form of trusts formed out of the companies'
bankruptcies. Those trusts have funding of US$30 billion to US$60
billion for asbestos claims, creditors said.
Creditors said they need the claims information to determine
whether future claims will be more like levels GM saw in the
1990s, when average annual asbestos-related indemnity costs were
less than US$2 million, and the company saw fewer than 40
mesothelioma claims per year. From 2000 to 2008, costs rose to an
annual average of US$30 million, with 850 claims submitted per
year.
Under GM's transfer of its assets to new General Motors, the
debtor received 10% of stock in the new company and 15% of the
warrants. Unsecured creditors say they expect the stock and
warrants will be distributed to them.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Appleton Pensioner's Death Related to Exposure
---------------------------------------------------------------
A court has heard that the death of 75-year-old George Large, a
former builder from Appleton Thorn, Warrington, England, was
linked to workplace exposure to asbestos, this is Cheshire
reports.
On Aug. 6, 2010, Warrington Coroner's Court heard how damage that
ultimately led to the terminal illness occurred while Mr. Large
was working in Crosfields factory in the 1950s.
In his life account read out to the court, Mr. Large, who worked
at Crosfields as a builder for Woolston-based William Tarr,
described how workers at the factory were given no protection
against the lethal asbestos. He said there were no warning signs,
masks or respirators on site.
The court also heard how Mr. Large, who "took pain very well"
according to wife Margaret, was also exposed to asbestos when
later working at Rylands and Whitecross factories.
Mr. Large stopped working around asbestos permanently in 1957.
However, in November 2009, he complained of chest pain and a scan
revealed a shadow on his lungs.
A diagnosis of mesothelioma was confirmed in December 2009 but
because of Mr. Large's general health he could not be treated with
chemotherapy. After a five month battle, he died at St Rocco's on
May 23, 2010.
When recording a verdict of death due to industrial disease,
Coroner Janet Napier said, "It's awful for everybody to watch and
awful for him. It's so terribly sad and unfair; sort of a
punishment for working hard and not complaining."
ASBESTOS UPDATE: U.K. Horticulturalist's Death Linked to Hazard
---------------------------------------------------------------
An inquest in Gloucester, England, heard that the death of
renowned horticulturalist, Pamela Schwerdt, was related to
exposure to asbestos, the Cotswold Journal reports.
Ms. Schwerdt developed the Sissinghurst Castle gardens in Kent,
England.
Gloucestershire coroner Alan Crickmore heard that in the late
1940s and through most of the 1950s she stoked boilers at the
Waterperry horticultural school near Oxford. However, he said
there was no other evidence of asbestos exposure either in Ms.
Schwerdt's working or social life. He recorded an open verdict.
Ms. Schwerdt, who lived at Manor Farm, Condicote near Stow, died
at the age of 78 of malignant mesothelioma on Sept. 11 2009. She
was diagnosed with the disease in 2008.
Analysis of her lung tissues revealed 57,047 mineral fibers per
gram of dry lung tissue -- a "moderate" accumulation of fibers
consistent with causing mesothelioma.
Coroner Mr. Crickmore said he was satisfied that asbestos exposure
led to Ms. Scwerdt's death, but the question remained on how she
came to be exposed.
Ms. Schwerdt was joint head gardener for 31 years, with Sibylle
Kreutzberger, at the garden at Sissinghurst Castle, created by Sir
Harold Nicolson and his wife Vita Sackville-West. She retired from
Sissinghurst in 1990. She and Kreutzberger then started a new and
smaller garden in Gloucestershire.
Ms. Schwerdt was awarded the RHS Associate of Honour in 1980 and
appointed MBE in 1990.
In 1992, Ms. Schwerdt was co-recipient, with Ms. Kreutzberger, of
the third International Carlo Scarpa Prize for Gardens awarded by
the Fondazione Benetton. In 2006, Ms. Schwerdt was awarded the
Victoria Medal of Honour by the RHS.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Sunriver Homeowners' Case v. U.S. Govt. Ongoing
----------------------------------------------------------------
Citing asbestos contamination, property owners at Central Oregon's
Sunriver Resort have filed a US$3.2 million lawsuit against the
U.S. Federal government and other previous owners of the military
camp that preceded the resort, The Register-Guard reports.
In the complaint filed in July 2010, the Sunriver Owners
Association says it discovered the asbestos in a six-acre site
where demolished Camp Abbot buildings were buried.
The federal government purchased the future resort site in 1942
for use as a U.S. Army combat engineer training camp. Camp Abbot
consisted of nearly 100 buildings, "some or all of which" featured
cement asbestos board siding, as well as insulation, floor tiles,
ceilings and walls containing asbestos, Sunriver's suit alleges.
After passing through a succession of private owners, 3,300 acres
of the former camp became a private residential and resort
community in 1968.
Sunriver now has about 1,700 year-round residents, though its
population swells to an estimated 20,000 during the vacation
rental season.
The tainted land was discovered during design work for a proposed
22-acre aquatic, sledding and amphitheater complex. Members of the
nonprofit home-owners' association are scheduled to vote on a
US$18.9 million bond issue to finance the new recreation complex.
Designers of the "Amphitheater Project" found the asbestos-laden
debris in 2002, while assessing the undeveloped project site north
of Sunriver's retail mall.
Though the owners' group has since worked voluntarily with the
state Department of Environmental Quality to remove about 1,500
pounds of the material, more remains, the suit says.
The Sunriver lawsuit also names six other former owners of the
site since closure of Camp Abbot. They include the Shevlin-Hixon
Co.; W.R. Franks doing business as Franks & Mayfield Partnership;
E.J. and Clara Huckeba; William and Marian Mayfield; Goldie Evans;
and Hudspeth Land & Livestock Inc.
The owners' group already has spent about US$180,000 to safely
remove asbestos, and expects to spend at least US$3 million more,
the suit says.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: St. Joseph's Hospice to Get GBP10,000 in Payout
----------------------------------------------------------------
A High Court judge awarded St. Joseph's Hospice in Hackney, east
London, more than GBP10,000, plus interest, against a Company held
liable over the death of one of its patients from mesothelioma,
The Press Association reports.
James Wilson, who lived in a flat in Tower Hamlets, died in March
2007, of which his mesothelioma was contracted as a result of
exposure to asbestos while working for Foster Wheeler Ltd in the
early 1950s as a boiler erector at Dartford power station.
Mr. Wilson's daughters, Catherine Drake and Tina Starkey,
executives of his estate, won damages against the company on
behalf of themselves, Mr. Wilson's children and grandchildren. The
daughters, who both live in Dagenham, Essex, also put in a claim
on behalf of St. Joseph's.
Judge Anthony Thornton QC, sitting at the High Court in London,
ruled the hospice was entitled to "a reasonable sum" from the
company, which he set at GBP10,021 with interest from the date of
Mr. Wilson's death.
The judge observed the care given to Mr. Wilson was "charitable in
nature, gratuitous and provided without St Joseph's being under an
obligation to provide it."
ASBESTOS UPDATE: N.J. Court Denies Motion to Amend Gurvey Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey, denied H. Scott
Gurvey and Amy R. Gurvey's motion for leave to file and serve an
amended asbestos-related complaint.
The case is styled Gurvey, et al. v. Fixzit National Install
Services, Inc., et al.
U.S. Magistrates Judge Michael A. Shipp entered judgment in Civil
Action No. 06-1779 (DRD)(MAS) on July 19, 2010.
Defendants Jim Lamberti, an individual, and Jim Lamberti Heating,
Electrical & Air Conditioning opposed the Gurveys' request.
Mr. Lamberti visited the Gurveys' home in September 2002 to
inspect the newly installed air conditioning system upon the
request of former co-defendant Joseph M. Rutkoski, Sr., on behalf
of Fixzit National Install Services, Inc.
The Gurveys alleged that although Defendants knew that the plaster
ceilings and walls of the Gurvey home would have to be cut,
Defendants failed to test them for asbestos during their
evaluation.
Subsequent to Defendants' inspection, the Gurveys asserted that
Mrs. Gurvey became ill in 2009, her lungs becoming irritated and
inflamed with blood. Her physicians recommended that the Gurvey
home be tested for contamination and the testing confirmed that
the Gurvey home was contaminated with toxic levels of asbestos and
mold.
Accordingly, the Gurveys argued that Defendants are liable for
Plaintiffs' injuries. Plaintiffs contended that while Defendants
did not initially install the air conditioning unit, Defendants
nonetheless worked with the former co-defendants "as a team" when
they inspected the unit and are therefore liable.
Defendants argued that Mr. Lamberti visited the Gurvey home on one
occasion to evaluate the air conditioning unit, which had already
been installed. According to Defendants, the Gurveys were aware
from early on that the problems that they experienced with the
system were due to its improper design and installation.
Defendants further noted that Plaintiffs' evaluators reported that
the evaporator coil of the air conditioning unit at issue froze
because Mr. Sorokin, a technician hired by the former co-
defendants, installed a defective piston. Therefore, they asserted
that Plaintiffs' motion was a mere attempt to attribute the
liability of Fixzit National Install Services, Inc., Steve Levi
and Joseph M. Rutkoski, Sr. to the remaining Defendants.
The Gurveys' motion to amend the complaint and for sanctions was
denied.
Haydn Julian Brill, Esq., of Brill & Associates, New York,
represented Fixzit National Install Services, Inc., et al.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ohio Court OKs Judge's Ruling in Leonard Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, Eastern
Division, affirmed the June 22, 2010 Order and Report and
Recommendation of a Magistrate Judge in a case involving asbestos
styled Ronald D. Leonard, Plaintiff v. Ohio Department of
Rehabilitation and Correction, et al., Defendants.
U.S. District Judge Algenon L. Marbley entered judgment in Case
No. 2:09-CV-961 on July 30, 2010.
Plaintiffs Ronald Leonard and Cole Worthington are state inmates
who claimed that their exposure to asbestos and black mold at the
Chillicothe Correctional Institution [CCI] amounted to a violation
of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Mr. Leonard sought a temporary restraining order, claiming that
the exposure to mold and asbestos placed him in "imminent danger."
In his motion, he requested that he be evacuated from CCI and that
an investigation be ordered as to the presence of mold and
asbestos at the prison.
The Magistrate Judge recommended that the motion for temporary
injunctive relief be denied. In particular, the Magistrate Judge
concluded that Mr. Leonard failed to demonstrate a substantial
likelihood of success on the merits of the claim sufficient to
warrant interim injunctive relief.
Mr. Leonard filed an Objection to the Magistrate Judge's decision.
As the Magistrate Judge concluded, Mr. Leonard had not come
forward with evidence to show that he is presently suffering a
health condition due to exposure to mold and asbestos or that his
future health is at risk.
Mr. Leonard's Objection to the Magistrate Judge's decision was
denied. The decision of the Magistrate Judge was adopted and
affirmed. Mr. Leonard's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order was
denied.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Split Ruling Issued in Russell's Action v. Ford
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 8, issued split
rulings in a case involving asbestos styled John Russell et al.,
Plaintiffs and Respondents v. Ford Motor Company, Defendant and
Appellant.
Judges Tricia A. Bigelow, Madeleine Flier and Elizabeth A. Grimes
entered judgment in Case No. B213596 on July 30, 2010.
This was an appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los
Angeles.
Ford Motor Company appealed from a judgment awarding John Russell
and his wife, Esther Russell, US$1,493,330 for personal injuries
resulting from asbestos exposure.
In 2007, Mr. Russell was diagnosed with malignant pleural
mesothelioma. The Russells sued Ford, Maremont Corporation and a
number of other defendants who sold, manufactured or supplied
asbestos-containing products. Mr. Russell's Feb. 22, 2008
complaint alleged claims for negligence, strict liability and loss
of consortium.
Ford sold and distributed brake products containing asbestos from
1910 to 2001. All new Ford vehicles sold from 1910 to 1982
included asbestos containing brakes. Ford also sold replacement
brakes under its FOMOCO brand name that contained asbestos. During
that time, Ford brakes contained between 40% to 60% chrysotile
asbestos by weight.
At trial, Mr. Russell testified that he was exposed to Ford brake
products in the 1950s. During the summer of 1953 and 1954, he
changed tires for West Coast Stores in North Hollywood. Most, if
not all, of the cars he worked on were made by Ford, General
Motors or Chrysler.
In his complaint, Mr. Russell alleged that Ford's brakes were
defective in design and that Ford failed to warn that the asbestos
in its brakes was hazardous. Due to Mr. Russell's poor health and
advanced age, the trial court set a preferential trial date for
Aug. 4, 2008, about six months after he filed the initial
complaint.
The matter was submitted to the jury on Aug. 26, 2008. The jury
found Mr. Russell incurred US$994,633 in economic damages and US$6
million in non-economic damages and awarded US$100,000 to
Russell's wife for loss of consortium. The jury allocated 10% of
the total fault to Ford.
Mr. Russell requested the trial court enter judgment in the amount
of US$1,493,333, which included an offset of US$111,300 for his
out of court settlements with the other defendants. The trial
court entered Mr. Russell's proposed judgment on Oct. 22, 2008.
Subsequent to the entry of judgment, Ford filed a number of post-
trial motions. First, it moved to vacate the judgment, arguing
that the amount of the judgment was unsupported by the special
verdict or by the evidence and that the special verdict was
inconsistent.
Ford also moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) on
the ground that there was no evidence that Ford's failure to warn
caused Mr. Russell's mesothelioma. Finally, Ford sought a new
trial. Those motions were denied on Dec. 19, 2008. Ford timely
appealed.
The jury's liability and damages findings were affirmed. The
judgment was vacated and the cause remanded to the trial court
with directions to allow Ford's counsel to review the relevant
terms of the settlement agreement and upon further argument by the
parties and due consideration, a new judgment shall be entered.
Bryan Cave, Esq., Brian J. Recor, Esq., and John M. Thomas, Esq.,
represented Ford.
Simon, Eddins & Greenstone (David C. Greenstone, Esq., and Brian
P. Barrow, Esq.) represented the Russells.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: RBS Global's Stearns Unit Still Has 1,425 Cases
----------------------------------------------------------------
RBS Global, Inc. says that multiple lawsuits -- with about 1,425
claimants -- are pending in state or federal court in numerous
jurisdictions relating to alleged personal injuries due to the
alleged presence of asbestos in certain brakes and clutches
previously manufactured by the Company's Stearns division and/or
its predecessor owners.
Invensys plc and FMC, prior owners of the Stearns business, have
paid 100% of the costs to date related to the Stearns lawsuits,
according to the Company's quarterly report filed on Aug. 4, 2010
with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Milwaukee-based RBS Global, Inc. is an industrial company that is
comprised of two strategic platforms: (i) Process and Motion
Control and (ii) Water Management.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 2 Lawsuits Ongoing v. RBS Global's Prager Unit
---------------------------------------------------------------
RBS Global, Inc.'s Prager subsidiary continues to face two pending
multi-defendant lawsuits relating to alleged personal injuries due
to the alleged presence of asbestos in a product allegedly
manufactured by Prager, according to the Company's quarterly
report filed on Aug. 4, 2010 with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.
Additionally, there are about 3,700 individuals who have filed
asbestos related claims against Prager. However, these claims are
currently on the Texas Multi-district Litigation inactive docket.
To date, the Company's insurance providers have paid 100% of the
costs related to the Prager asbestos matters.
Milwaukee-based RBS Global, Inc. is an industrial company that is
comprised of two strategic platforms: (i) Process and Motion
Control and (ii) Water Management.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: RBS Global's Falk Unit Faces 180 Exposure Cases
----------------------------------------------------------------
RBS Global, Inc.'s subsidiary, Falk Corporation (through its
successor entity) is a defendant in about 180 lawsuits pending in
state or federal court in numerous jurisdictions relating to
alleged personal injuries due to the alleged presence of asbestos
in certain clutches and drives previously manufactured by Falk.
There are about 540 claimants in these suits, according to the
Company's quarterly report filed on Aug. 4, 2010 with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
Hamilton Sundstrand is defending the Company in these lawsuits
under its indemnity obligations and has paid 100% of the costs to
date.
Milwaukee-based RBS Global, Inc. is an industrial company that is
comprised of two strategic platforms: (i) Process and Motion
Control and (ii) Water Management.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Zurn Still Facing 6,000 Injury Cases at July 3
---------------------------------------------------------------
RBS Global, Inc.'s Zurn division and an average of 80 unrelated
companies, as of July 3, 2010, were defendants in about 6,000
asbestos related lawsuits representing about 27,000 claims,
according to the Company's quarterly report filed on Aug. 4, 2010
with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Plaintiffs' claims allege personal injuries caused by exposure to
asbestos used primarily in industrial boilers formerly
manufactured by a segment of Zurn. Zurn did not manufacture
asbestos or asbestos components. Instead, Zurn purchased them from
suppliers. These claims are being handled under a defense strategy
funded by insurers.
As of July 3, 2010, the Company estimates the potential liability
for asbestos-related claims pending against Zurn as well as the
claims expected to be filed in the next 10 years to be about US$86
million of which Zurn expects to pay about US$67 million in the
next 10 years on such claims, with the balance of the estimated
liability being paid in subsequent years.
Management estimates that its available insurance to cover its
potential asbestos liability as of July 3, 2010, is about US$269
million, and believes that all current claims are covered by this
insurance.
However, principally as a result of the past insolvency of certain
of the Company's insurance carriers, certain coverage gaps will
exist if and after the Company's other carriers have paid the
first US$193 million of aggregate liabilities.
In order for the next US$51 million of insurance coverage from
solvent carriers to apply, management estimates that it would need
to satisfy US$14 million of asbestos claims. Layered within the
final US$25 million of the total US$269 million of coverage,
management estimates that it would need to satisfy an additional
US$80 million of asbestos claims.
As of July 3, 2010, the Company recorded a receivable from its
insurance carriers of US$86 million, which corresponds to the
amount of its potential asbestos liability that is covered by
available insurance and is currently determined to be probable of
recovery.
However, there is no assurance that US$269 million of insurance
coverage will ultimately be available or that Zurn's asbestos
liabilities will not ultimately exceed US$269 million.
Milwaukee-based RBS Global, Inc. is an industrial company that is
comprised of two strategic platforms: (i) Process and Motion
Control and (ii) Water Management.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Vector Group Facing Burik Lawsuit in Md. Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
Vector Group Ltd. is named a defendant in the asbestos case styled
Burik, et al. v. John-Crane Houdaille, Inc. et al., Case No. 24-X-
08-000429, Circuit Court, Maryland, Baltimore City.
In the case filed on June 9, 2010, Plaintiff is suing individually
and as personal representative of the estate of a deceased smoker.
Plaintiff seeks damages allegedly caused to decedent by exposure
to asbestos and cigarettes, with claims against certain asbestos
manufacturer defendants and certain tobacco company defendants,
including the Company's subsidiary Liggett Group LLC.
Defendants' response to Plaintiff's complaint is due on Aug. 13,
2010. Liggett will file an adoption of Cigarette Defendants'
Motion to Dismiss.
Miami-based Vector Group Ltd. is a holding company that is
principally engaged in the manufacture and sale of cigarettes in
the United States through its Liggett Group LLC and Vector Tobacco
Inc. subsidiaries.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Liggett Group Party to Love Action in Md. Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
Vector Group Ltd.'s subsidiary, Liggett Group LLC, is party to
asbestos litigation styled Love, et al. v. John-Crane Houdaille,
Inc. et al., Case No. 24-X-08-000120, Circuit Court, Maryland,
Baltimore City.
In the case filed on June 1, 2010, Plaintiff and his wife seek
damages allegedly caused by exposure to asbestos and cigarettes,
with claims against certain asbestos manufacturer defendants and
certain tobacco company defendants, including Liggett.
Defendants' response to Plaintiff's complaint is due on Aug. 6,
2010.
Liggett will file an adoption of Cigarette Defendants' Motion to
Dismiss.
Miami-based Vector Group Ltd. is a holding company that is
principally engaged in the manufacture and sale of cigarettes in
the United States through its Liggett Group LLC and Vector Tobacco
Inc. subsidiaries.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Vector Group Involved in Parsons Case in W.Va.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Vector Group Ltd. is still involved in litigation involving
asbestos styled Parsons, et al. v. A C & S Inc., et al., Case No.
98-C-388, Circuit Court, W.Va., Kanawha County.
Filed on April 9, 1998, this personal injury class action is
brought on behalf of plaintiff's decedent and all West Virginia
residents who allegedly have personal injury claims arising from
their exposure to cigarette smoke and asbestos fibers.
The case is stayed as a result of the December 2000 bankruptcy
petitions filed by three defendants in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court
for the District of Delaware.
Miami-based Vector Group Ltd. is a holding company that is
principally engaged in the manufacture and sale of cigarettes in
the United States through its Liggett Group LLC and Vector Tobacco
Inc. subsidiaries.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide Has 66,099 Open Claims at June 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Union Carbide Corporation faced 66,099 unresolved asbestos claims
at June 30, 2010, compared with 74,957 unresolved claims at June
30, 2009, according to the Company's quarterly report filed on
Aug. 4, 2010 with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company faced 74,839 unresolved asbestos claims at March 31,
2010, compared with 74,802 claims at March 31, 2009. (Class Action
Reporter, May 14, 2010)
The Company is and has been involved in a large number of
asbestos-related suits filed primarily in state courts during the
past three decades. These suits allege personal injury resulting
from exposure to asbestos-containing products and frequently seek
both actual and punitive damages.
The alleged claims primarily relate to products that the Company
sold in the past, alleged exposure to asbestos-containing products
located on the Company's premises, and the Company's
responsibility for asbestos suits filed against a former UCC
subsidiary, Amchem Products, Inc.
At June 30, 2010, the Company recorded 3,675 claims filed and
12,606 claims settled, dismissed, or otherwise resolved. Claimants
with claims against both the Company and Amchem amounted to 21,226
and the Company recorded 44,873 individual claimants.
At June 30, 2009, the Company recorded 4,263 claims filed and
5,012 claims settled, dismissed, or otherwise resolved. Claimants
with claims against both the Company and Amchem amounted to 24,138
and the Company recorded 50,819 individual claimants.
The Company's asbestos-related liability for pending and future
claims was US$814 million at June 30, 2010. About 22% of the
recorded liability related to pending claims and about 78% related
to future claims.
Houston-based Union Carbide Corporation produces building-block
chemicals like ethylene and propylene, which are converted into
plastics resins like polyethylene and polypropylene. The Company
also produces ethylene oxide and ethylene glycol used to make
polyester fibers and antifreeze. The Company is a subsidiary of
The Dow Chemical Company.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide Cites $36MM June 30 Defense Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------
Union Carbide Corporation recorded US$36 million defense costs for
asbestos-related claims during the six months ended June 30, 2010,
compared with US$20 million during the six months ended June 30,
2009, according to the Company's quarterly report filed on Aug. 4,
2010 with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company recorded US$14 million defense costs for asbestos
claims during the three months ended March 31, 2010, compared with
US$11 million during the three months ended March 31, 2009. (Class
Action Reporter, May 14, 2010)
The Company recorded US$26 million resolution costs for asbestos-
related claims during the six months ended June 30, 2010, compared
with US$41 million during the six months ended June 30, 2009.
The Company expenses defense costs as incurred. The pretax impact
for defense and resolution costs, net of insurance, was US$22
million in the second quarter of 2010, (US$9 million in the second
quarter of 2009), and US$36 million in the first six months of
2010, (US$20 million in the first six months of 2009), and was
reflected in "Cost of sales" in the consolidated statements of
income.
Houston-based Union Carbide Corporation produces building-block
chemicals like ethylene and propylene, which are converted into
plastics resins like polyethylene and polypropylene. The Company
also produces ethylene oxide and ethylene glycol used to make
polyester fibers and antifreeze. The Company is a subsidiary of
The Dow Chemical Company.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide's Insurance Case Ongoing in N.Y.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Union Carbide Corporation continues to pursue an asbestos-related
comprehensive insurance coverage action in the Supreme Court of
the State of New York, County of New York.
In September 2003, the Company filed the comprehensive insurance
coverage case, seeking to confirm its rights to insurance for
various asbestos claims and to facilitate an orderly and timely
collection of insurance proceeds.
The Insurance Litigation was filed against insurers that are not
signatories to the Wellington Agreement and/or do not otherwise
have agreements in place with the Company regarding their
asbestos-related insurance coverage, in order to facilitate an
orderly resolution and collection of such insurance policies and
to resolve issues that the insurance carriers may raise.
Since the filing of the case, the Company has reached settlements
with several of the carriers involved in the Insurance Litigation,
including settlements reached with two significant carriers in the
fourth quarter of 2009.
Houston-based Union Carbide Corporation produces building-block
chemicals like ethylene and propylene, which are converted into
plastics resins like polyethylene and polypropylene. The Company
also produces ethylene oxide and ethylene glycol used to make
polyester fibers and antifreeze. The Company is a subsidiary of
The Dow Chemical Company.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide Still Has $84M June 30 Receivable
----------------------------------------------------------------
Union Carbide Corporation's receivable for insurance recoveries
related to its asbestos liability was US$84 million at June 30,
2010 and Dec. 31, 2009, according to the Company's quarterly
report filed on Aug. 4, 2010 with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.
At June 30, 2010 and Dec. 31, 2009, all of the receivable for
insurance recoveries was related to insurers that are not
signatories to the Wellington Agreement and/or do not otherwise
have agreements in place regarding their asbestos-related
insurance coverage.
The Company's receivables related to its asbestos-related
liability totaled US$370 million as of June 30, 2010, compared
with US$532 million as of Dec. 31, 2009.
Houston-based Union Carbide Corporation produces building-block
chemicals like ethylene and propylene, which are converted into
plastics resins like polyethylene and polypropylene. The Company
also produces ethylene oxide and ethylene glycol used to make
polyester fibers and antifreeze. The Company is a subsidiary of
The Dow Chemical Company.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Transocean's Units Still Face Lawsuits in Miss.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Certain of Transocean Ltd.'s subsidiaries continue to face
asbestos-related lawsuits in the Circuit Courts of the State of
Mississippi.
In 2004, several of the Company's subsidiaries were named in 21
complaints filed on behalf of 769 plaintiffs in the Circuit Courts
of the State of Mississippi and which claimed injuries arising out
of exposure to asbestos allegedly contained in drilling mud during
these plaintiffs' employment in drilling activities between 1965
and 1986.
A Special Master, appointed to administer these cases pre-trial,
subsequently required that each individual plaintiff file a
separate lawsuit, and the original 21 multi-plaintiff complaints
were dismissed by the Circuit Courts. The amended complaints
resulted in one of the Company's subsidiaries being named as a
direct defendant in seven cases.
The Company has or may have an indirect interest in an additional
17 cases. The complaints generally allege that the defendants used
or manufactured asbestos-containing products in connection with
drilling operations and have included allegations of negligence,
products liability, strict liability and claims allowed under the
Jones Act and general maritime law. The plaintiffs generally seek
awards of unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.
In each of these cases, the complaints have named other
unaffiliated defendant companies, including companies that
allegedly manufactured the drilling-related products that
contained asbestos.
None of the cases in which one of the Company's subsidiaries is a
named defendant has been scheduled for trial in 2010, and the
preliminary information available on these claims is not
sufficient to determine if there is an identifiable period for
alleged exposure to asbestos, whether any asbestos exposure in
fact occurred, the vessels potentially involved in the claims, or
the basis on which the plaintiffs would support claims that their
injuries were related to exposure to asbestos.
In 2009, two cases that were part of the original 2004 multi-
plaintiff suits went to trial in Mississippi against unaffiliated
defendant companies which allegedly manufactured drilling-related
products containing asbestos.
The Company was not a defendant in either of these cases. One of
the cases resulted in a substantial jury verdict in favor of the
plaintiff, and this verdict was subsequently vacated by the trial
judge on the basis that the plaintiff failed to meet its burden of
proof.
While the court's decision is consistent with the Company's
general evaluation of the strength of these cases, it has not been
reviewed on appeal. The second case resulted in a verdict
completely in favor of the defendants. There have been no other
trials involving any of the parties to the original 21 complaints.
Vernier, Switzerland-based Transocean Ltd. is a provider of
offshore contract drilling services for oil and gas wells. At June
30, 2010, the Company owned, had partial ownership interests in or
operated 139 mobile offshore drilling units.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Transocean Unit Facing 1,062 Actions at June 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
A Transocean Ltd. subsidiary, as of June 30, 2010, was a defendant
in about 1,062 asbestos-related lawsuits, according to the
Company's quarterly report filed on Aug. 4, 2010 with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
As of March 31, 2010, the subsidiary was a defendant in about
1,054 asbestos-related lawsuits. (Class Action Reporter, May 21,
2010)
The subsidiary was involved in lawsuits arising out of the
subsidiary's involvement in the design, construction and
refurbishment of major industrial complexes.
The operating assets of the subsidiary were sold and its
operations discontinued in 1989, and the subsidiary has no
remaining assets other than the insurance policies involved in its
litigation, fundings from settlements with insurers, assigned
rights from insurers and "coverage-in-place" settlement agreements
with insurers, and funds received from the cancellation of certain
insurance policies.
The subsidiary has been named as a defendant, along with numerous
other companies, in lawsuits alleging personal injury as a result
of exposure to asbestos.
Some of these lawsuits include multiple plaintiffs and the Company
estimates that there are about 2,569 plaintiffs in these lawsuits.
For many of these lawsuits, the Company has not been provided with
sufficient information from the plaintiffs to determine whether
all or some of the plaintiffs have claims against the subsidiary,
the basis of any such claims, or the nature of their alleged
injuries. The first of the asbestos-related lawsuits was filed
against this subsidiary in 1990.
Through June 30, 2010, the amounts expended to resolve claims,
including both attorneys' fees and expenses and settlement costs,
have not been material, and all deductibles with respect to the
primary insurance have been satisfied. The subsidiary continues to
be named as a defendant in additional lawsuits. The subsidiary has
in excess of US$1 billion in insurance limits potentially
available to the subsidiary.
Vernier, Switzerland-based Transocean Ltd. is a provider of
offshore contract drilling services for oil and gas wells. At June
30, 2010, the Company owned, had partial ownership interests in or
operated 139 mobile offshore drilling units.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Odyssey Records $386.44M Losses, LAE at June 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Odyssey Re Holdings Corp.'s gross asbestos-related unpaid losses
and loss adjustment expenses were US$386,443,000 during the three
and six months ended June 30, 2010, compared with US$342,482,000
during the three and six months ended June 30, 2009, according to
the Company's quarterly report filed on
Aug. 4, 2010 with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company's gross asbestos-related unpaid losses and loss
adjustment expenses were US$368,400,000 during the three months
ended March 31, 2010, compared with US$349,151,000 during the
three months ended March 31, 2009. (Class Action Reporter,
May 21, 2010)
The Company's net asbestos-related unpaid losses and LAE were
US$237,545,000 during the three and six months ended June 30,
2010, compared with US$220,335,000 during the three and six months
ended June 30, 2009.
Net unpaid asbestos and environmental losses and loss adjustment
expenses as of June 30, 2010 were US$263 million, representing
5.6% of total net unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses,
compared with US$265.5 million, or 5.7% of total net unpaid losses
and loss adjustment expenses as of Dec. 31, 2009.
The Company's reserves for asbestos and environmental-related
liabilities are from business written prior to 1986.
Net losses and loss adjustment expenses for asbestos claims
increased US$15 million for both the six month and three month
periods ended June 30, 2010, due to loss emergence greater than
expectations in the three months ended June 30, 2010.
The Company did not incur net losses and loss adjustment expenses
for asbestos claims for either the six month or the three month
periods ended June 30, 2009.
The Company's survival ratio for asbestos and environmental-
related liabilities as of June 30, 2010 is seven years. The
Company's underlying survival ratio for asbestos-related
liabilities is seven years.
Stamford, Conn.-based Odyssey Re Holdings Corp. is an underwriter
of reinsurance, providing property and casualty products on a
worldwide basis, and an underwriter of specialty insurance,
primarily in the United States and through the Lloyd's of London
marketplace.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Gardner Denver Still Party to Exposure Lawsuits
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gardner Denver, Inc. continues to be involved as a defendant in a
number of asbestos personal injury lawsuits, according to the
Company's quarterly report filed on Aug. 5, 2010 with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
The plaintiffs in these suits allege exposure to asbestos from
multiple sources and typically the Company is one of about 25 or
more named defendants. In the Company's experience to date, the
substantial majority of the plaintiffs have not suffered an injury
for which the Company bears responsibility.
Predecessors to the Company sometimes manufactured, distributed
and/or sold products allegedly at issue in the pending asbestos
litigation lawsuits.
However, neither the Company nor its predecessors ever mined,
manufactured, mixed, produced or distributed asbestos fiber, the
materials that allegedly caused the injury underlying the
lawsuits. Moreover, the asbestos-containing components of the
Products, if any, were enclosed within the subject Products.
The Company has entered into a series of cost-sharing agreements
with multiple insurance companies to secure coverage for asbestos
lawsuits. The Company also believes some of the potential
liabilities regarding these lawsuits are covered by indemnity
agreements with other parties.
Quincy, Ill.-based Gardner Denver, Inc. makes blowers, petroleum
pumps, and various compressors, such as reciprocating, rotary
screw, and sliding vane compressors, as well as positive
displacement and centrifugal blowers.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 122,490 U.S. Claims Ongoing v. Foster Wheeler
--------------------------------------------------------------
Foster Wheeler AG's subsidiaries in the United States faced
122,490 open asbestos claims during the fiscal three months ended
June 30, 2010, compared with 130,500 open claims during the fiscal
three months ended June 30, 2009, according to the Company's
quarterly report filed on Aug. 5, 2010 with the Securities and
Exchange Commission.
The Company's subsidiaries in the United States faced 125,430 open
asbestos-related claims during the fiscal three months ended March
31, 2010, compared with 131,010 open claims during the fiscal
three months ended March 31, 2009. (Class Action Reporter, May 14,
2010)
During the fiscal three months ended June 30, 2010, the Company
recorded 1,000 new claims and 3,940 claims resolved. During the
fiscal three months ended June 30, 2009, the Company recorded
1,040 new claims and 1,550 claims resolved.
Total asbestos-related assets were US$253.8 million as of June 30,
2010, compared with US$274 million as of Dec. 31, 2009. Total
asbestos-related liabilities were US$351.3 million as of June 30,
2010, compared with US$376.5 million as of Dec. 31, 2009.
The Company's estimated asbestos liability decreased during the
fiscal six months ended June 30, 2010 as a result of payments
totaling about US$34 million, partially offset by an increase of
US$8.8 million related to the rolling 15-year asbestos-related
liability estimate.
The amount paid for asbestos litigation, defense and case
resolution was US$18.5 million for the fiscal quarter ended June
30, 2010 and US$34 million for the six months ended June 30, 2010,
and US$13.4 million for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2009 and
US$34 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009.
As of June 30, 2010, total asbestos-related liabilities were
comprised of an estimated liability of US$129.9 million relating
to open (outstanding) claims being valued and an estimated
liability of US$221.4 million relating to future unasserted claims
through the fiscal second quarter of 2025.
Geneva, Switzerland-based Foster Wheeler AG an engineering and
construction contractor and power equipment supplier delivering
technically advanced, reliable facilities and equipment. The
Company employs about 13,000 professionals.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Foster Wheeler Still Has $3.7MM Insurance Asset
----------------------------------------------------------------
Foster Wheeler AG, as of June 30, 2010, estimated the value of its
unsettled asbestos insurance asset related to ongoing litigation
in New York state court with its subsidiaries' insurers at US$3.7
million.
The litigation relates to the amounts of insurance coverage
available for asbestos-related claims and the proper allocation of
the coverage among the Company's subsidiaries' various insurers
and its subsidiaries as self-insurers.
Over the last several years, certain of the Company's subsidiaries
have entered into settlement agreements calling for insurers to
make lump-sum payments, as well as payments over time, for use by
the subsidiaries to fund asbestos-related indemnity and defense
costs and, in certain cases, for reimbursement for portions of
out-of-pocket costs previously incurred.
During the fiscal six months ended June 30, 2010, the subsidiaries
reached agreements to settle their disputed asbestos-related
insurance coverage with two additional insurers. As a result of
these settlements, the Company increased its asbestos-related
insurance asset and recorded gains of US$3 million in the fiscal
quarter ended June 30, 2010 and US$7 million in the fiscal six
months ended June 30, 2010.
In fiscal year 2006, the Company was successful in its appeal of a
New York state trial court decision that previously had held that
New York, rather than New Jersey, law applies in a coverage
litigation with the Company's subsidiaries' insurers, and as a
result, the Company increased its insurance asset and recorded a
gain of US$19.5 million.
On Feb. 13, 2007, the subsidiaries' insurers were granted
permission by the appellate court to appeal the decision to the
New York Court of Appeals, the state's highest court. On Oct. 11,
2007, the New York Court of Appeals upheld the appellate court
decision in the Company's favor.
Geneva, Switzerland-based Foster Wheeler AG an engineering and
construction contractor and power equipment supplier delivering
technically advanced, reliable facilities and equipment. The
Company employs about 13,000 professionals.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 289 Claims Remain v. Foster Wheeler U.K. Units
---------------------------------------------------------------
Foster Wheeler AG's subsidiaries in the United Kingdom faced 289
open asbestos-related claims as of June 30, 2010, according to the
Company's quarterly report filed on Aug. 5, 2010 with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
To date, 950 claims have been brought against the U.K.
subsidiaries.
The Company's subsidiaries in the United Kingdom faced 366 open
asbestos-related claims as of March 31, 2010. (Class Action
Reporter, May 14, 2010)
As of June 30, 2010, the Company recorded total liabilities of
US$33.2 million comprised of an estimated liability relating to
open (outstanding) claims of US$5.5 million and an estimated
liability relating to future unasserted claims through the fiscal
second quarter of 2025 of US$27.7 million.
Of the total, US$3.2 million was recorded in accrued expenses and
US$30 million was recorded in asbestos-related liability on the
consolidated balance sheet. An asset in an equal amount was
recorded for the expected U.K. asbestos-related insurance
recoveries, of which US$3.2 million was recorded in accounts and
notes receivable-other and US$30 million was recorded as asbestos-
related insurance recovery receivable on the consolidated balance
sheet.
The liability estimates are based on a U.K. House of Lords
judgment that pleural plaque claims do not amount to a compensable
injury and accordingly, the Company has reduced its liability
assessment.
If this ruling is reversed by legislation, the total asbestos
liability and related asset recorded in the U.K. would be about
US$$50.5 million.
Geneva, Switzerland-based Foster Wheeler AG an engineering and
construction contractor and power equipment supplier delivering
technically advanced, reliable facilities and equipment. The
Company employs about 13,000 professionals.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Midwest Generation Cites $49M June 30 Liability
----------------------------------------------------------------
Midwest Generation, LLC had recorded a US$49 million liability at
June 30, 2010 for previous, pending and future asbestos claims,
according to the Company's quarterly report filed on Aug. 5, 2010
with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
There were about 217 cases for which the Company was potentially
liable and that had not been settled and dismissed at June 30,
2010.
The Company entered into a supplemental agreement with
Commonwealth Edison and Exelon Generation Company LLC on Feb. 20,
2003 to resolve a dispute regarding interpretation of its
reimbursement obligation for asbestos claims under the
environmental indemnities set forth in the Asset Sale Agreement.
Under this supplemental agreement, the Company agreed to reimburse
Commonwealth Edison and Exelon Generation for 50% of specific
asbestos claims pending as of February 2003 and related expenses
less recovery of insurance costs, and agreed to a sharing
arrangement for liabilities and expenses associated with future
asbestos-related claims as specified in the agreement.
As a general matter, Commonwealth Edison and the Company apportion
responsibility for future asbestos-related claims based upon the
number of exposure sites that are Commonwealth Edison locations or
Company locations.
The supplemental agreement had an initial five-year term with an
automatic renewal provision for subsequent one-year terms (subject
to the right of either party to terminate); under the automatic
renewal provision, it has been extended until February 2011.
Bolingbrook, Ill.-based Midwest Generation, LLC sells wholesale
electricity to markets in the Midwest. The power producer has a
generating capacity of more than 5,470 MW from its six coal-fired
power plants in Illinois. It also oversees the operation of the
Fisk and Waukegan on-site generating plants which have 305 MW of
capacity.
*********
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, Christopher Patalinghug, Frauline
Abangan 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 * * *