CAR_Public/120224.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Friday, February 24, 2012, Vol. 14, No. 39

                             Headlines

ADVANCED SPORTS: Recalls 10,500 Fuji Saratoga Women's Bicycles
AMERICAN HONDA: Recalls 2,900 ATVs due to Crash Hazard
APPLE: Judge Okays iPhone 4 "Death Grip" Class Action Settlement
ARMY CORPS: May Face Class Action Over 2010 Floods
BEACH BUSINESS: April 19 Class Action Settlement Hearing Set

BORDERS GROUP: Gets Final OK on Pinsker WARN Act Class Settlement
DAVID LERNER: Faces Class Action in N.Y. Over Apple REITs
EMDEON INC: Reimbursement of Physicians Under Settlement Ongoing
GOOGLE INC: Faces Privacy Class Action Over Safari Web Browser
KRAFT FOODS: Macuga & McCarthy File Class Action Over "Tassimo"

LIFE INVESTORS: 6th Cir. Vacates Class Cert. Order in Breach Suit
MERCK & COMPANY: Ky. App. Ct. Reverses Certification of Vioxx Suit
OVERHILL FARMS: Class Certification Hearing Set for April 2012
PAIN THERAPEUTICS: Faces "Southey" Securities Suit in Texas
PHARMERICA CORP: Defends Suit Over Refusal to Sell to Omnicare

PHILIP MORRIS: Continues to Defend Class Suits in Brazil
PHILIP MORRIS: Awaits Certification Bid Ruling in "El-Roy" Suit
PHILIP MORRIS: Class Cert. Bid Pending in Flue-Cured Tobacco Suit
PHILIP MORRIS: Continues to Defend "Bourassa" Suit in Canada
PHILIP MORRIS: Continues to Defend "McDermid" Suit in Canada

PHILIP MORRIS: "Dorion" Class Suit Remains Pending in Canada
PHILIP MORRIS: "Kunta" Class Suit Remains Pending in Canada
PHILIP MORRIS: Preliminary Motions Pending in "Adams" Suit
PHILIP MORRIS: "Semple" Class Suit Remains Pending in Canada
PHILIP MORRIS: Trial in "Blais" Suit Set to Begin on March 5

PHILIP MORRIS: Trial in "Letourneau" Suit to Begin on March 5
PHILIP MORRIS: Trial in "Smith" Class Suit Set for July 2012
PLAZA MEXICO: Failed to Honor Overtime Pay, Trial Court Finds
PRO ARMOR: Recalls 5,200 Latches for Utility Vehicle Doors
RALCORP HOLDINGS: Units Continue to Defend Wage and Hour Suits

SHIMANO AMERICAN: Recalls 296 Mountain Bike Handlebar Stems
SUGARLAND: Responds to Class Action Over State Fair Collapse
UNITED STATES: Blacks Farmers' Settlement Enters Final Phase
WARNER MUSIC: Digital Music Suit Discovery to Be Completed in May
WHIRLPOOL CORP: Sued Over False Labels on Washing Machines

WINDMILL HEALTH: Sued Over Kardashian Quicktrim Endorsement

                         Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Harbinger Group Still Involved in Exposure Suits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: United Technologies Still Faces Exposure Suits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Exelon Unit Reserves $49MM for Claims at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 2 Exposure Suits Remain Pending Against Thermon
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 4.6K Claims Pending v. Owens-Illinois at Dec. 31

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Corning Inc. Awaits Ruling on PCC Plan Changes
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Corning Liability Estimated at $657MM at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Skilled Healthcare's ARO Was $4MM at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: No Removal Plans Yet, Says Empire State Realty
ASBESTOS UPDATE: BorgWarner Has 16,000 Pending Claims at Dec. 31

ASBESTOS UPDATE: BorgWarner Still Pursues Litigation vs. Insurers
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Goodyear Records Gross Liabilities at $138MM
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide's Liability Was $668MM at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide's Insurance Suit Still Pending
ASBESTOS UPDATE: "Parsons" Suit Vs. RJR Tobacco Remains Stayed

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Kemper Corp. Reserves $52.6MM at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Rogers Corp. Faces 242 Pending Claims at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Navigators' Net Reserves Were $15MM at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell Remains Liable Under NARCO Plan
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell's Bendix Unit Has $613MM Liabilities

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Illinois Tool Continues to Defend Exposure Suits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hershey Says Estimated Liability Not Material
ASBESTOS UPDATE: General Dynamics Continues to Defend Claims
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Delphi Automotive's ARO Were $3MM at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Potlatch Can't Estimate Fair Value of Liability

ASBESTOS UPDATE: ABB Says Effect of Obligations Not Significant
ASBESTOS UPDATE: UK Hopes For Same Justice Demonstrated In Turin
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Campaign For Liability Cap Law Reaches Minnesota
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Pacific Faces Lawsuit From 7 Former Workers
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Winnipeg NDP MP Slams Chrysotile Trade Supporters

ASBESTOS UPDATE: McComb Lawyers Appeal Fraud Ruling
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Class Action Lawyers Contribute to Candidate
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Illegally Dumped Toxic Waste Found In Haresfield
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Miles for Meso Run Raises $50,000 Research Fund
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Quebec Likely to Approve $58MM Loan Guaranty

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Pumping Plant Officials Stress Safety
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Plaintiffs Ask Court to Declare Claims Standard
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Contractor Faces $10,000 Fine, 1yr Imprisonment
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Contaminants Found in Sequim "Were Expected"
ASBESTOS UPDATE: $30MM Loan Covers Hardie's Contribution to AICF

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Judge Rejects John Crane's Motion for Mistrial
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Chrysotile Trader Preparing to Hire 60 Workers
ASBESTOS UPDATE: CPSM Alerts Clients on Leslie Controls Case
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Family of Former Worker Sues BNSF Railway Company
ASBESTOS UPDATE: EA Investigates Tons of Toxic Wastes Near Redruth

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Abatement Costs Keep Contagions in 378 UK Schools
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Review Outcome to Resolve McGill U's Position
ASBESTOS UPDATE: MP Says Kingdoms Disunite in Asbestos Payout Laws
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Mount Sinai Honors 9/11 First Responders Hero
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Brazilian Eternit Clarifies Practice Distinction

ASBESTOS UPDATE: CA Allows Thorpe Insurers to Show Proof of Claim
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toxic Waste Entered Convenience Center Unnoticed
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Advocates Say McGill's Self-Review Not Credible
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Mesothelioma Kills 8/100,000 People in Barrow
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Man Dying of Mesothelioma Reaches Out For Peers

ASBESTOS UPDATE: AIAAC to Award Mesothelioma Advocate and Sufferer
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 16 Swiss Workers Exposed to Fibro in Railway Cars
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Landlord Pleads Guilty to Health Law Violation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: MW and TCCI Launch Guidebook On The Deadly Fiber
ASBESTOS UPDATE: New cba Company Solely Deals With Toxic Fibers

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Jury Verdict Awards $9.18MM Against John Crane
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Church Pointer Carps Boatshed Abatement Procedure
ASBESTOS UPDATE: CPSM Updates Website for US Air Force Veterans
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Norway Opera House Up For Decontamination
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Malta Dock Workers' Heirs File Tort Claims in NY

ASBESTOS UPDATE: 3 Lawsuits Filed in St. Clair Ct Vs. 183 Cos
ASBESTOS UPDATE: High Cancer-Related Deaths in South Derbyshire
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Razed Augusta-Margaret Sites Up for Abatement


                          *********

ADVANCED SPORTS: Recalls 10,500 Fuji Saratoga Women's Bicycles
--------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Advanced Sports Inc., of Philadelphia, announced a voluntary
recall of about 10,500 Fuji Saratoga Women's Bicycles.  Consumers
should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise
instructed.  It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a
recalled consumer product.

The bicycle's frame can break in the center of the downtube during
use, causing the rider to lose control and fall.

The Company is aware of 12 reports of bicycle frames breaking,
including two injuries, a head laceration requiring 20 stitches
and scrapes and bruises.

The recalled bicycles are Fuji women's cruiser bicycles.  The 2008
through 2010 models Saratoga 1.0, Saratoga 2.0, Saratoga 3.0 and
Saratoga 4.0 are included.  The bicycles are various colors.
"Fuji" and "Saratoga" alone or "Saratoga" along with the model
number is printed on the frame of the bicycle.  Serial numbers
beginning with ICFJ7, ICFJ8, ICFJ9, ICFJ10 and ICFJ11 are included
in this recall.  The serial number is located on the bottom of the
frame near the crank.  A picture of the recalled products is
available at:

     http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml12/12112.html

The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold by
specialty bicycle stores nationwide from November 2007 through
December 2011 for between $300 and $500.

Consumers should stop riding the recalled bicycle immediately and
return it to any authorized Fuji Bicycle dealers for a free
replacement frame.  For additional information, consumers should
contact Advanced Sports Inc. toll-free at (888) 286-6263 between
8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Eastern Time Monday through Friday or
visit the company's Web site at http://www.fujibikes.com/


AMERICAN HONDA: Recalls 2,900 ATVs due to Crash Hazard
------------------------------------------------------
About 2,900 All-Terrain Vehicles were voluntarily recalled by
American Honda Motor Company, of Torrance, California, in
cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Consumers should stop using the product immediately unless
otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell or attempt to
resell a recalled consumer product.

A weld on the ATV's front right upper suspension arm can separate,
causing the driver to lose control of the vehicle, posing a crash
hazard.

Honda is aware of four incidents of suspension arm weld failures,
including one in which a rider suffered a sprained wrist.

The recalled vehicles are two-wheel drive 2012 Honda FourTrax
Rancher ATV models TRX420TE and TRX420TM.  The ATVs are red or
green and have the word "Honda" on both sides of the fuel tank and
the word "Rancher" on the front cowl below the handlebars and on
the left rear fender.  Rancher models in the following VIN ranges
are being recalled:

        Model                      VIN Ranges
      --------         --------------------------------
      TRX420TE         1HFTE344* C4500841 thru C4502580
      TRX420TM         1HFTE340* C4500542 thru C4501681

* Denotes a random alphanumeric identifier: "0-9" or "X"

The model number is visible on the right front frame down pipe
above the driver's right-hand side front wheel.  The VIN is
located on the top center front of the frame and is visible
looking down between the bars of the gear rack and through the
middle opening of the front fairing.  Pictures of the recalled
products are available at:

     http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml12/12722.html

The recalled products were manufactured in the United States of
America and sold at Honda ATV dealers nationwide from September
2011 to January 2012 for between $5,100 and $5,300.

Consumers should immediately stop using these ATVs and contact
their Honda ATV dealer to schedule a free repair.  For more
information, contact American Honda between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00
p.m. Pacific Time Monday through Friday toll-free at (866) 784-
1870 or visit the American Honda's Web site at
http://powersports.honda.com/. American Honda is contacting its
customers directly.


APPLE: Judge Okays iPhone 4 "Death Grip" Class Action Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nick McCann at Courthouse News Service reports that a federal
judge approved a settlement to class action claims that holding
their 4G iPhones by the bottom left corner caused a "death grip"
for cellular service.

The customers can receive a $15 cash payment or a free "bumper"
for their phones based on the terms of the settlement.

Between June and September 2010, there were 16 federal class
actions filed against Apple across the country.  A master
consolidated complaint was filed in February 2011.

In an action in California's Northern District, named plaintiff
Alan Benevisty said he experienced a "widely reported issue" --
his iPhone dropped signals if his palm covered the bottom left
corner of the device.

Mr. Benevisty demanded class damages for fraud, false advertising
and breach of warranty.

"Apple CEO Steve Jobs extolled the iPhone 4 in the keynote address
at the Worldwide Developers conference on June 7, 2010, stating,
among other things, that the iPhone 4 is 'the most precise thing
we have ever made' and its 'brilliant design' has 'integrated
antennas right in the structure of the phone; it's never been done
before and it's really cool engineering,'" according to the
complaint.

But despite Apple's claim that loss of reception was a "non-issue"
and that users should "just avoid holding it that way," the "cool
engineering appears to be the problem."

After selling 1.7 million of the phone in its first three days on
the market, Apple told its customers to "avoid gripping it in the
lower left corner in a way that covers both sides of the black
strip in the metal band, or simply use one of many available
cases," according to the complaint.

Mr. Benevisty said "it comes as no surprise" that Apple would
recommend users buy a case to resolve the "death grip" issue,
because Apple makes the cases or "bumpers," which it sells for
$29.

Apple allegedly knew of the signal degradation problem, as it made
the "bumpers" available on the day the product was launched.

Though Apple disputed the class allegations, it entered into a
settlement and did not admit any wrongdoing.

Based on the terms of the agreement, eligible class members can
receive a $15 cash payment or a free bumper for their phones.

U.S. District Judge Ronald Whyte conditionally certified the
settlement class Friday and preliminarily approved the agreement,
finding it "fair, reasonable and adequate."

A copy of the Order Granting Conditional Certification of a
Settlement Class, Approval of Forms and Methods of Notice, and
Preliminary Approval of Settlement Agreement and Release in In re
Apple iPhone 4 Products Liability Litigation, Case No. 10-md-02188
(N.D. Calif.), is available at:

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/02/21/510-md-02188.pdf


ARMY CORPS: May Face Class Action Over 2010 Floods
--------------------------------------------------
Hank Bonecutter, writing for Clarksville Online, reports that
there will be a class-action lawsuit filed against the Army Corps
of Engineers for their handling of the 2010 floods filed on behalf
of several Clarksville businesses.  Clarksville Online has learned
that a meeting is scheduled for Feb. 24 with the Nashville law
firm, Bass Berry and Sims to discuss the arrangements.  There's
been no confirmation that the City of Clarksville will join the
suit, since it's fairgrounds park property was flooded, causing
delays in the marina project that was underway at the time.
The 2010 flood caused damages in the millions of dollars to
business and property owners along the Cumberland River, when the
banks of the river rose over sixty feet above flood stage.

Controversy on the Corps handling of the river became evident
during the rains that had plagued Middle Tennessee.  Flood waters
covered Riverside Drive, destroying many businesses and causing
some businesses to close, or temporarily move from their location
to stay in business.

The firm of Bass Berry and Sims is a high profile law firm who
counts former U.S District Judge Robert Echols as a member of the
firm.  The meeting on Feb. 24 will be to discuss strategy and to
include all parties who want to be a part of the suit.  It's
expected to determine how the parties are to be paid, should the
lawsuit be successful.  A similar lawsuit against the Corps of
Engineers is making its way through the court system now, and is
reportedly going to land in favor of the flood victims.


BEACH BUSINESS: April 19 Class Action Settlement Hearing Set
------------------------------------------------------------
Beach Business Bank issued a statement pursuant to an order of the
Los Angeles Superior Court:

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES IN
RE BEACH BANK SHAREHOLDER LITIGATION CLASS ACTION Case No.
BC470648

NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTIONS

TO: ALL RECORD HOLDERS AND BENEFICIAL OWNERS OF SHARES OF COMMON
STOCK OF BEACH BUSINESS BANK AT ANY TIME FROM AND INCLUDING AUGUST
31, 2011 THROUGH AND INCLUDING THE DATE THE ACQUISITION IS
COMPLETED, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE FAMILIES, ASSOCIATES, ATTORNEYS,
ADVISORS, HEIRS, EXECUTORS, TRUSTEES, PERSONAL OR LEGAL
REPRESENTATIVES, ESTATES, ADMINISTRATORS, AGENTS, PREDECESSORS,
SUCCESSORS, AND ASSIGNS, IMMEDIATE OR REMOTE, AND ANY PERSON OR
ENTITY ACTING FOR OR ON BEHALF OF, OR CLAIMING UNDER ANY OF THEM,
AND EACH OF THEM.

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that a settlement has been proposed in the
above-captioned case.

Settlement Hearing.  A hearing will be held on April 19, 2012, at
10 a.m., before the Hon. William F. Highberger, in the Superior
Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, 600 S.
Commonwealth Avenue, 90005, to determine whether: (1) the
provisional class action certification granted by the Court on
February 9, 2012 should be made final; (2) the proposed Settlement
should be approved as fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the best
interests of the Class; (3) Plaintiffs' Counsel's application for
an award of attorneys' fees and expenses should be approved; (4)
an Order and Final Judgment should be entered, dismissing with
prejudice and releasing all claims against the Defendants relating
to the conduct alleged in this case; and (5) the Court should rule
on such other matters as it deems appropriate.  If approved, the
Settlement will resolve all claims in this litigation and all
other related claims.

Explanation of the Case.  On August 31, 2011, First PacTrust
Bancorp, Inc. ("BANC") and Beach Business Bank ("Beach") jointly
announced that they had entered into a definitive merger agreement
on August 30, 2011 under which BANC will acquire the stock of
Beach Business for approximately $37.4 million, or approximately
$9.07 per diluted share.  Under the terms of the transaction,
Beach shareholders will be entitled to receive either (1) $4.61
per share in cash and 0.33 of a share of BANC common stock or (2)
$9.12 per share in cash plus one warrant to purchase 0.33 of a
share of BANC common stock at an exercise price of $14.00 per BANC
share.

Plaintiffs Robert K. Stevens and Ronald Durand initiated similar
proposed class actions in Los Angeles County Superior Court on
behalf of all shareholders of Beach Bank against Beach Bank, BANC,
and the members of Beach Bank's board of directors, challenging
the Acquisition, seeking injunctive relief, and alleging, inter
alia, that the individual Defendants breached their fiduciary
duties by failing to adequately disclose certain material
information regarding the Acquisition in Statement.

Recognizing the time, expense, and uncertainty inherent in further
litigation of these Actions, the Parties agreed to settle the
Actions as detailed in the Parties' Stipulation of Settlement,
which is on file with the Court.  Plaintiffs' entry into the
Stipulation is not an admission that the Actions' claims lack
merit.  Likewise, Defendants deny that they have committed,
attempted to commit, or aided and abetted in the commission of any
breach of fiduciary duty or duty of disclosure, that they engaged
in any wrongful acts, that they have any liability to the
Plaintiffs and the Class, or that any additional disclosures were
required or material as a matter of law.

Terms of Settlement.  In consideration for the Settlement and
dismissal with prejudice of the Actions and the releases, BANC
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 9,
2011, a Form 8-K, containing certain supplemental disclosures as
agreed to by the Parties.  The Supplemental Disclosures are
publicly available online with the SEC -- http://www.sec.gov/--
and are also attached as Exhibit A to the Stipulation.

Release of Claims.  Upon Final Court Approval (as defined in the
Stipulation), all claims or causes of action asserted by or on
behalf of any member of the Settlement Class against Defendants
and all Released Persons (as defined in the Stipulation) which
have arisen or could have arisen, known and unknown, and which
relate to the claims or allegations asserted by Plaintiffs in the
Actions or relate in any way to the Acquisition will be completely
and forever released.  More information is contained in the
Stipulation, a copy of which is on file with the Court.

Effect of Release.  The release contemplated by the Stipulation
shall extend to claims that the Releasors (as defined in the
Stipulation) do not know or suspect to exist at the time of the
release, including claims which if known, might have affected
their decision to enter into the release or to object or not to
object to the Settlement.  The Releasors shall be deemed to
relinquish, to the extent applicable, and to the full extent
permitted by law, the provisions, rights and benefits of Section
1542 of the California Civil Code, or comparable principle, which
states that: A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE
CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT
THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE, WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM OR HER
MUST HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE
DEBTOR.  More information is contained in the Stipulation, a copy
of which is on file with the Court.

Plaintiffs' Attorneys' Fees.  If the Court approves the
Settlement, Plaintiffs' Counsel intend to ask the Court for an
award of attorneys' fees (including costs and expenses) subject to
the Court's approval.  The Court's final resolution of Plaintiffs'
Counsel's fee application shall not be a precondition to dismissal
of the Actions, and shall have no effect on the terms of the
Settlement.

Objections.  Any member of the Class who objects to the Settlement
or who otherwise wishes to be heard, may appear in person or by
his attorney at the Settlement Hearing and present evidence or
argument; provided, however, that, except for good cause shown, no
person shall be heard and no documents submitted by any person
shall be considered by the Court unless, no later than twenty-one
(21) calendar days prior to the Settlement Hearing, that person
files with the Court and serves upon Plaintiffs' Counsel listed
below: (a) written notice of intention to appear; (b) a statement
of such person's objections to any matters before the Court, and
(c) the grounds for such objections and the reasons that such
person desires to appear and be heard, as well as all documents or
writings such person desires the Court to consider.  Such filings
shall be served upon the following counsel:

          Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP
          1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 201-9150
          Facsimile: (310) 201-9160
          (Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs)

Unless the Court otherwise directs, no person shall be entitled to
object to the approval of the Settlement, and judgment entered
thereon, the adequacy of representation of the Settlement Class by
Plaintiffs and their counsel, any award of attorneys' fees, or
otherwise be heard, except by serving and filing a written
objection and supporting documents as described above.  Any person
who fails to object in the manner described above shall be deemed
to have waived the right to object (including any right of appeal)
and shall be forever barred from raising such objection in this or
any other action or proceeding.  More information is contained in
the Stipulation on file with the Court.

By Order of the Court


BORDERS GROUP: Gets Final OK on Pinsker WARN Act Class Settlement
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Martin Glenn approved, on a final basis, a settlement
resolving a class action adversary proceeding captioned Jared
Pinsker, on behalf of himself and all others similar situated v.
Borders, Inc., now known as BGI, Inc. , Case No. 11-10614, Adv.
Pro. No. 11-02586 (S.D.N.Y. Bankr. Ct.)

The complaint, filed in September 2011, asserted claims under the
Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act and the New York
State Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act by the
closure of a plant and mass layoffs at a Michigan facility on
July 22, 2011, through August 23, 2011 without providing 60-day's
advance notice.

The class settlement provides that BGI will pay $240,000 -- $3,000
to Mr. Pinsker as the class representative; $158,000 to be divided
equally among the Class Members; and $79,000 in attorneys' fees to
counsel for the Class.

A copy of Judge Glenn's Feb. 17, 2012 Memorandum Opinion is
available at http://is.gd/3BIufgfrom Leagle.com.

Joseph A. Piesco, Esq. -- jpiesco@kasowitz.com -- of KASOWITZ,
BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN LLP, in New York, serves as attorney for
Borders Group, Inc.

Timothy R. Wheeler, Esq. -- wheeler@lowenstein.com -- of
LOWENSTEIN SANDLER PC, in , Roseland, New Jersey , serves as
attorney for the Liquidating Trust of BGI.

Stuart J. Miller, Esq., of LANKENAU & MILLER, LLP, in New York,
serves as attorney for the Plaintiff and the Settlement Class.

Mary E. Olsen, Esq. --molsen@thegardnerfirm.com -- M. Vance
McCrary, Esq. -- vmccrary@thegardnerfirm.com -- of THE GARDNER
FIRM, P.C., in Mobile, Alabama, also serve as attorneys for the
Plaintiff and the Settlement Class.


DAVID LERNER: Faces Class Action in N.Y. Over Apple REITs
---------------------------------------------------------
Iulia Filip at Courthouse News Service reports that a federal
class action accuses David Lerner Associates of "targeting
unsophisticated and elderly customers" to sell more than $300
million of a $2 billion real estate investment trust "without
performing adequate due diligence."

Lead plaintiff Laurie Brody sued David Lerner Associates Inc. and
five of its top officials: president and controlling owner David
Lerner, executive vice president and CFO Alan Chodosh, senior vice
president of sales John G. Dempsey Jr., executive vice president
of sales Martin Lerner, and chief compliance officer Steven
Sormani.  Also sued are Apple REIT Six Inc., Apple REIT Seven
Inc., those entities' chairman and CEO Glade M. Knight, and Apple
Suites Realty Group, wholly owned by Knight.

The complaint states: "Since January 2011, David Lerner Associates
Inc. ('DLA') has recommended and sold over $300 million of a $2
billion real estate investment trust ('REIT') without performing
adequate due diligence in violation of its suitability
obligations.  Earlier Apple REITs under the same management
inappropriately valued the REITs' shares at a constant artificial
price of $11 notwithstanding years of market fluctuations,
performance declines, increased leverage and excessive return of
capital to investors.  DLA has sold and continues to sell Apple
REITs targeting unsophisticated and elderly customers to buy the
illiquid security.

"The performance results for Apple REIT Six and Apple REIT Seven
are misleading because (i) they do not reflect the recent
reduction in distribution rates and (ii) DLA does not disclose
that income from those REITs was insufficient to support their 7-8
percent returns and that the distributions were partially funded
by debt that further leveraged the REITs."

David Lerner Associates is a privately held brokerage firm that
"purports to specialize in fixed income, government bonds,
municipal bonds, and conservative investments for individual
investors and retirees," according to the complaint.  Founded by
David Lerner in 1975, the firm is based in Syosset, N.Y. and has
branches in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Florida.

The complaint states: "Since 1992, DLA has served as the
underwriter and sole distributor of a series of ten REITs that
have issued nearly $6.8 billion in securities to date.  A REIT is
a company that owns and usually operates income-producing real
estate.  To qualify as a REIT, a company must have most of its
assets and income tied to a real estate investment and must
distribute at least 90 percent of its taxable income to
shareholders annually in the form of dividends.

"Apple REIT Six and Apple REIT Seven were founded and managed by
defendant Knight and his affiliates, and as both REITs Six and
Seven closed to new investors, defendant Knight opened another.

"Apple REIT Six and Apple REIT Seven opened between April 2004 and
2006 and both completed offerings at a price of $11 per share.
Apple REIT Six and Apple REIT Seven have never changed the value
of their shares from the $11 price despite (i) market
fluctuations, including the economic downturn for commercial real
estate in general and the hotel and hospitality industry in
particular; (ii) net income declines; (iii) increased leverage
through borrowings; and (iv) return of capital to investors
through distributions."

Ms. Brody claims: "Most of DLA's revenue derives from sales of
Apple REITs.

"Although there is no formal affiliation between DLA and the Apple
REIT companies, defendant DLA has sold nearly $6.8 billion of
Apple REIT securities into approximately 122,600 customer accounts
in its role as sole distributor (managing dealer) of the
offerings.

"Although all of the Apple REITs are illiquid and concentrated in
one subsector, extended stay hotels, a substantial number of
defendant DLA's customers own two or more of the Apple REITs.
Many of defendant DLA's customers are senior and/or
unsophisticated, and defendant DLA solicits customers by general
means such as the Internet, radio, cold calling, mailings, and
open invitation seminars at senior centers.

"Defendant DLA earns 10 percent of all offerings of Apple REIT
securities, composed of 7.5 percent in commissions and 2.5 percent
in selling fees.  The firm also earns fees for account maintenance
services.  The nearly $600 million generated from Apple REIT sales
has accounted for 60-70 percent of DLA's business annually since
1996.

"Defendant DLA has earned over $30 million in commissions and
marketing allowances related to sales of Apple REIT Ten shares
alone.

"All or nearly all of defendant DLA's sales of the Apple REITs
were solicited."

Ms. Brody claims the Apple trusts issued shares at $11 each, which
were "unsupported . . . valuations," that did not change, despite
fluctuating market conditions and declining performance of
extended-stay hotels.

"The performance of all of the Apple REITs has varied due to a
number of factors since each REIT's inception," the complaint
states.  "In particular, Apple REIT Six and Apple REIT Seven
suffered substantial performance declines in 2008 and 2009, which
did not fully recover in 2010.  . . ."

Ms. Brody says the trusts' cash flow, total revenue, net income
and revenue per room substantially declined from 2008 to 2009,
according to their SEC filings.

She adds: "Defendant DLA knew or should have known (with adequate
due diligence) of changes and declines in performance that were
affecting the value of Apple REIT Six and Apple REIT Seven.  Most
or all of the data reflecting performance changes and declines
were available in public filings by the Apple REIT companies."

Ms. Brody claims the Apple REIT companies did not pay investors
entirely from income generated by the trusts, which lacked the
income from operations needed to pay the 7 and 8 percent
distributions.

She says the trusts maintained an artificially high return on
investment by paying investors with borrowed money and with their
own capital, which further affected their value.

"Returning capital to investors and taking on debt (which must be
serviced out of future income and new investor proceeds) would
reduce the REIT's ability to acquire income producing assets to
generate future income for distribution to investors," according
to the complaint.  "Increasing leverage in this manner decreased
the REIT's ability to maintain distribution levels in the future
and reduced the value of the REIT."

Ms. Brody claims that David Lerner Associates advertised the
trusts' performance using misleading return figures and failed to
disclose that income from operations was insufficient to support
the high returns and that the distributions were partially funded
by debt that further leveraged the REITs.

She adds: "The DLA defendants advanced their own interests in
continuing the sale of Apple REIT Six and Apple REIT Seven shares
and the commissions those sales generated to the detriment of
plaintiff and class members."

Ms. Brody seeks class certification and damages for breach of
fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, negligence, breach of contract
and violations of the New Jersey Securities Act.

A copy of the Complaint in Brody v. David Lerner Associates Inc.,
et al., Case No. 12-cv-00782 (E.D.N.Y.) (Korman, J.), is available
at:

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/02/21/REIT.pdf

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Thomas J. McKenna, Esq.
          Gregory M. Egleston, Esq.
          GAINEY & MCKENNA
          440 Park Avenue South, 5th Floor
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 983-1300
          E-mail: tjmckenna@gaineyandmckenna.com
                  tjmlaw2001@yahoo.com
                  egleston@gme-law.com

               - and -

          Barry J. Gainey, Esq.
          GAINEY & MCKENNA
          140 Route 17 North, Suite 203
          Paramus, NJ 07652
          Telephone: (201) 225-9001
          E-mail: bgainey@gaineyandmckenna.com


EMDEON INC: Reimbursement of Physicians Under Settlement Ongoing
----------------------------------------------------------------
Emdeon Inc. on Feb. 21 announced its ongoing efforts to facilitate
the distribution of more than $25 million of reimbursement funds
owed to over 75,000 physicians, as a result of the 2009 settlement
of a class action lawsuit involving out-of-network reimbursement
policies.

The American Medical Association (AMA) and a number of state
medical societies filed a class action lawsuit in 2008, alleging
certain health insurance claims had been underpaid for out-of-
network services.  The lawsuit was settled for $350 million --
and, on February 3, 2012, a federal court judge issued rulings to
release nearly $200 million for claims that physicians had filed.

Shortly after the lawsuit was settled, Emdeon began working with
the Managed Care Advisory Group (MCAG), who was selected to enroll
and subsequently facilitate payments to impacted providers.  As
the single largest financial and administrative health information
network in the nation, Emdeon was able to utilize its data assets
and analytics capabilities to work together with MCAG and
communicate with physician groups regarding reimbursements to
which they are entitled.  Emdeon and MCAG also assisted in
processing physicians' proof of claims, effectively reducing the
administrative burden typically associated with class action
claims.

"We are very pleased that we could utilize our data and analytics
capabilities in conjunction with the efforts of MCAG to help our
provider customers participate in this settlement," said Philip
Hardin, executive vice president of Provider Services for Emdeon.
"Our solutions help simplify the complex business of healthcare,
and in this case, we succeeded in assisting our providers'
navigation through a complex process and receive reimbursement."

With the settlement funds now being released by the court, Emdeon
will continue to work with MCAG to facilitate payments directly to
physicians and their technology partners.

"Class action lawsuits can be complex, confusing and time
consuming," said Tim Schmidt, president of MCAG.  "Without
Emdeon's market intelligence and technological expertise, it is
unlikely we could have helped providers receive their payments in
such a timely and efficient manner."

Emdeon Inc. -- http://www.emdeon.com-- is a provider of revenue
and payment cycle management and clinical information exchange
solutions.


GOOGLE INC: Faces Privacy Class Action Over Safari Web Browser
--------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that a federal class action claims
Google circumvented privacy settings on (nonparty) Apple's Safari
web browser, violating users' privacy.

A copy of the Complaint in Soble v. Google Inc., Case No. 12-cv-
00200 (D. Del.), is available at:

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/02/21/Google.pdf

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David A. Straite, Esq.
          Ralph N. Sianni, Esq.
          SIANNI & STRAITE LLP
          1201 N. Orange St., Suite 740
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Telephone: (302) 573-3560
          E-mail: dstraite@siannistraite.com
                  rsianni@siannistraite.com


KRAFT FOODS: Macuga & McCarthy File Class Action Over "Tassimo"
---------------------------------------------------------------
On February 20, 2012, Detroit-based Macuga, Liddle & Dubin, P.C.,
and Okemos-based McCarthy Law Group commenced a class action
lawsuit on behalf of consumers against Kraft Foods Global, Inc.
and Starbucks Corporatino for allegedly misleading consumers
regarding the companies' "Tassimo" coffee system.  The case,
Montgomery v Kraft et al., File No. 1:12-cv-149 was filed in the
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan.
Allegations include that from 2010 to 2012 Kraft and Starbucks
continued promising buyers of the "Tassimo" the availability of
Starbucks' proprietary brewing cups (this information was printed
directly on the box and product literature) despite Kraft's and
Starbucks' allegedly knowing as early as 2010 that Starbucks would
soon stop selling Tassimo-compatible brewing cups.  By Dec. 6,
2010 the dissonance between Kraft/Starbucks was such that Kraft
sought an injunction in a New York federal court (Case No. 10-
9085-cs) to prevent Starbucks from breaking the Tassimo contract.
Thus, the Montgomery suit alleges that neither Kraft nor Starbucks
can reasonably claim to have lacked notice that Starbucks Tassimo
cups would become unavailable to consumers.  Nevertheless, it is
alleged the Starbucks-branded Tassimo systems remained on the
retail shelf throughout 2011 and into 2012.

During the last five years, single serve coffee brewing systems
have steadily emerged in the marketplace as an increasingly
appealing alternative to the conventional coffeemaker.  And while
numerous other manufacturers have introduced variations of the
single-serve concept (e.g., Senseo; Brookstone; Black&Decker;
Cuisinart etc.), the "pod" genre has inarguably been dominated by
two competing products: Tassimo's T-cup system; and Keurig's K-cup
system.

Functionally speaking, the Tassimo and Keurig are very similar;
both deliver single servings of brewed coffee using convenient,
throw-away brewing cups: T-cups for the Tassimo; K-cups for the
Keurig.  Owners must use these patented, proprietary cups, which
are compatible only for the machines they were designed for and,
as one might imagine, quite expensive when compared to the cost of
bulk coffee.

Because each system only accepts its proprietary type of brewing
cup, of paramount importance to consumers in choosing a Tassimo or
Keurig was (and still is) knowing what coffees were available for
use with each system.  This has been especially true of the
Tassimo system, which historically offered a coffee selection much
narrower than its competing system, the Keurig.  What the Tassimo
had going for it, however, was the exclusive availability of
proprietary Starbucks T-cups.

The lawsuit alleges that Kraft and Starbucks violated Michigan's
Consumer Protection Act and other state consumer laws; and the
Lanham Act, among other claims by packaging, promoting and selling
the Tassimo system with packaging and literature stating the
Tassimo was the system for which Starbucks brewing cups were
available, despite knowing the same was false or would imminently
become false, and worse yet, despite knowing Starbucks brewing
cups would in the immediate future become exclusively available
for use with the Tassimo's competing system, the Keurig.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of
the Tassimo system during the Class Period.  The Plaintiff is
represented by Macuga, Liddle & Dubin P.C., which has extensive
expertise in class action litigation, and by co-counsel, The
McCarthy Law Group P.C. which has expertise in complex civil and
commercial litigation.

Contacts: Peter Macuga, Esq.
          Macuga, Liddle & Dubin, P.C.
          975 East Jefferson Avenue
          Detroit, MI 48207-3101
          Telephone: (313) 392-0015

          Tim McCarthy, Esq.
          McCarthy Law Group P.C.
          3905 Raleigh Drive
          Okemos, MI 48864-3643
          E-mail: tim@mccarthy-group.net


LIFE INVESTORS: 6th Cir. Vacates Class Cert. Order in Breach Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned Anthony Gooch v. Life
Investors Insurance Company of America and Aegon USA, Inc., Case
Nos. 10-5003, 10-5723, (6th Cir.), the plaintiff alleges breach of
contract on the cancer insurance policy he procured from the
defendant.  The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of
Tennessee granted the plaintiff's class certification motion.  The
District Court also issued a preliminary injunction that requires
Life Investors to pay Mr. Gooch on his interpretation of an
"actual charges" provision in the policy.  Meanwhile, an Arkansas
state court certified a nearly identical class, and the Arkansas
Supreme Court has affirmed the class's settlement.

Based on the intervening Arkansas class action, the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Sixth Circuit concluded that the Gooch class
action is precluded in part and that class certification, in its
current terms, is improper.

Accordingly, the Sixth Circuit vacated the order of class
certification but dismissed the appeal of the order that denied
the motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction for lack of
jurisdiction.  The case is remanded for further proceedings.

A copy of the Sixth Circuit's Feb. 10, 2012 Opinion is available
at http://is.gd/pEKnELfrom Leagle.com.

Markham R. Leventhal, Esq. -- ml@jordenusa.com -- Richard J.
Ovelmen, Esq. --rjo@jordenusa.com -- and Julianna Thomas McCabe,
Esq. -- jt@jordenusa.com -- at JORDEN BURT LLP, in Miami, Florida,
represent Life Investors.

Thomas O. Sinclair, Esq., and M. Clayborn Williams, Esq., at
SINCLAIRWILLIAMS, LLC -- info@sinclairwilliams.com -- in
Birmingham, Alabama; and Eric L. Buchanan, Esq., at ERIC BUCHANAN
& ASSOCIATES, PLLC -- info@buchanandisability.com -- in
Chattanooga, Tennessee, represent the Plaintiff Anthony Gooch.


MERCK & COMPANY: Ky. App. Ct. Reverses Certification of Vioxx Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Court of Appeals of Kentucky orders the Pike Circuit Court to
vacate its certification order of a class action lawsuit initiated
by James Ratliff, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated, against Merck & Company, Inc., nka Merck Sharp & Dohme
Corporation.  The lawsuit alleges the defendant's concealment of
the dangerous side effects of the prescription medication,
rofecoxib, marketed under the name "Vioxx."

"Here, since each plaintiff may have had different medical
conditions and circumstances at the time they were prescribed the
drug, and because each may have experienced different effects from
the drug as compared to its risks, a separate risk/benefit
analysis would effectively have to be undertaken for each putative
class member," the Court of Appeals said.  "Thus, we find that
common questions do not predominate."

The appeal case is captioned Merck & Company, Inc., nka Merck
Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. James Ratliff, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated, Case No. 2011-CA-000234-MR (App. Ct.
Ky.)

A copy of the Appeals Court's Feb. 10, 2012 opinion is available
at http://is.gd/gzsm2Lfrom Leagle.com.


OVERHILL FARMS: Class Certification Hearing Set for April 2012
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class certification hearing in the lawsuit commenced by former
employees of Overhill Farms, Inc. is set for April 2012, according
to the Company's February 9, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended January
1, 2012.

On July 1, 2009, Bohemia Agustiana, Isela Hernandez, and Ana Munoz
filed a purported "class action," captioned Agustiana, et al. v.
Overhill Farms, against the Company in which they asserted claims
for failure to pay minimum wage, failure to furnish wage and hour
statements, waiting time penalties, conversion and unfair business
practices.  The plaintiffs are former employees who had been
terminated one month earlier because they had used invalid social
security numbers in connection with their employment with the
Company.  They filed the case in Los Angeles County on behalf of
themselves and a class which they say includes all non-exempt
production and quality control workers who were employed in
California during the four-year period prior to filing their
complaint.  The plaintiffs seek unspecified damages, restitution,
injunctive relief, attorneys' fees and costs.

The Company filed a motion to dismiss the conversion claim, and
the motion was granted by the court on February 2, 2010.

On May 12, 2010, Alma Salinas filed a separate purported "class
action" in Los Angeles County Superior Court against the Company
in which she asserted claims on behalf of herself and all other
similarly situated current and former production workers for
failure to provide meal periods, failure to provide rest periods,
failure to pay minimum wage, failure to make payments within the
required time, unfair business practice in violation of Section
17200 of the California Business and Professions Code and Labor
Code Section 2698 (known as the Private Attorney General Act
("PAGA")).  Ms. Salinas is a former employee who had been
terminated because she had used an invalid social security number
in connection with her employment with the Company.  Ms. Salinas
sought allegedly unpaid wages, waiting time penalties, PAGA
penalties, interest and attorneys' fees, the amounts of which are
unspecified.  The Salinas action has been consolidated with the
Agustiana action.

In about September 2011, plaintiffs Agustiana and Salinas agreed
to voluntarily dismiss and waive all of their claims against the
Company.  They also agreed to abandon their allegations that they
could represent any other employees in the alleged class.  The
Company did not pay them any additional wages or money.

One former employee remains as a plaintiff, Isela Hernandez.  She
has not requested the court to certify her as a class
representative, and no class has been certified.  The Company has
asked the court to disqualify this remaining plaintiff as a class
representative, and her attorneys have asked the court to add four
former employees as plaintiffs and potential class
representatives.  Without ruling on the Company's request, the
court allowed the four new plaintiffs to join the case, and it
scheduled a class certification hearing for April 2012.  Three of
the four new plaintiffs are former employees that the Company
terminated one month before this case was filed because they had
used invalid social security numbers in connection with their
employment with the Company.  The fourth new plaintiff has not
worked for the Company since February 2007.

The parties are engaged in the discovery phase of the case, and
the court has scheduled a class certification hearing date for
April 2012.  The Company believes it has valid defenses to the
plaintiff's remaining claims and that it paid all wages due to
these employees.


PAIN THERAPEUTICS: Faces "Southey" Securities Suit in Texas
-----------------------------------------------------------
Pain Therapeutics, Inc. is facing a securities class action
lawsuit in Texas, according to the Company's February 9, 2012,
Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the year ended December 31, 2011.

On December 2, 2011, Charles Southey filed a purported class
action against the Company and its executive officers in the U.S.
District Court for the Western District of Texas, captioned
Charles Southey, Individually and On Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated v. Pain Therapeutics, Inc., Remi Barbier, Nadav
Friedman, Grant L. Schoenhard and Peter S. Roddy.  This complaint
alleges, among other things, violations of Section 10(b), Rule
10b-5, and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
arising out of allegedly untrue or misleading statements of
material facts made by the Company regarding REMOXY's development
and regulatory status during the purported class period, February
3, 2011, through June 23, 2011.  The complaint states that
monetary damages are being sought, but no amounts are specified.


PHARMERICA CORP: Defends Suit Over Refusal to Sell to Omnicare
--------------------------------------------------------------
PharMerica Corporation is defending a consolidated class action
lawsuit arising from its refusal to accept Omnicare, Inc.'s tender
offer, according to the Company's February 9, 2012, Form 10-K
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
year ended December 31, 2011.

On August 23, 2011, Omnicare, Inc. ("Omnicare") made public an
unsolicited proposal to acquire all of the outstanding shares of
PharMerica Corporation's ("the Corporation") common stock for
$15.00 per share in cash.  After careful consideration with the
Corporation's financial and legal advisors, its Board of Directors
determined unanimously that Omnicare's proposal undervalues the
Corporation and was not in the best interests of its stockholders.
On September 7, 2011, Omnicare, through its wholly-owned
subsidiary, Philadelphia Acquisition Sub, Inc., commenced an
unsolicited tender offer to purchase all of the outstanding shares
of the Corporation's common stock at $15.00 per share.  On
September 18, 2011, the Board again met with its financial and
legal advisors, and after careful consideration the Corporation's
Board of Directors again unanimously recommended that its
stockholders reject the offer and not tender their shares of the
Corporation's common stock because it believes that Omnicare's
tender offer (i) undervalues the Corporation and its prospects,
(ii) is illusory because it is subject to significant regulatory
and other uncertainty, and (iii) is opportunistic based on the
Corporation's then traded market value.  On
September 20, 2011, the Corporation filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission ("SEC") a Recommendation/Solicitation
Statement on Schedule 14D-9 detailing the recommendation of the
Corporation's Board of Directors in response to Omnicare's tender
offer and the reasons it rejected the offer.

On October 5, 2011, Omnicare extended the expiration date of its
tender offer until 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on Friday,
December 2, 2011, unless further extended.  On December 5, 2011,
Omnicare extended the expiration date of its tender offer until
5:00 p.m., New York City time, on Friday, January 20, 2012, unless
further extended.  On January 19, 2012, Omnicare extended the
expiration date of its tender offer until 5:00p.m., New York City
time, on Friday, January 27, 2012, unless further extended.  On
January 27, 2012, Omnicare extended the expiration of its tender
offer until 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on Friday, February 17,
2012, unless further extended.

On August 25, 2011, after careful consideration and consultation
with the Corporation's financial and legal advisors, the
Corporation's Board of Directors adopted a rights plan and
authorized the execution of the Rights Agreement, dated
August 25, 2011 (the "Rights Agreement"), between the Corporation
and Mellon Investor Services LLC, as Rights Agent.  On August 25,
2011, the Board of Directors of the Corporation declared a
dividend of one preferred share purchase right (a "Right") for
each outstanding share of common stock, par value $0.01 per share.
The dividend was payable on September 6, 2011, to the stockholders
of record on September 6, 2011.  The Rights will expire on the
earlier of August 25, 2021, or redemption by the Corporation.
However, the rights will expire immediately at the final
adjournment of the Corporation's 2012 annual meeting of
stockholders if stockholder approval of the Rights Agreement has
not been received prior to that time.  The Rights Agreement is
designed to prevent third parties from opportunistically acquiring
the Corporation in a transaction that the Corporation's Board of
Directors believes is not in the best interests of the
Corporation's stockholders.  In general terms, it works by
imposing a significant penalty upon any person or group that
acquires beneficial ownership of 15 percent or more of the
Corporation's outstanding common stock without the prior approval
of its Board of Directors.  The Corporation's Board of Directors
believes the Rights Agreement has helped the Corporation's
stockholders at this time by effectively preventing Omnicare from
opportunistically acquiring the Corporation at a price that the
Corporation's Board of Directors believes is inadequate.  The
Rights Agreement has been narrowly tailored in a manner that the
Corporation's Board of Directors believes appropriately balances
the interests of the Corporation's stockholders in connection with
what its Board of Directors considers an opportunistic, illusory
and disadvantageous proposal, against the need to avoid excessive
anti-takeover protections that ultimately may adversely impact
stockholder value.  The Corporation says the Rights Agreement
should not interfere with any merger or other business combination
approved by the Board of Directors.

On September 9, 2011, the Louisiana Municipal Police Employees'
Retirement System ("LMPERS") filed a lawsuit in the Court of
Chancery of the State of Delaware, purportedly on behalf of a
class of the Corporation's stockholders, against the Corporation
and the members of the Corporation's Board of Directors, styled
Louisiana Municipal Police Employees' Retirement System v. Frank
Collins, et al., Civil Action No. 6851-CS.  In the action, LMPERS
alleges that the members of the Board of Directors breached their
fiduciary duties to the Corporation and its stockholders by, among
other things, adopting the Rights Agreement and failing to respond
appropriately to the tender offer.  LMPERS seeks declaratory and
injunctive relief, including an order certifying the case as a
class action and an order enjoining application of the Rights
Agreement and Section 203 of the DGCL to the tender offer and
proposed merger.

On September 22, 2011, Hugh F. Drummond as Trustee of the FBO Hugh
F. Drummond Trust ("Drummond") filed a lawsuit in the Court of
Chancery of the State of Delaware, purportedly on behalf of a
class of the Corporation's stockholders, against the Corporation
and the members of the Corporation's Board of Directors, styled
Hugh F. Drummond as Trustee of the FBO Hugh F. Drummond Trust v.
PharMerica Corp., et al., Civil Action No. 6882.  In the action,
Mr. Drummond alleges that the members of the Board of Directors
breached their fiduciary duties to the Corporation and the
Corporation's stockholders by, among other things, adopting the
Rights Agreement and failing to respond appropriately to the
tender offer.  Mr. Drummond seeks declaratory and injunctive
relief, including an order certifying the case as a class action
and an order enjoining the directors and the Corporation from
excluding strategic bidders, including Omnicare, imposing
unreasonable preconditions on such strategic bidders, refusing to
provide due diligence to strategic bidders, and conducting a
limited sale process not designed to produce the best transaction
for PharMerica's stockholders.

On October 3, 2011, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware
entered an order consolidating the LMPERS and Drummond actions
under the caption In re PharMerica Corporation Shareholders
Litigation, Consolidated Civil Action No. 6851-CS.  Plaintiffs in
the consolidated action designated the complaint filed in the
Drummond action as operative.  The Corporation and its directors
believe that the claims made by LMPERS and Drummond are without
merit and intend to defend the consolidated action vigorously.


PHILIP MORRIS: Continues to Defend Class Suits in Brazil
--------------------------------------------------------
Philip Morris International Inc. continues to defend two class
action lawsuits pending in Brazil, according to the Company's
February 9, 2012, Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission.

In the class action pending in Brazil, The Smoker Health Defense
Association (ADESF) v. Souza Cruz, S.A. and Philip Morris
Marketing, S.A., Nineteenth Lower Civil Court of the Central
Courts of the Judiciary District of Sao Paulo, Brazil, filed
July 25, 1995, the Company's subsidiary and another member of the
industry are defendants.  The plaintiff, a consumer organization,
is seeking damages for smokers and former smokers and injunctive
relief.

In February 2004, the Civil Court of Sao Paulo found defendants
liable without hearing evidence.  The court did not assess moral
or actual damages, which were to be assessed in a second phase of
the case.  The size of the class was not defined in the ruling.

In April 2004, the court clarified its ruling, awarding "moral
damages" of R$1,000 (approximately $530) per smoker per full year
of smoking plus interest at the rate of 1% per month, as of the
date of the ruling.  The court did not award actual damages, which
were to be assessed in the second phase of the case.  The size of
the class was not estimated.  Defendants appealed to the Sao Paulo
Court of Appeals, which annulled the ruling in November 2008,
finding that the trial court had inappropriately ruled without
hearing evidence and returned the case to the trial court for
further proceedings.  In May 2011, the trial court dismissed the
claim.  Plaintiff has appealed.

In addition, the defendants filed a constitutional appeal to the
Federal Supreme Tribunal on the basis that the plaintiff did not
have standing to bring the lawsuit.  This appeal is still pending.

In the second class action pending in Brazil, Public Prosecutor of
Sao Paulo v. Philip Morris Brasil Industria e Comercio Ltda.,
Civil Court of the City of Sao Paulo, Brazil, filed August 6,
2007, the Company's subsidiary is a defendant.  The plaintiff, the
Public Prosecutor of the State of Sao Paulo, is seeking (i)
unspecified damages on behalf of all smokers nationwide, former
smokers, and their relatives; (ii) unspecified damages on behalf
of people exposed to environmental tobacco smoke ("ETS")
nationwide, and their relatives; and (iii) reimbursement of the
health care costs allegedly incurred for the treatment of tobacco-
related diseases by all Brazilian States and Municipalities, and
the Federal District.  In an interim ruling issued in December
2007, the trial court limited the scope of this claim to the State
of Sao Paulo only.  In December 2008, the Seventh Civil Court of
Sao Paulo issued a decision declaring that it lacked jurisdiction
because the case involved issues similar to the ADESF case and
should be transferred to the Nineteenth Lower Civil Court in Sao
Paulo where the ADESF case is pending.  The court further stated
that these cases should be consolidated for the purposes of
judgment.

The Company's subsidiary appealed this decision to the State of
Sao Paulo Court of Appeals, which subsequently declared the case
stayed pending the outcome of the appeal.  In April 2010, the Sao
Paulo Court of Appeals reversed the Seventh Civil Court's decision
that consolidated the cases, finding that they are based on
different legal claims and are progressing at different stages of
proceedings.  This case was returned to the Seventh Civil Court of
Sao Paulo, and the Company's subsidiary filed its closing
arguments in December 2010.


PHILIP MORRIS: Awaits Certification Bid Ruling in "El-Roy" Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Morris International Inc. is awaiting a court decision with
respect to a motion for class certification in a class action
lawsuit pending in Israel, according to the Company's February 9,
2012, Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.

In the class action pending in Israel, El-Roy, et al. v. Philip
Morris Incorporated, et al., District Court of Tel-Aviv/Jaffa,
Israel, filed January 18, 2004, the Company's subsidiary and
indemnitees (PM USA and the Company's former importer) are
defendants.  The plaintiffs filed a purported class action
claiming that the class members were misled by the descriptor
"lights" into believing that lights cigarettes are safer than full
flavor cigarettes.  The claim seeks recovery of the purchase price
of lights cigarettes and compensation for distress for each class
member.  Hearings took place in November and December 2008
regarding whether the case meets the legal requirements necessary
to allow it to proceed as a class action.  The parties' briefing
on class certification was completed in March 2011.  A hearing for
final oral argument on class certification took place in November
2011.  The Company is awaiting the court's decision.

The claims in a second class action pending in Israel, Navon, et
al. v. Philip Morris Products USA, et al., District Court of Tel-
Aviv/Jaffa, Israel, filed December 5, 2004, against the Company's
indemnitee (the Company's distributor) and other members of the
industry are similar to those in El-Roy, and the case is currently
stayed pending a ruling on class certification in El-Roy.


PHILIP MORRIS: Class Cert. Bid Pending in Flue-Cured Tobacco Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Morris International Inc. is awaiting a court decision on a
motion for class certification in the breach of contract lawsuit
over flue-cured tobacco, according to the Company's February 9,
2012, Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.

In the breach of contract action in Ontario, Canada, The Ontario
Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board, et al. v. Rothmans,
Benson & Hedges Inc., Superior Court of Justice, London, Ontario,
Canada, filed November 5, 2009, the Company's subsidiary is a
defendant.  Plaintiffs in this putative class action allege that
the Company's subsidiary breached contracts with the proposed
class members (Ontario tobacco growers and their related
associations) concerning the sale and purchase of flue-cured
tobacco from January 1, 1986, to December 31, 1996.  Plaintiffs
allege that the Company's subsidiary was required by the contracts
to disclose to plaintiffs the quantity of tobacco included in
cigarettes to be sold for duty free and export purposes (which it
purchased at a lower price per pound than tobacco that was
included in cigarettes to be sold in Canada), but failed to
disclose that some of the cigarettes it designated as being for
export and duty free purposes were ultimately sold in Canada.  The
Company's subsidiary has been served, but there is currently no
deadline to respond to the statement of claim.  In September 2011,
plaintiffs served a notice of motion seeking class certification.


PHILIP MORRIS: Continues to Defend "Bourassa" Suit in Canada
------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Morris International Inc. continues to defend a class
action lawsuit captioned Bourassa v. Imperial Tobacco Canada
Limited, et al., pending in British Columbia, Canada, according to
the Company's February 9, 2012, Form 8-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission.

In the class action pending in Canada, Bourassa v. Imperial
Tobacco Canada Limited, et al., Supreme Court, British Columbia,
Canada, filed June 25, 2010, the Company, its subsidiaries, and
its indemnitees (PM USA and Altria Group, Inc.), and other members
of the industry are defendants.  The plaintiff, the heir to a
deceased smoker, alleges that the decedent was addicted to tobacco
products and suffered from emphysema resulting from the use of
tobacco products.  She is seeking compensatory and unspecified
punitive damages on behalf of a proposed class comprised of all
smokers who were alive on June 12, 2007, and who suffered from
chronic respiratory diseases allegedly caused by smoking, their
estates, dependents and family members, plus disgorgement of
revenues earned by the defendants from January 1, 1954, to the
date the claim was filed.  Defendants have filed jurisdictional
challenges on the grounds that this action should not proceed
during the pendency of the Saskatchewan class action, Adams v.
Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers' Council, et al., The Queen's
Bench, Saskatchewan, Canada, filed July 10, 2009.


PHILIP MORRIS: Continues to Defend "McDermid" Suit in Canada
------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Morris International Inc. continues to defend a class
action lawsuit captioned McDermid v. Imperial Tobacco Canada
Limited, et al., pending in British Columbia, Canada, according to
the Company's February 9, 2012, Form 8-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission.

In the class action pending in Canada, McDermid v. Imperial
Tobacco Canada Limited, et al., Supreme Court, British Columbia,
Canada, filed June 25, 2010, the Company, its subsidiaries, and
its indemnitees (PM USA and Altria Group, Inc.), and other members
of the industry are defendants.  The plaintiff, an individual
smoker, alleges his own addiction to tobacco products and heart
disease resulting from the use of tobacco products.  He is seeking
compensatory and unspecified punitive damages on behalf of a
proposed class comprised of all smokers who were alive on June 12,
2007, and who suffered from heart disease allegedly caused by
smoking, their estates, dependents and family members, plus
disgorgement of revenues earned by the defendants from January 1,
1954, to the date the claim was filed.  Defendants have filed
jurisdictional challenges on the grounds that this action should
not proceed during the pendency of the Saskatchewan class action,
Adams v. Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers' Council, et al., The
Queen's Bench, Saskatchewan, Canada, filed July 10, 2009.


PHILIP MORRIS: "Dorion" Class Suit Remains Pending in Canada
------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit entitled Dorion v. Canadian Tobacco
Manufacturers' Council, et al., remains pending in Alberta,
Canada, according to Philip Morris International Inc.'s
February 9, 2012, Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission.

In the class action pending in Canada, Dorion v. Canadian Tobacco
Manufacturers' Council, et al., The Queen's Bench, Alberta,
Canada, filed June 15, 2009, the Company, its subsidiaries, and
its indemnitees (PM USA and Altria Group, Inc.), and other members
of the industry are defendants.  The plaintiff, an individual
smoker, alleges her own addiction to tobacco products and chronic
bronchitis and severe sinus infections resulting from the use of
tobacco products.  She is seeking compensatory and unspecified
punitive damages on behalf of a proposed class comprised of all
smokers, their estates, dependents and family members, restitution
of profits, and reimbursement of government health care costs
allegedly caused by tobacco products.  To date, the Company, its
subsidiaries, and its indemnitees have not been properly served
with the complaint.  No activity in this case is anticipated while
plaintiff's counsel pursues the class action filed in
Saskatchewan, Adams v. Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers' Council, et
al., The Queen's Bench, Saskatchewan, Canada, filed July 10, 2009.


PHILIP MORRIS: "Kunta" Class Suit Remains Pending in Canada
-----------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit entitled Kunta v. Canadian Tobacco
Manufacturers' Council, et al., remains pending in Canada,
according to Philip Morris International Inc.'s February 9, 2012,
Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

In the class action pending in Canada, Kunta v. Canadian Tobacco
Manufacturers' Council, et al., The Queen's Bench, Winnipeg,
Canada, filed June 12, 2009, the Company, its subsidiaries, and
its indemnitees (PM USA and Altria Group, Inc.), and other members
of the industry are defendants.  The plaintiff, an individual
smoker, alleges her own addiction to tobacco products and chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease ("COPD"), severe asthma and mild
reversible lung disease resulting from the use of tobacco
products.  She is seeking compensatory and unspecified punitive
damages on behalf of a proposed class comprised of all smokers,
their estates, dependents and family members, as well as
restitution of profits, and reimbursement of government health
care costs allegedly caused by tobacco products.  In September
2009, plaintiff's counsel informed defendants that he did not
anticipate taking any action in this case while he pursues a class
action filed in Saskatchewan, Adams v. Canadian Tobacco
Manufacturers' Council, et al., The Queen's Bench, Saskatchewan,
Canada, filed July 10, 2009.


PHILIP MORRIS: Preliminary Motions Pending in "Adams" Suit
----------------------------------------------------------
Preliminary motions are pending in a class action lawsuit pending
in Saskatchewan, Canada, according to Philip Morris International
Inc.'s February 9, 2012, Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission.

In the class action pending in Canada, Adams v. Canadian Tobacco
Manufacturers' Council, et al., The Queen's Bench, Saskatchewan,
Canada, filed July 10, 2009, the Company, its subsidiaries, and
its indemnitees (PM USA and Altria Group, Inc.), and other members
of the industry are defendants.  The plaintiff, an individual
smoker, alleges her own addiction to tobacco products and COPD
resulting from the use of tobacco products.  She is seeking
compensatory and unspecified punitive damages on behalf of a
proposed class comprised of all smokers who have smoked a minimum
of 25,000 cigarettes and have allegedly suffered, or suffer, from
COPD, emphysema, heart disease, or cancer, as well as restitution
of profits.  Preliminary motions are pending.


PHILIP MORRIS: "Semple" Class Suit Remains Pending in Canada
------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned Canada, Semple v. Canadian
Tobacco Manufacturers' Council, et al., remains pending in Nova
Scotia, Canada, according to Philip Morris International Inc.'s
February 9, 2012, Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission.

In the class action pending in Canada, Semple v. Canadian Tobacco
Manufacturers' Council, et al., The Supreme Court (trial court),
Nova Scotia, Canada, filed June 18, 2009, the Company, its
subsidiaries, and its indemnitees (PM USA and Altria Group, Inc.),
and other members of the industry are defendants.  The plaintiff,
an individual smoker, alleges his own addiction to tobacco
products and COPD resulting from the use of tobacco products.  He
is seeking compensatory and unspecified punitive damages on behalf
of a proposed class comprised of all smokers, their estates,
dependents and family members, as well as restitution of profits,
and reimbursement of government health care costs allegedly caused
by tobacco products.  No activity in this case is anticipated
while plaintiff's counsel pursues the class action filed in
Saskatchewan, Adams v. Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers' Council, et
al., The Queen's Bench, Saskatchewan, Canada, filed July 10, 2009.


PHILIP MORRIS: Trial in "Blais" Suit Set to Begin on March 5
------------------------------------------------------------
Trial is scheduled to begin on March 5, 2012 in the class action
lawsuit commenced by Conseil Quebecois Sur Le Tabac Et La Sante
and Jean-Yves Blais, according to Philip Morris International
Inc.'s February 9, 2012, Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission.

In the class action pending in Canada, Conseil Quebecois Sur Le
Tabac Et La Sante and Jean-Yves Blais v. Imperial Tobacco Ltd.,
Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc. and JTI Macdonald Corp., Quebec
Superior Court, Canada, filed in November 1998, the Company's
subsidiary and other Canadian manufacturers are defendants.  The
plaintiffs, an anti-smoking organization and an individual smoker,
are seeking compensatory and unspecified punitive damages for each
member of the class who allegedly suffers from certain smoking-
related diseases.  The class was certified in 2005.  Pre-trial
proceedings are ongoing.  Trial is scheduled to begin on March 5,
2012.


PHILIP MORRIS: Trial in "Letourneau" Suit to Begin on March 5
-------------------------------------------------------------
Trial in the class action lawsuit commenced by Cecilia Letourneau
in Canada is scheduled to begin on March 5, 2012, according to
Philip Morris International Inc.'s February 9, 2012, Form 8-K
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

In the class action pending in Canada, Cecilia Letourneau v.
Imperial Tobacco Ltd., Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc. and JTI
Macdonald Corp., Quebec Superior Court, Canada, filed in September
1998, the Company's subsidiary and other Canadian manufacturers
are defendants.  The plaintiff, an individual smoker, is seeking
compensatory and unspecified punitive damages for each member of
the class who is deemed addicted to smoking.  The class was
certified in 2005.  Pre-trial proceedings are ongoing.  Trial is
scheduled to begin on March 5, 2012.


PHILIP MORRIS: Trial in "Smith" Class Suit Set for July 2012
------------------------------------------------------------
Trial in a class action lawsuit pending in Kansas is set for July
2012, according to Philip Morris International Inc.'s February 9,
2012, Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.

In the antitrust class action in Kansas, Smith v. Philip Morris
Companies Inc., et al., District Court of Seward County, Kansas,
filed February 7, 2000, the Company and other members of the
industry are defendants.  The plaintiff asserts that the defendant
cigarette companies engaged in an international conspiracy to fix
wholesale prices of cigarettes and sought certification of a class
comprised of all persons in Kansas who were indirect purchasers of
cigarettes from the defendants.  The plaintiff claims unspecified
economic damages resulting from the alleged price-fixing, trebling
of those damages under the Kansas price-fixing statute and counsel
fees.  The trial court granted plaintiff's motion for class
certification.  A court-ordered mediation was held in October
2010, prior to which the Company filed a summary judgment motion.
The court has not yet ruled on the Company's summary judgment
motion, but has set a trial date in July 2012.


PLAZA MEXICO: Failed to Honor Overtime Pay, Trial Court Finds
-------------------------------------------------------------
Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz granted summary judgment on
plaintiffs' claims in consolidated actions against employees of
Mama Mexico restaurants for wage and overtime violations.

The consolidated actions are Teresa Lara Benavidez, et al. v.
Plaza Mexico, Inc. et al., and Guillermo Paez, et al. v. Plaza
Mexico Inc. et al., Case Nos. 09-Civ.-5076 and 09-Civ.-9574
(S.D.N.Y.)

The Plaintiffs sought summary judgment solely on liability as to
certain Defendants.  They specifically contended that undisputed
record shows that: (1) Defendants Piramides Mayas Inc., Shaddai
Inc., and Juan Rojas Campos willfully failed to pay Plaintiffs
overtime, spread-of-hours pay, and statutory uniform maintenance
payments; (2) the same Defendants failed to reimburse Plaintiffs
for the cost of required uniforms and failed to give Plaintiffs
notice of the tip credit, as required by Section 203(m) of the
Florida Labor Standard Act; and (3) Defendant Rojas Campos, Mama
Mexico's owner, is individually liable as the Plaintiffs'
employer.  The Plaintiffs further contend that Defendants
Piramides Mayas Inc., Shaddai Inc., Mama Mexico Midtown Realty
LLC, and Mama Mexico Englewood Realty LLC are in default because
they are not represented by counsel.

A copy of the District Court's Feb. 14, 2012 Memorandum and Order
is available at http://is.gd/eehDiOfrom Leagle.com.


PRO ARMOR: Recalls 5,200 Latches for Utility Vehicle Doors
----------------------------------------------------------
About 5,200 latches for utility vehicle door were voluntarily
recalled by LSI Products Inc., doing business as Pro Armor of
Riverside, California, in cooperation with the U.S. Consumer
Product Safety Commission.  Consumers should stop using the
product immediately unless otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to
resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

The latch pin can disengage from the latch allowing the door to
open while the vehicle is moving.  This can pose a risk of
ejection of an unrestrained rider and impact or laceration
hazards.

Pro Armor has received nine reports of the latch pin disengaging.
No injuries have been reported.

The Pro Armor Slam Latches are black metal door latches sold for
use in Polaris RZR, Can-Am Commander and Kawasaki Teryx utility
vehicles.  The latches were sold separately or purchased as an
add-on installed on a door that was bought separately.

A picture of the recalled products is available at:

     http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml12/12723.html

The recalled products were manufactured in the United States of
America and sold at Powersports dealers and online nationwide from
January 2011 through November 2011 for about $50.

Consumers should immediately stop using vehicles with this latch
installed and contact Pro Armor for a free repair kit.  For more
information, contact Pro Armor at (888) 312-7667 between 8:00 a.m.
and 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time Monday through Friday or via the firm's
Web site at http://www.proarmor.com/. Pro Armor is contacting its
customers directly.


RALCORP HOLDINGS: Units Continue to Defend Wage and Hour Suits
--------------------------------------------------------------
Two subsidiaries of Ralcorp Holdings, Inc. are subject to three
pending lawsuits brought by former employees currently pending in
separate California state courts, alleging, among other things,
that employees did not receive sufficient meal breaks resulting in
incorrect wage statements, unpaid overtime and untimely payments
to terminated employees.  Each of these lawsuits was filed as a
class action and seeks to include in the class certain current and
former employees of the respective subsidiary involved.  In each
case, the plaintiffs are seeking unpaid wages, interest,
attorneys' fees, compensatory and other monetary damages and
injunctive relief.  No determination has been made by either court
regarding class certification and there can be no assurance as to
whether a class will be certified or, if a class is certified, as
to the scope of such class.  The Company's liability, if any,
relating to these lawsuits cannot be reasonably estimated at this
time; however, the Company does not expect that its ultimate
liability, if any, will exceed $10 million.

No further updates were reported in the Company's February 9,
2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended December 31, 2011.


SHIMANO AMERICAN: Recalls 296 Mountain Bike Handlebar Stems
-----------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and Health Canada, in
cooperation with manufacturer, Post Moderne Corporation, of
Taiwan, and importer, Shimano American Corporation, of Irvine,
California, announced a voluntary recall of 213 units of Mountain
Bicycle Handlebar Stem in the United States of America and 83 in
Canada.  Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately
unless otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell or attempt
to resell a recalled consumer product.

The bolts holding the front plate of the stem to the stem body can
be pulled out of the threads while the bike is being ridden,
causing the rider to lose control of the bike and fall.

Shimano has received one report of an incident in which the rider
fell and received torso and arm injuries.

This recall involves PRO Atherton direct mount bicycle handlebar
stems with the model number PRSS0049 and supplied from October
2009 to November 2010.  The stem consists of a metal alloy body
and front plate and four alloy bolts.  The stem body is black with
red markings.  It has the word "PRO" in four places on the sides
and the word "Atherton."  The front plate is black and silver with
the PRO logo in the center.  The model number is located on the
barcode sticker on the backside bottom of the packaging material.
Stems with the following identification codes are being recalled:
HH, HJ, HK, HL, IA, IC, ID, IE and IF.  Some of these stems were
outfitted with 18mm bolts instead of 21mm bolts.  The
identification code is located on the stem body where the
handlebars are seated.  Pictures of the recalled products are
available at:

     http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml12/12113.html

The recalled products were manufactured in Taiwan and sold at REI,
bicycle specialty stores and dealers nationwide from October 2009
to November 2010 for about $120.

Consumers should immediately stop using bicycles with PRO Atherton
handlebar stems and take them to an authorized retailer to
determine if the stem on their bike is subject to the recall.
Authorized retailers will replace 18mm bolts with 21mm bolts free
of charge.  For more information and to find an authorized
retailer, contact Shimano American Corporation at (800) 353-4719
between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time Monday through
Friday, or visit the company's Web site at http://www.shimano.com/


SUGARLAND: Responds to Class Action Over State Fair Collapse
------------------------------------------------------------
Alex Brown, writing for WIBC, reports that country music duo
Sugarland has responded to a class-action lawsuit regarding the
State Fair stage collapse.

The lawsuit alleges Sugarland and other defendants including Mid-
America Sound, Live Nation and others allowed the stage rigging at
the Indiana State Fair to be overloaded with equipment, failing to
monitor weather conditions properly and failing to evacuate the
area quickly.

Sugarland responded saying the group had nothing to do with the
construction of the stage at the grandstands, adding that the
stage was not built specifically for the August 13 concert.

"The incident at issue in this litigation resulted from a gust of
wind of unprecedented intensity, which caused a structure that may
have been improperly designed, maintained and/or inspected to
fail.  As such, this was a true accident or Act of God," the
response says.  "The Plaintiffs' claims and injuries were caused
by an open and obvious danger.  The (Defendants) have no duty
toward the Plaintiff, including any duty to warn with respect to
such an obvious danger."

Attorney Mario Massillamany, who is representing some of the
victims, tells RTV6 that a deposition released earlier this month
puts the burden on Sugarland.

"Cindy Hoye, who's with the Indiana State Fair, in her deposition
stated that at least twice Sugarland was asked if they would
cancel the concert, and they didn't," Mr. Massillamany says.
"Why? Because they were more concerned about getting to their next
show, so instead of protecting their fans, they were more
concerned with getting to their next show to collect their
paycheck."

The band's response also claims "some or all of the Plaintiffs
knowingly and voluntarily assumed and/or incurred the risk of
injury to themselves," and "failed to exercise due care for their
own safety."

Seven people died as a result of the collapse and more than 40
were injured.  The estates of four of the seven people who died
are listed as Plaintiffs in the lawsuit.


UNITED STATES: Blacks Farmers' Settlement Enters Final Phase
------------------------------------------------------------
A landmark class action settlement for African Americans who
experienced farm loan discrimination by the USDA is entering its
final phase.  African Americans who farmed or attempted to farm
(or their heirs) may be eligible for a sizeable cash payment or
loan forgiveness from this $1.25 billion class action settlement.
This final phase of the Black Farmers Discrimination Settlement
(sometimes called "Pigford II") is only for people who tried to
file a late claim in the original Pigford case. The absolute,
final deadline for filing a claim is May 11, 2012.

This is the last chance for those eligible to get payments and
loan forgiveness from the Black Farmers Discrimination Settlement.

Lawyers appointed by the court are holding meetings around the
country to provide those who are included in the settlement with
free help filing claims.  Completing a claim may take some time,
so those who think they are included should get more information
now.

For more information, including about how to file a claim and
meeting locations: call toll-free 1-877-810-8110 or visit
http://www.BlackFarmerCase.com


WARNER MUSIC: Digital Music Suit Discovery to Be Completed in May
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Discovery in the consolidated lawsuit over pricing of digitally
downloaded music is currently scheduled to be substantially
completed by May 31, 2012, according to Warner Music Group Corp.'s
February 9, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
December 31, 2011.

On December 20, 2005, and February 3, 2006, the Attorney General
of the State of New York served the Company with requests for
information in connection with an industry-wide investigation as
to the pricing of digital music downloads.  On February 28, 2006,
the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice served
the Company with a Civil Investigative Demand, also seeking
information relating to the pricing of digitally downloaded music.
Both investigations were ultimately closed, but subsequent to the
announcements of the investigations, more than thirty putative
class action lawsuits were filed concerning the pricing of digital
music downloads.  The lawsuits were consolidated in the Southern
District of New York.  The consolidated amended complaint, filed
on April 13, 2007, alleges conspiracy among record companies to
delay the release of their content for digital distribution,
inflate their pricing of CDs and fix prices for digital downloads.
The complaint seeks unspecified compensatory, statutory and treble
damages.  On October 9, 2008, the District Court issued an order
dismissing the case as to all defendants, including the Company.
However, on January 12, 2010, the Second Circuit vacated the
judgment of the District Court and remanded the case for further
proceedings and on January 10, 2011, the Supreme Court denied the
defendants' petition for Certiorari.

Upon remand to the District Court, all defendants, including the
Company, filed a renewed motion to dismiss challenging, among
other things, plaintiffs' state law claims and standing to bring
certain claims.  The renewed motion was based mainly on arguments
made in defendants' original motion to dismiss, but not addressed
by the District Court.  On July 18, 2011, the District Court
granted defendants' motion in part, and denied it in part.
Notably, all claims on behalf of the CD-purchaser class were
dismissed with prejudice.  However, a wide variety of state and
federal claims remain, for the class of Internet Music purchasers.
The parties have filed amended pleadings complying with the
court's order, and the case is proceeding into discovery, which is
currently scheduled to be substantially completed by May 31, 2012.
The parties are scheduled to confer at the end of August 2012 on a
class certification briefing schedule, for a determination by the
District Court as to whether class treatment is appropriate.  The
case will proceed into discovery, based on a schedule to be
determined by the District Court.

The Company says it intends to defend against these lawsuits
vigorously, but is unable to predict the outcome of these
lawsuits.  Regardless of the merits of the claims, this and any
related litigation could continue to be costly, and divert the
time and resources of management.


WHIRLPOOL CORP: Sued Over False Labels on Washing Machines
----------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that Whirlpool has misrepresented
Maytag Centennial washing machines as Energy Star compliant, and
consumers are losing out on promised efficiency savings as well as
the higher up-front cost, a class claims.

A copy of the Complaint in Angelone, et al. v. Whirlpool
Corporation, et al., Case No. 12-cv-_____, docketed as Doc. 14116
in Case No. 33-av-00001 on Feb. 16, 2012 (D. N.J.), is available
at:

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/02/21/maytag.pdf

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          James E. Cecchi, Esq.
          Lindsey H. Taylor, Esq.
          CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI, OLSTEIN, BRODY & AGNELLO
          5 Becker Farm Road
          Roseland, NJ 07068
          Telephone: (973) 994-1700

               - and -

          Antonio Vozzolo, Esq.
          Christopher Marlborough, Esq.
          FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
          369 Lexington Avenue, 10th Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (212) 983-9330
          E-mail: avozzolo@faruqilaw.com
                  cmarlborough@faruqilaw.com

               - and -

          Scott A. Bursor, Esq.
          Joseph I. Marchese, Esq.
          BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
          369 Lexington Avenue, 10th Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (212) 989-9113
          E-mail: scott@bursor.com
                  jmarchese@bursor.com


WINDMILL HEALTH: Sued Over Kardashian Quicktrim Endorsement
-----------------------------------------------------------
New York Post reports that Kim Kardashian and her sister Khloe
face a possible class-action lawsuit over their diet product
QuickTrim, which detractors say contains high levels of caffeine,
an ingredient that's "not safe or effective for weight loss."

Kim and Khloe caused a stir over their paid endorsement of the
product, which features a picture of bikini-clad Kim.  It has
reportedly generated $45 million in revenue since they struck the
deal with New Jersey-based Windmill Health Products in 2009.

Law firm Bursor & Fisher is preparing a suit against Windmill and
the marketing claims made by the Kardashians.  An e-mail it sent
to product users included a link to the firm's Web site, which
states, "The active ingredient in QuickTrim weight loss products
is a large dose of caffeine . . . The FDA has determined that
caffeine is not safe or effective for weight loss."

Partner Scott A. Bursor told New York Post, "My firm has been
retained by an individual that purchased QuickTrim, and we are
investigating the matter.  We have provided written notice of our
client's claims to the company and others involved in marketing
QuickTrim," and his firm is reaching out to other QuickTrim users.
Bursor & Fisher has won or settled cases against firms peddling
products including hair loss remedy Avacor and diet supplement
Xenadrine.

In January 2010, Kim said she used QuickTrim to shed 15 pounds in
weeks.  Last year she tweeted that she was using it to get in
shape for her wedding, and Khloe also claimed she lost 15 pounds.

Adriane Fugh-Berman, a physician at Georgetown University Medical
Center, warned in 2010 that QuickTrim contains large amounts of
caffeine.  She said, "They're not saying how much caffeine is in
these pills.  Too much caffeine can make you jittery and increase
your blood pressure and pulse.  If you pop a couple of these pills
with your Starbucks . . . you could get caffeine poisoning, which
can cause heart arrhythmias."

                        Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Harbinger Group Still Involved in Exposure Suits
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Harbinger Group Inc. is involved in litigation and claims
incidental to its current and prior businesses. These include
worker compensation and environmental matters and pending cases in
Mississippi and Louisiana state courts and in a Federal multi-
district litigation alleging injury from exposure to asbestos on
offshore drilling rigs and shipping vessels formerly owned or
operated by its offshore drilling and bulk-shipping affiliates.
Based on currently available information, including legal defenses
available to it, and given its reserves and related insurance
coverage, the Company does not believe that the outcome of these
legal and environmental matters will have a material effect on its
financial position, results of operations or cash flows, according
to the Company's February 9, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended
January 1, 2012.

No further asbestos-related updates were reported in the Company's
latest SEC filing.

Harbinger Group Inc. is a diversified holding company with
principal operations conducted through subsidiaries that offer
life insurance and annuity products, and branded consumer products
such as batteries, personal care products, small household
appliances, pet supplies, and home and garden pest control
products. HGI is headquartered in New York.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: United Technologies Still Faces Exposure Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------
United Technologies Corporation continues to defend against
asbestos exposure lawsuits, according to the Company's
February 9, 2012, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

Like many other industrial companies in recent years, United
Technologies Corporation or its subsidiaries are named as a
defendant in lawsuits alleging personal injury as a result of
exposure to asbestos integrated into certain of its products or
premises. While the Company has never manufactured asbestos and no
longer incorporate it in any currently-manufactured products,
certain of its historical products, like those of many other
manufacturers, have contained components incorporating asbestos. A
substantial majority of these asbestos-related claims have been
covered by insurance or other forms of indemnity or have been
dismissed without payment. The remainder of the closed cases have
been resolved for amounts that are not material individually or in
the aggregate. Based on the information currently available, the
Company does not believe that resolution of these asbestos-related
matters will have a material adverse effect upon its competitive
position, results of operations, cash flows or financial
condition.

United Technologies Corporation (UTC) is a diversified company
whose products include Carrier heating and air conditioning,
Hamilton Sundstrand aerospace systems and industrial products,
Otis elevators and escalators, Pratt & Whitney aircraft engines,
Sikorsky helicopters, UTC Fire & Security systems and UTC Power
fuel cells.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Exelon Unit Reserves $49MM for Claims at Dec. 31
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Exelon Corporation's subsidiary had reserved approximately $49
million for asbestos-related bodily injury claims at December 31,
2011, according to the Company's February 9, 2012, Form 10-K
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, maintains a reserve for claims
associated with asbestos-related personal injury actions in
certain facilities that are currently owned by Generation or were
previously owned by Commonwealth Edison Company and PECO Energy
Company. The reserve is recorded on an undiscounted basis and
excludes the estimated legal costs associated with handling these
matters, which could be material. Legal costs are charged to
operating and maintenance expense as incurred.

At December 31, 2011 and 2010, Generation had reserved
approximately $49 million and $53 million, respectively, in total
for asbestos-related bodily injury claims. As of December 31,
2011, approximately $14 million of this amount related to 180 open
claims presented to Generation, while the remaining $35 million of
the reserve is for estimated future asbestos-related bodily injury
claims anticipated to arise through 2050 based on actuarial
assumptions and analyses, which are updated on an annual basis. On
a quarterly basis, Generation monitors actual experience against
the number of forecasted claims to be received and expected claim
payments and evaluates whether an adjustment to the reserve is
necessary. During 2011, 2010 and 2009, the updates to this reserve
did not result in material adjustments.

Exelon Corporation is one of the nation's largest electric
companies with approximately $19 billion in annual revenues.
Exelon's family of companies include energy generation, power
marketing, transmission and energy delivery.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: 2 Exposure Suits Remain Pending Against Thermon
----------------------------------------------------------------
Since 1999, Thermon Group Holdings, Inc., and Thermon Holding
Corp. have been named as one of many defendants in 16 personal
injury suits alleging exposure to asbestos from their products.
None of the cases alleges premises liability. Two cases are
currently pending. Insurers are defending the Company in one of
the two lawsuits, and the Company expects that an insurer will
defend it in the remaining matter. Of the concluded suits, there
were five cost of defense settlements and the remainder were
dismissed without payment. There are no claims unrelated to
asbestos exposure for which coverage has been sought under the
policies that are providing coverage.

The Company can give no assurances it will prevail in any of these
matters, according to the Company's February 9, 2012,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2011.

Thermon Group Holdings, Inc., provides thermal solutions for
process industries. The Company provides a range of products,
including heating cables, tubing bundles and control systems, and
services, including design optimization, engineering, installation
and maintenance services.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: 4.6K Claims Pending v. Owens-Illinois at Dec. 31
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Owens-Illinois, Inc., had 4,600 asbestos claims pending at the end
of 2011, according to the Company's February 9, 2012, Form 10-K
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2011

The Company is a defendant in numerous lawsuits alleging bodily
injury and death as a result of exposure to asbestos dust. From
1948 to 1958, one of the Company's former business units
commercially produced and sold approximately $40 million of a
high-temperature, calcium-silicate based pipe and block insulation
material containing asbestos. The Company exited the pipe and
block insulation business in April 1958. The typical asbestos
personal injury lawsuit alleges various theories of liability,
including negligence, gross negligence and strict liability and
seeks compensatory and in some cases, punitive damages in various
amounts.

Based on an analysis of the lawsuits pending as of December 31,
2011, approximately 71% of plaintiffs either do not specify the
monetary damages sought, or in the case of court filings, claim an
amount sufficient to invoke the jurisdictional minimum of the
trial court. Approximately 27% of plaintiffs specifically plead
damages of $15 million or less, and 2% of plaintiffs specifically
plead damages greater than $15 million but less than $100 million.
Fewer than 1% of plaintiffs specifically plead damages $100
million or greater but less than $122 million.

The Company believes that as of December 31, 2011 there are
approximately 400 claims against other defendants which are likely
to be asserted sometime in the future against the Company.

The Company is also a defendant in other asbestos-related lawsuits
or claims involving maritime workers, medical monitoring
claimants, co-defendants and property damage claimants. Based upon
its past experience, the Company believes that these categories of
lawsuits and claims will not involve any material liability.

Since receiving its first asbestos claim, the Company as of
December 31, 2011, has disposed of the asbestos claims of
approximately 387,000 plaintiffs and claimants at an average
indemnity payment per claim of approximately $8,100. Certain of
these dispositions have included deferred amounts payable over a
number of years. Deferred amounts payable totaled approximately
$18 million at December 31, 2011 ($26 million at December 31,
2010) and are included in the average indemnity payment per claim.
The Company's asbestos indemnity payments have varied on a per
claim basis, and are expected to continue to vary considerably
over time.

The Company believes that its ultimate asbestos-related liability
(i.e., its indemnity payments or other claim disposition costs
plus related legal fees) cannot reasonably be estimated. Beginning
with the initial liability of $975 million established in 1993,
the Company has accrued a total of approximately $4.0 billion
through 2011, before insurance recoveries, for its asbestos-
related liability.

On March 11, 2011, the Company received a verdict in an asbestos
case in which conspiracy claims had been asserted against the
Company. Of the total nearly $90 million awarded by the jury
against the four defendants in the case, almost $10 million in
compensatory damages were assessed against all four defendants,
and $40 million in punitive damages were assessed against the
Company.

The Company continues to deny the conspiracy allegations in this
case and will vigorously challenge this verdict, if necessary, in
the appellate courts, and, therefore, has made no change to its
asbestos-related liability as of December 31, 2011. While the
Company cannot predict the ultimate outcome of this lawsuit, the
Company and other conspiracy defendants have successfully
challenged jury verdicts in similar cases.

The Company's reported results of operations for 2011 were
materially affected by the $165 million fourth quarter charge for
asbestos-related costs and asbestos-related payments continue to
be substantial.

Owens-Illinois, Inc., through its subsidiaries, is the successor
to a business established in 1903. The Company is the largest
manufacturer of glass containers in the world, with leading
positions in Europe, North America, South America and Asia
Pacific.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Corning Inc. Awaits Ruling on PCC Plan Changes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Corning Incorporated is awaiting a ruling on proposed
modifications to the amended plan of reorganization of Pittsburgh
Corning Corporation, according to the Company's February 13, 2012,
Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

Corning Incorporated and PPG Industries, Inc. (PPG) each own 50%
of the capital stock of Pittsburgh Corning Corporation (PCC). Over
a period of more than two decades, PCC and several other
defendants have been named in numerous lawsuits involving claims
alleging personal injury from exposure to asbestos. On April 16,
2000, PCC filed for Chapter 11 reorganization in the U.S.
Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. At the
time PCC filed for bankruptcy protection, there were approximately
11,800 claims pending against Corning in state court lawsuits
alleging various theories of liability based on exposure to PCC's
asbestos products and typically requesting monetary damages in
excess of one million dollars per claim. Corning has defended
those claims on the basis of the separate corporate status of PCC
and the absence of any facts supporting claims of direct liability
arising from PCC's asbestos products. Corning is also currently
involved in approximately 9,900 other cases (approximately 38,300
claims) alleging injuries from asbestos and similar amounts of
monetary damages per case. Those cases have been covered by
insurance without material impact to Corning to date. Several of
Corning's insurance carriers have filed a legal proceeding
concerning the extent of any insurance coverage for these claims.

Corning, with other relevant parties, has been involved in ongoing
efforts to develop a Plan of Reorganization that would resolve the
concerns and objections of the relevant courts and parties. In
2003, a plan was agreed to by various parties (the 2003 Plan),
but, on December 21, 2006, the Bankruptcy Court issued an order
denying the confirmation of that 2003 Plan. On January 29, 2009,
an amended plan of reorganization (the Amended PCC Plan) -- which
addressed the issues raised by the Court when it denied
confirmation of the 2003 Plan -- was filed with the Bankruptcy
Court.

The proposed resolution of PCC asbestos claims under the Amended
PCC Plan would have required Corning to contribute its equity
interests in PCC and Pittsburgh Corning Europe N.V. (PCE), a
Belgian corporation, and to contribute a fixed series of payments,
recorded at present value. Corning would have had the option to
use its shares rather than cash to make these payments, but the
liability would have been fixed by dollar value and not the number
of shares. The Amended PCC Plan would, originally, have required
Corning to make (1) one payment of $100 million one year from the
date the Amended PCC Plan becomes effective and certain conditions
are met and (2) five additional payments of $50 million, on each
of the five subsequent anniversaries of the first payment, the
final payment of which is subject to reduction based on the
application of credits under certain circumstances. Documents were
filed with the Bankruptcy Court further modifying the Amended PCC
Plan by reducing Corning's initial payment by $30 million and
reducing its second and fourth payments by $15 million each. In
return, Corning would relinquish its claim for reimbursement of
its payments and contributions under the Amended PCC Plan from the
insurance carriers involved in the bankruptcy proceeding with
certain exceptions.

On June 16, 2011, the Court entered an Order denying confirmation
of the Amended PCC Plan. The Court's memorandum opinion
accompanying the order rejected some objections to the Amended PCC
Plan and made suggestions regarding modifications to the Amended
PCC Plan that would allow the Plan to be confirmed. Corning and
other parties have filed a motion for reconsideration, objecting
to certain points of this Order. Certain parties to the proceeding
filed specific plan modifications in response to the Court's
opinion and Corning supported these filings. Corning and other
parties also filed a motion for reconsideration objecting to
certain points in the Court's opinion and Order. Proposed plan
modifications will be discussed during the hearing scheduled for
February 17, 2012.

The Amended PCC Plan does not include certain non-PCC asbestos
claims that may be or have been raised against Corning. Corning
has recorded an additional $150 million for such claims in its
estimated asbestos litigation liability.

Several of Corning's insurers have commenced litigation in state
courts for a declaration of the rights and obligations of the
parties under insurance policies, including rights that may be
affected by the potential resolutions. Corning is vigorously
contesting these cases. Management is unable to predict the
outcome of this insurance litigation and therefore cannot estimate
the range of any possible loss.

Corning Incorporated (NYSE: GLW) is an American manufacturer of
glass, ceramics and related materials, primarily for industrial
and scientific applications.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Corning Liability Estimated at $657MM at Dec. 31
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Corning Incorporated's asbestos litigation liability was estimated
to be $657 million at December 31, 2011, according to the
Company's February 13, 2012, Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2011.

In 2011, the Company recorded an increase to its asbestos
litigation liability of $24 million compared to a net decrease in
2010 of $49 million. The net decrease in 2010 was due primarily to
a $54 million decrease to the Company's estimated liability for
asbestos litigation that was recorded in the first quarter of
2010, as a result of the change in terms of the proposed
settlement of the Pittsburgh Corning Corporation (PCC) asbestos
claims. For the remainder of 2010, the Company recorded net credit
adjustments to its asbestos litigation liability of $5 million to
reflect the change in value of the estimated settlement liability.
In 2009, the Company recorded an increase to its asbestos
litigation liability of $20 million.

The Company's asbestos litigation liability was estimated to be
$657 million at December 31, 2011, compared with an estimate of
$633 million at December 31, 2010. The entire obligation is
classified as a non-current liability as installment payments for
the cash portion of the obligation are not planned to commence
until more than 12 months after the proposed Amended PCC Plan is
ultimately effective, and a portion of the obligation fulfilled
through the direct contribution of Corning's investment in PCE
(currently recorded as a non-current other equity method
investment).

Corning Incorporated (NYSE: GLW) is an American manufacturer of
glass, ceramics and related materials, primarily for industrial
and scientific applications.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Skilled Healthcare's ARO Was $4MM at Dec. 31
-------------------------------------------------------------
Skilled Healthcare Group, Inc., recorded asset retirement
obligations of $4.0 million as of December 31, 2011, according to
the Company's February 13, 2012, Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2011.

The Company determined that a conditional asset retirement
obligation exists for asbestos remediation. Though not a current
health hazard in its facilities, upon renovation the Company may
be required to take the appropriate remediation procedures in
compliance with state law to remove the asbestos. The removal of
asbestos-containing materials includes primarily floor and ceiling
tiles from the Company's pre-1980 constructed facilities. The fair
value of the conditional asset retirement obligation was
determined as the present value of the estimated future cost of
remediation based on an estimated expected date of remediation.
This computation is based on a number of assumptions which may
change in the future based on the availability of new information,
technology changes, changes in costs of remediation, and other
factors. Any change in the assumptions can impact the value of the
determined liability and will be recognized as a change in
estimate in the period identified.

As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, the asset retirement obligations
were $4.0 million and $3.9 million, respectively, which are
classified as other long-term liabilities.

Skilled Healthcare Group, Inc., is a holding company with
subsidiaries that operate skilled nursing facilities, assisted
living facilities, a rehabilitation therapy business, hospice
businesses, and home health care businesses.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: No Removal Plans Yet, Says Empire State Realty
---------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental site assessments and investigations have identified
asbestos or asbestos-containing building materials in certain of
Empire State Realty Trust, Inc., properties. As of December 31,
2010, management has no plans to remove or alter these properties
in a manner that would trigger federal and other applicable
regulations for asbestos removal, and accordingly, the obligations
to remove the asbestos or asbestos-containing building materials
from these properties have indeterminable settlement dates. As
such, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate the fair value
of the associated conditional asset retirement obligation. However
ongoing asbestos abatement, maintenance programs and other
required documentation are carried out as required and related
costs are expensed as incurred.

The Property -- Empire State Building situated at 350 Fifth Avenue
in New York -- contains asbestos. The asbestos is appropriately
contained, in accordance with current environmental regulations.
As certain demolition of the space occurs, environmental
regulations are in place, which specify the manner in which the
asbestos must be handled and disposed. Because the obligation to
remove the asbestos has an indeterminable settlement date, the
Company is unable to reasonably estimate the fair value of this
obligation. Asbestos abatement costs are charged to expense as
incurred, according to the Company's February 13, 2012, Form S-11
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Empire State Realty Trust, Inc., is a Maryland corporation
organized to qualify as a real estate investment trust that owns,
manages, operates, acquires and repositions office and retail
properties in Manhattan and the greater New York metropolitan
area.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: BorgWarner Has 16,000 Pending Claims at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
BorgWarner Inc. had approximately 16,000 pending asbestos-related
product liability claims as of December 31, 2011, according to the
Company's February 14, 2012, Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2011.

Like many other industrial companies who have historically
operated in the U.S., the Company (or parties the Company is
obligated to indemnify) continues to be named as one of many
defendants in asbestos-related personal injury actions. The
Company believes that its involvement is limited because, in
general, these claims relate to a few types of automotive friction
products that were manufactured many years ago and contained
encapsulated asbestos. The nature of the fibers, the encapsulation
and the manner of use lead the Company to believe that these
products are highly unlikely to cause harm. As of December 31,
2011 and December 31, 2010, the Company had approximately 16,000
and 17,000 pending asbestos-related product liability claims,
respectively. Of the approximately 16,000 outstanding claims at
December 31, 2011, approximately half were pending in
jurisdictions that have undergone significant tort and judicial
reform activities subsequent to the filing of these claims.

The Company's policy is to vigorously defend against these
lawsuits and the Company has been successful in obtaining
dismissal of many claims without any payment. The Company expects
that the vast majority of the pending asbestos-related product
liability claims where it is a defendant (or has an obligation to
indemnify a defendant) will result in no payment being made by the
Company or its insurers. In 2011, of the approximately 1,800
claims resolved, 288 (16%) resulted in any payment being made to a
claimant by or on behalf of the Company. In the full year of 2010,
of the approximately 7,700 claims resolved, 245 (3%) resulted in
any payment being made to a claimant by or on behalf of the
Company.

BorgWarner Inc. (NYSE: BWA) is a United States-based worldwide
automotive industry components and parts supplier. It is primarily
known for its powertrain products, which include manual and
automatic transmissions and transmission components, (e.g.,
electro-hydraulic control components, transmission control units,
friction materials, and one-way clutches), turbochargers, engine
valve timing system components, along with four-wheel drive system
components.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: BorgWarner Still Pursues Litigation vs. Insurers
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BorgWarner Inc. continues to vigorously pursue litigation against
certain insurers in relation to coverage disputes over asbestos-
related product liability claims, according to the Company's
February 14, 2012, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

Prior to June 2004, the settlement and defense costs associated
with all claims were paid by the Company's primary layer insurance
carriers under a series of funding arrangements. In addition to
the primary insurance available for asbestos-related claims, the
Company has substantial excess insurance coverage available for
potential future asbestos-related product claims. In June 2004,
primary layer insurance carriers notified the Company of the
alleged exhaustion of their policy limits.

A declaratory judgment action was filed in January 2004 in the
Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois by Continental Casualty
Company and related companies ("CNA") against the Company and
certain of its other historical general liability insurers. The
court has issued a number of interim rulings and discovery is
continuing. CNA and the Company have entered into a settlement
agreement resolving their coverage disputes, pursuant to which CNA
will pay amounts over the next four years to the Company. The
Company is vigorously pursuing the litigation against the
remaining insurers.

Management does not believe that asbestos-related product
liability claims are likely to have a material adverse effect on
the Company's results of operations, financial position or cash
flows.

To date, the Company has paid and accrued $190.9 million in
defense and indemnity in advance of insurers' reimbursement and
has received $81.1 million in cash and notes from insurers,
including CNA. The net balance of $109.8 million, is expected to
be fully recovered, of which approximately $33 million is
estimated to be recovered within one year. Timing of recovery is
dependent on final resolution of the declaratory judgment action
or additional negotiated settlements. At December 31, 2010,
insurers owed $120.6 million in association with these claims.

On April 5, 2010, the Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate
Division affirmed a lower court judgment in an asbestos-related
action against the Company and others. The Company filed its
Notice of Petition to the Supreme Court of New Jersey in late
April, seeking to appeal the decisions of the lower courts. On
July 8, 2010 the Supreme Court of New Jersey denied the Company's
Notice of Petition appealing the decision of the lower courts. The
total claim of $40.7 million was paid by the Company in July 2010.

In addition to the $109.8 million net balance relating to past
settlements and defense costs, the Company has estimated a
liability of $61.7 million for claims asserted, but not yet
resolved and their related defense costs at December 31, 2011. The
Company also has a related asset of $61.7 million to recognize
proceeds from the insurance carriers. Insurance carrier
reimbursement of 100% is expected based on the Company's
experience, its insurance contracts and decisions received to date
in the declaratory judgment action. At December 31, 2010, the
comparable value of the insurance asset and accrued liability was
$50.6 million.

BorgWarner Inc. (NYSE: BWA) is a United States-based worldwide
automotive industry components and parts supplier. It is primarily
known for its powertrain products, which include manual and
automatic transmissions and transmission components, (e.g.,
electro-hydraulic control components, transmission control units,
friction materials, and one-way clutches), turbochargers, engine
valve timing system components, along with four-wheel drive system
components.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Goodyear Records Gross Liabilities at $138MM
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company had recorded gross liabilities
for asbestos claims, inclusive of defense costs, totaling $138
million at December 31, 2011, according to the Company's
February 14, 2012, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company is a defendant in numerous
lawsuits alleging various asbestos-related personal injuries
purported to result from alleged exposure to asbestos in certain
products manufactured by the Company or present in certain of its
facilities. Typically, these lawsuits have been brought against
multiple defendants in state and Federal courts. To date, the
Company has disposed of approximately 98,100 claims by defending
and obtaining the dismissal thereof or by entering into a
settlement. The sum of the Company's accrued asbestos-related
liability and gross payments to date, including legal costs,
totaled approximately $388 million through December 31, 2011 and
$365 million through December 31, 2010.

The Company periodically, and at least annually, reviews its
existing reserves for pending claims, including a reasonable
estimate of the liability associated with unasserted asbestos
claims, and estimate its receivables from probable insurance
recoveries.  The Company had recorded gross liabilities for both
asserted and unasserted claims, inclusive of defense costs,
totaling $138 million and $126 million at December 31, 2011 and
December 31, 2010, respectively. The recorded liability represents
the Company's estimated liability over the next ten years, which
represents the period over which the liability can be reasonably
estimated. Due to the difficulties in making these estimates,
analysis based on new data and/or a change in circumstances
arising in the future could result in an increase in the recorded
obligation in an amount that cannot be reasonably estimated, and
that increase could be significant. The portion of the liability
associated with unasserted asbestos claims and related defense
costs was $64 million at December 31, 2011 and $63 million at
December 31, 2010. At December 31, 2011, the Company's liability
with respect to asserted claims and related defense costs was $74
million, compared to $63 million at December 31, 2010. The
increase is primarily due to a $13 million adjustment related to
prior periods. At December 31, 2011, the Company estimates that it
is reasonably possible that its gross liabilities, net of its
estimate for probable insurance recoveries, could exceed its
recorded amounts by approximately $10 million.

The Company recorded a receivable related to asbestos claims of
$67 million as of December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010. The
Company expects that approximately 50% of asbestos claim related
losses would be recoverable through insurance through the period
covered by the estimated liability.

The Company believes that, at December 31, 2011, it had
approximately $160 million in limits of excess level policies
potentially applicable to indemnity and defense costs for asbestos
products claims.

Goodyear is one of the world's largest tire companies. It employs
approximately 73,000 people and manufactures its products in 53
facilities in 22 countries around the world.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide's Liability Was $668MM at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
At December 31, 2011, Union Carbide Corporation's asbestos-related
liability for pending and future claims was $668 million,
according to the Company's February 15, 2012, Form 10-K filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2011.

The Corporation 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 principally 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 UCC sold in the past,
alleged exposure to asbestos-containing products located on UCC's
premises, and UCC's responsibility for asbestos suits filed
against a former UCC subsidiary, Amchem Products, Inc. ("Amchem").
In many cases, plaintiffs are unable to demonstrate that they have
suffered any compensable loss as a result of such exposure, or
that injuries incurred in fact resulted from exposure to the
Corporation's products.

Based on a study completed by Analysis, Research & Planning
Corporation ("ARPC") in January 2003, the Corporation increased
its December 31, 2002 asbestos-related liability for pending and
future claims for the 15-year period ending in 2017 to $2.2
billion, excluding future defense and processing costs. Since
then, the Corporation has compared current asbestos claim and
resolution activity to the results of the most recent ARPC study
at each balance sheet date to determine whether the accrual
continues to be appropriate.

At December 31, 2009, the Corporation's asbestos-related liability
for pending and future claims was $839 million.

In November 2010, the Corporation requested ARPC to review the
Corporation's historical asbestos claim and resolution activity
and determine the appropriateness of updating its December 2008
study. In response to that request, ARPC reviewed and analyzed
data through October 31, 2010. The resulting study, completed by
ARPC in December 2010, stated that the undiscounted cost of
resolving pending and future asbestos-related claims against UCC
and Amchem, excluding future defense and processing costs, through
2025 was estimated to be between $744 million and $835 million. As
in its earlier studies, ARPC provided estimates for a longer
period of time in its December 2010 study, but also reaffirmed its
prior advice that forecasts for shorter periods of time are more
accurate than those for longer periods of time.

In December 2010, based on ARPC's December 2010 study and the
Corporation's own review of the asbestos claim and resolution
activity, the Corporation decreased its asbestos-related liability
for pending and future claims to $744 million, which covered the
15-year period ending 2025, excluding future defense and
processing costs. The reduction of $54 million was shown as
"Asbestos-related credit" in the consolidated statements of
income. At December 31, 2010, the asbestos-related liability for
pending and future claims was $728 million.

In November 2011, the Corporation requested ARPC to review the
Corporation's 2011 asbestos claim and resolution activity and
determine the appropriateness of updating its December 2010 study.
In response to that request, ARPC reviewed and analyzed data
through October 31, 2011. In January 2012, ARPC stated that an
update of its study would not provide a more likely estimate of
future events than the estimate reflected in its study of the
previous year and, therefore, the estimate in that study remained
applicable. Based on the Corporation's own review of the asbestos
claim and resolution activity and ARPC's response, the Corporation
determined that no change to the accrual was required. At December
31, 2011, the Corporation's asbestos-related liability for pending
and future claims was $668 million.

At December 31, 2011, approximately 18 percent of the recorded
liability related to pending claims and approximately 82 percent
related to future claims. At December 31, 2010, approximately 21
percent of the recorded liability related to pending claims and
approximately 79 percent related to future claims.

Union Carbide Corporation is a chemicals and polymers company that
has been a wholly owned subsidiary of The Dow Chemical Company
since 2001.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide's Insurance Suit Still Pending
-------------------------------------------------------------
Union Carbide Corporation's lawsuit against certain insurers
seeking to confirm its rights to insurance for various asbestos
claims remain pending in New York, according to the Company's
February 15, 2012, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

At December 31, 2002, the Corporation increased the receivable for
insurance recoveries related to its asbestos liability to $1.35
billion, substantially exhausting its asbestos product liability
coverage. The insurance receivable related to the asbestos
liability was determined by the Corporation after a thorough
review of applicable insurance policies and the 1985 Wellington
Agreement, to which the Corporation and many of its liability
insurers are signatory parties, as well as other insurance
settlements, with due consideration given to applicable
deductibles, retentions and policy limits, and taking into account
the solvency and historical payment experience of various
insurance carriers. The Wellington Agreement and other agreements
with insurers are designed to facilitate an orderly resolution and
collection of the Corporation's insurance policies and to resolve
issues that the insurance carriers may raise.

In September 2003, the Corporation filed a comprehensive insurance
coverage case, now proceeding in the Supreme Court of the State of
New York, County of New York, 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"). The Insurance Litigation was filed against insurers
that were not signatories to the Wellington Agreement and/or did
not otherwise have agreements in place with the Corporation
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 Corporation 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. The Insurance Litigation
is ongoing.

The Corporation's receivable for insurance recoveries related to
its asbestos liability was $40 million at December 31, 2011 and
$50 million at December 31, 2010. At December 31, 2011 and 2010,
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.

In addition to the receivable for insurance recoveries related to
its asbestos liability, the Corporation had receivables for
defense and resolution costs submitted to insurance carriers that
have settlement agreements in place regarding their asbestos-
related insurance coverage.

The Corporation expenses defense costs as incurred. The pretax
impact for defense and resolution costs, net of insurance, was $88
million in 2011, $73 million in 2010 and $58 million in 2009, and
was reflected in "Cost of sales" in the consolidated statements of
income.

After a review of its insurance policies, with due consideration
given to applicable deductibles, retentions and policy limits,
after taking into account the solvency and historical payment
experience of various insurance carriers; existing insurance
settlements; and the advice of outside counsel with respect to the
applicable insurance coverage law relating to the terms and
conditions of its insurance policies, the Corporation continues to
believe that its recorded receivable for insurance recoveries from
all insurance carriers is probable of collection.

Union Carbide Corporation is a chemicals and polymers company that
has been a wholly owned subsidiary of The Dow Chemical Company
since 2001.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: "Parsons" Suit Vs. RJR Tobacco Remains Stayed
--------------------------------------------------------------
In Parsons v. A C & S, Inc., a case filed in February 1998 in
Circuit Court, Ohio County, West Virginia, the plaintiff sued
asbestos manufacturers, U.S. cigarette manufacturers, including
Reynolds American Inc.'s subsidiaries R. J. Reynolds Tobacco
Company and Brown & Williamson Holdings, Inc., and parent
companies of U.S. cigarette manufacturers, including RJR, seeking
to recover $1 million in compensatory and punitive damages
individually and an unspecified amount for the class in both
compensatory and punitive damages. The class was brought on behalf
of persons who allegedly have personal injury claims arising from
their exposure to respirable asbestos fibers and cigarette smoke.
The plaintiffs allege that Mrs. Parsons' use of tobacco products
and exposure to asbestos products caused her to develop lung
cancer and to become addicted to tobacco. The case has been stayed
pending a final resolution of the plaintiffs' motion to refer
tobacco litigation to the judicial panel on multi-district
litigation filed in In Re: Tobacco Litigation in the Supreme Court
of Appeals of West Virginia.

In December 2000, three defendants, Nitral Liquidators, Inc.,
Desseaux Corporation of North American and Armstrong World
Industries, filed bankruptcy petitions in the U.S. Bankruptcy
Court for the District of Delaware, In re Armstrong World
Industries, Inc. Pursuant to section 362(a) of the Bankruptcy
Code, Parsons is automatically stayed with respect to all
defendants.

No further asbestos-related updates were reported in the Company's
February 15, 2012, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

Reynolds American Inc., referred to as RAI, is a holding company
whose operating subsidiaries include the second largest cigarette
manufacturer in the United States, R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company;
the second largest smokeless tobacco products manufacturer in the
United States, American Snuff Company, LLC, referred to as
American Snuff Co.; the manufacturer of the fastest growing super-
premium cigarette brand, Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company, Inc.
referred to as SFNTC; and Niconovum AB.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Kemper Corp. Reserves $52.6MM at Dec. 31
---------------------------------------------------------
In estimating Kemper Corporation's Property and Casualty Insurance
Reserves, the Company's actuaries exercise professional judgment
and must consider, and are influenced by, many variables that are
difficult to quantify. Accordingly, the process of estimating and
establishing the Company's Property and Casualty Insurance
Reserves is inherently uncertain and the actual ultimate net cost
of claims may vary materially from the estimated amounts reserved.
The reserving process is particularly imprecise for claims
involving asbestos, environmental matters, construction defect and
other emerging and/or long-tailed exposures that may not be
discovered or reported until years after the insurance policy
period has ended.

Property and Casualty Insurance Reserves related to the Company's
Discontinued Operations are predominantly long-tailed exposures,
of which $52.6 million was related to asbestos, environmental
matters and construction defect exposures at December 31, 2011,
according to the Company's February 17, 2012, Form 10-K filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2011.

Kemper Corporation is a financial services provider. The Kemper
family of companies specializes in property and casualty insurance
and life and health insurance products for individuals, families,
and small businesses.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Rogers Corp. Faces 242 Pending Claims at Dec. 31
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Rogers Corporation is facing 242 pending asbestos claims as of
December 31, 2011, according to the Company's February 17, 2012,
Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

The Company did not mine, mill, manufacture or market asbestos;
rather it made a limited number of products which contained
encapsulated asbestos.  Such products were provided to industrial
users.  The Company stopped manufacturing these products in the
late 1980s.

The Company has been named in asbestos litigation primarily in
Illinois, Pennsylvania and Mississippi.  As of December 31, 2011,
there were 242 pending claims compared to 194 pending claims at
December 31, 2010.  Of the 242 claims pending as of December 31,
2011, 68 claims do not specify the amount of damages sought, 171
claims cite jurisdictional amounts, and only three (3) claims
(less than 2.0% of the total pending claims) specify the amount of
damages sought not based on jurisdictional requirements. Of these
three (3) claims, one (1) claim alleges compensatory and punitive
damages of $20 million each; one (1) claim alleges compensatory
damages of $65 million and punitive damages of $60 million and one
(1) claim alleges compensatory and punitive damages of $1 million
each.  These three (3) claims name between ten (10) and 109
defendants.  However, the Company does not believe that this data
allows for an accurate assessment of the relation that the amount
of alleged damages claimed might bear to the ultimate disposition
of these cases.

The Company continues to believe that a majority of the claimants
in pending cases will not be able to demonstrate exposure or loss.
This belief is based in large part on two factors: the limited
number of asbestos-related products manufactured and sold by the
Company and the fact that the asbestos was encapsulated in such
products.  In addition, even at sites where the presence of an
alleged injured party can be verified during the same period those
products were used, the Company's liability cannot be presumed
because even if an individual contracted an asbestos-related
disease, not everyone who was employed at a site was exposed to
the asbestos-containing products that the Company manufactured.
Based on these and other factors, the Company has and will
continue to vigorously defend itself in asbestos-related matters.

For the year ended December 31, 2011, the Company was able to have
120 claims dismissed and settled 8 claims.  For the year ended
December 31, 2010, 162 claims were dismissed and 21 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
approximately $8.1 million in 2011, compared to $6.8 million in
2010.

National Economic Research Associates, Inc. (NERA), a consulting
firm with expertise in the field of evaluating mass tort
litigation asbestos bodily-injury claims, has historically been
engaged to assist the Company in projecting its future asbestos-
related liabilities and defense costs with regard to pending
claims and future unasserted claims.

Marsh Risk Consulting (Marsh), a consulting firm with expertise in
the field of evaluating insurance coverage and the likelihood of
recovery for asbestos-related claims, has historically been
engaged to work with the Company to project its insurance coverage
for asbestos-related claims.

Based on the assumptions employed by and the report prepared by
NERA and other variables, NERA and Marsh updated their respective
analyses for year end 2011 and the estimated liability and
estimated insurance recovery, for the five-year period through
2016, is $28.8 million and $28.4 million, respectively.  As of
December 31, 2010, the estimated liability and estimated insurance
recovery, for the five-year period through 2015, was $29.7 million
and $29.3 million respectively.

Rogers Corporation (NYSE: ROG) is an American specialty materials
company with headquarters located in Rogers, Connecticut. The
company was founded in 1832 as a paper mill in Manchester,
Connecticut, and now has manufacturing and sales office locations
in North America, Asia, and Europe. Rogers Corporation has seven
divisions, including the Advanced Circuit Materials division,
which offers high-frequency printed circuit board laminates and
flexible circuit laminates; the High Performance Foams division;
and the Durel division, which offers electroluminescent lighting
and drivers.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Navigators' Net Reserves Were $15MM at Dec. 31
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Navigators Group, Inc.'s net reserves for asbestos exposure
for the year ended December 31, 2011, were $15,089,000, according
to the Company's February 17, 2012, Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2011.

The Navigators Group, Inc.'s exposure to asbestos liability
principally stems from marine liability insurance written on an
occurrence basis during the mid-1980s. In general, its
participation on such risks is in the excess layers, which
requires the underlying coverage to be exhausted prior to coverage
being triggered in its layer. In many instances the Company is one
of many insurers who participate in the defense and ultimate
settlement of these claims, and it is generally a minor
participant in the overall insurance coverage and settlement.

The reserves for asbestos exposures as of December 31, 2011 are
for: (i) one large settled claim for excess insurance policy
limits exposed to a class action suit against an insured involved
in the manufacturing or distribution of asbestos products being
paid over several years (two other large settled claims were fully
paid in 2007); (ii) other insureds not directly involved in the
manufacturing or distribution of asbestos products, but that have
more than incidental asbestos exposure for their purchase or use
of products that contained asbestos; and (iii) attritional
asbestos claims that could be expected to occur over time.
Substantially all of the Company's asbestos liability reserves are
included in its marine loss reserves.

The table shows the Company's gross and net loss and LAE reserves
for its asbestos exposures:

                                        Year Ended Dec. 31, 2011
                                        ------------------------
Gross of Reinsurance
    Beginning gross reserves                        $20,513,000
    Incurred loss & LAE                                 128,000
    Calendar year payments                              811,000
                                                    -----------
    Ending gross reserves                            19,830,000
                                                    -----------

Gross case loss reserves                             13,565,000
Gross IBNR loss reserves                              6,265,000
                                                    -----------
    Ending gross reserves                            19,830,000
                                                    -----------

Net of Reinsurance
    Beginning net reserves                           15,161,000
    Incurred loss & LAE                                (780,000)
    Calendar year payments                             (708,000)
                                                    -----------
    Ending net reserves                              15,089,000
                                                    -----------

Net case loss reserves                                9,029,000
Net IBNR loss reserves                                6,060,000
                                                    -----------
    Ending net reserves                             $15,089,000
                                                    ===========

The Navigators Group, Inc., is an international insurance company
focusing on specialty products within the overall property and
casualty insurance market. The Company's product line is ocean
marine insurance. It has also developed specialty niches in
professional liability insurance, as well as other specialty
insurance lines, such as commercial primary and excess liability.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell Remains Liable Under NARCO Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Like many other industrial companies, Honeywell International
Inc., is a defendant in personal injury actions related to
asbestos.  The Company did not mine or produce asbestos, nor did
it make or sell insulation products or other construction
materials that have been identified as the primary cause of
asbestos related disease in the vast majority of claimants.

Honeywell's predecessors owned North American Refractories Company
(NARCO) from 1979 to 1986. NARCO produced refractory products
(bricks and cement used in high temperature applications). The
Company sold the NARCO business in 1986 and agreed to indemnify
NARCO with respect to personal injury claims for products that had
been discontinued prior to the sale (as defined in the sale
agreement). NARCO retained all liability for all other claims.
NARCO and/or Honeywell are defendants in asbestos personal injury
cases asserting claims based upon alleged exposure to NARCO
asbestos-containing products. Claimants consist largely of
individuals who allege exposure to NARCO asbestos-containing
refractory products in an occupational setting. These claims, and
the filing of subsequent claims, have been stayed continuously
since January 4, 2002, the date on which NARCO sought bankruptcy
protection.

NARCO's asbestos-related liabilities at December 31, 2011, were
$1,123 million.

In November 2007, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western
District of Pennsylvania confirmed NARCO's Third Amended Plan of
Reorganization (NARCO Plan of Reorganization). All challenges to
the NARCO Plan of Reorganization were fully resolved in the third
quarter of 2010. The NARCO Plan of Reorganization cannot become
effective, however, until unrelated issues pertaining to certain
NARCO affiliates which are pending in Bankruptcy Court are
resolved. Honeywell expects that the stay enjoining litigation
against NARCO and Honeywell will remain in effect until the
effective date of the NARCO Plan of Reorganization.

In connection with NARCO's bankruptcy filing, Honeywell agreed to
certain obligations which will be triggered upon the effective
date of the NARCO Plan of Reorganization. Honeywell will provide
NARCO with $20 million in financing and simultaneously forgive
such indebtedness. Honeywell will also pay $40 million to NARCO's
former parent company and $16 million to certain asbestos
claimants whose claims were resolved during the pendency of the
NARCO bankruptcy proceedings.

When the NARCO Plan of Reorganization becomes effective, in
connection with its implementation, a federally authorized 524(g)
trust ("NARCO Trust") will be established for the evaluation and
resolution of all existing and future NARCO asbestos claims. When
the NARCO Trust is established, both Honeywell and NARCO will be
entitled to a permanent channeling injunction barring all present
and future individual actions in state or federal courts and
requiring all asbestos related claims based on exposure to NARCO
products to be made against the Trust.

Once the NARCO Trust is established and operational, Honeywell
will be obligated to fund NARCO asbestos claims submitted to the
trust which qualify for payment under the Trust Distribution
Procedures, subject to annual caps up to $150 million in any year,
provided, however, that the first $100 million of claims processed
through the NARCO Trust (the "Initial Claims Amount") will not
count against the first year annual cap and any unused portion of
the Initial Claims Amount will roll over to subsequent years until
fully utilized.

Once the NARCO Trust is established and operational, Honeywell
will also be responsible for these funding obligations which are
not subject to the annual cap: a) previously approved payments due
to claimants pursuant to settlement agreements reached during the
pendency of the NARCO bankruptcy proceedings which provide that a
portion of these settlements is to be paid by the NARCO Trust,
which amounts are estimated at $130 million and are expected to be
paid during the first year of trust operations; and b) payments
due to claimants pursuant to settlement agreements reached during
the pendency of the NARCO bankruptcy proceedings that provide for
the right to submit claims to the NARCO Trust subject to
qualification under the terms of the settlement agreements and
Trust Distribution Procedures criteria, which amounts are
estimated at $150 million and are expected to be paid during the
first two years of trust operations.

The estimated liability for future NARCO asbestos claims is $743
to $961 million.

In 2006, Travelers Casualty and Insurance Company ("Travelers")
filed a declaratory judgment action in the Supreme Court of New
York, County of New York against Honeywell and other insurance
carriers that provide coverage for NARCO asbestos claims, seeking
a declaration regarding coverage obligations for NARCO asbestos
claims under high excess insurance coverage issued by Travelers
and the other insurance carriers. The other insurance carriers
asserted cross claims against Honeywell seeking declarations
regarding their coverage obligations for NARCO asbestos claims
under high excess insurance coverage issued by them. Since then,
the Company has entered into settlement agreements resolving all
NARCO-related asbestos coverage issues with certain of these
insurance carriers, including Travelers. Approximately $57 million
of remaining unsettled coverage is included in the Company's
NARCO-related insurance receivable at December 31, 2011. Honeywell
believes it is entitled to the coverage at issue and expects to
prevail in this matter. In 2007, Honeywell prevailed on a critical
choice of law issue concerning the appropriate method of
allocating NARCO-related asbestos liabilities to triggered
policies. The plaintiffs appealed and the trial court's ruling was
upheld by the intermediate appellate court in 2009. Plaintiffs'
further appeal to the New York Court of Appeals, the highest court
in New York, was denied in October 2009. A related New Jersey
action brought by Honeywell has been dismissed, but all coverage
claims against plaintiffs have been preserved in the New York
action.

No further asbestos-related updates were reported in Honeywell's
February 17, 2012, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

Honeywell International Inc. is a diversified technology and
manufacturing company, serving customers worldwide with aerospace
products and services, control, sensing and security technologies
for buildings, homes and industry, turbochargers, automotive
products, specialty chemicals, electronic and advanced materials,
process technology for refining and petrochemicals, and energy
efficient products and solutions for homes, business and
transportation.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell's Bendix Unit Has $613MM Liabilities
---------------------------------------------------------------
Honeywell International, Inc.'s Bendix business recorded $613
million for asbestos-related liabilities at December 31, 2011,
according to the Company's February 17, 2012, Form 10-K filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2011.

Honeywell's Bendix friction materials (Bendix) business
manufactured automotive brake parts that contained chrysotile
asbestos in an encapsulated form. Claimants consist largely of
individuals who allege exposure to asbestos from brakes from
either performing or being in the vicinity of individuals who
performed brake replacements.

Bendix had 22,571 unresolved asbestos claims at December 31, 2011.
Of these unresolved claims, 4,943 are Mesothelioma and Other
Cancer Claims while 17,628 are Nonmalignant Claims.

Honeywell believes it has sufficient insurance coverage and
reserves to cover all pending Bendix related asbestos claims and
Bendix related asbestos claims estimated to be filed within the
next five years.

Honeywell International Inc. is a diversified technology and
manufacturing company, serving customers worldwide with aerospace
products and services, control, sensing and security technologies
for buildings, homes and industry, turbochargers, automotive
products, specialty chemicals, electronic and advanced materials,
process technology for refining and petrochemicals, and energy
efficient products and solutions for homes, business and
transportation.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Illinois Tool Continues to Defend Exposure Suits
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Illinois Tool Works Inc. continues to defend asbestos exposure
lawsuits, according to the Company's February 17, 2012, Form 10-K
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

Among the toxic tort cases in which the Company is a defendant,
the Company as well as its subsidiaries Hobart Brothers Company
and Miller Electric Mfg. Co., have been named, along with numerous
other defendants, in lawsuits alleging injury from exposure to
welding consumables. The plaintiffs in these suits claim
unspecified damages for injuries resulting from the plaintiffs'
alleged exposure to asbestos, manganese and/or toxic fumes in
connection with the welding process. Based upon the Company's
experience in defending these claims, the Company believes that
the resolution of these proceedings will not have a material
adverse effect on the Company's operating results, financial
position or cash flows. The Company has not recorded any
significant reserves related to these cases.

Illinois Tool Works Inc. is a multinational manufacturer of a
diversified range of industrial products and equipment with
operations in 58 countries.  The Company operates in eight
business segments: Transportation; Power Systems & Electronics;
Industrial Packaging; Food Equipment; Construction Products;
Polymers & Fluids; Decorative Surfaces, and All Other.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hershey Says Estimated Liability Not Material
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Hershey Company has a number of facilities that contain
varying amounts of asbestos in certain locations within the
facilities.  The Company's asbestos management program is
compliant with current applicable regulations. Current regulations
require that the Company handles or disposes of asbestos in a
special manner if such facilities undergo major renovations or are
demolished. Plans associated with the closure of a manufacturing
facility under the Next Century program may require the removal of
asbestos. The estimated liability associated with the possible
removal of asbestos from the facility is not material and is
included in the Company's estimates. With regard to other
facilities, the Company believes it does not have sufficient
information to estimate the fair value of any asset retirement
obligations related to those facilities.  The Company cannot
specify the settlement date or range of potential settlement dates
and, therefore, sufficient information is not available to apply
an expected present value technique.  The Company expects to
maintain the facilities with repairs and maintenance activities
that would not involve or require the removal of asbestos.

No further asbestos-related updates were reported in the Company's
February 17, 2012, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

The Hershey Company is a producer of chocolate in North America
and sugar confectionery products. The Company's principal product
groups include chocolate and sugar confectionery products; pantry
items, such as baking ingredients, toppings and beverages, and gum
and mint refreshment products.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: General Dynamics Continues to Defend Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
Various claims and other legal proceedings incidental to the
normal course of business are pending or threatened against
General Dynamics Corporation. These matters relate to such issues
as government investigations and claims, the protection of the
environment, asbestos-related claims and employee-related matters.
The nature of litigation is such that the Company cannot predict
the outcome of these matters. However, based on information
currently available, the Company believes any potential
liabilities in these proceedings, individually or in the
aggregate, will not have a material impact on its results of
operations, financial condition or cash flows.

No further asbestos-related updates were reported in the Company's
February 17, 2012, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

General Dynamics Corporation offers a portfolio of products and
services in business aviation; combat vehicles, weapons systems
and munitions; military and commercial shipbuilding, and
communications and information technology.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Delphi Automotive's ARO Were $3MM at Dec. 31
-------------------------------------------------------------
Delphi Automotive Plc's asset retirement obligations were $3
million at December 31, 2011, according to the Company's
February 17, 2012, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

Asset retirement obligations are recognized in accordance with
FASB ASC 410, Asset Retirement and Environmental Obligations.
Conditional retirement obligations have been identified primarily
related to asbestos abatement at certain sites. To a lesser
extent, conditional retirement obligations also exist at certain
sites related to the removal of storage tanks and polychlorinated
biphenyl disposal costs. Asset retirement obligations were $3
million and $4 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010,
respectively.

Delphi Automotive PLC is a global vehicle components manufacturer
and provides electrical and electronic, powertrain, safety and
thermal technology solutions to the global automotive and
commercial vehicle markets.  It is one of the largest vehicle
component manufacturers, and its customers include 24 of the 25
largest automotive original equipment manufacturers ("OEMs") in
the world.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Potlatch Can't Estimate Fair Value of Liability
----------------------------------------------------------------
Under ASC Topic 410-20, Potlatch Corporation must recognize a
liability and an asset equal to the fair value of its legal
obligation to perform asset retirement activities that are
conditional on a future event if the amount can be reasonably
estimated. The Company's primary obligations relate to asbestos
located within its manufacturing facilities and a landfill site.
The Company has recorded assets and corresponding liabilities that
are not material to its financial position or results of
operations. The Company has also identified situations that would
have likely resulted in the recognition of additional asset
retirement obligations, except for an inability to reasonably
estimate the fair value of the liability at this time. Most of
these situations relate to asbestos located within the Company's
manufacturing facilities where a settlement date or range of
settlement dates cannot be specified, so the Company is unable at
this time to apply present value calculations to appropriately
value an obligation. The Company reviews these obligations
annually, and any additional obligations recognized in the future
as more information becomes available are not expected to have a
material effect on its financial position, results of operations
or cash flows.

No further asbestos-related updates were reported in the Company's
February 17, 2012, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

Potlatch Corporation is a real estate investment trust. Through
the Company's wholly owned subsidiaries, it operates real estate
sales and development business, and five wood products
manufacturing facilities that produce lumber and plywood.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: ABB Says Effect of Obligations Not Significant
---------------------------------------------------------------
ABB Ltd.'s Combustion Engineering Inc. subsidiary (CE) was a
co-defendant in a large number of lawsuits claiming damage for
personal injury resulting from exposure to asbestos. A smaller
number of claims were also brought against the Company's former
Lummus subsidiary as well as against other entities of the
Company. Separate plans of reorganization for CE and Lummus, as
amended, were filed under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.
The CE plan of reorganization and the Lummus plan of
reorganization (collectively, the Plans) became effective on April
21, 2006 and August 31, 2006, respectively.

Under the Plans, separate personal injury trusts were created and
funded to settle future asbestos-related claims against CE and
Lummus and on the respective Plan effective dates, channeling
injunctions were issued pursuant to Section 524(g) of the U.S.
Bankruptcy Code under which all present and future asbestos-
related personal injury claims filed against the Company and its
affiliates and certain other entities that relate to the
operations of CE and Lummus are channeled to the CE Asbestos PI
Trust or the Lummus Asbestos PI Trust, respectively.

In December 2010, the Company made a payment of $25 million to the
CE Asbestos PI Trust and thereby discharged its remaining payment
obligations to the CE Asbestos PI Trust.

The effect of asbestos obligations on the Company's Consolidated
Income Statements was not significant for the year and three
months ended December 31, 2011 and 2010.  The effect of asbestos
obligations on the Company's Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
was not significant for the year and three months ended December
31, 2011, and amounted to $51 million and $26 million,
respectively, for the year and three months ended December 31,
2010.  The effect of asbestos obligations on the Company's
Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2011 and 2010, was not
significant, according to the Company's February 17, 2012, Form 6-
K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
month of February 2012.

ABB Ltd. is engaged in power and automation technologies. The
Company provides a range of products, systems, solutions and
services. Its power businesses focus on power transmission,
distribution and power-plant automation and serve electric, gas
and water utilities, as well as industrial and commercial
customers. It operates in approximately 100 countries and has
structured its global organization into four regions: Europe, the
Americas, Asia, and the Middle East and Africa (MEA).


ASBESTOS UPDATE: UK Hopes For Same Justice Demonstrated In Turin
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Mirror Online reports that campaigners have welcomed the
jailing for 16 years of two former owners of one of the world's
biggest asbestos firms.

But, at the end of a groundbreaking seven-year investigation and
prosecution in Italy, there is outrage that British victims have
never seen similar justice in UK.

Belgian baron Jean-Louis Marie Ghislain de Cartier de Marchienne,
90, and Swiss billionaire Stephan Schmidheiny, 64, were found
guilty on Feb. 13 of failing to install safety measures to protect
workers and residents at four Italian factories.

They were major shareholders in Eternit, which prosecutors blamed
for the deaths of over 2,000 people through contamination with
asbestos dust.

Asbestos kills 5,000 people in Britain every year but the epidemic
is not expected to peak until 2020 and could claim 200,000 lives.

The Mirror's Asbestos Timebomb campaign is calling for better
protection and faster compensation for asbestos victims.

Tony Whitston, of the UK's Asbestos Victims Support Group, said:
"At last, company executives who put profit before lives have been
held accountable and face jail sentences for the deaths of
thousands of asbestos victims.

"For the thousands of asbestos victims in the UK there is no
justice.

"Despite having the highest incidence of asbestos cancer
mesothelioma worldwide, not one executive of our large asbestos
producing companies have faced criminal charges for thousands of
asbestos deaths in the UK.

"They have, literally, got away with murder."

Kevin Johnson of John Pickering solicitors welcomed the verdict
but said: "Asbestos manufacturers here have not been held to
account and the insurance industry has brought a stream of test
cases to try to avoid their responsibilities and deny
compensation."

Adrian Budgen of law firm Irwin Mitchell said: "We hope that this
groundbreaking trial will help set a much needed precedent for
positive change here in the UK."

Around 1,500 Eternit victims and their relatives watched the
verdict live on big screens in the Italian city of Turin.

De Cartier and Schmidheiny were also ordered to pay over GBP100
million in compensation, including GBP25,000 for every victim.

Piero Ferraris, whose father died of lung cancer after working in
an Eternit factory for over 30 years, said: "This trial will go
down in history . . . but it will not bring my dad back."

Italian prosecutor Raffaele Guariniello said in his closing
speech: "I have never seen such a tragedy.  It affects workers and
inhabitants . . . it continues to cause deaths and will continue
to do so for who knows how long."

Italy's Health Minister Renato Balduzzi said: "It is a historic
verdict.  But the battle against asbestos does not end here.  It
is not a local battle, but a national one, a worldwide one."

Eternit went bankrupt before asbestos was banned in Italy in 1992
and defense lawyers denied the accused men had direct
responsibility for the Italian company.

Both men plan to appeal.

Dad Eric Findlow died from asbestos in his lungs after playing as
a child on waste dumps outside a killer factory that had links to
Eternit.

The owners of the plant had paid Eternit for a license to use its
method of producing asbestos cement.

Eric died of asbestos cancer mesothelioma in 2007 at the age of
66.

Daughter Helen Wilson, 37, said: "Nobody took responsibility for
what happened to our Dad.

"I know he would have been pleased about this court case but it
doesn't take away the fact that we have lost our Dad."

Eric, who was also exposed to asbestos as a painter and decorator,
said he felt cheated when he was diagnosed with cancer.

He added: "The waste tip had grey sheets.  I didn't know what
asbestos was at the time but, having worked with it since, I am
sure it was asbestos.

"We jumped on the sheets and broke them up.  I got dust on myself
as I played."

There's been no official study into how the Everite plant in
Eric's hometown of Widnes, Cheshire, affected people.

Dozens of workers at the plant, which has now closed, died of
asbestos-related disease.

Researcher Jason Addy, of Manchester Metropolitan University,
said: "Production dust often settled on neighboring houses.

"And asbestos products were dumped in open waste sites on or near
the factory."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Campaign For Liability Cap Law Reaches Minnesota
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Schrade of The Star Tribune reports that a national effort by
an $8 billion can manufacturer to shield itself from costly
asbestos lawsuits has reached the Minnesota Legislature,
triggering criticism from victims' advocates, who say the campaign
puts a single corporation's interests over people who have been
harmed by the deadly material.

Philadelphia-based Crown Holdings Inc., which has three
manufacturing plants in southern Minnesota, is seeking to change
state law to prevent more asbestos claims stemming from a 1960s
merger.

The company, also known as Crown Cork and Seal, says it has been
unfairly harmed by decades of asbestos legal fights that have cost
it $700 million in claims and lawyer fees and $1 billion in higher
borrowing costs.  "We're trying to protect our company from an
unfair situation," said William Gallagher, Crown's general
counsel.  "Blanket successor liability as posed to us is very
unfair."

Victims and plaintiffs' attorneys in Minnesota say the proposal,
which could get a Senate vote within this month, is the company's
attempt to change the rules to skirt its legal obligations.  They
say it would not only harm victims in Minnesota but set a
dangerous precedent for other corporations.

"Any individual such as yourself or a corporation, if they make a
mistake, they ought to pay for their mistake," said Michael
Sieben, a plaintiff's lawyer whose firm has handled thousands of
asbestos cases.

Crown has had about 150 asbestos cases in Minnesota in the past 15
years but only a couple in the past year, according to Sen. Mike
Parry, R-Waseca, lead sponsor of the bill.  Crown Cork officials
say a primary goal of the legislation is to help repair its
reputation with Wall Street.

"To me this is common sense," Parry said.  "How much do you make a
company pay that had no knowledge, that was not in the asbestos
business and never intended to be in the asbestos business?"

Health problems stemming from asbestos exposure can take decades
to be detected.  Lawsuits related to asbestos comprise the
longest-running mass litigation effort in U.S. history, with legal
costs for businesses and insurers of $70 billion, according to a
Rand Corp. report from 2002.

Over the past decade, Crown has paid lobbyists in states across
the country to help cap its liability -- in essence exempting it
from future lawsuits.  The company's argument, that it's an
innocent successor, has gained traction in 15 states where the
legislation has passed, including Wisconsin, North Dakota and
South Dakota.

The company has been helped by the American Legislative Exchange
Council (ALEC), a business-friendly group that helps craft model
legislation for use in legislatures across the country.  Minnesota
is one of five states considering the proposal this year.

Crown's 1963 merger involved a rival with a separate manufacturing
operation that made insulation containing asbestos.  Under
Minnesota law, the merger left Crown with both the assets and
legal liabilities of its acquisition, even though Crown never
directly manufactured asbestos.  It sold the portion of the
company that manufactured the material within months after the
purchase.

Even though it doesn't mention Crown Cork by name, the bill
narrowly targets the company's interests.  Still, the legislation
could apply to other successor companies in acquisitions that took
place before 1972, but only if they didn't manufacture asbestos
after the merger.

The bill specifies 1972 because that's the period when the federal
government started regulating asbestos as a health risk, said Mark
Behrens, a Washington, D.C., attorney who has advised Crown and
works with ALEC on tort reform.

"A company like Crown that merged in the early 1960s had no idea
that its little $7 million deal would eventually result in $700
million in litigation costs," Behrens said.

Opponents say that's not quite right.  They say that the company
Crown bought had asbestos-related workers' compensation claims as
early as the 1950s and 1960s, and that the health concerns related
to asbestos were known even back then.

Sue Vento, the widow of former U.S. Rep. Bruce Vento, who died in
2000 from an asbestos-linked disease unrelated to Crown, said she
fears the bill could be tweaked later to strip all forms of
corporate responsibility for asbestos exposure.  "It's a bad idea
because it doesn't consider the interests of people who end up
with these illnesses, nor does it consider the interest of their
families," Vento said.

The Senate Judiciary and Public Safety Committee approved the bill
earlier this month in a party-line vote.  It is expected to pass
the Republican-controlled Legislature with relative ease.  Both
sides have already started asking Gov. Mark Dayton for his
support.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Pacific Faces Lawsuit From 7 Former Workers
------------------------------------------------------------------
Michelle Keahey of The Southeast Texas Record reports several
former railroad workers have filed a lawsuit against Union
Pacific, claiming they were exposed to asbestos and asbestos-
containing products for years.

Larry G. Moore, Raymond M. Edwards, Prince A. Hardin, Willie D.
Scroggins, Robert L. Vineyard, Don L. Ward and Jerry G. Woody
filed suit against Union Pacific Railroad Co. on Feb. 8 in the
Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont Division.

The men were employed as brakeman, switchman or conductor from
various times between 1971 until 2011.

Union Pacific is accused of violating the Federal Employer's
Liability Act and accused of negligence for failing to provide a
safe place to work and for continuing to use asbestos-containing
products despite knowledge regarding the health hazards associated
with occupational exposure.

Union Pacific is also accused of failing to warn its employees
regarding the presence of asbestos and asbestos-containing
products, failing to provide proper respirators, failing to
provide asbestos medical examinations and to medically monitor the
plaintiffs, and for violating its own policies regarding asbestos-
containing materials.

Union Pacific violated the Locomotive Boiler Inspection Act for
failing to provide locomotives and its parts which were in proper
and safe condition, the lawsuit alleges.

Union Pacific is sued as successor-in-interest to the Southern
Pacific Transportation Co., the St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co.
also known as Cotton Belt, the Missouri Pacific Railroad Co., the
Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Co. and the Chicago & Northwestern
Transportation Co.

The men are asking the court for an award of medical expenses,
mental anguish, physical pain and suffering, fear of cancer,
physical impairment, court costs and interest.

The plaintiffs are represented by J. Kirkland Sammons of Sammons &
Berry PC in Houston.  A jury trial is requested.

U.S. District Judge Ron Clark is assigned to the case.

Case No. 1:12-cv-00061


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Winnipeg NDP MP Slams Chrysotile Trade Supporters
------------------------------------------------------------------
CBC News Canada reports that Winnipeg NDP MP Pat Martin once
worked in an asbestos mine and often speaks out against the
promotion of chrysotile asbestos as a safe product for Canada to
export.

He's also fond of expressing his opinions using colorful language.

Mr. Martin used his member's statement prior to question period in
the House of Commons on Feb. 13 to condemn the Harper government's
support for Quebec's struggling asbestos industry.

Martin's outburst follows a CBC investigation into allegations
that a major 40-year study on asbestos safety by a group of
scientists at McGill University contained manipulated data.  The
Chrysotile Institute -- a lobby arm funded by, overseen and
closely associated with both Liberal and Conservative governments
-- used the findings of the McGill study to market Canadian
asbestos overseas.

Here's the full text of Martin's statement:

    "Mr. Speaker, the best science money can buy has been used to
justify and defend exporting a made-in-Canada asbestos epidemic
throughout the developing world, but the Conservatives and their
Asbestos Institute can no longer hide behind the phoney research
they bought and paid for.

    I rise today to condemn the Conservatives for their boosterism
and cheerleading of the asbestos cartel and the human misery it
causes.  I condemn the scientists and researchers who compromise
their professional integrity and the reputation of our great
university.

    Dante should have reserved a special level of hell for the
charlatans and the fraudsters of the government-sponsored Asbestos
Institute who knowingly and willingly conspired to hide the
effects of asbestos exposure from the world.

    I denounce them in the strongest possible terms.  I pray that
some day their treachery and deceit leads to criminal charges of
corporate manslaughter so that they may face justice in this world
as well.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: McComb Lawyers Appeal Fraud Ruling
---------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press reports that two Mississippi plaintiffs
lawyers, including a former state lawmaker, have appealed a
verdict that they committed fraud during an asbestos lawsuit they
filed in 2001.

A federal jury in Mississippi decided in 2010 that the lawyers
should pay Illinois Central Railroad Co. $420,000 in damages.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has scheduled oral arguments
in the case for March 6 at the University of Houston Law Center in
Houston, Texas.

Illinois Central claimed McComb attorneys William Guy and Thomas
Brock knew their clients lied about their involvement in an
earlier landmark asbestos case when they were questioned during
the railroad lawsuit.

Guy is a well-known attorney who served two terms as a state
representative in the late 1960s and 1970s before moving to the
Senate for one term.  He ran unsuccessfully for lieutenant
governor as a Democrat in 1995.

Guy and Brock claimed during trial that they didn't know their
clients had been plaintiffs in the earlier asbestos litigation --
Cosey v. E.D. Bullard -- one of several lawsuits with huge
verdicts in the 1990s that led to calls for tort reform in
Mississippi.

Illinois Central said it would not have settled with two former
employees -- Warren Turner, Jr. for $120,000 in 2002 and Willie
Harried for $90,000 in 2003 -- if the company had known they had
already been involved in the other asbestos lawsuit.

The case was a mass litigation filed in 1995 in Jefferson County
that grew to represent hundreds of people from around the country
who claimed asbestos made them sick.  Twelve of the plaintiffs
went to trial and were awarded $48.5 million.  Companies soon
agreed to settlements with other plaintiffs out fear of being hit
with another big verdict.

The railroad argued that Harried and Turner had both testified
that they each received several hundred thousand dollars in the
Cosey case.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Class Action Lawyers Contribute to Candidate
-------------------------------------------------------------
Ann Maher of The Madison / St. Clair Record reports asbestos and
class action attorneys are contributing in a big way to the
campaign of Fifth District Appellate Court candidate Judy Cates of
Swansea.

Last month, Cates, a Democrat, received $10,000 from the Simmons
law firm of Alton.  She also received a $5,000 contribution from
Korein Tillery of St. Louis and a separate $1,000 contribution
from Korein Tillery attorney Christine Moody, Esq. --
CMoody@koreintillery.com

Cates also received recent donations from UA Local 160 Plumbers &
Pipefitters and Threlkeld Investment Fund of $1,000 apiece.

She funded a previous primary campaign in 2008 with more than
$800,000 in personal loans or contributions from her law firm in a
failed bid for the Democratic nomination to the Fifth District.
In that election, James Wexstten of Mount Vernon won the primary
battle by a 53-47 percent margin and, unopposed in the general
election, went on to win the seat.

This time, Cates is running unopposed in the March 20 primary
election, and will face Republican Stephen McGlynn, of Belleville,
in the November general election.

Cates is a former president of the Illinois Trial Lawyers
Association.

McGlynn, who is currently an appointed St. Clair County circuit
judge, also is running unopposed in the primary.

To date, McGlynn has self-funded his campaign through loans or
donations totaling nearly $20,000, according to records available
at the Illinois State Board of Elections.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Illegally Dumped Toxic Waste Found In Haresfield
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This Is Gloucestershire reports that asbestos waste has been found
dumped illegally on Haresfield Beacon in the latest of a series of
incidents of illegal fly tipping at beauty spots discovered by
National Trust rangers.

The National Trust, which had to pay to have the area cleared and
made safe again, is appealing to anybody who spots illegal dumping
to report it to the police.

In the last few weeks, the Trust has had to deal with nine
incidents at Haresfield where rubbish has been dumped -- and in
each case has had to pay for it to be disposed of properly.

"The asbestos was our biggest concern because it needs to be
disposed of carefully by licensed contractors with the correct
safety equipment," said David Armstrong, Gloucestershire
Countryside head ranger.

"It will cost us well over GBP1,000 just to deal with that one
incident, money which we would rather spend on improving the
facilities for visitors to Haresfield and our other work on caring
for the wildlife on these wonderful places,'

"If anybody does see any vehicles illegally dumping rubbish they
should note the registration number and call the police."

Every time rubbish is dumped on National Trust land rangers have
to be diverted from their other work to clean it up and the Trust
is charged for having it correctly disposed of.

It usually takes just six weeks for the Trust rangers to fill a
skip from the rubbish they collect around the county.

"Haresfield is a really lovely place and we want to keep it like
that and make it even better for the wildlife and many people who
visit.  We have limited resources in Gloucestershire and we would
far rather spend it on improving these special places rather than
on cleaning them up and repairing damage caused," said Mr.
Armstrong.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Miles for Meso Run Raises $50,000 Research Fund
----------------------------------------------------------------
More than 300 runners, walkers and advocates participated in the
3rd Annual South Florida Miles for Meso 8K Run & 2 Mile Tribute
Walk on Feb. 12 to support individuals diagnosed with
mesothelioma, a rare cancer caused by asbestos exposure.

"We had a great crowd and an impressive representation of running
talent who helped us spread awareness of mesothelioma throughout
the streets of Boca Raton," said Race Director Larry Davis who is
also a mesothelioma survivor.  "Early estimates show the race
generated tens of thousands of dollars for the Mesothelioma
Applied Research Foundation."

The race's top runners finished seconds apart.  John Reback, 41,
took first place overall with a time of 27:44.5.  A second behind
Reback was Lemos Emiliano, 43, with a time of 27:45.7.  The female
overall winners were Stephanie Stevens, 43, with a time of
32:52.3; Nichole Hillstrom, 32, of Ft. Lauderdale, with a time of
32:53.4; and Rachelle Ginsburg, 33, with a time of 32:55.6.
Overall race results are available on the Accuchip Race Timing
website.

"Thank you to everyone who worked hard to help me organize such a
successful event," Davis said.  "I'm looking forward to giving the
Meso Foundation a nice check."

Cumulatively, the South Florida Miles for Meso race has raised
nearly $50,000 for mesothelioma research.  Additional donations
for this year's race will be accepted through Feb. 19.  For more
information about making a donation, contact Davis at,
mesosurvivor@aol.com

Every year, 3,000 new Americans are diagnosed with mesothelioma, a
rare cancer caused by asbestos exposure, which has no cure.  Miles
for Meso, nationally sponsored by the Simmons Law Firm, is a
nationwide effort by runners, survivors, patients, their families,
advocates and medical experts to start a conversation about
mesothelioma and the need for research.

"We are proud to support Miles for Meso events around the
country," said John Simmons, chairman of the Simmons Firm.  "The
events have not only raised a significant amount for mesothelioma
research, but they've brought the mesothelioma community together
and allowed us to explain the dangers of asbestos exposure in our
own local communities."

Visit milesformeso.org to learn more about how the mesothelioma
community is running toward a cure.

                   About the Simmons Firm

The Simmons Firm, headquartered in Alton, Ill., is one of the
country's leading asbestos and mesothelioma litigation firms.
With offices in Illinois, Missouri and California, the firm has
represented thousands of patients and families affected by
mesothelioma in every state.  The Simmons Firm has pledged over
$20 million to cancer research and proudly supports mesothelioma
medical researchers throughout the country in order to find a
cure.  For more information about the Simmons Firm, visit
http://www.simmonsfirm.com/

                    About Miles for Meso

Miles for Meso, an initiative of the Simmons Mesothelioma
Foundation, was established in 2009 to raise funds and awareness
for mesothelioma, a rare cancer caused by asbestos exposure.
Nearly 3,000 new Americans develop this relatively unknown cancer
every year.  The charity has helped others host Miles for Meso
races in several states including Illinois, Missouri, Indiana,
Virginia, New York and Florida and raised nearly a quarter of a
million dollars for mesothelioma research.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Quebec Likely to Approve $58MM Loan Guaranty
-------------------------------------------------------------
Michelle Lalonde of The Montreal Gazette reports that the Quebec
government continues to favor a relaunch of the asbestos industry
-- despite a storm of recent controversy, including groundbreaking
criminal convictions of two European businessmen for causing
thousands of asbestos-related deaths, and far-reaching concerns
about the research upon which the province bases its pro-asbestos
policy.

Members of the anti-asbestos movement say the Canadian and Quebec
governments have long relied on questionable studies produced by
researchers at McGill University and elsewhere, funded by the
asbestos industry, to promote chrysotile asbestos as relatively
harmless if used safely.

McGill is conducting a preliminary review of the research of
professor emeritus John Corbett McDonald to determine whether a
full investigation should be called into whether some of that
research was influenced by the fact it was funded by the Quebec
Asbestos Mining Association.

The university called for the review in response to a letter of
complaint sent by dozens of scientists and academics from across
Canada and abroad, plus two televised documentaries that raised
questions about McDonald's research ethics and the actions of the
asbestos industry in general.

McGill has not responded to charges by the complainants that its
preliminary review is compromised by the fact that it is being
conducted by Rebecca Fuhrer, who chairs McGill's Department of
Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, where many of
McDonald's colleagues continue to work.

On Feb. 15, McGill spokesperson Julie Fortier said Fuhrer has no
comment and is continuing her review.

On Feb. 13, the former owner and a former director of a bankrupt
Italian company that mined asbestos and made asbestos-reinforced
cement were each sentenced to 16 years in prison after an Italian
court found them criminally responsible for the deaths of more
than 3,000 people by failing to comply with safety regulations.

Swiss billionaire Stephan Schmidheiny, the former owner of
Eternit, and Jean-Louis de Cartier de Marchienne of Belgium were
ordered to pay $39,000 in damages to relatives of people killed by
asbestos-related diseases and $46,000 for every sick person, as
well as damages to three municipalities where Eternit factories
and mines operated.

A spokesperson for Balcorp Ltd., the Westmount company leading a
consortium of investors hoping to reopen the Jeffrey Mine in
Asbestos, told Canadian Press no such criminal prosecutions are
likely in Canada.  Canadian mines and factories that use asbestos
obey strict safety regulations, Guy Versailles said.

But critics are concerned that the reopening of the Jeffrey Mine
will put thousands of people in developing countries at risk of
deadly asbestos-related diseases such as lung cancer.

They note that asbestos-reinforced cement is used widely in
buildings and infrastructure in countries like India, where
workers and residents are likely to be left unprotected during
demolition, deterioration or renovation.

A spokesperson for Economic Development Minister Sam Hamad said
negotiations are continuing with the consortium that wants a $58
million loan guarantee from the Quebec government to reopen the
mine.

"We have a bias in favor of the project but there are conditions
(for the loan guarantee) -- notably they have to assure us that
the product will be used safely where it is sold," Harold Fortin
said.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Pumping Plant Officials Stress Safety
------------------------------------------------------
Pat Guth at The Mesothelioma Cancer Alliance reports that
officials at the Ira J. Chrisman Wind Gap Pumping Plant near
Bakersfield, Calif., which pushes water from Kern County over the
Grapevine and into Los Angeles, have said asbestos was discovered
there during routine maintenance at the plant.

"We were doing some maintenance to one of our large pumping units
and while we were disassembling some piping, an employee became
aware that he may have disturbed some asbestos," Field Division
Chief Jeff Said told the press.

On Feb. 15, the same officials announced that traces of asbestos
were also found at a second plant in Bakersfield, the John R.
Teerink Wheeler Ridge Pumping Plant.  According to a report aired
on KERO-TV 23, state inspectors headed to the Teerink Wheeler
Ridge Plant after the asbestos was found at the Chrisman location,
expecting that they might find the same.

Plant officials told the media that they took immediate steps to
protect employees and others from asbestos exposure during the
incident at Chrisman, recognizing the toxicity of the mineral,
which is a known carcinogen that causes lung problems.  The
facility was shut down promptly and the employee in question was
sent for testing.

Now, plant administrators say, they need to figure out just how
widespread asbestos might be at the facilities.  Once the
inventory is taken, the next step will be to determine how to best
clean up the asbestos material, which was once used in hundreds
and hundreds of building products, including pipe insulation.

But for now, there are signs on the buildings that warn others to
"keep out" unless they are wearing full protective gear to protect
them from exposure.

"We decided to get everybody out of the plant and post it to where
no one goes in without the proper personal protective equipment,
respirators, Tyvek suits etc," Said noted.

About 20 to 30 people normally work inside the contaminated
buildings at each location, but officials stressed that not all of
them were necessarily exposed to asbestos.  "Anybody that was in
that plant at that period of time feels that they want to be
tested for any exposure can be," Said explained.

Water department officials have continued to stress that they
sincerely believe that there was never any danger to the public or
to the water supply.  Clean up of the asbestos, including any
necessary asbestos removal, has begun, and as a further
precaution, the department will now test the Buena Vista Pumping
Plant near Taft, California.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Plaintiffs Ask Court to Declare Claims Standard
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jacqueline Palank at The Wall Street Journal reports that several
people seeking compensation for diseases and death due to asbestos
exposure on U.S. naval ships say those responsible for issuing
payment are unfairly discriminating against them because they are
not U.S. citizens.

The allegations form the basis for a newly filed lawsuit related
to the 1982 bankruptcy of Johns Manville Corp., a manufacturer of
building products that used Chapter 11 to resolve a wave of
litigation by people claiming to have become ill from the asbestos
in its products.

The latest suit, filed on Feb. 12 in Manhattan bankruptcy court,
concerns asbestos-related illnesses contracted by men from
England, Greece and Malta who worked on active-duty U.S. warships
docked in their home countries as well as in places like Hawaii's
Pearl Harbor and Virginia's Norfolk Naval Shipyard.  Some of the
men died from their illnesses, which include malignant
mesothelioma, asbestosis and gastrointestinal cancer.

Each man (or his representative) filed a claim against a trust set
up to compensate those who became ill from Johns Manville's
products.  The men say their illnesses resulted from their
exposure to the asbestos dust and fibers contained in Johns
Manville products found in the U.S. naval ships' boiler rooms,
engine rooms and other confined areas.  They say the trust has
wrongly concluded that their exposure occurred off U.S. soil.

"In the face of both domestic and international law to the
contrary, let alone common sense, the trust and the [trust's
claims processing company have each taken the position that active
naval warships of the United States Navy, while being repaired,
maintained, serviced, or refurbished at both civilian and military
shipyards of other nations and the United States, somehow lost
their sovereignty as territory of this country," the plaintiffs
wrote.

The plaintiffs say the trust's failure to designate their claims
as "standard" claims -- the designation given to U.S. and Canadian
creditors, where the bulk of Johns Manville's operations were
located -- represents discrimination based on their nationality:
"namely, that they are not U.S. citizens."

According to trust documents, holders of standard claims have to
prove their injuries meet certain criteria.  If they can show
this, they're entitled to a pre-set dollar amount.  But "non-
standard" creditors, as the plaintiffs are currently considered,
have to submit their claims for review and payment on an
individual basis.  The lawsuit specifically asks the bankruptcy
court to declare the plaintiffs' claims standard instead of non-
standard.

David Austern, general counsel for the Manville trust, told
Bankruptcy Beat that the trust opposes the plaintiffs' arguments
and their request.  He said the trust would likely file a motion
to dismiss the lawsuit.

Founded in 1858, the Denver-based Johns Manville emerged from
bankruptcy in 1988 and was acquired by Warren Buffett's Berkshire
Hathaway Inc. in 2001.

Court papers show that as of Sept. 30, the Manville trust has paid
out more than $4.2 billion to asbestos personal-injury creditors.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Contractor Faces $10,000 Fine, 1yr Imprisonment
----------------------------------------------------------------
WHEC.com reports that Kenneth J. Horan, a developer who failed to
properly remove asbestos from a renovation project in Irondequoit,
is facing one year in prison and a $10,000 fine.

Horan, 38, of Pittsford, pleaded guilty to violating the Clean Air
Act and National Emission Standards back in November.

Federal prosecutors say Horan supervised a renovation project on
4866 Culver Road in October 2009, and he failed to comply with
legally-required safety measures for removing asbestos.  They say
Horan hired unskilled and untrained workers to remove the
asbestos, risking exposure to the toxic substance.

Environmental testing at the site showed dangerous levels of a
form of asbestos, which means the public could have also been
exposed to the toxic substance.

The sentencing culminates a joint investigation by the
Environmental Protection Agency, the New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation Police and the Irondequoit Police
Department.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Contaminants Found in Sequim "Were Expected"
-------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Chew of the Peninsula Daily News reports that consultants for
the city of Sequim using ground-penetrating radar and boring into
the ground have uncovered two underground fuel tanks, but no leaks
were found at the property the city seeks to purchase as part of a
package for a new city hall and police station.

Asbestos also was found in the 1912 commercial and apartment
building owned by Serenity House at the corner of North Sequim
Avenue and West Cedar Street, which is the last piece needed for
city ownership of property to build new facilities.

The asbestos will be cleaned up without major cost, city officials
said.

"We knew there was a buried oil tank because it was in use" for
heating fuel, City Attorney Craig Ritchie said.

Another gas tank at the former corner store, now a beauty shop,
was decommissioned in the past and was not leaking, he said.

The asbestos was expected, Ritchie said, because of the age of the
building.

City Manager Steve Burkett said the city was merely performing its
"due diligence" to ensure that the existence of the fuel tanks or
asbestos was not too expensive to clean up.

The City Council discussed the issues Monday night, Feb. 13, while
looking over a proposed addendum to the real estate purchase
agreement with Serenity House.  The council went into closed
executive session to discuss the matter but did not take any
action when it reconvened in public.

The city is expected to close the deal on the property acquisition
as late as Feb. 28 or as early as Feb. 21, Ritchie said.

The City Council in late November approved the $1.25 million
purchase of a 22,000-square-foot property with existing buildings
at the corner of North Sequim Avenue and West Cedar Street for the
future site of a new city hall and police station.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: $30MM Loan Covers Hardie's Contribution to AICF
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Australian Associated Press reports that a compensation fund
that helps victims of asbestos-related diseases has been loaned
almost $30 million.

Building materials firm James Hardie makes regular contributions
to the Asbestos Injuries Compensation Fund (AICF), providing
payouts to those suffering illnesses such as mesothelioma.

New South Wales Attorney-General Greg Smith said James Hardie's
global operating cash flow, from which it makes the contributions,
had been affected by cyclical factors including a downturn in the
US housing construction market.

The $29.7 million short-term loan, provided by the NSW and Federal
Governments, is designed to ensure compensation payouts continue
in full.

It is part of a $320 million loan facility available to the
compensation fund, agreed upon in 2010.

"This funding provides financial stability to the AICF and peace
of mind to asbestos victims," Mr. Smith said in a statement on
Feb. 17.

Mr. Smith said the loan did not reduce James Hardie's obligations
under the funding agreement.

James Hardie has paid $426 million into the compensation fund
since it was established in 2005.

James Hardie is expected to pay a further $1 billion over the next
34 years.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Judge Rejects John Crane's Motion for Mistrial
---------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Dujardin of Daily Press, Newport News, Va., reports that a
Newport News Circuit Court jury went home on Feb. 16 without a
verdict at a trial in the case of a worker who came down with
asbestos-related cancer decades after being exposed to the deadly
fibers at Newport News Shipbuilding.

A seven-member jury began deliberating at about 1:30 p.m.
Thursday, Feb. 16, and asked to go home at about 4:30 p.m.  They
were set to return on Feb. 17.

John K. Bristow, 68, of Virginia Beach, who worked for decades at
the Newport News yard, died in March 2011, about a year after
coming down with mesothelioma, which doctors said he had likely
contracted at the shipyard in the 1960s and 1970s.

The lawsuit, against Chicago-area parts maker John Crane Inc., is
brought on behalf of Bristow's wife, Anne, and two sons.

The suit, which seeks about $9.95 million, asserts that John Crane
should have known about the dangers of asbestos and "failed in
their duty" to warn workers of the dangers.

One matter in dispute concerns which asbestos parts triggered
Bristow's cancer: Was it, in fact, the adding and removing of John
Crane gaskets that led him to breath in the deadly fibers?

In closing arguments on Feb. 16, Tom Burns, an attorney for John
Crane Inc., said asbestos was so widespread at the yard that
someone living near it likely breathed in fibers.

Mr. Burns said it was unfair to assign blame to John Crane, which
was one of many companies that made asbestos parts.  He said the
plaintiffs had failed to prove that the company had "substantially
contributed" to Bristow's death.

John Crane made gaskets, widely used as seals in the joints
between pieces of pipe -- such as in steam and exhaust systems.
John Crane also made "sheet packing" -- rolls of material cut out
by workers to form the gaskets.

Burns suggested that asbestos insulation -- which was also widely
used in shipboard pipes -- was a more likely culprit, asserting
that insulation creates more workplace hazards than gaskets.

Bobby Hatten -- RRHatten@pwhd.com -- the plaintiffs' lead attorney
with the Patten, Wornom, Hatten and Diamonstein law firm, said
that the asbestos came from a variety of sources, and that the
higher cumulative total dose that someone is exposed to, the
greater the risk.

John Crane, Hatten said, was among the chief sources of asbestos
at the yard, with Bristow breathing in the invisible fibers
without knowing it.

Much of the case came down to a battle of experts, with both sides
touting doctors and researchers.

On Feb. 16, Burns defended one of his defense witnesses as being
renowned in his field.  That came a day after Hatten had lambasted
the witness for changing his views and hiring himself out to the
asbestos industry.

Before Burns' closing argument, plaintiffs' attorney William Harty
-- wharty@pwhd.com -- addressed an issue that had come up earlier.

After Hatten's closing argument on Feb. 15, Burns had fervently
asked Circuit Judge David Pugh to order a mistrial.

Burns claimed that Hatten had told the jury that Burns chose not
to ask a key witness a question during the trial because he was
"afraid" of the answer.  Burns said the statement not only wasn't
true, but was such a concern that the trial should end after three
weeks and start over.

But on Feb. 16, Harty said a review of Hatten's closing argument
proves that Burns -- not Hatten -- was mistaken.

Harty said attorneys reviewed the trial transcripts, finding that
"it never came out of Mr. Hatten's lips" that Burns was "afraid"
to ask a witness anything.  In fact, Harty said, Burns' request
for a mistrial was the first time the language appeared.

On Feb. 16, Burns did not defend his earlier assertion, with
another John Crane lawyer standing to briefly argue that Hatten
had tried to leave the impression that Burns was afraid to ask.
But Pugh didn't buy it, saying that Hatten had not attempted to
mislead the jury.

Pugh had already rejected Burns' motion for a mistrial.  On Feb.
16, the judge said his earlier offer to tell the jury to disregard
that part of Hatten's closing argument "is not necessary."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Chrysotile Trader Preparing to Hire 60 Workers
---------------------------------------------------------------
Kristy Kirkup of CNEWS at CANOE.ca reports that an Ontario woman
whose husband died due to a painful asbestos-related illness
brought her crusade against the mined mineral to Ottawa on
Feb. 16.

Margaret Buist, 73, of Sarnia, has launched a postcard campaign to
urge federal and provincial leaders to stop "promoting" the
production of chrysotile asbestos.

Buist's 58-year-old husband died to an asbestos-related disease in
1996.  She said she promised her husband one thing during his
health battle -- when he cried, she didn't and when she cried, he
didn't.

"I don't know how we did what we did," she said, stating her
husband was exposed to asbestos while he worked for Imperial Oil.

Canada's last asbestos mine closed recently in Quebec due to
financial and environmental issues -- marking the end of a 130-
year-old industry -- but a Montreal asbestos trader is trying to
reopen a mine in Asbestos, Que.

Quebec Premier Jean Charest said he would grant a $58-million
government loan to support the project to kick start the failed
mine, but the deal has not been approved yet.

Montreal-based asbestos businessman Balit Chadha is hopeful the
project will be given the green light following a third-party
safety audit.  Chadha's company has already started reviewing
resumes to hire 60 workers.

Buist was joined at an Ottawa news conference on Feb. 16 by NDP
MPs Pat Martin and Francois Lapointe to protest Charest's support
for the project.

Martin said the Criminal Code of Canada should be amended to
address what he calls "murder" by the asbestos industry.

The federal government maintains it has promoted "safe use of
chrysotile domestically and internationally for more than 30
years" and scientific reviews confirm fibers can be used safely
under controlled conditions.

Martin said an inventory of asbestos is still available from the
last Canadian asbestos mine, but he said the industry will die "a
natural death" if reopening the Quebec mine is rejected.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: CPSM Alerts Clients on Leslie Controls Case
------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware has affirmed
the U.S. Bankruptcy Court's confirmation of Leslie Controls' pre-
negotiated Chapter 11 reorganization plan (In re: Leslie Controls,
Inc., Chapter 11 Case No. 10-12199 (CSS), First Amended Plan of
Reorganization of Leslie Controls Inc.  Under Chapter 11 of the
Bankruptcy Code), opening the way for those injured by asbestos to
pursue financial awards for their asbestos related deaths and
illnesses, such as mesothelioma and asbestosis.

A pre-negotiated plan enables the company to complete the Chapter
11 bankruptcy process more quickly and cost effectively than
conventional filing because details have been worked out and
agreements made that lead to less appeals and faster support by
all parties.

Leslie Controls was first founded in 1905 by J.S. Leslie and later
became a wholly owned subsidiary of CIRCOR International.
According to CIRCOR, Leslie Controls equipped U.S. navy ships with
asbestos containing gaskets and valves (asbestos components
purchased from an outside supplier.)

Asbestos is a naturally occurring yet highly toxic mineral that
was once used in thousands of industrial and construction products
because of its heat, fire and erosion resistant properties.
Exposure to asbestos causes fatal illnesses, such as mesothelioma,
asbestosis and cancer.  Anyone who develops an asbestos related
injury, many of whom are military and Navy veterans who worked
aboard ships, are entitled to file a mesothelioma lawsuit or
asbestos bankruptcy claim against those they can prove are
responsible for the products that caused their injury.

Leslie Controls sought bankruptcy protection in 2010 when,
according to court papers, there were more than 1300 pending
personal injury asbestos claims filed against them.  Following
U.S. law, all claims and litigation against Leslie Controls was
stayed while the bankruptcy was pending.  With approval of the
reorganization plan, asbestos claimants can now file for
compensation against the approved $75 million asbestos trust
funded by Leslie and CIRCOR.

Mesothelioma attorneys Clapper Patti Schweizer & Mason (CPSM), who
specialize in representing military and navy veterans diagnosed
with asbestos cancer and diseases, want to alert clients that
Leslie Controls reorganization plan has been approved.  Final
completion of the bankruptcy approval process, according to a
press release given by CIRCOR, is expected to "be completed in as
little as 120 days."

After such time, plaintiffs of Leslie asbestos cases will be able
to make claims against the established trust for compensation for
proven asbestos related deaths and illnesses.

                           *     *     *

Bloomberg posts that CIRCOR International, Inc., on Feb. 7
announced that the U.S. District Court for the District of
Delaware has affirmed the U.S. Bankruptcy Court's confirmation of
the amended pre-negotiated Chapter 11 reorganization plan filed by
its wholly owned subsidiary, Leslie Controls, Inc.  CIRCOR also
announced that, in connection with the Bankruptcy and District
Court review and approval, all appeals previously lodged by
certain of Leslie's insurers have been resolved, and the amended
plan was unopposed.

"This is a great day for Leslie Controls and CIRCOR," said CIRCOR
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer Bill Higgins.
"With District Court affirmation of Leslie's reorganization plan
and resolution of all pending appeals, we have now achieved the
last major milestones in our effort to permanently resolve
Leslie's asbestos liability.  We are now completing the
formalities necessary for Leslie to legally emerge from
bankruptcy.  Leslie is a strong business, key to our strategy in
the global power markets and a critical supplier to the U.S.
Navy."

Leslie and CIRCOR will fund the Section 524(g) asbestos trust
established under the reorganization plan once various closing
mechanics are satisfied and the plan becomes effective, whereupon
Leslie will emerge from Chapter 11 protection.  Leslie and CIRCOR
expect these steps to be completed within the next 60 days.

             About CIRCOR International, Inc.

CIRCOR International, Inc. designs, manufactures and markets
valves and other highly engineered products and subsystems that
control the flow of fluids safely and efficiently in the
aerospace, energy and industrial markets.  With more than 7,000
customers in over 100 countries, CIRCOR has a diversified product
portfolio with recognized, market-leading brands.  CIRCOR's
culture, built on the CIRCOR Business System, is defined by the
Company's commitment to attracting, developing and retaining the
best talent and pursuing continuous improvement in all aspects of
its business and operations.  The Company's strategy includes
growing organically by investing in new, differentiated products;
adding value to component products; and increasing the development
of mission-critical subsystems and solutions.  CIRCOR also plans
to leverage its strong balance sheet to acquire strategically
complementary businesses.  For more information, visit the
Company's investor relations web site at
http://investors.circor.com/


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Family of Former Worker Sues BNSF Railway Company
------------------------------------------------------------------
On Feb. 10, the estate of a former New Mexico railroad employee
sued BNSF Railway alleging wrongful death, due to asbestos
exposure, of locomotive repair shop worker Santiago Riley.  During
13 years of employment from 1942-1955 at railroad facilities in
New Mexico and Arizona, Riley made locomotive repairs, performed
various shop duties and swept floors around dusty asbestos-
containing substances without any respiratory protection.

This exposure caused permanent injury and contributed to his
eventual death, according to the lawsuit --
http://lawsuitpressrelease.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/RILEY-
SANTIAGO-FILED.CMPLT_.pdf -- filed by his children.  The estate
seeks damages for mental and physical suffering, lost wages,
medical bills and other financial losses.

BNSF Railway was created in 1995 from the merger of Burlington
Northern Inc. (parent company of Burlington Northern Railroad) and
Santa Fe Pacific Corporation (parent company of the Atchison,
Topeka and Santa Fe Railway).  In 2010, BNSF became a subsidiary
of Berkshire Hathaway, Inc.

According to the Riley family's attorney, John D. Roven, many
railroad employees were required to work with toxic materials like
asbestos without warnings, and asbestos was widely used on
locomotives as insulation during the time of Riley's employment.

"The medical and safety departments at the former AT&SF Railway
knew or should have known about the hazardous conditions to which
they were subjecting Riley and many others," said Roven. "Today,
we are asking a jury to hold the Railroad accountable for those
choices."

According to the National Institute of Health, asbestosis, the
lung disease from which Riley suffered, occurs from breathing
asbestos fibers.  Severity of illness depends on how long the
person was exposed and the amount inhaled.  Often, people do not
notice shortness of breath for 25 years or more after exposure,
and malignant mesothelioma can develop many decades after exposure
ends.

The estate of Santiago Riley is represented in Los Lunas, N.M. by
the Law Offices of Michael Sanchez and by Roven-Kaplan, LLP in
Houston.  For further information about this or other railroad
injury cases, call 1-800-997-1505 or visit
http://www.rovenlaw.com/ A copy of the Riley lawsuit is available
at http://lawsuitpressrelease.com/wp-
content/uploads/2012/02/RILEY-SANTIAGO-FILED.CMPLT_.pdf


ASBESTOS UPDATE: EA Investigates Tons of Toxic Wastes Near Redruth
------------------------------------------------------------------
BBC NEWS Cornwall reports that a large quantity of asbestos waste
dug up from an old mineshaft is being investigated by the
Environment Agency and the Health and Safety Executive.

The waste was excavated during an operation to recover the body of
a horse in a field near Redruth.  The animal died when the
mineshaft beneath its feet in Scorrier collapsed.

The owner of the horse said it looked as if the asbestos had been
thrown down the shaft many years ago.

David Rashleigh, the horse's owner said: "I hired a digger to get
the horse out.  I was moving nothing but asbestos.  I would say
there was about ten tons of it.

"The bulk of it was corrugated asbestos but there was also white
sheet asbestos.  I was led to believe that was the most dangerous
one."

Mr. Rashleigh said he contacted the authorities when he made the
discovery.

A spokesperson for the Health and Safety Executive said asbestos
waste was supposed to be wrapped in special bags and disposed of
only at a licensed site.

The Environment Agency is currently investigating the incident and
trying to find out who was responsible for dumping it down the
mineshaft.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Abatement Costs Keep Contagions in 378 UK Schools
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bristol Evening Post, thisisbristol.co.uk, reports that
Earlier this month MPs and peers said the presence of the
potentially lethal material constituted a "time bomb in our
schools", and called for a scheme for its removal.  Bristol City
Council has told the Evening Post that asbestos is present in
about 50 of the city's state primary schools and two secondary
schools.

But it says it has no plans to remove all of it because of the
likely cost.

In South Gloucestershire a total of 81 schools -- 63 primaries, 13
secondaries, two pupil referral units and three special schools --
have asbestos in the fabric of their buildings.

In North Somerset, asbestos is present in 52 of the council's 67
primaries and eight of its 10 secondaries.  The council audited
all buildings in 2009 and 2010, risk assessments were completed
and it now has a program of abatement works, annual re-inspections
and training for head teachers.

Bath & North East Somerset Council was not able to provide the
Post with figures last night but the total number of schools
affected in the other three authority areas is 195.

The Parliamentary Group on Occupational Safety and Health released
a report earlier this month calling for asbestos to be removed
from all schools and making recommendations including annually
updating parents, teachers and staff about asbestos in their
schools, and reinstating inspections into asbestos management.

The report stated that more than 140 teachers had died from the
rare asbestos-related cancer mesothelioma in the past ten years
across the UK and that an unknown number of supports staff had
also died.

The city council says that two secondary schools in the city have
"some level of asbestos" and about half of the city's primary
schools have "varying degrees of asbestos" although "most are low
level".

Spokeswoman Julia Walton said: "Like many local authorities
Bristol has a number of schools with some remaining low-level
asbestos.

"This is carefully managed with schools under health and safety
guidelines and includes training for head teachers who are the
duty holders.  As school buildings are upgraded or replaced then
asbestos is carefully removed but there are no current plans to
routinely remove all asbestos materials from schools where it is
being successfully managed, due to excessive costs."

Asbestos was used extensively as a building material from the
1950s until the mid-1980s, often in fireproofing and insulation.
It poses minimal risks in normal circumstances but becomes
dangerous if disturbed or damaged, when fibers can be released
into the air.  If inhaled, they can cause lung complaints such as
the fatal mesothelioma and debilitating asbestosis.

Researchers in the US found that for every death of a teacher from
asbestos-related diseases, nine children will die.  Children are
more vulnerable because they have longer than adults to develop
diseases related to the material.

According to the Health and Safety Executive, inhaling asbestos is
the single greatest cause of work-related deaths in the UK,
accounting for 4,000 deaths per year.

In 2004 asbestos at Hanham High School was disturbed during
renovation work in a humanities block.

Classrooms had to be decontaminated and pupils' work destroyed
after being covered in asbestos dust.

The clean-up cost South Gloucestershire Council GBP300,000 and it
was later fined GBP25,000 for health and safety offences.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Review Outcome to Resolve McGill U's Position
--------------------------------------------------------------
McGill Reporter, the official news source of McGill University
reports that the Senate's Feb. 15 meeting was marked by a vigorous
debate over a motion urging University officials to issue a public
statement clarifying McGill's position on asbestos research.

While the resolution was ultimately tabled, pending the outcome of
a preliminary review of the research, the animated debate
underscored a dilemma raised by the issue: several senators argued
that it was important to take a stance in order to defend the
University's reputation and address an important public-health
issue, while others worried that an official University position
on any scientific issue would undercut academic freedom.

The debate followed recent allegations in the media that retired
Emeritus Professor, J. Corbett McDonald, may have allowed his
research to be influenced by the asbestos industry.  Those
allegations prompted the Faculty of Medicine to launch a
preliminary review of McDonald's work.

In a Feb. 9 message to the McGill community, Dean of Medicine
David Eidelman said Rebecca Fuhrer, Chair of the Dept. of
Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, was
undertaking a review "to ensure that the research of Prof.
McDonald was conducted according to the rigorous scientific
standards for which McGill is known."  The outcome of the review
will determine whether a more detailed investigation is needed.

Chrysotile Mortality Rates

Starting in 1966, McDonald and colleagues began an epidemiological
study investigating the mortality rates of about 11,000 Quebec
miners and millers of chrysotile, a type of asbestos fiber.  They
published the findings in a series of research articles in
international peer-reviewed journals from 1971 to 1998.  The
research was funded in part by the Institute of Occupational and
Environmental Health of the Quebec Asbestos Mining Association, "a
fact that Prof. McDonald acknowledged clearly in peer-reviewed
published journal articles," Eidelman said.

A recent CBC documentary stated that McDonald's "scientific
studies suggested other possible culprits for the cancer being
found in the asbestos workers in Quebec."

In his message, Eidelman noted that "McDonald suggested that the
health risks of chrysotile asbestos could be greatly minimized
through lessening exposure, and that chrysotile was significantly
safer than other types of asbestos fibers.  Nonetheless, his
published work also demonstrates a clear link between higher rates
of mortality and the exposure to asbestos that the 11,000 men
received during the course of their employment.  Thus, Prof.
McDonald's work demonstrated that asbestos, including chrysotile
asbestos, is a carcinogen associated with both lung cancer and
mesothelioma."

The Senate debate involved a resolution, proposed by Prof. Edith
Zorychta, of the Faculty of Medicine, and Law Prof. Richard Janda,
to "strongly encourage University officials to issue a public
statement clarifying McGill's position on asbestos research, which
indicates that: a) none of the research on asbestos at McGill
refutes the international scientific consensus that chrysotile can
cause lung cancer, mesothelioma and asbestosis; and b) McGill
research does not document that chrysotile use is safe in other
countries.

In presenting the resolution, Zorychta said the public accusations
concerning asbestos research at McGill have been disturbing to
members of the University community.  A concise, factual statement
by University officials on the matter could help "put to rest some
misconceptions" stemming from media coverage, she argued.

Motion Tabled

Eidelman said that while he was sympathetic to the intent of the
motion, he had concerns about the University taking a position on
social issues; instead, he suggested, professors and students
should be the ones to present and defend opinions, backing them up
with the highest-quality data.

Dean of Law Daniel Jutras echoed Eidelman's concern, saying that
it touched on the issue of academic freedom.  Others said they
didn't have the scientific expertise to weigh in on the specifics
of the controversy.

Janda, for his part, argued that McGill's good name is being used
by government and chrysotile-industry officials to promote their
interests -- and that the University has a responsibility as a
public institution to protect public health.

Senators ultimately agreed to table the motion until Dean Eidelman
makes known the outcome of the preliminary review.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: MP Says Kingdoms Disunite in Asbestos Payout Laws
------------------------------------------------------------------
Terry Kelly at The Shields Gazette reports that an angry South
Tyneside campaigner, who pressed the Government for answers on
asbestos compensation, claims different laws "make a mockery" of
the idea of a United Kingdom.

Although ex-shipyard workers and those who worked in heavy
industry in England and Wales can no longer claim compensation for
the lung condition pleural plaques, people in Scotland and
Northern Ireland still can.

Bob Cusworth, 74, of Ribble Walk, Jarrow, suffers from pleural
plaques, which is caused by exposure to asbestos fibers.  Pleural
plaques is scarring of the lung tissue, which can lead to the
killer disease mesothelioma.

Mr. Cusworth asked Jarrow MP Stephen Hepburn to tackle the
Government about a geographical legal arrangement he slammed as
"totally unfair".

Mr. Cusworth, who was awarded GBP5,000 compensation under a
limited scheme agreed by the Ministry of Justice, said: "It's hard
to believe we live in what's called 'the United Kingdom,' when
different laws apply on compensation for lads in England, Scotland
and Northern Ireland.

"It makes a mockery of the term when people in Tyneside with
pleural plaques cannot claim, when those just across the border in
Scotland can, plus ex-workers in Northern Ireland."

Mr. Cusworth received a response from Mr. Hepburn, who passed on
his concerns to Jonathan Djanogly, Parliamentary Under-Secretary
of State for Justice.

Mr. Hepburn said: "Unfortunately, I feel under this Government
there is very little chance of seeing legislation similar to that
brought through in Scotland and Northern Ireland."

Mr. Djanogly said: "The civil legal systems in Scotland and
Northern Ireland and that in England and Wales are separate, and
inevitably there will be differences in the law.

"The Scottish and Northern Irish legislation is solely a matter
for those administrations."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Mount Sinai Honors 9/11 First Responders Hero
--------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Povtak of The Mesothelioma Center relates that Stephen M.
Levin, M.D. will not be forgotten anytime soon.

Levin, the New York City occupational specialist who carried the
health-care torch for the 9/11 First Responders, was honored
Tuesday, Feb. 21 with a memorial service at the Mount Sinai
Medical Center where he worked.

Levin, 70, died of lung cancer, but not before a decade of raising
awareness to the serious health issues facing the firemen,
policemen and a variety of rescue workers who were near the World
Trade Center after it crumbled in 2001.

Levin's memory was just one of several important topics covered at
the Mesothelioma Center and Asbestos.com.

He was the one who sounded the alarm immediately after the
terrorist attack, warning of both the short and long term
respiratory effects of the toxic, asbestos-laced dust cloud that
covered Lower Manhattan for weeks after the attack.

He pushed long and hard for a warning, even when some government
officials were insisting the air was safe to breath in the days
after 9/11.  His research and his voice also were instrumental in
getting help to the rescue workers, including the most recent,
$2.8 billion Victims Health and Compensation Fund in 2011.  It is
designed to provide both medical and non-medical expenses still
being faced.

It was just recently that a special advisory panel met to decide
how to expand the scope of that Victims Fund to include certain
cancers -- including mesothelioma -- now being faced by many First
Responders.

Cancer was not originally included in the law, even while his
research was showing a dramatic increase of cancer in those who
served the city so admirably.  In the past, guardians of the fund
had insisted there was no definitive link between the increase of
cancers and the toxic cloud that covered the city.

The Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation announced awarding of
$500,000 in grants to help scientists and researchers in their
quest to battle this cancer caused by asbestos exposure.

Five different grants of $100,000 each will be spread across four
different research centers, including the Memorial Sloan-Kettering
Cancer Center and the Brigham and Women's Hospital.

The goal is to help find better therapies and eventually a cure
for mesothelioma, a rare cancer that is diagnosed in close to
3,000 Americans annually.  Because of its rarity, research money
often is difficult to attain.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Brazilian Eternit Clarifies Practice Distinction
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Brazilian Eternit Group, in view of recent news regarding the
trial held at the Court of Justice in Turin, Italy, in which two
ex-board members of Eternit Italy were held responsible for deaths
resulting from the use of asbestos in its plants, wishes to
publicly clarify that:

"Eternit S.A. is a locally-owned, publicly traded company listed
in the New Market, which is the highest level of Corporate
Governance at the Sao Paulo State Stock, Commodities and Futures
Exchange (BM&FBOVESPA), and bears no relation to Eternit in other
countries, including Italy.  The ownership and use of the
trademark are exercised in distinct manners by different companies
in several countries.

In Brazil Eternit employs chrysotile asbestos as a reinforcement
fiber in the manufacturing of asbestos-cement roofing sheets and
tiles using modern production techniques.  The Italian company
employed various types of asbestos, especially the amphibole
variety, in several applications and without protection for the
workers.

The activity in Brazil is regulated by Federal Law 9.055/95,
Decree 2.350/97 and Regulatory Norms issued by the Ministry of
Labor and Employment.  These regulate the extraction,
industrialization, sale and transportation of chrysotile asbestos
and products which contain it, providing the Brazilian population
with durable, high quality and excellent cost-benefit products; in
this manner contributing to reduce the Brazilian housing deficit.

Market competition in the cement-asbestos segment, between Eternit
S.A. and a French group that also is active in Brazil in the
manufacturing and use of synthetic fibers, has led some Brazilian
states, especially where the plants are located, to approve anti-
asbestos legislation.  It is worth mentioning that the validity of
these laws awaits a merit decision on the part of the Supreme
Federal Court.

The extraction and processing of chrysotile asbestos by controlled
entity SAMA and the use of the mineral in Eternit's plants are
subject to strict security standards that surpass legal
requirements.  With the improvement in production techniques and
the perfection of work safety mechanisms, no accounts of disease
related to the use of chrysotile asbestos have been reported among
company employees who joined the group since the 1980's.  A three-
way agreement signed and in place since 1989, between the
companies in the chain of production, workers and labor union
entities and registered at the Ministry of Labor and Employment,
has been instrumental and decisive in consolidating this
achievement.

The use of asbestos-cement, water tank and roofing tile products
containing chrysotile asbestos does not present risks to the
population's health.  There are no reports in Brazil of a single
case of a resident who developed any disease as a result of
inhabiting one of the more than 25 million residences covered by
cement-asbestos roofing tiles containing asbestos.  This fact is
corroborated by a nationwide survey conducted by a renowned
medical team linked to the main Brazilian universities, the
project and final report for which were approved by the National
Council for Scientific and Technological Development - CNPq, and
which is available at the site http://www.sectec.go.gov.br/portal

The Eternit Group operates under full transparency and maintains
an "Open Doors Program" that has already received more than 50
thousand visitors to its plants and which grants access to any
person who wishes to know more about the safe processes employed
in mining and producing products that contain chrysotile asbestos.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: CA Allows Thorpe Insurers to Show Proof of Claim
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kenneth Bradley, Esq., of Westlaw Journal Asbestos reports that
several insurance companies that were denied standing to challenge
Thorpe Insulation Co.'s bankruptcy reorganization plan will have
the right to have their objections heard by the bankruptcy judge,
the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled.

In the Matter of Thorpe Insulation Co., Nos. 10-56543 and
10-56622, 2012 WL 178998 (9th Cir. Jan. 24, 2012).

Although it may be unfair to toss out the plan entirely, there are
viable remedies for amending it if the insurers can show their
claims have merit, the panel said in a written opinion.

Tanc Schiavoni -- tschiavoni@omm.com -- of O'Melveny & Myers, who
represents some of the insurers, said, "the 9th Circuit had come
to a landmark decision both on insurer standing to be heard in
bankruptcy proceedings and on what is called equitable mootness --
the concept that a case is moot if it is too late to come to an
equitable result for the moving party."

He said it was the first decision to reach the issue in the 9th
Circuit and would affect future bankruptcies, ensuring more just
outcomes.

Gary Svirsky -- gsvirsky@omm.com -- also of O'Melveny & Myers,
said the insurer standing holding 'recognizes that insurers have a
broad right to be heard in bankruptcies where their policies could
potentially be impacted.'

The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
approved the bankruptcy judge's creation of a trust to settle
Thorpe's asbestos-related debts in September 2010 under 11 U.S.C.
Sec. 524(g).  That section of the Bankruptcy Code allows for "the
reorganization of companies facing substantial asbestos-related
liability," the opinion says.

Thorpe's financial difficulty stemmed from its distribution of
asbestos-containing products between 1948 and 1972, which led to
about 12,000 lawsuits filed against it claiming personal injury
for asbestos exposure.

Several insurance companies, including Motor Vehicle Casualty Co.
and Century Indemnity Co., which had general liability policies
with Thorpe, did not reach a settlement with the company regarding
the reorganization plan.

The court-approved plan allowed claimants to sue non-settling
insurers directly under Thorpe's insurance policies.  The non-
settling insurers objected to the District Court's approval of the
plan.  U.S. District Judge Dale S. Fischer said they did not have
standing to challenge the plan, which the judge described as
"insurance-neutral."

The insurers appealed to the 9th Circuit.  The three-judge panel
said that calling the plan insurance-neutral does not settle the
issue.

The insurers have standing because the plan might increase their
liability, the panel said.

The judges rejected Thorpe's contention that the insurers' appeal
was moot because of the finality of the District Court's
confirmation of the plan.

"This is not a case where the appellants sat on their rights," the
panel said.  They sought a stay, and even if it was rejected,
failure to obtain a stay does not mean the parties did not
exercise due diligence in trying to protect their rights, the
panel explained.

"To say that a party's claims, although diligently pursued, are
equitably moot because of the passage of time, before the party
had a chance to present views on appeal, would alter the doctrine
to be one of inequitable mootness," the appeals court said.

"There are several ways to get some relief without completely
upsetting the plan," the judges added.

They noted that the Bankruptcy Court could require the settling
parties to pay more to the trust or it could allow the objecting
insurers to present evidence and ask for changes to the trust
distribution procedures.

"We expect there are many options open to the Bankruptcy Court
other than complete plan reversal that can remedy some of the
appellants' claims if proved valid," the panel said.

The panel reversed the District Court's judgment and ordered
remand to the Bankruptcy Court to allow the appellants to submit
proof of their claims.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toxic Waste Entered Convenience Center Unnoticed
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Amanda Goodman at KRQE News 13 reports that a city of Albuquerque
Solid Waste Department worker claimed workers at the Eagle Rock
Convenience Center near Interstate 25 and Alameda were accepting
asbestos laden materials.

The worker claimed management ignored his claims, so last
September he took his allegations to the Office of the Inspector
General.

"The basis of the complaint was accepting asbestos at the Eagle
Rock Convenience Center, which is not in accordance with our
policies or our permit," said Acting City Solid Waste Director
Jill Holbert.  The inspector general decided to investigate and
found workers had accepted materials containing asbestos.

"We didn't know that there would be asbestos coming in," Holbert
said.  "Basically we hadn't focused on that because we don't
accept commercial demolition loads."

The facility is open to private citizens who want to get rid of
nonhazardous trash items like mattresses, old toys or boxes for a
small fee.  Holbert said it appears some materials containing
asbestos inadvertently made it into the facility.  "One of the
main ones I think that we found is tile, 9-by-9 tiles that you
pull out of a house," said Holbert.

The inspector general's office found there were no procedures in
place to screen for the hazardous material.

Holbert said once the IG's office notified the department of the
allegations, they took action immediately starting with employees.
"We trained them in identification of asbestos, asbestos awareness
as well as waste screening procedures for asbestos and then a
contingency plan so if they do find it what should they do to
follow up," Holbert said.

In addition to that Holbert said they have also posted signs at
all three convenience centers letting customers know asbestos is
not accepted.

Workers are also paying closer attention to what customers are
bringing in and asking them if they have anything that might
contain asbestos.

"I think our customers don't know what asbestos looks like either,
so it's not so much that they're trying to sneak it in, they don't
know that they have it," said Holbert.

At the request of the IG's office the Solid Waste Department
performed air quality tests at the Eagle Rock facility in November
and found no signs of asbestos in the air.  Holbert said there was
not enough asbestos or enough long-term exposure for it to cause
any health risks for the workers or public.

The use and disposal of asbestos products are tightly controlled
because fibers from the mineral can cause significant health
problems if inhaled.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Advocates Say McGill's Self-Review Not Credible
----------------------------------------------------------------
Henry Gass of The McGill Daily News reports that a week after
coming under criticism for its past and present connections with
the Quebec asbestos industry, McGill launched a review into the
research of one of its retired professors.

On Feb. 16, VP (Health Affairs) and Dean of Medicine David
Eidelman announced that the faculty had appointed Rebecca Fuhrer,
chair of McGill's Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and
Occupational Health, to conduct a preliminary review of the
research of John Corbett McDonald, an emeritus professor in the
department.

Fuhrer has not given a deadline for the completion of her
preliminary review, but in an email she wrote, "The timeline for
this preliminary review will depend on the time that is needed to
respond accurately to the remit I have been given by the Dean."

In a statement, Eidelman said Fuhrer's review "is being undertaken
to ensure that the research of Professor McDonald was conducted
according to the rigorous scientific standards for which McGill is
known."

"The outcome of Professor Fuhrer's review will determine whether
there is a need for a more detailed investigation, in accordance
with our standard policies and procedures," continues Eidelman's
statement.

Kathleen Ruff, senior human rights adviser for the Ottawa-based
Rideau Institute, said the circumstances of the review "are such
that it clearly raises issues of conflict of interest."

"It is not acceptable; it does not have credibility to do an in-
house investigation of the department, by the department,"
continued Ruff.

A group of academics and health experts -- many of whom, including
Ruff, initially condemned McGill's asbestos connections -- have
signed a letter criticizing the internally-conducted preliminary
review.  The letter was published on Feb. 17.

The letter calls specifically for McGill to revisit a complaint
filed in September 2002 by David Egilman, a clinical associate
professor at Brown University and signatory to the letter.
Egilman's complaint, addressed to Robert E. MacKenzie, the then-
associate dean of graduate studies and research, alleged that
McDonald had manipulated data and cited supporting data that did
not exist.

"I asked them three questions.  I think they should answer those
three questions, and they need to publish the answers to those
three questions," said Egilman in an interview with The Daily.

With regards to his 2002 complaint, Egilman received a response
from McGill 16 months later, stating that his grievance was
"unfounded."

"If the data's there, [Eidelman] could end the investigation in
about five minutes," continued Egilman.

Egilman sent his three questions, along with his supporting
evidence, to Eidelman on Feb. 18, copying both Fuhrer and six news
outlets -- including The Daily -- on the email.

Fuhrer replied the next day, confirming that Egilman's documents
"will be added to those that we are collecting."

Fernand Turcotte, lead signatory of the letter and professor
emeritus of Public Health and Preventive Medicine at the
Universite Laval, said that the outcome of the current review is
crucial to "preserving the credibility of McGill as an
institution."

"If this second attempt at dealing properly with the questions --
that were perfectly legitimate, [which] were raised by Dr. Egilman
-- if this is missed a second time, well that's going to become a
problem on its own," said Turcotte.

Eidelman addressed Egilman's 2002 complaint in an interview with
the Montreal Gazette.  "It's a very painful episode for us at
McGill to have these allegations made, but we have to follow
standard procedure," Eidelman told the Gazette.  "If you ask me,
we are unlikely to find anything this time either."

Ruff believes Eidelman's statements supporting McDonald have
prejudiced Fuhrer's review.

"The instructions and statement that Dean Eidelman gave create a
tainted atmosphere, create a prejudiced atmosphere, which makes
the whole exercise suspect," she said.

Esli Osmanlliu, president of the McGill Medical Students' Society,
said he felt comfortable with the faculty's response, though he
added that it was "shocking to hear those allegations" against
McDonald.

"I don't have access to the sources justifying the allegations in
the documentary, but it is still worrying to think that there may
have been some influences from the industry when the research was
conducted," he said.

"I believe [Fuhrer] is very well suited to undergo this review,"
he continued. "I think the review is actually a very good thing,
because as long as it stands, those are allegations."

SSMU President Maggie Knight said the review would likely come up
at the Feb. 22 Senate meeting.

"It's an issue that's very much related to the academic premise of
the University and the academic integrity of our research," said
Knight.  "We come here, we work hard, and we want to know that
people have faith in the research that comes out of McGill," she
continued.

In the Senate meeting, a motion from the floor to encourage the
issuing of a public statement regarding asbestos research at
McGill was tabled until Fuhrer's review is completed.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Mesothelioma Kills 8/100,000 People in Barrow
--------------------------------------------------------------
North West Evening Mail News reports that Barrow has the highest
death rate in England and Wales for terminal asbestos cancer.

Figures obtained by not-for-profit campaign group the Association
of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) show from 2006 to the end of
2010, the death rate for mesothelioma -- a terminal cancer of the
lung wall, was more than three times the national average in
Barrow.

The disease, which almost exclusively affects workers who have
come into contact with asbestos, was recorded as the cause of 45
deaths in the area -- the equivalent to 8.4 deaths in 100,000
people.  The national average during the same period was 2.5.

Asbestos-related cancer is prevalent across Furness because of
historical exposure while working in the engineering and shipyard
industries.

APIL president David Bott said: "More people die of mesothelioma
in Barrow per head of the population than in any other part of the
country.

"This is bad enough, but the number of men dying from this disease
is expected to peak during the next five years and what many
people don't realise is that hundreds of sufferers across the UK
cannot get the compensation they need to help them through the
last days of their life.

"What is needed is for the government to bring forward proposals
for a fund of last resort which would act as a safety net for
injured workers who are otherwise unable to pursue the justice
they deserve."

APIL said many workers are often unable to pursue a claim for
damages because they are unable to trace their former employers.

The group has called on the government to provide support for
retired workers to bring damages claims against their former
employers.

Bob Pointer is one of the founders of BARDS -- the Barrow Asbestos
Related Diseases Support Group.  Mr. Pointer worked in the
shipyard and steelworks for 19 years and has seen many of his
former colleagues succumb to asbestos-related cancers.

He said: "Barrow has been one of the worst areas in terms of the
number of asbestos-related deaths for a number of years, because
of the town's industrial heritage with the shipyard, steelworks
and railways.  Despite this, there is still disrespect for
asbestos; it is still in many schools and other buildings and is
often dumped with little regard for the consequences.  You would
think people here would know the dangers but some still continue
to ignore it."

The next meeting of BARDS was scheduled to take place at St Mark's
Church in Rawlinson Street, Barrow, on Feb. 20.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Man Dying of Mesothelioma Reaches Out For Peers
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sara Nichol of the Evening Chronicle News reports that a granddad
suffering from an aggressive form of asbestos-related cancer is
desperately trying to discover how he came into contact with the
deadly material.

Pensioner William Wood, known as Billy, was diagnosed with deadly
mesothelioma -- cancer of the chest lining -- in November last
year.

The 74-year-old believes he was exposed to asbestos at some point
during his employment in various roles across the North East.

And the-dad-of-three, who is deaf, has lost a lot of weight and
struggles to walk, is now trying to find an ex-colleagues who may
be able to help him shed any light on why he has contracted the
disease.

The granddad-of-four, from Washington, said he was struggling to
understand why he was suffering so much.

Mr. Wood, who lives with his wife Margaret, said: "My diagnosis
has been absolutely devastating for me and my entire family.  It's
hard to understand how my work has caused me to suffer so much.
To know simple steps could have been taken that could have
prevented my illness is often hard to cope with."  Mrs. Wood
added: "It was a long time ago that he worked at some of these
places and he can't remember everyone he worked with.  Most of the
people he does remember or was in contact with have passed away.

"It's been awful watching his health rapidly deteriorate."

From 1960 to 1961, Mr. Wood worked for Pyrex (now known as Corning
Ltd) in Sunderland where he was employed as a laborer and swept up
glass debris, waste and rejects and take it to the factory waste
area.

Then, in 1966 and 1967, whilst employed for Graham Mowatts (Graham
(NE) Ltd), he worked as a delivery driver for a building firm.

He delivered asbestos loft insulation and asbestos loft insulation
board.  Later that year, he worked as a laborer at Washington
Chemical Company, where his job was to bag up the waste within the
factory, including collecting cut-offs of asbestos board.

Mr. Wood then worked for The National Coal Board at Wearmouth
Colliery, from 1972 until 1974, where his job was a boiler man who
shoveled coal into the boiler fire to keep the boiler going for
water for baths for the men coming off shift.  The boiler pipe
work was lagged with asbestos.

Finally, at various times between 1975/76 and 1987, William worked
for Wade's Transport as a HGV driver when he would carry out pick-
ups from Washington Chemical Company which were rolls of brown
asbestos insulation.  He would load the insulation up and would
then hand the rolls back down to people who were collecting them
at his destination.

Isobel Lovett -- isobel.lovett@irwinmitchell.com -- an asbestos
expert in the Newcastle office of Irwin Mitchell Solicitors, is
representing William in his legal battle for justice.

She said: "Throughout the course of his employment, William was
never warned about these dangers nor was he ever provided with
breathing equipment which could have protected him."

Anyone with information should contact Isobel Lovett on 0191 279
0104 or e-mail isobel.lovett@irwinmitchell.com


ASBESTOS UPDATE: AIAAC to Award Mesothelioma Advocate and Sufferer
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Plymouth Herald reports that a woman battling a deadly lung
cancer caused by asbestos will receive an international award for
her tireless campaigning.

Debbie Brewer will be presented with a special recognition award
at the Annual International Asbestos Awareness Conference in Los
Angeles, USA.

The 52-year-old, of Eggbuckland, was given only months to live
when diagnosed with mesothelioma in November 2006.

More than five years later she continues to fight the disease and
highlight the dangers of asbestos.

She received a Government payout after linking the condition to
her father's dockyard overalls and has undergone experimental
chemotherapy treatment in Germany.

The mum of three said she is "absolutely thrilled" to be have been
chosen for the award.

"It is a real honor," she said.  "I didn't know whether I would be
well enough to collect it in person, but I've spoken to my
oncologist and everything is stable.

"There's a lot of people with asbestos-related diseases who don't
want to see another generation getting it.

"Awareness is the most important thing.  People need to know that
asbestos is often in the home, in the work place.

"The dust, which can be disturbed during renovations and DIY, is
not going to make you ill immediately.  But it can be deadly."

Asbestos was widely used as insulation and fireproofing until the
1970s.  It remains in many older buildings today.

Debbie's tumour began to spread slightly again last year, but a CT
scan this month showed it has stabilized.

She runs her own website -- mesothelioma-and-me.com -- which
documents her own struggle with the illness while providing
support and advice for others.

She has attended conferences around the world to raise awareness
of the disease and is in the early stages of helping to set up a
local asbestos charity.

The Asbestos Awareness Conference in the USA has been organized by
Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO) that was founded by
Doug Larkin and Linda Reinstein, whose husband Alan died of
mesothelioma.

Debbie will receive The Alan Reinstein Award for her commitment to
education, advocacy, and support to countless patients and
families.

The event will take place from March 30 to April 1 in Los Angeles,
California.

Plymouth is a hotspot for asbestos-related conditions.  From 2006
to the end of 2010, the death rate for mesothelioma in the city
was almost twice the national average, according to figures
obtained by not-for-profit campaign group the Association of
Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL).

The disease was recorded as the underlying cause of 89 deaths in
the area -- the equivalent to 4.8 deaths in 100,000 people.  The
national average during the same period was 2.5.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: 16 Swiss Workers Exposed to Fibro in Railway Cars
------------------------------------------------------------------
swissinfo.ch reports that renovation work has been halted on a
series of railway carriages after asbestos was found in some of
the paint.

The Federal Railways said on Feb. 20 that there was no danger to
passengers.

A small area containing asbestos was discovered Feb .17 in the
coating used on the doors and ceiling of a "Bpm 51" carriage being
upgraded in the work shed in Bellinzona, in Italian-speaking
Switzerland.

But the area in question is only accessible during maintenance,
and asbestos fibers would only be released if it were machined in
any way, the railways said, adding that the amount of asbestos
found was very small and was stable.

However, 16 workers had been exposed to it.  Experts are now
considering how work can proceed.

In the past few months, 50 carriages of the same type have been
renovated in Bellinzona and the north western town of Olten, out
of a total of 180.  Work in Olten has also been halted.

They are single decker carriages, normally used for extra trains
laid on at rush hours or for special events.

The railways say that all rolling stock containing asbestos had
been refurbished or scrapped by 2010.

The transport workers' trades union has now called for all rolling
stock of the same age to be re-examined.  They also demanded that
any workers who might have come into contact with asbestos should
be monitored for life.

Swiss industrialist Stephan Schmidheiny has been sentenced to 16
years imprisonment by an Italian court which found him responsible
for the deaths of thousands of workers from asbestos-related
diseases.

Breathing in asbestos fibers can cause various fatal lung diseases
including cancer, which normally only become apparent many years
later.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Landlord Pleads Guilty to Health Law Violation
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United Kingdom Industry News at build.co.uk reports that a
property manager from Cardiff has been fined for failing to
properly manage the risks from asbestos at one of his premises.

Richard Hayward of Cardiff Bay was prosecuted by the Health and
Safety Executive (HSE) over failings at the former Rhondda
Pressing building, located on the Penygraig Industrial Estate.

Mr. Hayward, trading as Richard Hayward Properties, managed the
property on behalf of a company called Guinevere Holdings Limited.

Pontypridd Magistrates' Court heard that Mr. Hayward had let out
part of the building in 2007 but it was only in 2008, when a
request to provide an asbestos survey for insurance purposes was
made, that the presence of asbestos insulating board (AIB) roof
tiles and brown and blue asbestos was identified in the premises.

A subsequent HSE investigation confirmed there was a risk of
exposure to asbestos due to the poor condition the asbestos was
found in.

The court was told that between 2005 and 2008, three companies
occupied the building.  During this time, structural work to
install a partition wall was completed and contractors were hired
to carry out electrical works at the site.

In addition to those undertaking the work, any person in the
vicinity, including tenants, were at risk of exposure to asbestos.

The HSE investigation found Mr. Hayward did not take steps to
discover whether asbestos was present or liable to be present and
he failed to effectively identify and manage the risks arising
from asbestos containing materials at the building.

Mr. Hayward, of Adventurers' Quay, Cardiff Bay, pleaded guilty to
breaching Section 3 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act
1974.  He was fined GBP12,000 and ordered to pay costs of
GBP20,000.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: MW and TCCI Launch Guidebook On The Deadly Fiber
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Tasmanian Government states that the Minister for Workplace
Relations, David O'Byrne, on Feb. 21, launched a new asbestos
'pocket guide' to help keep trades people safe and informed about
asbestos hazards.

The new guide, Asbestos: What Are You Really Risking?, has been
developed by the Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, with
funding provided under the Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation
Act 1988.

"Prevention is clearly better than cure.  Education and awareness
is a crucial part of the Government's approach to tackling
asbestos problems and it is a key agenda item for me as Workplace
Relations Minister in better protecting the health and safety of
our workers," Mr. O'Byrne said.

"That's why we've funded this new guide book for Tasmanian
tradies, and anyone else who may come across asbestos -- including
renovators.

"The new guide highlights the major risks in dealing with
asbestos, and how to limit those risks.

"It includes information on where you might find asbestos, what
industries are most likely to come across it, and the things to
consider before starting a job.

"I commend the TCCI for thinking seriously about workers' safety,
and producing this valuable tool in the fight against asbestos-
related health problems," Mr. O'Byrne said.

Printed on Teslin, the guide is a waterproof, tear-proof product
to make it durable for trades people.

Copies are available from the TCCI or by calling 6236 3600.

Late last year, Mr. O'Byrne launched Tasmania's first Asbestos
Compensation Scheme -- allowing current and former workers
suffering asbestos-related diseases to receive up to $500,000 in
timely compensation.

Last August, the Government also launched Tasmania's new asbestos
website, highlighting the risks involved in dealing with the
substance: http://www.asbestos.tas.gov.au/


ASBESTOS UPDATE: New cba Company Solely Deals With Toxic Fibers
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Evening Telegraph at peterboroughtoday.co.uk reports that
Peterborough construction and property consultants cba group has
formed a new company to exclusively deal with its increasing
asbestos-related workload and to increase its workforce.

Based at Asset House, in Thorpe Wood, the group has seen the
number of asbestos enquiries steadily growing over the past three
years, prompting it to launch the company -- cba asbestos.

The newly-formed division will take over all of the asbestos
surveying, management and testing work previously undertaken by
cba developments for the past eight years.

The developments sector will continue to operate with its existing
project management, design and surveying work.

Group chairman Phil Elmer said: "We are extremely pleased that our
reputation for asbestos work has been growing consistently over
recent years, not solely in the Peterborough area, but throughout
the UK.  We aim to double our workforce over the next year.

"At the moment we are five-strong in the asbestos division -- two
full-time and three part-time.  Basically, we will be seeking to
increase our part-time associates."

Projects undertaken in Peterborough include asbestos survey work
at the former Peterborough District Hospital site in Thorpe Road,
Guild House in Oundle Road, Peterborough Greyhound Stadium and
Priestgate House, together with a series of surveys for the Anglia
Regional Co-operative Society.

More recently, cba has completed several jobs in London with a
large chain of hotels, together with surveys at the Rosemary
Murray library in Cambridge, Darwin College in Cambridge, churches
and bakeries within Lincolnshire and numerous smaller projects
within a 50-mile radius of the city.

Stephen Spinks, who takes over the role as director to enhance his
other functions within the group, added: "In these difficult times
it is rewarding to create a new division.  I am pleased to be part
of this progression."

The cba group now comprises three divisions -- asbestos,
developments and projects.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Jury Verdict Awards $9.18MM Against John Crane
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Mesothelioma Center reports that the family of John Bristow
won a $9.18 million award in a Newport News, Va., asbestos case on
Feb. 17.  The jury decided that John Crane Inc. was ultimately
liable for Bristow contracting mesothelioma.

Bristow, 68, died more than a year ago from mesothelioma cancer
after working for 37 years as a shipyard worker where he was
exposed to asbestos.  He is survived by a wife and two sons.

Mesothelioma is a rare and aggressive disease caused by asbestos
exposure.  This disease claims approximately 3,000 deaths per
year, many of which are related to occupational hazards associated
with shipyards, construction work or other industrial fields.

The jury deliberated for eight hours on Feb. 16 and 17 before
settling on its verdict and award total.

The verdict concluded a three-week trial, and the $9.18 million
award came close to the $9.95 million figure that the family's
attorney requested.

The total award makes the case one of the largest asbestos
verdicts in Virginia history.

"It was an agonizing two days of nail biting, waiting for the
jury," said Bobby Hatten -- RRHatten@pwhd.com -- lead attorney for
the plaintiff.  "It's very satisfying to know that they believed
us and trusted our evidence and that they assigned a high value to
the life of a very, very good man."

The total award consisted of $3.5 million for Bristow's pain and
suffering, $2 million for losses suffered by his wife, along with
$2.5 million for losses suffered by his sons.  Additionally,
$780,000 was awarded to compensate his wife for what she endured
while he was sick.

For medical expenses, the jury awarded $141,295 and an additional
$11,611 for funeral expenses.  Moreover, $250,000 was awarded to
cover expenses that the family has related to things that Bristow
used to do.

Illinois-based John Crane Inc. was held 100 percent accountable
for damages because the company was the only one of six
potentially liable companies to take this case to trial.  Five
others settled out of court for undisclosed sums.  The attorney
for the Bristow family expects John Crane Inc. to appeal the case.

John Crane is known for manufacturing various asbestos-containing
products, including gaskets, piping, exhaust systems, boiler
lining, sheet packing and multiple other parts.

Tom Burns, the attorney who represented John Crane in the trial,
argued that blame should be assigned to other companies, citing
that insulating material, which is a product not manufactured by
his company, was more likely to blame for Bristow's cancer.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Church Pointer Carps Boatshed Abatement Procedure
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Manly Daily at whereilive.com.au reports that a Church Point
resident has complained of asbestos dust after a 100-year-old
boatshed was torn down opposite his home on Feb. 20.

Warning letters from Pittwater Council about the impending
demolition of Bennett's Boatshed and removal of the dangerous
mineral were sent to neighboring properties at the eastern end of
Church Point Reserve in the prior week.

Asbestos warning signs were also erected around the site on
Feb. 20.

But Collyn Rivers, who lives directly across from the site, said
he was shocked to witness the council-contracted workers destroy
the building with hammers without any apparent action taken to
contain asbestos dust, apart from wrapping up some of the building
material in plastic before putting it in on a truck.

He said much of the building material was left in a "huge pile"
for hours.

"To my horror, they just smashed (the shed) apart and I didn't see
them take any precautions," he said.

"I would have expected some occupational work and safety measures.

"They just wrapped some in plastic before putting it in the back
of a truck."

Asbestos can be hazardous when microscopic fibers become airborne
and are inhaled.

Mr. Rivers worried that people who waited at a nearby bus stop,
walked past the site on the foreshore walk or were at the car park
could have been affected.

A Pittwater Council spokeswoman said the licensed building
contractor hired by the council removed the asbestos according to
Environmental Protection Agency rules.

"These guidelines stipulate that neighboring property owners be
notified seven days in advance; the asbestos is removed and
wrapped; and that it is taken to a waste facility licensed to
accept asbestos," she said.  "All these actions have been carried
out by the contractor."

As reported by the Manly Daily last October, the shed was listed
for demolition after a council report said it posed "numerous
hazards and presents as a potential nuisance to third parties".

The decision upset the non-profit jewelry and metalworking
organization Silver Plus, which successfully applied for a $40,000
state government grant to have the boatshed rebuilt as a workshop.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: CPSM Updates Website for US Air Force Veterans
---------------------------------------------------------------
Clapper Patti Schweizer & Mason (CPSM) have a newly updated
section of their website specifically for U.S. Air Force veterans
diagnosed with mesothelioma and other military veterans who have
been exposed to asbestos and now live with the threat of
developing this incurable cancer.  Due to a long latency period
between time of exposure and development of symptoms of
mesothelioma, this cancer is often not diagnosed until it has
reached advanced stages.

CPSM now offers comprehensive information, particularly for those
most at risk of exposure to asbestos due to their occupation (i.e.
aircraft mechanic) and/or from living and eating quarters likely
to have been constructed with asbestos materials.

Jack Clapper, founder of CPSM and veteran of the US Air Force
Veteran himself, speaks to his dedication to fight for justice for
airmen and women who were injured by asbestos.  "I was a fighter
pilot in the United States Air Force, and I'm accustomed to being
able to fight for people when they need help.  I am especially
dedicated to helping Air Force mechanics as they run a higher risk
of mesothelioma given that they worked in enclosed, tight spaces
when repairing aircraft with asbestos components and to Air Force
Veterans who constructed or repaired buildings on base where
exposure to asbestos was unavoidable."

CPSM has updated their website to offer the latest, most useful
information for veterans from the Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps,
Army and Coast Guard who are dealing with a diagnosis of
mesothelioma.  CPSM lawyers specialize in asbestos lawsuits and in
representing former US Army and Air Force personnel.

In addition to the newly updated website, veterans diagnosed with
mesothelioma are offered immediate free case evaluation with an
experienced attorney.  Brochures and other resources are also
available to help veterans and their family members who may be
coping with a new diagnosis of an asbestos related disease.  After
finding out the particulars to your case, the attorneys at CPSM
can also suggest names of recommended mesothelioma treatment
centers and oncologists closest to where you live.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Norway Opera House Up For Decontamination
----------------------------------------------------------
Leslie H. Dixon of the Sun Journal reports that mold and asbestos
found in several areas of the 1894 Opera House will be removed
before a $1 million renovation project begins this spring.

Jake Keeler, an associate with Lachman Architects & Planners of
Portland, said some of the hazardous materials were found in the
first-floor storefronts of the Main Street building.

"Several basement spaces have mold and asbestos, as well as some
flooring materials," he said.  "The actual material that makes up
the storefronts was not found to contain such materials, but
various interior spaces were."

The affected spaces include flooring in the former Colonial Cafe.
"Some of the affected areas are quite exposed and work will be
fairly simple, while other materials are buried under many other
layers of newer flooring," he said.

Although mold and asbestos were removed from the basement and
other areas during stabilization of the Opera House in 2010 and
2011, Keeler said areas that were not being worked on then
remained untouched.

"Work to remove asbestos is heavily regulated and we're working on
securing bids from licensed abatement contractors that are able to
do such work before the big project goes out to general bid" this
spring, Keeler said.

Bids for the $1 million renovations to the basement and
storefronts are expected to go out in May.

The cost of the abatement work and how to pay for it is not clear
yet, Dennis Gray, president of the Norway Opera House Corp., said.
Selectmen have approved deeding the building to the corporation.

The three-story brick Opera House was taken by the town by eminent
domain in 2010, because a partial roof collapse in 2007 rendered
it structurally unstable.  The town compensated owner Bitim
Enterprises of Londonderry, N.H., with $185,000.

Two of the six storefronts were vacated when the roof collapsed.
The others, as well as the second floor ballroom and third floor
balcony had been empty for years.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Malta Dock Workers' Heirs File Tort Claims in NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Mesothelioma Center reports that the heirs of dockyard workers
from the small Mediterranean country of Malta are filing liability
claims in New York against American companies that provided
asbestos products for U.S. Navy ships.

Many of the workers are already deceased by either mesothelioma or
asbestosis.  Others are struggling with respiratory illnesses
linked to asbestos on those Navy ships docked for service, repairs
or regular maintenance in Malta shipyards.

According to Maltatoday, one of the country's leading news
providers, the families of more than 400 workers have filed either
individual or class action lawsuits in the United States.

Most of the cases, from U.S. attorneys, were filed in the U.S.
Bankruptcy Court of New York.  Although many of the companies
named are no longer in business, there are more than 60 asbestos
liability trusts in the United States worth a combined $37
billion.

It can take up to 50 years after being exposed to asbestos for a
diagnosis of mesothelioma.

U.S. Navy veterans and workers in the shipbuilding industry are
two of the hardest hit occupational groups in terms of asbestos
poisoning because of its past prevalence on ships.

Although the U.S. military is protected by sovereign immunity and
the Feres Doctrine from most liability, litigants can file against
companies that provided toxic products used by the Navy.  Most of
the claims in the past involving Navy ships came from veterans or
American shipyard workers.

This recent wave from Malta is relatively new.  Much of it
involved work done many years ago for the Navy at the HM Drydocks,
which later become the Malta Drydocks.  In the past, the trust
money was protected against exposure that occurred on land outside
the United States.

The recent class action suits were combined with other shipyard
workers in Great Britain and Greece who also are seeking
compensation for asbestos exposure.  Asbestos was used on warships
from bow to stern, and most prominently in boiler rooms, engine
rooms and any confined areas.  It was used for its heat
resistance, playing a large role in preventing fires aboard the
ship.

As part of the recent wave of asbestos litigation, attorneys for
the foreign ship maintenance works want their claims to be
designated as "standard," which requires less documentation of
exposure and allows for easier compensation payouts.

The "non-standard" designation, which they now have, are more
stringently reviewed and each one is judged individually.

One of the richest defendants is the Johns Manville Corp., which
went into bankruptcy in 1982 to protect itself from a wave of
litigation but came out in 1988.  It was acquired by Berkshire
Hathaway Inc. in 2001.

According to Maltatoday, the Manville trust already has paid out
$4.2 billion to asbestos-related injury claims.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: 3 Lawsuits Filed in St. Clair Ct Vs. 183 Cos
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kelly Holleran of The Madison / St. Clair Record reports that
Another three suits have been added St. Clair County's asbestos
docket.

Robert and Nancy Drzymala filed an asbestos lawsuit in St. Clair
County Circuit Court on Feb. 8 against 63 defendant corporations;
Tommy and Ruth Ann Dickerson filed one on Feb. 8 against 63
defendant corporations; Howard Basso, Sr., and Louise Basso filed
a suit on Feb. 3 against 60 defendant corporations.  None of the
plaintiffs specify where they reside.

The three sets of plaintiffs will be represented by Randy L. Gori
and Barry Julian of Gori, Julian and Associates in Edwardsville.

In their complaint, the Drzymalas allege the defendant companies
caused Robert Drzymala to develop lung cancer after his exposure
to asbestos-containing products throughout his career.

The complaint does not indicate where the Drzymalas reside;
however, it states that Rovert Drzymala worked as a deckhand
aboard the U.S.S. Demoise for the U.S. Navy at the Great Lakes
Naval Station in Illinios from 1958 until 1964, as a laborer at
Atlas Plastics from 1964 until 1972, as a laborer performing side
jobs such as carpentry, siding and roofing from 1964 until the
late 1970s and as a pattern maker at Buffalo Forge from 1966 until
1992.

In their complaint, the Dickersons allege Tommy Dickerson
developed lung cancer after his exposure to asbestos products
during his career as a mechanic and military policeman from 1961
until 1964, as an assembly line worker at Ford Motor Company in
Chicago from 1964 until 1966, as an equipment operator at Clement
Brothers Construction from 1966 until 1968, as a dock worker at
Pacific Intermountain Express in Chicago from 1968 until 1970, as
an equipment operator at Anaconda Copper Mine from 1970 until
1973, as a carpenter from 1973 until 1976, as a coal miner at
Harrison Construction from 1976 until 1987, as an equipment
operator at Buesing Construction from 1987 until 1988, as owner
and operator of Dickerson Mobile Home Services from 1991 until
2003 and as a self-employed truck operator at TC Trucking from
2004 until 2012.

The Bassos allege Howard Basso, Sr., developed lung cancer after
his exposure to asbestos products during his career as a
welder/foundry worker at American Motors from 1947 until 1978 and
as a caretaker at Radar Base from 1980 until 1981.

The defendants should have known of the harmful effects of
asbestos, but failed to exercise reasonable care and caution for
the plaintiffs' safety, the suits state.

As a result of their asbestos-related diseases, Rober Drzymala,
Tommy Dickerson and Howard Basso, Sr., became disabled and
disfigured, incurred medical costs and suffered great physical
pain and mental anguish, the complaints say.  In addition, they
became prevented from pursuing their normal course of employment
and, as a result, lost large sums of money that would have accrued
to them, they claim.

In their nine-count complaint, the Drzymalas are seeking a
judgment of more than $100,000, compensatory damages of more than
$100,000, economic damages of more than $150,000 and punitive and
exemplary damages of more than $100,000, plus other relief the
court deems just.

In their nine-count complaint, the Dickersons are seeking a
judgment of more than $100,000, punitive and exemplary damages of
more than $100,000, economic damages of more than $150,000 and
compensatory damages of more than $100,000, plus other relief the
court deems just.

In their five-count complaint, the Bassos are seeking a judgment
of more than $100,000, punitive and exemplary damages of more than
$100,000 and compensatory damages of more than $100,000.

St. Clair County Circuit Court case numbers: 12-L-67, 12-L-76, 12-
L-77.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: High Cancer-Related Deaths in South Derbyshire
---------------------------------------------------------------
Christina Massey of the Burton Mail reports that the number of
deaths from asbestos-related cancer in South Derbyshire is well
above the national average, statistics have revealed.

Between January 2006 and December 2010, there were 23 deaths
attributed to mesothelioma -- a terminal cancer of the lung wall -
- in the area, the equivalent to 3.7 in every 100,000 people.

The average for England and Wales during the same period was 2.5
per 100,000 people.

From 2006 to 2010, 12 people died as a result of mesothelioma in
East Staffordshire and nine in North West Leicestershire.

The figure has been released by the nonprofit campaign group the
Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL).

APIL president David Bott said: "More people die of mesothelioma
in South Derbyshire per head of the population than in most other
parts of the country.

"This is bad enough, but the number of men dying from this disease
is expected to peak during the next five years and what many
people don't realise is that hundreds of sufferers across the UK
cannot get the compensation they need to help them through the
last days of their life."

The reason for this is that the symptoms of the illness often do
not emerge until decades after workers have come into contact with
asbestos, during which time employers have often gone out of
business and insurance documents have either been lost or
destroyed.

That is the situation Sally Ward, of Repton, found herself in when
her husband, Steve, died from mesothelioma at the age of just 49.

Mr. Ward had come into contact with asbestos while working at a
garage in the 1980s.

Since his death two years ago, his window has had to resign
herself to the fact she may never get compensation as she has been
unable to contact his employer's insurer.

"If you can't find that insurer you're left like our family
without compensation," the 51-year-old said.

"It seems so unfair that some can get compensation purely because
they have found the paperwork.

"I have lost my husband, at the end of the day, because of his
work."

Mrs. Ward said the Derbyshire Asbestos Support Team was
campaigning to get an employers' liability insurance bureau set up
as a central information point.

"So if they can't find the insurers, like in my situation, then
you can access the information," she said.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Razed Augusta-Margaret Sites Up for Abatement
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Augusta Margaret River Mail reports that six fire-affected
sites on the coast have been found to contain asbestos, and
Augusta-Margaret River Shire president Ray Colyer has given
emergency expenditure authorization to have it removed, cleared
and cleaned up by contractors.

The properties were impacted by the November fires, and the shire
is co-coordinating all activities in relation to the removal,
clearing and cleanup of these sites.

The removal of asbestos will be reimbursed under Western Australia
Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements.  Expenditure is
estimated at over AU$100,000 without formal tender arrangements.


                           *********

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.  Noemi Irene
A. Adala, Joy A. Agravante, Ivy B. Magdadaro, Psyche A. Castillon,
Julie Anne L. Toledo, Christopher Patalinghug, Frauline Abangan
and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2012.  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 Peter Chapman
at 240/629-3300.





                 * * *  End of Transmission  * * *