CAR_Public/130222.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

           Friday, February 22, 2013, Vol. 15, No. 38

                             Headlines



ATLAS AIR: Class Cert. Bid in Antitrust Suit Remains Pending
BANK OF NEW YORK: Judge Refuses to Reconsider Class Action Ruling
CARNIVAL TRIUMPH: Lipcon Law Firm Files Class Action in Florida
CHEVRON CORP: Settles Colorado Asbestos Class Action for $40 Mil.
DELTA AIR: Awaits Order on Bid to Dismiss EU Regulation 261 Suit

DELTA AIR: Class Cert. Bid in Checked Bag Fee Suit Still Pending
EI DU PONT: Accord in Imprelis Class Action Tentative Approval
ENCORE CAPITAL: Appeals in "Brent" Class Suit Remain Pending
ENCORE CAPITAL: Fla. TCPA Suit Consolidated in California MDL
ENSIGN GROUP: Medicare Coverage Settlement Approved in January

ENSIGN GROUP: Still Awaits Court Nod of Staffing Suit Settlement
FIFTH THIRD: Breach of Contract Suit Remanded to Dist. Court
GOLD COAST: Traders Mull Class Action Over Light Rail Construction
HOSPIRA INC: Still Defends Securities Class Suit in Illinois
HYATT HOTELS: Defends Antitrust Class Action Suit in Connecticut

NAT'L COLLEGIATE: Former UMaine Hockey Player Joins Class Action
NTS REALTY: Faces Merger-Related Class Action Suit in Delaware
OVERHILL FARMS INC: Appeal From Denial of Class Cert. Pending
PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL: Appeal in "Fairmount" Suit Remains Pending
PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL: Continues to Defend "Cruise/Mullaney" Suit

REASSURE AMERICA: "Sunshine" Class Action Dismissal Upheld
REVLON INC: Awaits OK of $9.2MM Accord in Exchange Offer Suit
RJ REYNOLDS: Florida Jury Awards $40.5 Mil. to Smoker's Widow
SERVICE CORPORATION: Appeal in "Garcia" Suit Remains Pending
SERVICE CORPORATION: Continues to Defend "Niven" Class Suit

SERVICE CORPORATION: Continues to Defend "Schwartz" Class Suit
SERVICE CORPORATION: Continues to Defend California Class Suits
SERVICE CORPORATION: Defends Wage and Hour Suit in Kentucky
SERVICE CORPORATION: Has Settled Remaining "Prise" Suit Claims
SERVICE CORPORATION: "Sands" Suit Scheduled for Trial in July

STATER BROS: Full Amount of "Lunsford" Suit Deal Paid in 2013
TELIASONERA: Minority Shareholders Launch Class Action
WELLCARE HEALTH: Still Subject to Contingencies Under Suit Accord

* Federal Courts Challenge NLRB Mandatory Arbitration Ruling


                        Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: USD-234 Releases Annual Abatement Report
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Australian Unions Call to Effect AMRC Proposals
ASBESTOS UPDATE: UTC Cites Federal Officer Removal Provision
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Insurer Says It Has No Duty To Apex's Fibro Suit
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Suspected Fibro Cancels Intramurals at TRU

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Estancia Middle School Set For 3-Week Cleanup
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Decon Unit Contains Fibro at Cupar Garage Fire
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro "Fire Curtains" Removed at Seward Harbor
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 4 Months-Old Hazmat At Dale Farm Finally Removed
ASBESTOS UPDATE: TRU Gym Reopens After Averting Asbestos Scare

ASBESTOS UPDATE: HSE to Launch Electronic Campaign on Fibro Risks
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Alamogordo Commission Delays Vacant Motel Cleanup
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Remains a Very Real Health Threat in the US
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Avoidance From All Types Of Fibro Recommended
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Brown's Barus and Holley Abatement Plan Underway

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Telstra Work Stopped Due To Licensing Breach
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hazmat at the Rochdale Factory Fire Contained
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Surrey Fire and Rescue Faces Mesothelioma Suit
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Mckenzie-Willamette Cited For Health Violations
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Continued Closure of Cwmcarn School Questioned

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Detected During Washington Building Arson
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dust Levels At Orange City Work Site Raise Alarm
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Nylex Owner Snubs Suspicions of Illegal Abatement
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Islington Faces Suit Over Workmen's Negligence
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Abatement Begins at Former Grace Hospital

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Abatement Plan for East Central Schools Underway
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Online Video On Dust Sampling Method Announced
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Reverses Judgment in USF&G Recovery Suit
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Class Suit v. Asbestos Processing to Proceed
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Suit Junked Due to Gov't Officials' Immunity

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ky. Court Affirms Denial of NSI's New Trial Plea
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Appeals Ct. Overturns Ruling v. Dow Chemical
ASBESTOS UPDATE: NY Court Denies Uncontested Labor Law Claim
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Chevron Settles Colo. Class Action for $40 Mil.


                           *********


ATLAS AIR: Class Cert. Bid in Antitrust Suit Remains Pending
------------------------------------------------------------
Atlas Air Worldwide Holdings, Inc., continues to await a court
decision on plaintiffs' motion for class certification in a
consolidated lawsuit over the manipulation of fuel surcharges
pending in the U.S., according to Atlas Air's February 13, 2013,
Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the year ended December 31, 2012.

Atlas Air Worldwide Holdings, Inc., is the parent company of its
principal operating subsidiary, Atlas Air, Inc., and of Polar Air
Cargo LLC -- Old Polar.

In 2010, Old Polar entered into a plea agreement with the United
States Department of Justice (the "DOJ") relating to the
previously disclosed DOJ investigation concerning alleged
manipulation by cargo carriers of fuel surcharges and other rate
components for air cargo services (the "DOJ Investigation").

As a result of the DOJ Investigation, the Company and Old Polar
have been named defendants, along with a number of other cargo
carriers, in several class actions in the United States arising
from allegations about the pricing practices of a number of air
cargo carriers that have now been consolidated for pre-trial
purposes in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of New York.  The consolidated complaint alleges, among
other things, that the defendants, including the Company and Old
Polar, manipulated the market price for air cargo services sold
domestically and abroad through the use of surcharges, in
violation of United States, state, and European Union antitrust
laws.  The lawsuit seeks treble damages and injunctive relief.

In 2007, the Company and Old Polar commenced an adversary
proceeding in bankruptcy court against each of the plaintiffs in
this class action litigation seeking to enjoin the plaintiffs from
prosecuting claims against the Company and Old Polar that arose
prior to 2004, the date on which the Company and Old Polar emerged
from bankruptcy.  In 2007, the plaintiffs consented to the
injunctive relief requested and the bankruptcy court entered an
order enjoining plaintiffs from prosecuting Company claims arising
prior to 2004.

The court in the antitrust class actions has heard and decided a
number of procedural motions.  Among those was the plaintiffs'
motion to join Polar Air Cargo Worldwide, Inc. as an additional
defendant, which the court granted on April 13, 2011.  There was
substantial pre-trial written discovery and document production,
and a number of depositions were taken.  The case is currently in
the class certification phase, with additional depositions
occurring.  The plaintiffs' motion for class certification was
filed on October 28, 2011, and the Company filed its response on
May 25, 2012.  The Company says it is unable to reasonably predict
the court's ruling on the motion or the ultimate outcome of the
litigation.

The Company, Old Polar and a number of other cargo carriers have
also been named as defendants in civil class action lawsuits in
the provinces of British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec, Canada,
that are substantially similar to the class action lawsuits in the
United States.  The plaintiffs in the British Columbia case have
indicated they do not intend to pursue their lawsuit against the
Company and Old Polar.  The Company says it is unable to
reasonably predict the outcome of the litigation in Ontario and
Quebec.

If the Company or Old Polar were to incur an unfavorable outcome
in connection with one or more of the matters, such outcome is not
expected to materially affect the Company's business, financial
condition, results of operations, and/or cash flows.

Based in Purchase, New York, Atlas Air Worldwide Holdings, Inc.
provides outsourced aircraft services to the global air freight
market. The Company, which is the parent of Atlas Air, Inc. and
Polar Air Cargo Worldwide, Inc., has operations in Asia, Europe,
South America, the Middle East, Australia, Africa and the U.S.


BANK OF NEW YORK: Judge Refuses to Reconsider Class Action Ruling
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Litigation Daily reports that a federal judge has refused to
reconsider his earlier decision allowing a purported class action
to proceed accusing The Bank of New York Mellon of failing to stem
Countrywide Financial's collapse due to overexposure from
mortgage-backed securities.  But the judge ruled that the bank
could make an interlocutory appeal to the Second Circuit.


CARNIVAL TRIUMPH: Lipcon Law Firm Files Class Action in Florida
---------------------------------------------------------------
Miami based maritime law firm Lipcon, Margulies, Alsina &
Winkleman, P.A. has filed a proposed class action lawsuit (Case
number 1:13-cv-20592 in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Florida) on behalf of passengers who were
onboard the Carnival Triumph.

The firm, which has over 80 years of cruise ship litigation
experience in representing passengers and crewmembers who have
been involved in various types of accidents at sea or in port,
explained that the conditions Triumph passengers were subjected to
onboard after the vessel was impaled from a fire were hazardous to
their health.

Michael A. Winkleman, an experienced maritime lawyer with the
Lipcon firm, discussed the fire onboard the Triumph on a recent
interview on Fox Network's Fox & Friends, detailing the conditions
passengers had to suffer through.  Mr. Winkleman also appeared on
the network's America Live with Megyn Kelly, Justice with Judge
Jeanine and The O'Reilly Factor shows.  Lipcon's Jason R.
Margulies was interviewed by CNN regarding the situation.

According to the firm, cruise lines are responsible for the safety
of everyone onboard, including passengers and crewmembers, which
entails making sure illness and disease don't spread among those
aboard a vessel.  When an incident onboard a cruise vessel does
take place, whether it is a medical complication resulting from
disease, an injury related to a slip and fall, or a passenger
going overboard, the line may be found at least partially
responsible for any injuries or fatalities.

Apart from the shipboard conditions caused by the cruise ship
fire, Lipcon also points out that Carnival's decision to tow the
Triumph to Mobile, instead of the closer port of Progreso, Mexico,
caused passengers to endure more time onboard the disabled vessel
than was necessary, prolonging their exposure to disease,
accidents and trauma.

Attorney Margulies said "an evacuation in Progreso would have
allowed Carnival to contain its passengers' suffering and would
have enabled Carnival, from civilization, to systematically
coordinate the passengers' transport back to the United States."
Maritime lawyer Margulies further stated that "If investigations
uncover that either the fire itself or the delay in docking may
have contributed to any illnesses or injuries onboard the Carnival
Triumph, this can be considered a violation of passenger safety."

Unfortunately, some cruise lines, including Carnival, have
stipulations on their ticket contracts that make it difficult for
passengers and crewmembers to obtain their rightful benefits,
including medical care and money damages.  Because Carnival in
particular is not a U.S. corporation, Mr. Winkleman explained to
Fox News that the line is "not subject to U.S. taxes or labor
laws," a factor which prevents victims from making a full recovery
following cruise ship accidents and injuries.

Although Carnival released a statement on its Web site explaining
Triumph passengers will be compensated with a "full refund of the
cruise and transportation expenses, a future cruise credit equal
to the amount paid for the voyage, reimbursement of all shipboard
purchases made during the voyage, with the exception of casino,
gift shop and artwork purchases, and further compensation of $500
per person," Mr. Winkleman said passengers do not have to settle
for this meager compensation and that the firm has found
sufficient evidence providing grounds for Triumph victims to file
a proposed class action lawsuit against Carnival.

Lipcon, Margulies, Alsina & Winkleman, P.A. are committed to
obtaining just compensation for the passengers of the Triumph.
"We will not allow Carnival to put profits over passenger safety,"
said Attorney Margulies, on behalf of the Lipcon firm.  Anyone who
has been involved in this cruise ship accident and is interested
in joining the class action can contact Lipcon, Margulies, Alsina
& Winkleman, P.A. directly.

         About Lipcon, Margulies, Alsina & Winkleman, P.A.

Lipcon, Margulies, Alsina & Winkleman, P.A. is a maritime and
admiralty law firm handling personal injury claims against cruise
lines, cargo vessels, tow companies, and boat operators.


CHEVRON CORP: Settles Colorado Asbestos Class Action for $40 Mil.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
David Forster, writing for Law Week Colorado, reports that a long-
running dispute between northern Colorado landowners and a major
oil company over asbestos contamination ended last month with a
$40 million settlement.

Along the way, the case drew a significant ruling from the
Colorado Supreme Court on class action certifications.

The court's October 2011 ruling upholding a trial court judge's
decision to let the case proceed as a class action dealt a setback
to Unocal, now owned by Chevron Corp.  Settlement talks began a
couple of months later.

Under the terms of the deal approved in late January by a district
court judge, Chevron will pay $32.5 million in cash to the
landowners in the class.  It will also pay $7.5 million for
asbestos cleanup and testing.


DELTA AIR: Awaits Order on Bid to Dismiss EU Regulation 261 Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Delta Air Lines, Inc. is awaiting a court decision on its motion
to dismiss all claims in a class action lawsuit seeking
compensation under EU Regulation 261, according to the Company's
February 13, 2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the year ended December 31, 2012.

In February 2011, a putative class action was filed in the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois seeking to
represent all U.S. residents who were passengers on flights during
the period from February 2009 to the present who are allegedly
entitled to compensation under EU Regulation 261 because their
flight was cancelled or delayed by more than three hours.
Plaintiffs allege that Delta has incorporated a duty to pay this
compensation into its contract of carriage, and assert a claim for
breach of contract as the basis for their cause of action.  The
complaint seeks recovery of the EU Regulation 261 compensation of
EUR600 for each U.S. resident on a flight qualifying for such
compensation.

Delta disputes the allegations in the Complaint, has filed a
motion to dismiss all claims and intends to vigorously defend the
matter.


DELTA AIR: Class Cert. Bid in Checked Bag Fee Suit Still Pending
----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs' motion to certify a class with respect to their claims
under Section 1 of the Sherman Act remains pending, according to
Delta Air Lines, Inc.'s February 13, 2013, Form 10-K filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended
December 31, 2012.

In May, June and July, 2009, a number of purported class action
antitrust lawsuits were filed in the U.S. District Courts for the
Northern District of Georgia, the Middle District of Florida and
the District of Nevada against Delta and AirTran Airways
("AirTran").  In these cases, the plaintiffs originally alleged
that Delta and AirTran engaged in collusive behavior in violation
of Section 1 of the Sherman Act in November 2008 based upon
certain public statements made in October 2008 by AirTran's CEO at
an analyst conference concerning fees for the first checked bag,
Delta's imposition of a fee for the first checked bag on November
4, 2008, and AirTran's imposition of a similar fee on November 12,
2008.  The plaintiffs sought to assert claims on behalf of an
alleged class consisting of passengers who paid the first bag fee
after December 5, 2008, and seek injunctive relief and unspecified
treble damages.  All of these cases have been consolidated for
pre-trial proceedings in the Northern District of Georgia by the
Multi-District Litigation ("MDL") Panel.

In February 2010, the plaintiffs in the MDL proceeding filed a
consolidated amended class action complaint which substantially
expanded the scope of the original complaint.  In the consolidated
amended complaint, plaintiffs add new allegations concerning
alleged signaling by both Delta and AirTran based upon statements
made to the investment community by both carriers relating to
industry capacity levels during 2008-2009.  Plaintiffs also added
a new cause of action against Delta alleging attempted
monopolization in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act,
paralleling a claim previously asserted against AirTran but not
Delta.

In August 2010, the District Court issued an order granting
Delta's motion to dismiss the Section 2 claim, but denying its
motion to dismiss the Section 1 claim.  Plaintiffs have filed a
motion to certify the Section 1 class, which remains pending.

Delta believes the claims in these cases are without merit and is
vigorously defending these lawsuits.


EI DU PONT: Accord in Imprelis Class Action Tentative Approval
--------------------------------------------------------------
Wright & Schulte LLC, a product liability law firm, reports that
the federal judge overseeing Imprelis class action lawsuits in
Pennsylvania federal court has granted tentative approval to an
Imprelis class action lawsuit settlement.  According to court
records, the terms of the Imprelis class action lawsuit settlement
require DuPont to compensate tens of thousands of property owners
for their dead and damaged trees, including costs for removal,
replacements, maintenance and warranties.  The Imprelis class
action lawsuit settlement also provides for compensation to
herbicide applicators for costs they incurred while investigating
plant and tree Imprelis damage.  Participants in the settlement
may still file claims for environmental or personal injury damage.
(In re Imprelis Herbicide Marketing, Sales Practices and Products
Liability Litigation, 2:11-md-02284)

Wright & Schulte LLC is representing hundreds of plaintiffs in
Imprelis lawsuits filed outside of the Pennsylvania class action,
and is offering free advice to property owners who wish to opt out
of the proposed settlement.

Richard Schulte, a partner with Wright & Schulte LLC, told the
Columbus Dispatch last year that the offers DuPont had made to
property owners via its previously established claims program were
unsatisfactory.  "None of our clients are participating in the
settlements because the offers are inadequate," said Mr. Schulte.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a Stop Sale
and Removal Order for Imprelis in August 2011, after the agency
investigated hundreds of reports of Imprelis tree death throughout
the Northeast and Midwest U.S. Imprelis had only been approved for
sale in October 2010, but by the time it was pulled from the
market, it had killed or damaged thousands of ornamental landscape
trees.

According to a report from Bloomberg.com, DuPont has set aside
$750 million to compensate property owners for Imprelis-damaged
trees, and has said costs could reach $900 million.  However, that
figure includes compensation paid through the company's Imprelis
claims program, and doesn't include the class action lawsuit.


ENCORE CAPITAL: Appeals in "Brent" Class Suit Remain Pending
------------------------------------------------------------
On May 19, 2008, an action captioned Brent v. Midland Credit
Management, Inc. et. al was filed in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Ohio Western Division, in which
the plaintiff filed a class action counter-claim against two of
Encore Capital Group, Inc.'s subsidiaries (the "Midland
Defendants").  The complaint alleged that the Midland Defendants'
business practices violated consumers' rights under the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA") and the Ohio Consumer Sales
Practices Act.  The plaintiff sought actual and statutory damages
for the class of Ohio residents, plus attorney's fees and costs of
class notice and class administration.  On August 12, 2011, the
court issued an order granting final approval to the parties
agreed upon settlement of this lawsuit, as well as two other
pending lawsuits in the Northern District of Ohio entitled
Franklin v. Midland Funding LLC and Vassalle v. Midland Funding
LLC, on a national class basis, and dismissed the cases against
the Midland Defendants with prejudice.  That order has been
appealed by certain objectors to the settlement, which appeals
remain pending.

No further updates were reported in the Company's February 13,
2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the year ended December 31, 2012.


ENCORE CAPITAL: Fla. TCPA Suit Consolidated in California MDL
-------------------------------------------------------------
The latest class action lawsuit filed in Florida against Encore
Capital Group, Inc. was transferred to California for
consolidation with the multidistrict litigation, according to the
Company's February 13, 2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended
December 31, 2012.

On November 2, 2010, and December 17, 2010, two national class
actions entitled Robinson v. Midland Funding LLC and Tovar v.
Midland Credit Management, respectively, were filed in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of California.
The complaints allege that certain of the Company's subsidiaries
violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA") by calling
consumers' cellular phones without their prior express consent.
The complaints seek monetary damages under the TCPA, injunctive
relief, and other relief, including attorney fees.  On May 10,
2011, and May 11, 2011, two class actions entitled Scardina v.
Midland Credit Management, Inc., Midland Funding LLC and Encore
Capital Group, Inc. and Martin v. Midland Funding, LLC,
respectively, were filed in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of Illinois.  The complaints allege on
behalf of a putative class of Illinois consumers that certain of
the Company's subsidiaries violated the TCPA by calling consumers'
cellular phones without their prior express consent.  The
complaints seek monetary damages under the TCPA, injunctive
relief, and other relief, including attorney fees.  On July 28,
2011, the Company filed a motion to transfer the Scardina and
Martin cases to the United States District Court for the Southern
District of California to be consolidated with the Tovar and
Robinson cases.  On October 11, 2011, the United States Judicial
Panel on Multidistrict Litigation granted the Company's motion to
transfer.  All four of these cases are now pending in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of California in a
multidistrict litigation titled In re Midland Credit Management
Inc. Telephone Consumer Protection Act Litigation.  The lead
plaintiffs filed an amended consolidated complaint on July 11,
2012.

On October 17, 2012, a national class action titled Hartman v.
Midland Credit Management, Inc. was filed in the Middle District
of Florida.  The complaint in Hartman alleged that the Company's
subsidiary violated the TCPA by calling consumers' cellular phones
without their prior express consent.  On November 20, 2012, the
Hartman case was transferred to the Southern District of
California to be consolidated with the multidistrict litigation.


ENSIGN GROUP: Medicare Coverage Settlement Approved in January
--------------------------------------------------------------
The federal class action lawsuit settlement that would end the
Medicare coverage standard for skilled nursing, home health and
outpatient therapy services was approved last month, according to
The Ensign Group, Inc.'s February 13, 2013, Form 10-K filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended
December 31, 2012.

A proposed federal class action settlement was filed in federal
district court on October 16, 2012, that would end the Medicare
coverage standard for skilled nursing, home health and outpatient
therapy services that a beneficiary's condition must be expected
to improve.  The settlement was approved on January 24, 2013,
which tasked the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)
with revising its Medicare Benefit Manual and numerous other
policies, guidelines and instructions to ensure that Medicare
coverage is available for skilled maintenance services in the home
health, skilled nursing and outpatient settings.  CMS must also
develop and implement a nationwide education campaign for all who
make Medicare determinations to ensure that beneficiaries with
chronic conditions are not denied coverage for critical services
because their underlying conditions will not improve.  At the
conclusion of the CMS education campaign, the members of the class
will have the opportunity for re-review of their claims, and a
two- or three-year monitoring period will commence.
Implementation of the provisions of this settlement agreement
could favorably impact reimbursement for the Company's services.


ENSIGN GROUP: Still Awaits Court Nod of Staffing Suit Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Ensign Group, Inc. is still awaiting court approval of its
settlement of a class action lawsuit alleging violations of state-
established minimum staffing requirements, according to the
Company's February 13, 2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended
December 31, 2012.

Healthcare litigation is common and is filed based upon a wide
variety of claims and theories, and the Company is routinely
subjected to varying types of claims.  One particular type of
lawsuit arises from alleged violations of state-established
minimum staffing requirements for skilled nursing facilities.
Failure to meet these requirements can, among other things,
jeopardize a facility's compliance with conditions of
participation under certain state and federal healthcare programs;
it may also subject the facility to a notice of deficiency, a
citation, civil money penalties, or litigation.  These "staffing"
lawsuits have become more prevalent in the wake of a previous
substantial jury award against one of the Company's competitors,
and the Company expects the plaintiff's bar to become increasingly
aggressive in their pursuit of these staffing and similar claims.

The Company is currently defending one such staffing class-action
claim filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, and have reached a
tentative settlement with class counsel that is awaiting court
approval.  The total costs associated with the settlement,
including attorney's fees, estimated class payout, and related
costs and expense, are projected to be $5.0 million, of which $2.6
million of this amount was recorded in the quarter ended June 30,
2012, with the balance having been expensed in prior periods.

Assuming that the settlement is approved by the court, the
settlement will not have a material ongoing adverse effect on the
Company's business, financial condition, or results of operations.


FIFTH THIRD: Breach of Contract Suit Remanded to Dist. Court
------------------------------------------------------------
Arlington Video Productions, Inc. filed suit against Fifth Third
Bank alleging individual and class claims for breach of the Bank's
contractual obligation to inform customers in advance that certain
service fees would be charged to their accounts.  The district
court denied Arlington's motion for class certification and
subsequently granted the Bank's motion for summary judgment on
Arlington's individual claim.  Arlington appealed both decisions
to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

On February 14, 2013, the Sixth Circuit issued an opinion
reversing the grant of summary judgment to the Bank; reversing the
denial of class certification; and remanding to the district court
for further proceedings consistent with the Sixth Circuit Opinion.

The Sixth Circuit concluded that the district court erred in
granting summary judgment in favor of the Bank on Arlington's
individual claim and in denying class certification under Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a) & (b)(3).

Circuit Judge Jane B. Stranch, writing for the three-judge panel,
held that summary judgment in favor of the Bank was not warranted
on Arlington's individual breach of contract claim.  Arlington's
motion for class certification should also have been granted in
part and denied in part, she said.

Judge Stranch said the district court should have an opportunity
to reconsider the class-certification motion because it appears
"that Arlington can meet all of the Rule 23(a) and (b)(3)
prerequisites to class certification."  The Sixth Circuit,
however, agreed with the district court that the class definition
as initially proposed by Arlington is too broad and must be
narrowed.

It is the district court's prerogative to define the class in
accordance with the Opinion and to make any refinements to the
class definition that may be necessary to manage the litigation,
Judge Stranch ruled.

The case before the Sixth Circuit it ARLINGTON VIDEO PRODUCTIONS,
INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FIFTH THIRD BANCORP, Defendant-
Appellee, No. 11-4077.

A copy of the Appeals Court's February 14, 2013 Opinion is
available at http://is.gd/0uK1fifrom Leagle.com.


GOLD COAST: Traders Mull Class Action Over Light Rail Construction
------------------------------------------------------------------
Robyn Wuth, writing for GoldCoast.com.au, reports that traders
crippled by the billion-dollar light rail construction are
considering taking legal action against the State Government.

Southport-based law firm Evans Lawyers has called on business
owners and traders who have been financially affected by the
project to join a proposed class action bid for compensation.

CEO Troy Manhire said many Southport businesses had been
"devastated" during the light rail's construction and a class
action against the State Government, the Gold Coast City Council
and consortium GoldLinQ was "worth exploring".

"Our firm is based in the heart of Southport and we have been very
disturbed by the number of businesses that have closed or been
affected by this construction," Mr. Manhire said.

"We think what is going on, in good conscience, is simply not
right."  Mr. Manhire said "a number" of Southport traders had
committed to the legal action and he expected more would come
forward.

"We will explore whether these retailers have a course of action
-- if they do, we will go for it," he said.

"If they do not, at least they will know once and for all."

One trader who has joined the action and who asked not to be
named, said he felt he had "no other choice".

"We are barely surviving," he said.

"I don't even know if we will be able to hold out until (the
project) is finished.

"It has been tough.

"We're just hanging in and so many people have their backs to the
wall."

Southport Chamber of Commerce president Laird Marshall confirmed
the chamber had been approached to join the lawsuit.

"It is a shame that it has come to this, but I would have thought
it would happen sooner than this, to be honest," Mr. Marshall
said.

"Obviously these traders feel aggrieved and believed they have a
course of action -- that is their right."

Mr. Marshall said the construction phase had been "a real
nightmare" for traders.

Compensation measures were not built into the construction
contracts.

GoldLinQ did not respond to requests for comment.


HOSPIRA INC: Still Defends Securities Class Suit in Illinois
------------------------------------------------------------
Hospira, Inc. continues to defend itself and its officers against
a securities class action lawsuit pending in Illinois, according
to the Company's February 13, 2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended December 31,
2012.

Hospira and certain of its corporate officers and former corporate
officers are defendants in a lawsuit alleging violations of the
Securities and Exchange Act of 1934: City of Sterling Heights
General Employees' Retirement System, Individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated vs. Hospira, Inc., F. Michael
Ball, Thomas E. Werner, James H. Hardy, Jr., and Christopher B.
Begley, amended complaint filed June 25, 2012, and pending in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois.  The lawsuit alleges, generally, that the defendants
issued materially false and misleading statements regarding
Hospira's financials and business prospects and failed to disclose
material facts affecting Hospira's financial condition.  The
lawsuit alleges a class period from February 4, 2010 (announcement
of Q4, 2009 financial results) through October 17, 2011 (Hospira
announced preliminary financial results for Q3, 2011 on October
18, 2011).  The lawsuit seeks class action status and damages
including interest, attorneys' fees and costs.


HYATT HOTELS: Defends Antitrust Class Action Suit in Connecticut
----------------------------------------------------------------
Hyatt Hotels Corporation is defending a class action lawsuit
alleging violation of federal antitrust laws, according to the
Company's February 13, 2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended
December 31, 2012.

In September 2012, a putative class action was filed against the
Company, several other hotel companies and several online travel
companies in federal district court in Connecticut seeking an
unspecified amount of damages and equitable relief for an alleged
violation of the federal antitrust laws.  The online travel
companies and the other hotel companies have also been named in
other actions, and a motion for consolidation is before the
Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation.  The Company disputes
the allegations and will defend its interests vigorously.  The
Company currently does not believe the ultimate outcome of this
litigation will have a material effect on its consolidated
financial position, results of operation or liquidity.


NAT'L COLLEGIATE: Former UMaine Hockey Player Joins Class Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Russell, writing for the Portland Press Herald, reports that
Kyle Solomon, 25, of Southampton, N.Y., was a member of University
of Maine's hockey team from 2008 to 2010.  He left the team in the
middle of his sophomore season after suffering a series of head
injuries.

This week, Solomon added his name to a lawsuit filed in September
2011 in U.S. District Court in Northern Illinois.

The lawsuit includes three other former student-athletes who
suffered career-ending concussions: Adrian Arrington, who played
football for Eastern Illinois University; Derek Owens, who played
football for the University of Central Arkansas; and Angela
Palacios, who played soccer at Ouachita Baptist University in
Arkansas.

Solomon did not return several calls for comment Thursday and
Friday. The lawsuit details his history playing for UMaine.

Before joining the team in 2008, Solomon disclosed to UMaine's
coaching staff that he had suffered three concussions during his
prep career.

"Neither the coaching or (sic) training staff ever addressed or
discussed concussions or concussion symptoms with him," the
complaint reads. "He also did not receive any information from or
on behalf of the NCAA on how to recognize or report head
injuries."

Solomon's first concussion at UMaine came during a practice in
March 2009, when a teammate elbowed him in the head. When he tried
to get up after the hit, his legs collapsed and he felt dizzy, the
complaint says. The symptoms lasted several days.

In a nationally televised game between Maine and Boston College in
October 2009, Solomon was hit by an opposing player. The collision
sent Solomon toward the boards, where he hit his head above the
right ear and blacked out.

When he regained consciousness, he saw "stars" and had double
vision, the complaint reads. A trainer examined Solomon in the
locker room but did not diagnose a concussion. Solomon was given
seven stitches and returned to the game in the third period.

After the game, "Solomon was told to 'go back to his dorm room and
rest,' despite the fact that he lived alone and no one was present
to monitor his condition," the complaint reads. He continued to
experience concussion symptoms for about a week.

In January 2010, in a game between Maine and Merrimack College,
Solomon was elbowed again. He left that game in an ambulance and
was treated at a hospital for damage to his vocal cords and a
slight concussion. He was out of action for about two weeks.

Solomon's final head injury came during a practice in March 2010,
when he was "elbowed softly" by a teammate, the complaint reads.
He was diagnosed with a concussion but was cleared to return two
weeks later, "despite the fact that Solomon felt something was
wrong with him. He felt like a different person. He noticed a
change in his personality, felt depressed, and was disconnected
with reality."

After that hit, Solomon visited Dr. Robert Cantu, a neurologist in
Boston who specializes in brain injuries. Cantu told Solomon that
his brain had sustained severe trauma and "advised that another
concussion could kill him," the complaint says.

Solomon retired from hockey.

He has continued his studies at UMaine but the effects of his
concussions have been debilitating, the complaint says. He can't
read for long stretches, suffers from migraine headaches and often
cannot sleep.

The three other student-athletes named in the lawsuit have similar
stories.

"While playing NCAA sports, the NCAA did not encourage Arrington,
Owens, Palacios, Solomon or other student-athletes to report or
complain about their physical well-being, did not thoroughly
educate (them) of the long-term effects of concussions, and did
not thoroughly educate plaintiffs or other student-athletes about
head-injury prevention," the complaint reads.

The lawsuit seeks compensatory damages, "the amount of which is to
be determined at trial," and calls for adoption of a series of
preventive measures and the creation of a medical monitoring
program for college athletes.

Laura Reed, spokeswoman for the University of Maine athletic
department, said the university could not comment on Solomon's
time at Maine because of health privacy laws. She did not respond
to requests for comment about concussions related to the UMaine
hockey program.

The NCAA also did not respond Friday to a request for comment. In
its response to the original complaint, filed on Dec. 21, 2011,
the organization said it was "without knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the
allegations."

The NCAA has not responded to the amended complaint, which was
filed this week.

UMaine coach Tim Whitehead remembers Solomon as a tough, hard-
nosed player who suffered concussions before joining Maine's
hockey team. He said in an interview Thursday that he was not
aware that Solomon had become a plaintiff in the NCAA lawsuit.

"He played the game hard, so it wasn't like he could avoid
contact," Whitehead said. "We really felt for him, but the
decision to play again was clear . . . it was not worth the risk."

Whitehead said his team has had its share of concussion-related
injuries this season.

Four players have had to miss games or are currently out with
concussions. They include Kyle Beattie, a senior center who is out
indefinitely with his third concussion of the season.

"It's not a problem that is going away," Whitehead said. "A helmet
is only going to do so much."

He said one issue that the NCAA must address is players trying to
hide concussion symptoms from their coaches. Some players want to
maximize their ice time even if it means putting their bodies at
risk, he said. "We need to find a way to increase player
awareness."

Before the season, each player gets a baseline cognitive ability
test, which can be reviewed if a player suffers a concussion. But
Whitehead said the test is no good if a player tries to hide
concussion symptoms.

Whitehead said the speed of the game has increased in recent
years, and the plastic in protective equipment is much harder than
materials used in the past. Those factors, he believes, have led
to more concussions.

"The one thing that hasn't changed is the brain," he said.

Paul Greene, a Portland lawyer who has represented collegiate and
professional athletes and teaches sports law at the University of
Maine School of Law, said the lawsuit will come down to what the
NCAA's duty is to student athletes.

"I don't think it's unreasonable that the NCAA should have
regulations in place about concussions," Greene said Friday. "The
NCAA has a 450-page manual that directs schools in every other
capacity. It has never been averse to regulation." He predicted
that the class-action suit will drag on for months, possibly
years, and may never go to trial. But he said that in such cases,
the outcome is often less important than the public debate.


NTS REALTY: Faces Merger-Related Class Action Suit in Delaware
--------------------------------------------------------------
NTS Realty Holdings Limited Partnership disclosed in its
February 13, 2013, Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission that a putative class action lawsuit was filed
against it on February 12, 2013, in the Court of Chancery of the
State of Delaware.

Each of the members of the board of directors of NTS Realty
Capital, Inc., the Company's managing general partner ("Realty
Capital"), NTS Merger Parent, LLC and Realty Capital are also
named as defendants.  The lawsuit alleges, among other things,
that the board of directors breached their fiduciary duties to the
unitholders of the Company in connection with the board's approval
of the merger between NTS Merger Sub, LLC and the Company.  The
complaint seeks, among other things, money damages.

The Company urged interested parties to read relevant documents,
when and if filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, because they will contain important information.  The
Company has filed a preliminary proxy statement and will file
other documents regarding the proposed merger with the SEC, and
the definitive proxy statement will be sent to unitholders seeking
their approval of the matters at a special meeting of unitholders.
Unitholders are urged to read the proxy statement and any other
relevant document when they become available because they will
contain important information about the Company, the proposed
merger and related matters.  Interested parties may obtain a free
copy of the definitive proxy statement (when available) and other
documents filed by the Company with the SEC at the SEC's Web site
at http://www.sec.gov/

The Company, its managing general partner and its managing general
partner's directors, executive officers and other members of its
management and employees (including J.D. Nichols and Brian F.
Lavin) may be deemed participants in the solicitation of proxies
from the unitholders of the Company in connection with the
proposed transactions.  Information regarding the special
interests of persons who may be deemed to be such participants in
the proposed transactions will be included in the proxy statement.

                        About NTS Realty

The Company currently owns, wholly, as a tenant in common with
unaffiliated co-owners, or through joint venture investments with
affiliated and unaffiliated third parties, twenty-four properties
comprised of fifteen multifamily properties, seven office
buildings and business centers and two retail properties.  The
properties are located in and around Louisville and Lexington,
Kentucky, Nashville and Cordova, Tennessee, Richmond, Virginia,
Fort Lauderdale and Orlando, Florida, Indianapolis, Indiana and
Atlanta, Georgia.  The Company's limited partnership units are
listed on the NYSE MKT platform under the trading symbol of "NLP."


OVERHILL FARMS INC: Appeal From Denial of Class Cert. Pending
-------------------------------------------------------------
An appeal from the denial of class certification in the
consolidated lawsuit commenced in California remains pending,
according to Overhill Farms, Inc.'s February 13, 2013, Form 10-Q
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarter ended December 30, 2012.

On July 1, 2009, Bohemia Agustiana, Isela Hernandez, and Ana Munoz
filed a purported "class action" 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 lawsuit is
captioned Agustiana, et al. v. Overhill Farms.  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")).  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.  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.  The plaintiffs thereafter dropped their rest
break and PAGA claims when they filed a consolidated amended
complaint.

In 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.

The remaining plaintiff added four former employees as additional
plaintiffs.   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.

On June 26, 2012, the court denied the plaintiffs' motion to
certify the case as a class action, and it dismissed the class
allegations.  The five remaining plaintiffs can pursue their
individual wage claims against the Company, but the court has
ruled that they cannot assert those claims on behalf of the class
of current and former production employees they sought to
represent.  The Company believes it has valid defenses to the
plaintiffs' remaining claims, and that the Company paid all wages
due to these employees.

On September 7, 2012, the plaintiffs filed a notice to appeal the
denial of class certification.  The case is stayed while their
appeal is pending.


PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL: Appeal in "Fairmount" Suit Remains Pending
---------------------------------------------------------------
On November 8, 2006, a trustee of Fairmount Park Inc. Retirement
Savings Plan filed a putative class action lawsuit in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois
against Principal Financial Group, Inc.'s subsidiary, Principal
Life Insurance Company.  Principal Life's motion to transfer venue
was granted and the case is now pending in the Southern District
of Iowa.  The complaint alleged, among other things, that
Principal Life breached its alleged fiduciary duties while
performing services to 401(k) plans by failing to disclose, or
adequately disclose, to employers or plan participants the fact
that Principal Life receives "revenue sharing fees from mutual
funds that are included in its pre-packaged 401(k) plans" and
allegedly failed to use the revenue to defray the expenses of the
services provided to the plans.  Plaintiff further alleged that
these acts constitute prohibited transactions under the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA").

Plaintiff sought to certify a class of all retirement plans to
which Principal Life was a service provider and for which
Principal Life received and retained "revenue sharing" fees from
mutual funds.  On August 27, 2008, the plaintiff's motion for
class certification was denied.  On June 13, 2011, the court
entered a consent judgment resolving the claims of the plaintiff.
On July 12, 2011, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal related to
the issue of the denial of class certification.  Principal Life
continues to aggressively defend the lawsuit.

No further updates were reported in the Company's February 13,
2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the year ended December 31, 2012.


PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL: Continues to Defend "Cruise/Mullaney" Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
On December 2 and 4, 2009, two plaintiffs, Cruise and Mullaney,
each filed putative class action lawsuits in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York against
Principal Financial Group, Inc.; Principal Life Insurance Company;
Principal Global Investors, LLC; and Principal Real Estate
Investors, LLC (the "Cruise/Mullaney Defendants").  The lawsuits
alleged the Cruise/Mullaney Defendants failed to manage the
Principal U.S. Property Separate Account ("PUSPSA") in the best
interests of investors, improperly imposed a "withdrawal freeze"
on September 26, 2008, and instituted a "withdrawal queue" to
honor withdrawal requests as sufficient liquidity became
available.  Plaintiffs allege these actions constitute a breach of
fiduciary duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act
of 1974 ("ERISA").  Plaintiffs seek to certify a class including
all qualified ERISA plans and the participants of those plans that
invested in PUSPSA between September 26, 2008, and the present
that have suffered losses caused by the queue.  The two lawsuits,
as well as two subsequently filed complaints asserting similar
claims, have been consolidated and are now known as In re
Principal U.S. Property Account Litigation.

On April 22, 2010, an order was entered granting the motion made
by the Cruise/Mullaney Defendants for change of venue to the
United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.
Plaintiffs filed an Amended Consolidated Complaint adding five new
plaintiffs on November 22, 2010, and the Cruise/Mullaney
Defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint.

The court denied the Cruise/Mullaney Defendants' motion to dismiss
on May 17, 2011.  The Cruise/Mullaney Defendants are aggressively
defending the lawsuit.

No further updates were reported in the Company's February 13,
2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the year ended December 31, 2012.


REASSURE AMERICA: "Sunshine" Class Action Dismissal Upheld
----------------------------------------------------------
The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed
on February 15, 2013, the dismissal of Barry Sunshine's four-count
amended complaint against Reassure America Life Insurance Company.

The action, captioned BARRY SUNSHINE, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated, Appellant, v. REASSURE AMERICA LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANY; SWISS RE LIFE & HEALTH AMERICA, INCORPORATED,
No. 12-1796, sought damages in connection with a disability
insurance policy that Mr. Sunshine purchased from Reassure.

A copy of the Appeals Court's February 15, 2013 Opinion is
available at http://is.gd/7urbxsfrom Leagle.com.


REVLON INC: Awaits OK of $9.2MM Accord in Exchange Offer Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
Revlon, Inc. is still awaiting court approval of an agreement to
settle for $9.2 million lawsuits arising from its voluntary
exchange offer consummated in October 2009, according to the
Company's February 13, 2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended
December 31, 2012.

On October 8, 2009, the Company consummated its voluntary exchange
offer in which, among other things, Revlon, Inc. issued to
stockholders who elected to exchange shares (other than MacAndrews
& Forbes) 9,336,905 shares of its Preferred Stock in exchange for
the same number of shares of Revlon, Inc. Class A Common Stock
tendered in the Exchange Offer (the "Exchange Offer").  On April
24, 2009, May 1, 2009, May 5, 2009, and
May 12, 2009, respectively, four purported class actions were
filed by each of Vern Mercier, Arthur Jurkowitz, Suri Lefkowitz
and T. Walter Heiser in the Court of Chancery of the State of
Delaware (the "Chancery Court").  On May 4, 2009, a purported
class action was filed by Stanley E. Sullivan in the Supreme Court
of New York, New York County.  Each such lawsuit was brought
against Revlon, Inc., Revlon, Inc.'s then directors and MacAndrews
& Forbes, and challenged a merger proposal which MacAndrews &
Forbes made on April 13, 2009, which would have resulted in
MacAndrews & Forbes and certain of its affiliates owning 100% of
Revlon, Inc.'s outstanding Common Stock (in lieu of consummating
such merger proposal, the Company consummated the Exchange Offer).
Each action sought, among other things, to enjoin the proposed
merger transaction.  On June 24, 2009, the Chancery Court
consolidated the four Delaware actions (the "Initial Consolidated
Action"), and appointed lead counsel for plaintiffs.  As announced
on August 10, 2009, an agreement in principle was reached to
settle the Initial Consolidated Action, as set forth in a
Memorandum of Understanding (as amended in September 2009, the
"2009 Settlement Agreement").

On December 24, 2009, an amended complaint was filed in the
Sullivan action alleging, among other things, that defendants
should have disclosed in the Company's Offer to Exchange for the
Exchange Offer information regarding the Company's financial
results for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2009.  On
January 6, 2010, an amended complaint was filed by plaintiffs in
the Initial Consolidated Action making allegations similar to
those in the amended Sullivan complaint.  Revlon, Inc. initially
believed that by filing the amended complaint, plaintiffs in the
Initial Consolidated Action had formally repudiated the 2009
Settlement Agreement, and on January 8, 2010, defendants filed a
motion to enforce the 2009 Settlement Agreement.

In addition to the amended complaints in the Initial Consolidated
Action and the Sullivan action, on December 21, 2009, certain of
Revlon, Inc.'s then directors, a former director and MacAndrews &
Forbes were named as defendants in a purported class action filed
in the Chancery Court by Edward Gutman.  Also on December 21,
2009, a second purported class action was filed in the Chancery
Court against certain of Revlon, Inc.'s then directors and a
former director by Lawrence Corneck.  The Gutman and Corneck
actions make allegations similar to those in the amended
complaints in the Sullivan action and the Initial Consolidated
Action.  On January 15, 2010, the Chancery Court consolidated the
Gutman and Corneck actions with the Initial Consolidated Action.
A briefing schedule was then set to determine the leadership
structure for plaintiffs in the Consolidated Action.

On March 16, 2010, after hearing oral argument on the leadership
issue, the Chancery Court changed the leadership structure for
plaintiffs in the Consolidated Action.  Thereafter, newly
appointed counsel for the plaintiffs in the Consolidated Action
and the defendants agreed that the defendants would withdraw their
motion to enforce the 2009 Settlement Agreement and that merits
discovery would proceed.  Defendants agreed not to withdraw any of
the concessions that had been provided to the plaintiffs as part
of the 2009 Settlement Agreement.

On May 25, 2010, plaintiffs' counsel in the Consolidated Action
filed an amended complaint alleging breaches of fiduciary duties
arising out of the Exchange Offer and that defendants should have
disclosed in the Company's Offer to Exchange information regarding
the Company's financial results for the fiscal quarter ended
September 30, 2009.  On January 10, 2012, plaintiffs' counsel
filed a motion for class certification.  Briefing on that motion
was not completed.  Merits discovery proceeded in the Consolidated
Action.

On December 31, 2009, a purported class action was filed in the
U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware by John Garofalo
against Revlon, Inc., certain of Revlon, Inc.'s then directors, a
former director and MacAndrews & Forbes alleging federal and state
law claims stemming from the alleged failure to disclose in the
Offer to Exchange certain information relating to the Company's
financial results for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2009.
On July 29, 2011, the plaintiff in this action filed an amended
complaint.  On January 31, 2012, defendants filed motions to
dismiss the amended complaint in the Garofalo action.  On March 2,
2012, the plaintiff in the Garofalo action filed a response
opposing defendants' motions to dismiss, and a motion
alternatively seeking leave to amend and file a second amended
complaint.  Briefing was completed on the motions to dismiss and
motion to amend and defendants requested oral argument. Defendants
previously reached an agreement with the plaintiff in the Garofalo
action to permit the plaintiff to participate in merits discovery
in the Consolidated Action, and agreed to permit the plaintiff to
continue to participate in the merits discovery while the motions
to dismiss are pending.  An agreement was also reached with the
plaintiff in the Sullivan action to stay proceedings in that
action, including any response to the amended complaint, until
December 21, 2012, so that the plaintiff could participate in the
merits discovery in the Consolidated Action.

On May 11, 2010, a purported derivative action was filed in the
U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware by Richard
Smutek, derivatively and on behalf of Revlon, Inc. against Revlon,
Inc.'s then directors and MacAndrews & Forbes alleging breach of
fiduciary duty in allowing the Exchange Offer to proceed and
failing to disclose in the Offer to Exchange certain information
related to the Company's financial results for the fiscal quarter
ended September 30, 2009.  On August 16, 2010, defendants moved to
dismiss the complaint.  Briefing on defendants' motions to dismiss
was completed on December 10, 2010.  Thereafter, the parties
requested oral argument on the motions to dismiss.  On September
27, 2010, plaintiff filed a motion to compel discovery.  In
response, defendants moved to strike plaintiff's motion to compel
discovery or, in the alternative, for an extension of time for
defendants to respond to plaintiff's motion.  On October 17, 2011,
the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware denied
plaintiff's motion to compel and granted defendants' motion to
strike.

Plaintiffs in each of these actions sought, among other things, an
award of damages and the costs and disbursements of such actions,
including a reasonable allowance for the fees and expenses of each
such plaintiff's attorneys and experts.  Because the Smutek action
is styled as a derivative action on behalf of the Company, any
award of damages, costs and disbursements would be made to and for
the benefit of the Company.

Although the Company disputes the allegations in the pending
actions and believes them to be without merit, on June 21, 2012,
without admitting any liability, Revlon, Inc., Revlon, Inc.'s then
directors and MacAndrews & Forbes (collectively, "Defendants")
entered into a binding Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") with
Fidelity Management & Research Company ("FMR Co.") and its
investment advisory affiliates, all of which are direct or
indirect subsidiaries of FMR LLC (collectively, "Fidelity"), which
through various funds and management agreements controlled the
largest block of shares to participate in the Exchange Offer, to
settle potential claims Fidelity could have as a potential member
of the classes that plaintiffs seek to certify in the pending
actions.

Fidelity executed the MOU on behalf of 6,111,879 shares (the
"Fidelity Controlled Shares") out of the 6,933,526 shares (the
"Fidelity Shares") of the Company's Class A Common Stock that
Fidelity exchanged in the Exchange Offer, and pursuant to the
terms of the MOU, the remaining 821,647 shares agreed on July 12,
2012, to participate in the settlement.  As part of the
settlement, Fidelity agreed, among other things, to accept a cash
payment from Defendants of $22.5 million, which amount was
subsequently paid from insurance proceeds in July 2012, in
exchange for Fidelity's opting out with respect to the Fidelity
Shares of any purported class action related to the Exchange Offer
and Fidelity's release of all related potential claims.  On July
20, 2012, Fidelity and the Defendants executed a final Stipulation
and Settlement Agreement the terms of which are substantively
identical to the terms of the MOU.  The Stipulation supersedes the
MOU.

In addition, on July 17, 2012, the Defendants entered into a
binding MOU with two additional stockholders who collectively
exchanged 310,690 shares in the Exchange Offer, the terms of which
are substantively identical to the settlement with Fidelity and
call for the payment of $1 million, in the aggregate, to the two
stockholders.  In August 2012, Defendants and the two additional
stockholders executed a final Stipulation and Settlement Agreement
which supersedes, and is substantively identical to, the MOU.  The
$1 million payment was subsequently paid from insurance proceeds
in August 2012.

In the second quarter of 2012, the Company recorded a charge and
corresponding income from insurance proceeds related to Revlon
Inc.'s estimated allocable portion of the Fidelity Settlement
Amount and the additional $1 million payment, which resulted in no
impact to the Company's Consolidated Statements of Income and
Comprehensive Income for the year ended December 31, 2012.

The Defendants also agreed with Fidelity and the two additional
stockholders that, in the event a settlement is reached with the
purported class action plaintiffs, or an award of damages is
issued following a trial in any of the actions, and that
settlement amount or damage award exceeds the settlement amounts
on a per share basis received by the settling stockholders, the
settling stockholders would each receive additional consideration
subject to certain parameters.  The agreements with the settling
stockholders are not subject to court approval and have no effect
on the actions other than to exclude the settling stockholders
from any certified class.

Although the Company continues to believe it has meritorious
defenses to the asserted claims in the actions, the Defendants and
plaintiffs agreed to the terms of a settlement and on
October 8, 2012, executed settlement agreements that, if approved
by the courts to which they are presented, will resolve all claims
in all of the actions.

The Settlement provides that the Defendants will make net cash
payments totaling approximately $9.2 million to settle all of the
actions, and full and complete releases will be provided to
Defendants from all plaintiffs.  In addition, if approved by the
courts, the Settlement will also result in additional payments to
the settling stockholders totaling approximately $4.2 million, of
which approximately $4 million will be paid to Fidelity.

In the second quarter of 2012, the Company recorded a charge of
$6.7 million with respect to the Company's then-estimated costs of
resolving the actions, including the Company's estimate at that
time of additional payments to be made to the settling
stockholders.  In addition to the charge of $6.7 million it
recorded in the second quarter of 2012, the Company recorded an
additional charge of $2.2 million in the third quarter of 2012 in
connection with payments to be made by the Company as a result of
the Settlement and the additional payments to be made to the
settling stockholders, for a total charge of $8.9 million for the
year ended December 31, 2012.  This charge is included within SG&A
expenses in the Company's Consolidated Statements of Income and
Comprehensive Income for the year ended December 31, 2012.

There can be no assurance as to the amount, if any, of additional
insurance proceeds that Revlon, Inc. may receive in connection
with its resolution of the actions.  In any event, at least $5
million of future payments to be made by the Defendants relating
to these matters, including expenses, will not be covered by
insurance.

The Settlement is subject to court approval.


RJ REYNOLDS: Florida Jury Awards $40.5 Mil. to Smoker's Widow
-------------------------------------------------------------
Daily Business Review reports that a Florida jury has awarded
$40.5 million in compensatory and punitive damages to the widow of
a smoker in a negligence case against R.J. Reynolds Tobacco.  The
jury assigned 75% of fault to the tobacco company and 25% to the
smoker.  The case is one of thousands filed by smokers after the
Florida Supreme Court disbanded a statewide class action.


SERVICE CORPORATION: Appeal in "Garcia" Suit Remains Pending
------------------------------------------------------------
Service Corporation International's appeal from a class
certification order in the class action lawsuit commenced by
Reyvis Garcia and Alicia Garcia remains pending, according to the
Company's February 13, 2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended
December 31, 2012.

Reyvis Garcia and Alicia Garcia v. Alderwoods Group, Inc., Osiris
Holding of Florida, Inc., a Florida corporation, d/b/a Graceland
Memorial Park South, f/k/a Paradise Memorial Gardens, Inc. , was
filed in December 2004, in the Circuit Court of the Eleventh
Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida, Case No.
04-25646 CA 32.  Plaintiffs are the son and sister of the
decedent, Eloisa Garcia, who was buried at Graceland Memorial Park
South in March 1986, when the cemetery was owned by Paradise
Memorial Gardens, Inc.  Initially, the lawsuit sought damages on
the individual claims of the plaintiffs relating to the burial of
Eloisa Garcia.  Plaintiffs claimed that due to poor recordkeeping,
spacing issues and maps, and the fact that the family could not
afford to purchase a marker for the grave, the burial location of
the decedent could not be readily located.  Subsequently, the
decedent's grave was located and verified.  In July 2006,
plaintiffs amended their complaint, seeking to certify a class of
all persons buried at this cemetery whose burial sites cannot be
located, claiming that this was due to poor recordkeeping, maps,
and surveys at the cemetery.  Plaintiffs subsequently filed a
third amended class action complaint and added two additional
named plaintiffs.  The plaintiffs are seeking unspecified monetary
damages, as well as equitable and injunctive relief.  On May 4,
2011, the trial court certified a class and the Company is
appealing that ruling.

The Company says it cannot quantify its ultimate liability, if
any, for the payment of any damages.


SERVICE CORPORATION: Continues to Defend "Niven" Class Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
Service Corporation International continues to defend itself
against a class action lawsuit initiated by Janie Niven & Jennifer
Mazzo, according to the Company's February 13, 2013, Form 10-K
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
year ended December 31, 2012.

Janie Niven & Jennifer Mazzo, Individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. SCI Funeral Services of Florida,
Inc., et al .; Case No. 2012CA015951, In the Circuit Court of the
15th Judicial District in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, was
filed by plaintiffs in "Sands" and "Schwartz" cases regarding Beth
David Memorial Gardens and Chapel located in Hollywood, Florida.
Although the Company acquired the cemetery in connection with the
Company's 2006 acquisition of Alderwoods Group, Inc., the Company
never managed the cemetery and sold it to a third-party shortly
after closing on the Alderwoods acquisition.  Plaintiffs seek to
certify a class of cemetery plot owners and their families.
Plaintiffs allege the cemetery engaged in wrongful burial
practices and did not disclose them to customers.  Plaintiffs seek
compensatory, consequential and punitive damages as well as the
appointment of a receiver to oversee the cemetery operations.  The
Company says it cannot quantify its ultimate liability, if any,
for the payment of damages.


SERVICE CORPORATION: Continues to Defend "Schwartz" Class Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Service Corporation International continues to defend itself
against a class action lawsuit filed by Barbara Schwartz & Carol
Neitlich, according to the Company's February 13, 2013, Form 10-K
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
year ended December 31, 2012.

The lawsuit Barbara Schwartz & Carol Neitlich, Individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. SCI Funeral Services of
Florida, Inc., et al.; Case No. 2012CA015954, In the Circuit Court
of the 15th Judicial District in and for Palm Beach County,
Florida, has been removed to the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Florida and is now Case No. 9:12-CV-80180-
DMM.  This case was filed by counsel for plaintiffs in the "Sands"
case regarding the Company's Star of David Memorial Gardens
Cemetery and Funeral Chapel and Bailey Memorial Gardens located in
North Lauderdale, Florida.  Plaintiffs seek to certify a class of
cemetery plot owners and their families.  Plaintiffs allege the
cemetery engaged in wrongful burial practices and did not disclose
them to customers.  Plaintiffs seek compensatory, consequential
and punitive damages as well as the appointment of a receiver to
oversee the cemetery operations.  The Company says it cannot
quantify its ultimate liability, if any, for the payment of
damages.


SERVICE CORPORATION: Continues to Defend California Class Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Service Corporation International continues to defend itself
against two class action lawsuits in California, according to the
Company's February 13, 2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended
December 31, 2012.

The cases captioned Bryant, et al. v. Service Corporation
International, et al.; Case No. RG-07359593; and Helm, et al. v.
AWGI & SCI; Case No. RG-07359602; in the Superior Court of the
State of California, County of Alameda, were filed on December 5,
2007, by counsel for plaintiffs in the "Prise" Wage and Hour
Lawsuit.  These cases assert state law claims similar to the
federal claims asserted in the Wage and Hour Lawsuit.  These cases
were removed to federal court in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California, San Francisco/Oakland Division.
The Bryant case is now Case No. 3:08-CV-01190-SI and the Helm case
is now Case No. C 08-01184-SI.  On December 29, 2009, the court in
the Helm case denied the plaintiffs' motion to certify the case as
a class action.  The plaintiffs modified and refiled their motion
for certification.  On March 9, 2011, the court denied plaintiffs'
renewed motions to certify a class in both of the Bryant and Helm
cases and dismissed the Helm case.  The Helm plaintiff is
appealing the court's order decertifying her claims.  The
individual claims in the Bryant case are still pending.  The
plaintiffs have also (i) filed additional lawsuits with similar
allegations seeking class certification of state law claims in
different states, and (ii) made a large number of demands for
arbitration.  The Company says it cannot quantify its ultimate
liability, if any, in these lawsuits.


SERVICE CORPORATION: Defends Wage and Hour Suit in Kentucky
-----------------------------------------------------------
Service Corporation International is defending a class action
lawsuit alleging violations of Kentucky wage and hour laws and
breach of contract, according to the Company's February 13, 2013,
Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the year ended December 31, 2012.

Southern, et al. v. SCI Kentucky Funeral Services, Inc.; Case No.
11CIO6501; in the Jefferson Circuit Court, Division Eight,
Kentucky, was filed on October 6, 2011, against an SCI subsidiary
and purports to have been brought on behalf of employees who
worked in Kentucky as funeral directors.  The plaintiffs allege
causes of action for various violations of Kentucky wage and hour
laws, and breach of contract.  Plaintiffs seek unpaid wages,
compensatory and exemplary relief, damages, attorneys' fees and
costs, and pre- and post judgment interest.

The Company says the ultimate outcome of the matter cannot be
determined at this time.  The Company intends to vigorously defend
the lawsuit; however, an adverse decision in one or more of such
matters could have a material effect on the Company, its financial
condition, results of operations, and cash flows.


SERVICE CORPORATION: Has Settled Remaining "Prise" Suit Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Service Corporation International disclosed in its February 13,
2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the year ended December 31, 2012, that it has
settled the remaining claims in the class action lawsuit filed by
Prise, et al.

The wage and hour lawsuit, captioned Prise, et al., v. Alderwoods
Group, Inc., and Service Corporation International; Cause No.
06-164; in the United States District Court for the Western
District of Pennsylvania, was filed by two former Alderwoods
(Pennsylvania), Inc. employees in December 2006 and was originally
brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and various
state laws on behalf of all Alderwoods and SCI-affiliated
employees who performed work for which they allegedly were not
fully compensated, including work for which overtime pay was owed.
Although the court initially conditionally certified an FLSA class
of claims as to certain job positions for Alderwoods employees,
the court granted the Company's motion to decertify the class on
September 9, 2011, and dismissed the claims of all collective
members except two named plaintiffs.  Of the two remaining
plaintiffs, one has dismissed her claims with prejudice and the
Company has settled with the other plaintiff for an amount that is
not material to the Company.

The Company says the ultimate outcome of the matter cannot be
determined at this time.  The Company intends to vigorously defend
the lawsuit; however, an adverse decision in one or more of such
matters could have a material effect on the Company, its financial
condition, results of operations, and cash flows.


SERVICE CORPORATION: "Sands" Suit Scheduled for Trial in July
-------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit initiated by F. Charles Sands is
scheduled for trial in July 2013, according to Service Corporation
International's February 13, 2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended December 31,
2012.

F. Charles Sands, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, v. Eden Memorial Park, et al.; Case No.
BC421528; in the Superior Court of the State of California for the
County of Los Angeles - Central District, was filed in September
2009 against SCI and certain subsidiaries regarding its Eden
Memorial Park cemetery in Mission Hills, California.  The
plaintiff seeks compensatory, consequential and punitive damages
as well as the appointment of a receiver to oversee cemetery
operations.  The plaintiff alleges the cemetery engaged in
wrongful burial practices and did not disclose them to customers.
After a hearing in February 2012, the court in May 2012 issued an
order certifying classes of cemetery plot owners and their
families based on alleged Company misrepresentation, concealment
or nondisclosure of material facts regarding alleged improper
burial practices pertaining to the period from February 1985 to
September 2009.  Pursuant to a court order, the Company may be
precluded from making certain arguments that challenge the
sufficiency of plaintiff's physical evidence, although the extent
to which that order will apply at trial remains unclear.

The case is scheduled for trial in July 2013.  The Company says it
cannot quantify its ultimate liability, if any, for the payment of
any damages.


STATER BROS: Full Amount of "Lunsford" Suit Deal Paid in 2013
-------------------------------------------------------------
The full amount of Stater Bros. Holdings Inc.'s settlement of a
class action lawsuit initiated by Harold F. Lunsford, et al., was
paid in fiscal 2013, according to the Company's February 13, 2013,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended December 30, 2012.

In May of 2011, Stater Bros. Markets was served with an action
filed in the Superior Court of the State of California for the
County of Riverside ("Harold F. Lunsford et al. v. Stater Bros.
Markets") seeking individual and potential class action damages
including associated penalties for Markets' alleged failure to
provide meal periods, rest periods or compensation in lieu thereof
and alleged failure to pay certain wages for terminated employees.
On January 26, 2012, following a mediation, this case was settled
which settlement was approved by the court.

The full settlement amount was recorded in the Company's
consolidated financial statements for fiscal 2012 and the full
amount was paid in fiscal 2013.

Stater Bros. Holdings Inc. -- http://www.staterbros.com/--
through its wholly owned subsidiary, Stater Bros. Markets,
operates a supermarket chain of 167 stores located throughout
Southern California.


TELIASONERA: Minority Shareholders Launch Class Action
------------------------------------------------------
SORAINEN Estonia is advising the minority shareholders of Eesti
Telekom, squeezed out when TeliaSonera, de-listed Estonia's
largest telecom, and who have launched a class action lawsuit
seeking a higher price for their shares.

TeliaSonera, the new owner of 60.12% of Eesti Telekom, offered EEK
93 per share to other shareholders, a 28% premium compared to the
average price of the six previous months.  Former minority
shareholders claim fair compensation for having to sell their
shares in a distressed situation.

The court appointed partners Carri Ginter and Reimo Hammerberg
together with specialist counsel Urmas Volens to represent the
squeezed out shareholders.


WELLCARE HEALTH: Still Subject to Contingencies Under Suit Accord
-----------------------------------------------------------------
WellCare Health Plans, Inc. disclosed in its February 13, 2013,
Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the year ended December 31, 2012, that it remains subject to
two contingencies related to a stipulation and agreement of
settlement with the lead plaintiffs in the consolidated securities
class action brought by Eastwood Enterprises, L.L.C.

The Company remains subject to two contingencies related to a
Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement with the lead plaintiffs
in the consolidated securities class action Eastwood Enterprises,
L.L.C. v. Farha, et al., Case No. 8:07-cv-1940-VMC-EAJ.  The
Stipulation Agreement was approved on May 4, 2011, and resolved
the putative class action complaints filed against the Company in
2007.

The Stipulation Agreement provides that if, within three years of
May 4, 2011, the Company is acquired or otherwise experience a
change in control at a share price of $30.00 or more, the Company
must pay an additional $25 million to the class action plaintiffs.
The Stipulation Agreement also requires the Company to pay to the
class action plaintiffs 25.00% of any sums the Company recovers
from Todd Farha, Paul Behrens and/or Thaddeus Bereday related to
the same facts and circumstances that gave rise to the
consolidated securities class action.


* Federal Courts Challenge NLRB Mandatory Arbitration Ruling
------------------------------------------------------------
Kimberly Atkins, writing for Dolan Media Newswires, reports that
one year after the National Labor Relations Board sent shock waves
through the labor and employment bar by ruling that mandatory
arbitration clauses barring class actions violated the National
Labor Relations Act, the decision is coming under direct fire from
federal courts -- and it could lead to a U.S. Supreme Court
showdown.


                        Asbestos Litigation


ASBESTOS UPDATE: USD-234 Releases Annual Abatement Report
---------------------------------------------------------
Each year, Unified School District 234 is required to publish an
update concerning the cleanup of asbestos in school buildings and
facilities.  This year's report submitted to The Fort Scott
Tribune has been prepared by Susan Brown.

The Fort Scott Tribune publication says that in October, 1987, a
new AHERA (Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act) Law went into
effect.  This new law required all K-12 schools, both public and
private, to inspect buildings for the presence of a common
building material called "asbestos."

When this asbestos material is crushed, cut, or pulverized, it can
release microscopic fibers into the air.  If breathed in, these
fibers can lodge in the lungs and may cause several kinds of
cancer.

The school inspection required identifying the location of the
asbestos, how much was present, and its current condition.  A
management plan then had to be formulated to insure that building
occupants were protected from asbestos fibers being released into
the air.  It contains a detailed plan of action to insure this.

In compliance with this AHERA Law, we are informing you of some
important items that deal with asbestos in the Fort Scott Public
Schools:

There is asbestos in our schools.  At this time, all the asbestos
in our schools is in good condition.

The Inspection and Management Plans are completed.  They are
available to you in the school principal's office during regular
business hours.  A special Asbestos File is kept there.  You may
also contact the district office at 424 S. Main, where a duplicate
file is kept.  Copies can be made at a reasonable cost.

John O'Dell, a member of the USD-234 maintenance staff, is our LEA
Designated Person and is responsible for training district
personnel.  He is also responsible for the documentation and
periodic inspections to insure that we are in compliance with the
AHERA Law.  John has received training to perform small short-
duration asbestos repair jobs.  All large asbestos projects will
be done by outside certified abatement contractors.

The majority of the asbestos material with the exception of floor
tile (which presents no danger) is located in areas accessible
only to our maintenance/custodial staff: boiler rooms, tunnels,
between walls, closet spaces, or above ceilings.  Entrances to
these areas have been labeled to provide warning.  The Management
Plan includes a floor plan drawing showing the location of the
asbestos.

The district's response actions include:

Significantly damaged material was removed during the summer of
1992 from the Eugene Ware School, the stadium, and the high
school.  An E.P.A. grant of almost $40,000, was received for this
removal.

Before beginning the Winfield Scott heating/air conditioning
renovation project, all asbestos except floor tile was removed
from that building during the summer of 1997.

Less damaged materials have already been repaired or removed.

During the summer of 1998, asbestos was removed from a water
storage tank in the Fort Scott High School boiler room.  The
removal, disposal, and clearance air monitoring was completed in
strict accordance with all applicable EPA, OSHA, and Kansas
Department of Health and Environment regulations.

Areas where there is potential for damage will be carefully
monitored.

All other asbestos will be maintained in its current good
condition.

The new Fort Scott Middle School and the additions at the
elementary schools were built with asbestos-free materials.

The Learning Center was inspected by Southeast Kansas Education
Service Center on Jan. 23, 2012, and no asbestos was found.

All asbestos will be visually surveyed and its condition recorded
each six months by the LEA Designated Person.  Every three years a
certified inspector will again do another inspection to insure
that all asbestos is in an intact, safe condition.  We completed
our first three-year reinspection in 1991, which was performed by
M. D. Environmental Consultants from Topeka.  Our second three-
year reinspection was completed on May 17, 1995, by Ecosphere
Environmental Services of Lawrence, Kansas.  Our third three-year
reinspection was performed by the Southeast Kansas Education
Service Center and was completed Feb. 5, 1998, and our fourth
three-year reinspection was completed by Southeast Kansa Education
Service Center on March 8, 2001.  Our fifth three-year
reinspection was completed by Southeast Kansas Education Service
Center on November 5, 2003.  Our sixth three-year reinspection was
completed by Southeast Kansas Education Service Center on June 16,
2006, and our seventh three-year reinspection was completed by
Southeast Kansas Education Service Center on Jan. 22, 2009.  The
latest and our eighth three-year reinspection was completed by
Southeast Kansas Education Service Center on Jan. 12, 2012.

Each school year you will receive a notification informing you of
the current status of the asbestos in our district schools.  After
the removal projects in the summer of 1992, we were inspected by
E. P. A. and informed that the district is in compliance with
AHERA regulations.

The district's goals at this time are:

(a) To continue to remove asbestos as funds are available.

(b) To monitor all asbestos to insure an intact condition and safe
environment.

(c) To monitor those areas where insulated pipe is in areas
accessible to occupants.

Asbestos in good condition presents no danger.  Danger occurs only
when it is disturbed or damaged.  Precautions will be taken by all
custodial/maintenance staff not to disturb asbestos material.

All outside contractors will be notified of the presence and
location of the asbestos before working in the district buildings.

Our Management Plan officially went into effect on July 9, 1989.
This plan has initiated the procedures, notifications, and
inspections that will insure compliance with the AHERA Law and
will provide a safe environment of students, employees, and
patrons.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Australian Unions Call to Effect AMRC Proposals
----------------------------------------------------------------
The West Australian reports that Serafina Salucci has lost a lung
and undergone several rounds of radiotherapy since being diagnosed
with mesothelioma six years ago.

On Wednesday, Feb. 13, the 43-year-old joined two of Australia's
biggest unions to call on state and federal governments to fully
fund and implement all recommendations from the Asbestos
Management Review Committee (AMRC).

Ms. Salucci believes a national awareness campaign will stop
others from suffering like she has.

"The reason why public awareness and education is so important is
the fact that there is no cure for mesothelioma," she told
reporters on Wednesday.

"Once you've got it, that's pretty much it."

Living with an asbestos-related disease has "been hell", Ms.
Salucci said.

"You can't put it into words what it's been like and what it's
done to my life and how difficult it's been."

The Australian Manufacturer Workers' Union (AMWU) and
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) on Feb.
13, launched a campaign calling on the federal government to
"address the deadly threat of asbestos that is still present in
many older homes, government and commercial buildings."

In Australia, which has the highest per capita rate of asbestos-
related disease, two thirds of houses built between World War II
and 1983 still contain asbestos, the unions said in a joint
statement.

"It's time for the Australian government to implement a strategy
to effectively tackle the threat of asbestos," AMWU National
Secretary Paul Bastian said.

"That means the recommendations from the Asbestos Management
Review Committee need to be implemented and fully funded to
eradicate asbestos from our environment by 2030."

Mr. Bastian said the rates of asbestos-related deaths will
increase until 2020.

"This is why we need to establish a dedicated National Asbestos
Authority, and a national set of laws."

CFMEU assistant secretary Lindsay Fraser said many people are
exposed to asbestos during renovations.

Removal of asbestos from government and public buildings should be
a priority, he added.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: UTC Cites Federal Officer Removal Provision
------------------------------------------------------------
Bethany Krajelis of The Madison / St. Clair Record reports that a
defendant in a Madison County asbestos lawsuit has removed the
matter to federal court.

United Technologies Corp. (UTC) on Friday, Feb. 8, filed notice to
remove the suit that a Mississippi couple filed in November
against it and 19 other defendants.

In their personal injury complaint, Walter and Ruby Leggett claim
that Walter developed lung cancer as a result of his exposure to
asbestos fibers from the defendants' products while serving in the
United States Air Force.

Walter was in the Air Force from 1957 to 1977 and was exposed to
asbestos during his work as a mechanic, plumber, electrician,
construction worker and machine operator, the suit states.

The Leggetts assert that they first became aware that Walter
developed lung cancer in June 2011 and learned within the past two
years that it was caused by asbestos exposure.

Among other claims, the suit accuses the defendants of failing to
exercise care and caution for Walter's safety by including
asbestos in their products.  It further asserts that the
defendants knew or should have known about the dangers associated
with asbestos.

The Leggetts seek more than $50,000 in their suit, which includes
counts for negligence, willful and wanton conduct, conspiracy,
negligent spoliation of evidence and strict liability.

UTC, which was served with the complaint on Jan. 11, removed the
suit from Madison County to federal court based on the U.S. Code's
federal officer removal provision.

This provision allows parties to remove suits if they can prove
they acted under the direction of a federal officer, raise a
colorable federal defense to the claims and show a causal nexus
between the claims and acts performed.

UTC asserts that it is entitled to the removal provision because
it acted as a government contractor when it manufactured aircraft
engines for use by the Air Force.

William Shultz, Jr., -- wshultz@kbslf.com -- of Kurwoski Shultz in
Swansea represents UTC and Steven Aroesty --
SAroesty@NapoliBern.com -- of Napoli Bern in Edwardsville
represents the Leggetts.

This marks at least the second time this month that the federal
officer removal provision has been cited to remove a Madison
County asbestos suit to federal court.

Last week, CBS Corp. removed a suit that Richard Spells, Jr.,
brought last year as the administrator of Richard Spells' estate.

It named 30 other defendants and claimed that Richard Spells, who
died, had developed lung cancer as a result of his exposure to
asbestos during his time in the Navy.  Aroesty represents the
plaintiff in that case as well.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Insurer Says It Has No Duty To Apex's Fibro Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Christina Stueve Hodges of The Madison / St. Clair Record reports
that an insurance company being sued for allegedly refusing to
defend Apex Oil in a Madison County asbestos lawsuit has responded
by saying it is not obligated to do so under terms of the policy.

In a suit against Arrowood Insurance, Apex wants the insurer to
pay defense costs it incurred in defending a 2010 lawsuit filed by
Mary Krohn over the death of her husband, Richard A. Krohn, who
worked for Clark (Oil) from 1957-1996.  Apex is successor to
Clark.

According to Apex, Arrowood issued workers' compensation insurance
to Clark when Richard Krohn worked for the company.

In a Feb. 7 response to the lawsuit, Arrowood claims it is not
legally obligated when damages involve "bodily injury by accident
or by disease, including death."

Apex seeks an award for the amount spent defending itself in the
Krohn lawsuit, plus attorneys' fees, pre- and post-judgment
interest, costs and other relief the court deems just.

William J. Knapp and Heather Mueller-Jones of Knapp, Ohl and Green
in Edwardsville represent Apex.

Gary Meadows -- gmeadows@heplerbroom.com -- of HeplerBroom in
Edwardsville represents the defense.

The case is assigned to Madison County Circuit Judge Andreas
Matoesian.

Madison County Circuit Court case number: 12-L-1962.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Suspected Fibro Cancels Intramurals at TRU
-----------------------------------------------------------
The Kamloops Daily News reports that Thompson Rivers University is
still trying to determine whether a substance that fell out of the
gym's walls Friday, Feb. 8, was in fact asbestos.

It will take until the end of the week for test results to confirm
what the material was, said Christopher Seguin, vice-president of
advancement at the university.

He stressed that it's not known whether the material is asbestos.

"But we are treating it with every caution available," he said.

A raucous TRU International Day finale appeared to have loosened
the substance behind the walls.  About two tablespoons of the
stuff poured out of holes that had been used as anchoring points,
which led to the gym's closure on Saturday, Feb. 9.

Seguin said university administration doesn't believe the
gymnasium environment is dangerous.

"But for the team that's in there handling the situation, (the
closure) is much more convenient," he said.

The facility is not typically open to the broader community so
staff and students are mostly impacted.

TRU recreation co-ordinator Pina Russo said intramural sports and
fitness activities have been cancelled.

Russo said she wasn't deeply concerned but the situation still
gave her pause.

"When you hear the word 'asbestos,' you think 'Oh my God,'" she
said.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Estancia Middle School Set For 3-Week Cleanup
--------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Bush of The Mountain View Telegraph reports that before the
aging Estancia Middle School building can be demolished to make
way for a new school, as planned, asbestos -- a potentially
dangerous material -- will have to be cleaned out of the old
structure.

Asbestos abatement contractors have already been contacted to
determine how much their services would cost and how long it would
take to clear the building of the mineral fiber.

Ovidiu Viorica, regional manager of the New Mexico Public Schools
Facilities Authority -- the state agency involved in developing
plans for the new building -- estimates abatement will cost about
$30,000 and take two to three weeks to complete.

Largely because of its strength and ability to resist heat,
asbestos was widely used for insulation, as a fire retardant, and
in building construction materials such as roofing shingles and
ceiling and floor tiles during the mid-20th century throughout the
United States and much of the world.  That was before the danger
of inhaling airborne dust particles of the substance was known.
Use of asbestos in construction diminished dramatically around
1975.

Estancia Middle School was built in 1954, with an addition
completed 40 years later.

Viorica said that before any school demolition project can begin,
a report is required to try to determine any use of asbestos-laden
materials during construction.  And, according to a survey
conducted last month by Paul Encinias, a federally accredited
inspector, items that contain asbestos in Estancia Middle School
include 15,920 square feet of 9-inch-by-9-inch floor tiles and the
glue used to hold them down.  The tiles are found throughout the
original main building.

Viorica noted that the tiles and glue, in and of themselves, pose
no threat.  "It is only when dust containing the material becomes
airborne that it becomes dangerous," he said.

Once asbestos is removed the material in which it is found has to
be disposed of in specialized landfills.

As soon as the asbestos in the old school building is abated,
construction will begin, hopefully by June, officials said.  It is
expected to be completed before the school year gets underway in
August of next year.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Decon Unit Contains Fibro at Cupar Garage Fire
---------------------------------------------------------------
Aileen Robertson of The Courier (UK) reports that a fire in a
garage triggered an asbestos scare in Cupar on Wednesday night
(Feb. 13).

Firefighters tackling a blaze in a domestic garage in Lunardi
Place discovered the fire had spread to asbestos sheeting.  A
decontamination unit was called to the scene to help deal with the
incident, which happened at around 7:30pm.

Crew members had their suits decontaminated to protect them from
any potential risks associated with asbestos fibers.

Fife Fire and Rescue Service said there was no risk to the public
and no-one was injured during the incident.  The fire was brought
under control in about half an hour.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro "Fire Curtains" Removed at Seward Harbor
---------------------------------------------------------------
Heidi Zemach of The Seward Phoenix Log reports that a series of
asbestos firewalls were removed from older docks in Seward Small
Boat Harbor recently.  The asbestos-laden sheets were clearly at
or nearing the end of their lifespan.  Some were observed to be
visibly deteriorating, with parts found flaking off or partly
submerged under water.

Seward Harbormaster Mack Funk and the city had an Anchorage-based
contractor remove a series of the firewalls from its older docks
B, C, D, G and S.  The asbestos sheets, embedded in cement boards
beneath the gratings, were designed to prevent a fire from
spreading from section to section along a dock.  The city hired
Sartori Group Inc, of Anchorage, one of five asbestos abatement
companies to bid on the project, and paid them $5,100 to do the
work.  There were three or four of the firewalls embedded in each
dock.

Sartori workers cordoned off the dock areas with tape warning of
the health hazards of coming in contact with asbestos.  The tape
allowed only people wearing full hazmat protection gear to be in
the cleanup area.  The material was removed and taken to a
disposal area in the Anchorage landfill, said Funk.

Funk, who took over leadership of the harbor more than a year ago,
said he learned of the firewall issue this past summer by Fred
Woelkers, a private contractor from Seward who had formerly
performed work for the city harbor department.

"I give the harbormaster credit, I'm glad they're doing the dock,"
said Woelkers.  He said he first brought his concerns about
asbestos released from aging docks to the city's attention four
years ago.  In 2001-02, as a subcontractor for the city, Woelkers
had removed about half a mile of old docks and some 250 pilings
from the harbor while working for Stallings of Anchorage.  His
concerns regarding the dock's contents and continuing
deterioration were not taken seriously by the former Seward
administration or harbor department officials, he said.

"I think they just thought I was a troublemaker," said Woelkers,
adding that he hadn't been fully compensated for work he did, and
that he still has some other ongoing issues with the city.

The old docks were put in by the State of Alaska following the
1964 Earthquake.  Later, the harbor was turned over to the City of
Seward.  The old docks have steadily deteriorated with time, with
asbestos flaking recently becoming more evident.  The city has
made improvements, maintaining and replacing the old docks as
funding has become available.  Dock D is scheduled to be replaced
later this year, said Funk.  The firewalls were shown on the
state's construction plans as "fire curtains" he said.

Resurrection Bay Conservation Alliance Advocacy Director Russ
Maddox said that a former member of harbor staff first alerted him
to the problem in 2010, but that the city administration ignored
those concerns when raised, calling them unwarranted.  Without an
analysis confirming the presence of asbestos the regulatory
agencies could not intervene, said Maddox.  Last month, however, a
concerned citizen provided RBCA with samples of the material
collected from the Seward harbor.  The lab analysis confirmed that
the material was asbestos, as suspected.  He forwarded the
information to the city and to responsible government agencies.

"This should serve as a cautionary tale for other communities with
similar old docks so they can also safely remove any asbestos that
may be crumbling into their harbors as well before it can cause
any problems," said Maddox.  "Our new administration and
harbormaster should be commended for finally solving this long
standing problem by not allowing the remaining asbestos to be
released into our environment and community."

Derek Lucas, principal owner of Sartori Group Inc, also commended
the City of Seward for dealing with the problem.  Other small
communities, including those in the Lower 48, have a tendency not
to be proactive in following environmental regulations, he said.
"Whether due to lack of knowledge or money I don't know," he said.

"In our experience, many small communities have difficulty
identifying, sampling, and remediating environmental hazards
associated with their properties," said Lucas.  "Discovery of
regulated environmental materials during a construction project
often results in schedule delays and escalated costs beyond the
original project budget.  The City of Seward was proactive in
making this project happen in advance (of) any future
renovations."

Lucas suspects that other Alaska communities' docks also have
asbestos firewalls.  However, in his 12 years of experience with
asbestos abatement, he's never been asked to look for it in docks
nor noticed it before, he said.  But he will be sure to do so in
the future, he added.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: 4 Months-Old Hazmat At Dale Farm Finally Removed
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Austin of Echo-News (UK)reports that Basildon Council
contractors have been back to Dale Farm to carry out work there
for the first time since the eviction 16 months ago.

Specialist staff were drafted in to remove asbestos sheets on
Thursday, Feb. 14, which were dumped on the former illegal site
for at least four months.

A council spokesman said: "It is up to the landowner to remove
this, but no one took responsibility so we had to clear it.  We
will be unable to recover any costs because it is not clear who
the landowner is."

The asbestos was dumped at the rear gate to resident Len Gridley's
property last October.

Mr. Gridley, from Oak Road, in Crays Hill, said: "It's a joke
taking this long to clear something dangerous like asbestos up."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: TRU Gym Reopens After Averting Asbestos Scare
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Kamloops Daily News reports that Thompson Rivers University
officials reopened the gym on Wednesday, Feb. 13, after averting
an asbestos scare.

The substance that shut down the gym shows only "trace amounts" of
asbestos, said Christopher Seguin, TRU vice president of
advancement.

A raucous party in the gym on Friday, Feb. 8, dislodged two
tablespoons of stuff from holes in the wall.

A demolition company immediately barricaded and cleaned up the
substance before sealing the wall with silicone.  An environmental
company also assessed the air quality.

The university's maintenance crews further sealed the wall with
concrete, said Seguin.

The entire process cost the university $2,000.

"We're taking every step to ensure the safety of all our
stakeholders and that's why the extra vigilance and process was
taken into account," said Seguin.

WorkSafeBC also visited and reviewed the university's actions and
stated no further investigation will be required.

On Wednesday, the area was deemed safe and the gym reopened.
However intramural sports won't resume until after the reading
break.

Testing determined the substance to be the insulation material
vermiculite, which included one percent asbestos.

It's highly unlike the level of exposure from Friday's incident
would cause injury.

And according to Health Canada, the material is harmless if
contained.

"There is currently no evidence of risk to your health if the
insulation is sealed behind wallboards and floorboards, isolated
in an attic, or otherwise kept from exposure to the interior
environment," states the government website.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: HSE to Launch Electronic Campaign on Fibro Risks
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Thomson of The Evening Times (UK) reports that apprentices
are being targeted in an electronic campaign which will highlight
the risks they face from asbestos.

And firms which employee trainees can discover more about the new
e-learning package at a free event being held at Clydebank College
next month.

Asbestos-related diseases (ARD) claim the lives of around 4000
people each year, so the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has put
together an interactive resource which spells out the dangers of
what's become known as the 'hidden killer'.

Officials warn that tradesmen and women working on buildings
erected or refurbished before 2000 are at risk.

Those who train apprentices can find out more about the e-learning
resource at the Clydebank College event on Wednesday, March 6.
Organized by the HSE, it's being held in partnership with the
college, Federation of Master Builders and the Scottish Centre for
Healthy Working Lives.

HSE principal inspector Archie Mitchell said: "Many young
tradespeople believe that, because asbestos is no longer used in
buildings, it's no longer a threat to them.  But that simply isn't
true.

"Older buildings contain asbestos and will continue to do so for
many years."

"I want to encourage those involved in training our workers of the
future to get this important message across."

Anyone interested in attending should contact Linda Aitken by
email at linda.aitken@hse.gsi.gov.uk


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Alamogordo Commission Delays Vacant Motel Cleanup
------------------------------------------------------------------
John Bear of The Alamogordo Daily News reports that the Alamogordo
City Commission postponed taking action on removing asbestos from
a vacant motel on the city's west side and demolishing it.

The city and a private land owner have been locked in a dispute
over the fate of two vacant buildings the owner has used to store
items related to his business.

The city has received a bid from an El Paso-based asbestos
abatement company, but the commission tabled taking action at an
earlier meeting to send the item out for bid again over concerns
that the current bid about $10,000 was too high for the amount of
asbestos believed to be in the building.

According to a city agenda report, three more companies, none of
them local, have expressed interest in bidding on the property.
Two of the companies have visited the site, located on the 700
block of U.S. Highway 70.

The owner of the buildings, Morris Calkins, said he uses the
buildings to store items related to his machine shop, located next
door.  He wants to use the lumber inside the buildings, which he
said is high quality, on another building project at an unrelated
piece of property.

The asbestos abatement, and another measure that would have
authorized the demolition of the buildings, were both postponed
again Tuesday, Feb. 12.

Both agenda items were part of the commission's consent agenda,
which means the commission considers the items routine and enacted
them along with several other unrelated items in a single vote.

The issue, which has been ongoing for several years, is expected
to come up again later this month, records show.

A naturally-occurring substance, asbestos was once widely used in
construction, but is now regulated because it is a known
carcinogen.  If it is found in sufficient levels in older
buildings, it must be professionally removed before any demolition
can occur.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Remains a Very Real Health Threat in the US
------------------------------------------------------------------
Each year more than 3,000 people die from mesothelioma, a rare and
deadly cancer caused by asbestos exposure.

So what is asbestos -- and why are people dying?  Asbestos is a
mineral fiber widely used for decades in thousands of products --
particularly construction materials -- due to its insulating and
fire-resisting properties.  But its tiny, inhalable fibers are
what make asbestos so dangerous to human health.  If those
microscopic fibers become airborne during demolition, remodeling,
or any activity that disturbs asbestos-containing materials, they
can be inhaled into the lungs where they can trigger life-
threatening illnesses such as mesothelioma.

Most people who suffer from mesothelioma experienced frequent
exposure to asbestos, usually due to their occupation and work
history.  They may have handled this deadly substance directly or
were in an environment with a high concentration of asbestos
fibers in the air.

Shockingly, no asbestos legislation exists to ban the use of this
known carcinogen in the U.S.  Asbestos remains a very real threat
to public health.  How can you protect yourself and your loved
ones?  Start by knowing the facts about asbestos and the symptoms
of mesothelioma.

"The best defense to any cancer is making sure you're armed with
the facts.  Mesothelioma is dangerous because its latency period
can run anywhere from 40-50 years and you may mistake its symptoms
for some minor ailment," says Amy Fair, Registered Nurse.  Nurse
Fair adds, "Symptoms will also vary from person to person
depending upon how long they were exposed to asbestos.  They could
include wheezing, fatigue, unexplained weight loss or shortness of
breath."

Nurse Fair goes on to say that some individuals who were exposed
for long periods of time to high concentrations of asbestos may
experience the production of sputum, mucus that is coughed up from
the lungs.

If an individual exhibits any of these symptoms they should see a
doctor right away.  The doctor will conduct a physical examination
and may order a chest X-ray or other tests.  Using a combination
of medical, work and military history, symptoms, and test results,
a doctor will be able to identify signs of an asbestos-related
disease such as mesothelioma.

For more information on the dangers of asbestos, visit
www.mesotheliomahelpnow.com, a resource site that is continually
expanding to better provide information to those currently living
with or caring for a victim of mesothelioma.

If you or a loved one has been diagnosed with mesothelioma, you
can contact an asbestos attorney to learn more about your legal
options.

For more information contact:

         Dian Dulberger, Esq.
         SOKOLOVE LAW
         Tel: 781-489-2608
         Email: ddulberger@sokolovelaw.com

                          About Sokolove Law

Sokolove Law, LLC provides quality legal services that help people
obtain access to the civil justice system.  With over 30 years of
service, Sokolove Law has helped thousands of injured parties
obtain the compensation they deserved from their legal claims.
The cases include birth injury, mesothelioma, cerebral palsy,
nursing home abuse, dangerous drugs, disability insurance denial,
and medical malpractice.  Sokolove Law is nationwide, with local
offices in 47 states.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Avoidance From All Types Of Fibro Recommended
--------------------------------------------------------------
The history of asbestos is one that is marred with
misunderstanding, half-truths and flat-out lies.  The mysteries
surrounding the harmful effects of asbestos have led to the
detriment of countless families.  Numerous men and women have lost
their lives to the asbestos-related diseases such as mesothelioma.
And worse, new diagnoses happen each day.  So just what is
asbestos and why were so many people exposed?

Asbestos is a type of fiber that was once a popular material used
in shipyards, factories, construction sites, industrial sites and
in commercially-distributed products.  The asbestos industry
continued to profit from the cheap, heat resistant material
throughout the 20th Century even though they knew of its cancer-
causing properties.  In fact, the asbestos industry knowingly
withheld medical research proving asbestos exposure could be
fatal.  Several companies also distributed propaganda that led the
public to believe that certain types of asbestos are not as
harmful as others.

In total, there are six different types of asbestos fibers.  The
most common type of asbestos in use is Chrysotile, or "white"
asbestos.  This type of asbestos makes up 95 percent of all
asbestos found in commercial and industrial products.  Chrysotile
is considered a different type of asbestos because of its curled
fibers.  Other types of asbestos fibers have a needle-like fiber
and are classified in the Amphibole group.  This group consists of
Grunerile, or "brown" asbestos, which is the second most commonly
used type; Crocidolite asbestos, or "blue" asbestos, which has
also been known to be used in various commercial products;
Tremolite, Actinolite and Anthophylite asbestos which have also
been known to be used in commercial products.

There has been misinformation released about the varying safely
levels of each type of asbestos.  Some companies have led the
public to believe that the asbestos in their products was less
dangerous than other types.  Regardless of what type of asbestos a
person is exposed to, it poses a major health risk and should be
avoided at all costs.

When asbestos fibers are released into the air, regardless of
type, they can be inhaled and result in asbestos-related diseases
such as mesothelioma.  The fibers are odorless and invisible to
the naked eye.  Complications of asbestos exposure can lie dormant
for decades.  Worst of all, asbestos is still used in the United
States today.

A person who is diagnosed with mesothelioma or other asbestos-
related diseases such as asbestosis or asbestos-related lung
cancer is a victim of negligence.

Although you may think it is impossible to pinpoint exactly when
and where a person was exposed and which companies are at fault,
the mesothelioma lawyers at Baron and Budd have been able to track
down those responsible for the asbestos exposure of countless
individuals with mesothelioma.  If you or someone you know
believes you have been diagnosed with mesothelioma, we want to
talk to you.  Contact us at 1.866.855.1229 or send us a message at
info@baronbudd.com.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Brown's Barus and Holley Abatement Plan Underway
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hannah Loewentheil of The Brown Daily Herald reports that nine
Barus and Holley classrooms and laboratories are currently being
cleared of asbestos, said Stephen Maiorisi, vice president for
Facilities Management.

Asbestos is a naturally occurring mineral fiber that is found in
rock and soil, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.
The fiber was widely used in manufactured goods and construction
materials -- such as floor tiles and floor tile glue, insulation
and countertops -- throughout the 1980s but is now illegal due to
its connection to lung cancer.

Brown University followed a codified process to identify the nine
classrooms and laboratories -- rooms 225, 446, 744, 747, 749,
738A, 744A, 744B and 730 -- that housed materials containing
asbestos, Maiorisi said.  If the University suspects asbestos may
be present, it hires an environmental consultant to survey the
material in the room in question, he said.  If asbestos is found,
the Rhode Island Department of Health must approve an abatement
plan.

The state approved the Barus and Holley abatement plan in November
2012, Maiorisi said.

The health risks associated with asbestos result from inhalation
of the fiber, said Steve Morin, director of environmental health
and safety.  But students and staff who have been exposed to the
areas in question are not at risk, he said.

"Until disturbed, (asbestos is) not dangerous at all, so when you
do disturb (it), you do it the right way," he added.

Trained and licensed professionals are brought in to perform
negative air containments and air clearances in order to make the
area safe.  Contracting companies Yankee Fiber Control and Emery
Environmental are currently supervising and carrying out the
asbestos removal process.

"Negative air containment means nothing can get out of that space
that is being filtered," Maiorisi said.  To abate the asbestos,
professionals implement a filter like those used in hospitals and
respirators to eradicate toxins without sending them into the
atmosphere, he said.

There is a common perception that abating is dangerous when people
are near the toxic space, Morin said.  But negative air
containment makes the surrounding atmosphere completely safe, he
added.

"You could be standing right outside the vent and it is not
harmful," Maiorisi said.

Buildings constructed in and before the 1980s are suspect,
Maiorisi said.  He added that he expects to deal with more
asbestos removal projects in the future.  "The process is so
regulated that we have it down to a science," he said.

Typically, the project manager is responsible for informing the
relevant department about an asbestos abatement project, Mairoisi
said, adding that the School of Engineering was notified before
the current removal project began.  The University is also
required to post signs around the space, he added.

Lawrence Larson, dean of the School of Engineering, was aware of
the ongoing project in Barus and Holley, he wrote in an email to
The Herald.  Both Maiorisi and Morin said they were not aware of
any health or safety concerns from students or faculty members
surrounding the project.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Telstra Work Stopped Due To Licensing Breach
-------------------------------------------------------------
Fleta Page of The Canberra Times reports that refurbishment work
at the Telstra Building on Kent Street, Deakin, came to a halt on
Friday, Feb. 15, with WorkSafe ACT and the Environment and
Sustainable Development Directorate issuing stop-work notices to
the contractor for breaches in licensing and building approvals
after asbestos was found on the site.

Construction union officials inspected the site on Thursday, Feb.
14, and raised various concerns with authorities.

The contractor, Business 2 Business Commercial Fitouts, a Sydney-
based company, voluntarily shut the site after the inspection.

Dean Hall, ACT branch secretary of the CFMEU, said the building's
asbestos register was not accurate, but the correct process of a
subsequent asbestos audit and development of a management plan was
not followed by the contractor.

A Telstra spokesman said it was "aware that a contractor working
on behalf of Telstra found some asbestos at a vacant part of the
Telstra site."

"The contractor took immediate action to ensure the safety of
their employees... [and] is now working with appropriate
authorities to ensure the site remains safe for anyone who works
there."

A spokesman for the ESDD said the stop-work notice was issued
under the Building Act "due to there being no building approval in
place for the work being undertaken."

"The head contractor did not have the appropriate license, the
asbestos removalist is licensed in the ACT.  However, there were
no approvals in place to undertake the work.  None of the work on
the site had the relevant approvals."

It is unknown how long the site will be closed, with a number of
approvals required.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hazmat at the Rochdale Factory Fire Contained
--------------------------------------------------------------
BBC News Manchester reports that a huge fire has broken out at a
former asbestos factory in Rochdale, Greater Manchester, the fire
service said.

About 50 firefighters tackled the blaze after being called out
just before 03:00 GMT on Feb. 15, to the old Turner and Newall
site in Spodden Valley.

Manchester Fire and Rescue Service said the fire was now under
control.

Tony Bryan, fire service hazardous materials officer, said an
initial assessment of nearby houses showed no spread of
contaminants.

He said: "We have identified some asbestos within the structure
[of the factory] -- but that has been contained into the area as
it was covered by metal sheeting.

"Having assessed the immediate area downwind from the fire, I've
deemed that it is safe."

The fire service said the blaze had engulfed all three floors of
the derelict building.

Firefighters will remained at the scene throughout the day damping
down.

A spokesman added surrounding roads are still closed but there
should be minimal disruption to schools and businesses in the
area.

Rochdale Council refused planning permission for 600 homes to be
built on the site in January 2011.

Peter Rawlinson, head of planning at Rochdale Council, said at the
time it was rejected because there was not enough detail about how
the site could be developed safely.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Surrey Fire and Rescue Faces Mesothelioma Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Guy Martin at Getsurrey.co.uk reports that a dying firefighter has
claimed a failure to protect him from exposure to asbestos during
his career may have caused his fatal illness.

Douglas Garnham has been told he will die next year due to an
incurable cancer which he believes is linked to his time spent
working for Surrey Fire and Rescue Service in the late 1970s and
early 1980s.

The 54-year-old, of Cannon Grove, Fetcham, is now suing the
service for up to GBP300,000.

His lawyers have alleged in a High Court writ that there are links
between his mesothelioma -- a lethal and incurable cancer of the
lining of the lungs -- and exposure to hazardous materials during
his training and work as a firefighter.

Simon Kilvington, Mr. Garnham's barrister, claims in the writ
that, at times, his client was "breathing in clouds of asbestos
dust and fiber" provoking the cancer which has robbed him of at
least two more decades of life.

Mr. Kilvington states: "During his initial training and on
refresher training Mr. Garnham would have to crawl into confined
and hot spaces, often the ducts under hospital boiler houses,
containing pipes lagged with asbestos.

"He would crawl over and among asbestos-lagged pipes and through
the asbestos dust and debris on the floors.  Once the exercise was
over, he would knock off the asbestos dust and fibers from his
fire kit, breathing in the clouds of asbestos dust and fiber."

And it was not just during training that the damage was done, Mr.
Kilvington claims.

"Mr. Garnham would often have to attend fires containing asbestos
materials," he stated.

"Asbestos dust and fiber would be released as the materials were
damaged and, after the fire was put out, he and his colleagues
would have to pull down and rake through materials including
asbestos, releasing further dust and fiber."

The writ also alleges: "He has suffered much mental distress as a
result of his illness which he knows to be fatal.  He will be aged
only 55 at death, losing more than 20 years of life."

A spokesman for Surrey Fire and Rescue Service said: "The safety
and welfare of our firefighters has always been very important to
us and we continue to invest in training, equipment and technology
to keep crews safe in a challenging job.  We're aware of Mr.
Garnham's claim with regard to his work with the service."

The writ has been issued but it has not yet been decided if the
case will be heard in court.

Last month a former fireman from Hull received a five figure
payout from Humberside Fire and Rescue Service after contracting
an asbestos-related disease.  The man, aged 84, was employed by
Hull Fire Brigade from 1951 to 1969 and served for much of the
time on a fireboat.

Deaths from mesothelioma continue to increase in significantly in
Great Britain and according to the Health and Safety Executive
most deaths are a legacy of past occupational exposures to
asbestos.

The number of mesothelioma deaths nationwide has increased from
153 in 1968 to 2,347 in 2010.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Mckenzie-Willamette Cited For Health Violations
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sherri Buri McDonald of The Register-Guard reports that State
occupational safety and health regulators fined McKenzie-
Willamette Medical Center and a Utah-based general contractor each
more than $25,000 for improper handling of asbestos during
renovations last year to the Springfield hospital's second floor.

The asbestos was in the sealant and tape used in duct work of the
hospital's HVAC system, said Melanie Mesaros, spokeswoman for the
health and safety division.

"It was found in the second-floor drop ceiling above the operating
room," she said.

Asbestos, which is found in a variety of building materials, can
cause respiratory disease and cancer if the fibers are disturbed
and inhaled.

State regulators also fined subcontractors FM Sheet Metal and JK
Guckenberger Electrical $1,750 and $1,050, respectively.  Both of
the Springfield companies are appealing those penalties.

The state also cited, but did not fine, Twin Rivers Plumbing Inc.
of Eugene, and Labor Ready, a Eugene firm that supplied temporary
employees who worked in the area where the asbestos was disturbed.

McKenzie-Willamette and Layton Construction Co. have until March 6
to file appeals.  Layton officials have said they don't plan to
appeal, while it wasn't immediately clear whether McKenzie-
Willamette will do so.

In a statement, McKenzie-Willamette officials did not address
specific assertions in the state's complaint but said the medical
center is "committed to providing a safe environment for all who
come to our hospital, whether patients, employees, visitors or
contractors.  We have cooperated fully with the Oregon
Occupational Safety and Health Division in their investigation and
are following through on their recommendations to reduce the
possibility of exposure."

In its statement, McKenzie-Willamette noted that the potential
exposure "was in an area of the hospital undergoing a heat and air
conditioning upgrade by licensed contractors, and, at the time of
construction, was not an active patient care area."

"We have received no notification of any injury," the hospital's
statement added.  "Additional asbestos identification and
management training has been done with all contractors and
employees who may come in contact with such materials."

Layton marketing director Alan Rindlisbacher said the contractor
has received the citation and is reviewing its findings.

"Our commitment to safety as a value of our company's way of doing
business is first and foremost.  Though we may not totally agree
with all of the citation's findings, we will continue to work with
Oregon OSHA to find appropriate solutions moving forward," he
said.

Other subcontractors did not comment, with the exception of Twin
Rivers Plumbing.

"We were pretty innocent in the whole thing," said Sandee Gerber,
Twin Rivers co-owner.  "We believed what (Layton) told us.  We
were given the report that there was no asbestos there."

Regulators fined McKenzie-Willamette $26,960 for seven violations,
including failure to inform custodians, housekeepers, operating
staff and other employees working near the construction zone about
the presence of asbestos; and failure to maintain records, such as
studies that had detected asbestos on site.

They fined Layton -- a large national contractor with projects in
17 states -- $25,200 for five violations, including failing to
inform subcontractors about the asbestos in the second-floor work
area, and failing to inform subcontractors of asbestos in the
basement within 24 hours of discovering it there.

Regulators doubled the penalties for some violations against the
hospital and general contractor.

"We used administrator's discretion on (some of) the penalties,"
said Mesaros, the health and safety spokeswoman.  "That's not
something we do very often; it is rare."

McKenzie-Willamette CEO Maurine Cate, as well as representatives
with the hospital's parent company, Community Health Systems, were
aware that materials containing asbestos had been found in the
second-floor duct work, according to a health and safety division
document outlining the penalty against the hospital.

McKenzie-Willamette representatives "showed a plain indifference
to employee safety and health because they were aware asbestos was
present, they were aware of its location and they failed to
communicate this to employees" working in or near the construction
area, the document said.

State health and safety regulators found that Layton
representatives also "showed a plain indifference to employee
safety and health" because they failed to identify asbestos and
told subcontractors there was no asbestos in the second-floor
construction area, where it was later disturbed and removed.

Regulators also doubled the fine against Layton for failing to
inform subcontractors within 24 hours of discovering asbestos in
the duct work in the hospital basement.

In mid-July, Layton representative Shane Thompson received test
results that showed asbestos in the hospital basement ducts,
according to safety and health division documents.  He temporarily
stopped work, telling employees with subcontractor FM Sheet Metal
that some of the duct work samples were positive for asbestos.

FM Sheet Metal employees asked to see the asbestos reports and
Thompson told them, "Keep your mouths quiet.  We don't know it's
asbestos; it could spread like wildfire, just get finished,"
according to the documents.

An anonymous complaint against Layton filed with the state safety
and health division on Aug. 14 prompted the state investigation.
From there, it widened to include McKenzie-Willamette and the
other subcontractors.

During the investigation, health and safety officials also grew
concerned about how the asbestos-contaminated debris had been
disposed.

In a letter to Layton dated Aug. 20, health and safety officials
said it was discovered that the waste material containing asbestos
from the McKenzie-Willamette renovation was "wheeled through the
hospital corridors, uncovered for disposal.  We also understand
the waste material was provided to Schnitzer Steel, where it is
unlikely Layton Construction Co. representatives communicated
asbestos hazards to that employer."

State health and safety inspectors referred the matter to the Lane
Regional Air Protection Agency in early September.

Air agency officials talked with officials at McKenzie-Willamette.
By that time, the construction project was completed, said agency
director Merlyn Hough.

"It didn't look like an ongoing problem situation," he said.

The agency issued a notice of noncompliance against Layton, so if
the out-of-state contractor returned to the area and ran into
problems, the notice would be on record, Hough said.

McKenzie-Willamette, which has about 800 employees, is owned by
Community Health Systems, based in Nashville, Tenn.  It is one of
the largest publicly traded health systems in the country.

Layton, based in Sandy, Utah, last year ranked as the fifth-
largest health care contractor in the United States.

Layton and an architectural consultant were brought into McKenzie-
Willamette after a previous construction project in fall 2011 sent
black dust from rubber belts into the hospital operating room,
according to safety and health division documents.

The operating room was closed for four to five days for extensive
cleaning and Cate contacted Community Health Systems
representatives, who sent Layton's Thompson and another consultant
to the hospital, the documents said.

Cate announced last spring in McKenzie-Willamette's community
newsletter that the hospital had embarked on a year-long planning
process to build a new hospital at its existing site in
Springfield.  Late last year she said "we are in the preliminary
stages of assessing the best way to serve our community into the
future.  We are committed to being a vital contributor and health
care resource for our community and will share information with
the community as decisions are finalized."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Continued Closure of Cwmcarn School Questioned
---------------------------------------------------------------
A war of words has broken out between Caerphilly council and the
head teacher of Cwmcarn High School, which was shut due to
asbestos late last year.

After a second report released at the beginning of February
revealed asbestos levels could be a lot lower than was initially
thought in the original Santia report which prompted the Cwmcarn
building's closure, the council released a statement Friday, Feb.
15.

That statement argued there are still large quantities of asbestos
throughout the school building, and that the building itself is in
a very poor condition, which is why the school cannot return to
the premises.  A third survey is now set to be carried out.

But an open letter by Ms. Peplinski posted on the Cwmcarn High
website hours later hit back at the council's claims the school
was closed partly because of the poor condition of the buildings.
Pupils are currently being taught at the former Coleg Gwent site
in Ebbw Vale.

A council spokesman said: "The building is a pre-1960s
construction and therefore contains large amounts of asbestos
material.  "Also, the current general condition of the school is
very poor (the school has a 'D Rating' according to the Welsh
Government's School Condition Survey in 2010 and is in the worst
condition of all schools in the county borough).

"Alongside the ongoing asbestos problems, there is also a
considerable repair and maintenance backlog which needs to be
addressed at the site.

"Our decisive steps to close the school on an interim basis for
further investigation to be undertaken back in October
demonstrated our commitment to protect the whole school community.

"Once we have the results of the new management survey, a report
will be presented to the council with options for
consideration."No decision about the re-occupation of the Cwmcarn
site can be made until this options appraisal is fully
considered."

On a post on the Cwmcarn High School website on Feb. 15,
headteacher Jacqui Peplinski said: "It is being suggested by the
council that the reason for closure of the school is the poor
condition of the fabric of the school, and outstanding maintenance
requirements as well as the presence of asbestos within the fabric
of the school.

"However the reports to council on Oct. 23 and Nov. 20 make no
mention whatsoever of the poor state of any or all of the school
buildings as a reason for closure.

"The reports justify closure solely on asbestos risks."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Detected During Washington Building Arson
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Sunderland Echo reports that arsonists could be putting their
lives at risk after firefighters found what they believe to be
asbestos in a derelict Washington building.

The Echo revealed that the former Instrip Demolition premises on
the town's Pattinson Industrial Estate had become a regular target
for firebugs setting light to rubbish.

Crews from Washington Station spent two hours tackling a blaze at
the site.

Fire officers have repeatedly called for action to secure the
building but to no avail.

Now a potential new threat has been uncovered after crews from
Washington fire station were called to the building recently.

Previous fires had been concentrated on the first floor, but watch
manager Stephen Burdis explained that the latest incident had been
in a different section.

"The area that was set alight is a single-storey part of the
building, where it has now been revealed that under the false
tiles on the ceiling, there is what is believed to be asbestos
boarding," he said.

Fire crews have regularly been called to the site in recent weeks,
but watch manager Burdis said he was not aware of asbestos having
been found previously.  "We have been spending a lot of time
there," he said.  "We were tied up there for two and a half hours
with two appliances.

"We have had fires there before and crews have been in other parts
of the building this week, but this is the first time we have been
in this part.

"I don't know it if has been reported by any of the other
watches."

The fire service has strict rules governing how such finds are
handled and watch manager Burdis said the discovery had been
reported to the Environment Agency and Health Protection Agency
with a view to making the building safe.

"Hopefully, the owners of the building, if they can be contacted,
will be able to prevent these young people from getting into the
building to set fires," he said.

Developers announced plans to create executive housing, a
pub/restaurant, takeaway, shops and business units on the land
almost two years ago but the site is still empty.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dust Levels At Orange City Work Site Raise Alarm
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The ABC News reports that a West Orange resident is worried about
dust levels at a work site on the Northern Distributor, saying it
is an area known to contain naturally occurring asbestos.

Jean Meiring says two large piles of rocks have been at the site,
near the intersection with Icely Road, since the bypass was
finished in August and that new work is set to start near the
site.

Ms. Meiring says she went to Orange City Council concerned about
asbestos, and has questioned the testing that has taken place.

She says the council has a good asbestos management plan, but is
worried residents are not being reassured.

"There's a lot of dust coming from that site onto Icely Road and
it's not about what air monitoring levels they do and don't get
from this and whether they're safe or not," she said.

"It's about the fact that their plan says they should not be
having dust come off that site onto a public road and it is
occurring."

The Orange Council's Technical Services Director Chris Devitt says
he visited the site on Friday, Feb. 15.

He says a geologist has advised the piles of rocks are likely to
not contain asbestos, but admits testing is still being carried on
other material on site.

Mr. Devitt says that material has either been buried or is being
managed.

He has also reassured the public about the dust on Icely Road.

"The dust has nothing to do with the material that may potentially
contain asbestos," he said.

"The dust is just from the worksite itself.

"It's a fairly isolated area.

"That is certainly not a problem at all."

The Orange City Council has defended its asbestos management plan,
amid concerns about the dust.

Mr. Devitt says Workcover's chief asbestos officer visited council
recently.

"Certainly you know her discussion with council is that we are
seen as one of the most well managed local government areas as far
as dealing with naturally occurring asbestos," he said.

"They're quite happy and satisfied with the management practices
we've got in place.

"And we've worked with them over a significant amount of time."

Ms. Meiring says while some of the tests may have come back as
negative, it is vital council keep the public informed.

"It's just the frustration of wanting this clarified," she said.

"They've got a very good plan in place, and if it is followed,
there is no risk to the public or to their workers.

"It's hard to get clarification of who's responsible and who takes
responsibility for this and who is there to reassure the public
about it."

The Orange City Council says it has spoken to Workcover about
providing more information to the public about control methods for
naturally occurring asbestos.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Nylex Owner Snubs Suspicions of Illegal Abatement
------------------------------------------------------------------
Madeline Healey of The Melbourne Leader reports that the owner of
the landmark Nylex building in Cremorne says there was nothing
untoward about the removal of a collapsed roof.

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) safety
adviser Peter Clark said he suspected tradespeople working at the
site "after hours and on weekends" had removed asbestos illegally
at the Richmond Maltings at numbers 2 and 15 in Gough St.

Mr. Clark visited the site, best known for the Nylex clock on top
of its silos, and said he had seen material that appeared to be
asbestos littering the floor.

"We are concerned the... works will expose the public to
asbestos," he told the Melbourne Leader.

But Stephen Prior from Richmond Malt, owner of the site, said a
portion of the roof collapsed last year and had created a
"dangerous situation."

He said WorkSafe was notified and the works to remove the roof
were carried out "correctly."

"I had a permit showing works were carried out," Mr. Prior said.

Yarra Mayor Jackie Fristacky said council officers who recently
attended the site did not find evidence of any asbestos or risk of
asbestos exposure.

"No offences have been identified," Cr Fristacky said.  "Some
scrap metal salvaging work is taking place but no council permit
is required for that work."

But Socialist councillor Stephen Jolly said he was skeptical about
the officers' assessment.

"It's an industry (construction) that I work in," Cr Jolly said.

"The City of Yarra officers sounded a little naive (in their
response)."

Worksafe spokesman Peter Flaherty confirmed on Thursday, Feb. 14,
that inspectors from the safety watchdog had attended the site
after receiving a complaint.

"However, as the site is abandoned, it cannot be determined if it
is a workplace and whether WorkSafe has jurisdiction in this
matter," Mr. Flaherty said.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Islington Faces Suit Over Workmen's Negligence
---------------------------------------------------------------
Meyrem Hussein of The Islington Gazette reports that Patricia
Moriarty is worried that her son's cancer -- which he successfully
fought off 12 years ago -- could be more likely to return as a
result of the alleged exposure.

Miss Moriarty, 47, a nursery nurse at The Whittington Hospital in
Archway, allowed workmen into her council house back in 2009 so
they could re-wire the three-bedroom property and upgrade the
kitchen and boiler.

Miss Moriarty says it was only later that she discovered that the
artex ceilings of the 1980s-built house, which is on the Hargrave
Park Estate off Junction Road, Archway, contained small amounts of
asbestos.

She is now worried that the dust generated during the works could
have been contaminated by the potentially toxic substance, which
can cause conditions such as mesothelioma.

And she alleges that the builders undertook no special protective
measures -- such as sealing off rooms or wearing protective suits
-- while they were working.

Miss Moriarty, whose son, now 24, underwent surgery, chemotherapy
and radiotherapy for Ewing's Sarcoma at the age of eight, said: "A
surveyor came to do samples of all the ceilings and his report
came back saying that there was asbestos, but that it was
considered a lower-level risk.

"Because the bathroom ceiling is flaking, I am getting them to
replace it.  But I can't do anything about the places they already
drilled into.  My son is so predisposed to cancer.  Am I going to
have to live in fear for the next 20 years?  I am considering
suing Islington Council."

According to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), asbestos
exposure is responsible for around 4,500 deaths a year because
when the fibers are inhaled they can cause serious lung diseases
such as mesothelioma and lung cancer as well as non-fatal
conditions such as asbestosis.

The HSE states that when drilling into materials containing
asbestos, protective overalls should be worn, rooms should be
closed off, surfaces should be protected with polythene and the
drilling should be done without creating dust.

An Islington Council spokesman insisted that all contractors were
instructed to use the correct procedures in dealing with asbestos.
He said they would have been told to anticipate the possibility of
asbestos when working in properties of this age and type, even
though Miss Moriarty's specific property had not been surveyed for
asbestos before the work started.

He added: "Last October's survey confirmed a small hairline crack
in the bathroom ceiling so we'd like to get in to make a repair.
While not standard procedure, to give Miss Moriarty peace of mind,
we will also run an air test."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Abatement Begins at Former Grace Hospital
----------------------------------------------------------
CBC News Windsor reports that on the eve of abatement and
demolition of the former Grace Hospital, neighbors are concerned
about what it could mean to them.

Some fear asbestos particles flying around as demolition is being
done.

Earlier, Budget Environmental Disposal of Hamilton estimated there
are several thousand tons of asbestos on the site.

Will Bartels, of Budget, ensured all demolition and removal will
be done according to government regulations.

"First off, we'll be prepping for abatement.  That's going to be a
pretty lengthy project, getting the abatement out, and from there
we'll start demolishing the buildings in sequence, after the
asbestos has been removed," he said.

Bartels also said his company is aware of the possibility that the
site may be home to rodents and vermin.

Bartels said he will call in an animal removal company if
necessary.

Some neighbors said when other buildings were demolished in the
area, they were infested with rats.

Lisa Harshaw lives near Grace and has concerns.

"Besides the asbestos for our health, I'm very concerned with
what's living in there," she said.  "They're going to be tearing
down that building and so we're going to have rodents running free
in our neighborhood, much like what happened across the street
when they tore down the houses."

Ted Foreman of Bob's Animal Removal said birds and cats are most
likely to be the biggest problems.  He said pigeons have moved
into the hospital and cats look for shelter and Grace would be a
good place.

Foreman said skunks and rats are not likely a big problem because
there is nothing to eat at the old hospital site.

Bartels hopes to complete the clean up by the end of July.  The
province is providing the city with $7 million to pay for the
operation.  Another $4 million may be available, if approved.

This weekend members of the Greek Orthodox community will decide
on a property exchange with the city.

A large industrial site they own on Walker Road would be swapped
for the hospital site.

Frank Harshaw has lived near the former hospital property for 15
years.  He supports the land exchange.

"That's great.  Compared to what we're living with now, anything
is better.  If that building comes down and they put grass in
there, I'm happy with that, too," he said.  "I'd like to see
development there.  I really don't care at this point.  I just
want that building down."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Abatement Plan for East Central Schools Underway
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Price of Fox San Antonio reports that a local school
district is making plans to remove asbestos found in two of its
older schools.

East Central Independent School District discovered the asbestos
in floor tiles during inspections required by the Environmental
Protection Agency.

The material was found at John Glenn Elementary and Salado
Intermediate School.

The assistant superintendent emphasizes that the asbestos they
detected is isolated to two older wings of each school and pose no
threat to students or faculty.

The district says no fibers are being released and there's no
reason for families to worry.

Plans are underway to have the material removed during the summer.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Online Video On Dust Sampling Method Announced
---------------------------------------------------------------
Asbestos was used heavily in many building materials in the United
States up until the mid-1980s.  According to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), "Asbestos fibers may be
released into the air by the disturbance of asbestos-containing
material during product use, demolition work, building or home
maintenance, repair, and remodeling."  The EPA goes on to report,
"Exposure to asbestos increases your risk of developing lung
disease.  That risk is made worse by smoking.  In general, the
greater the exposure to asbestos, the greater the chance of
developing harmful health effects."

When asbestos containing materials are disturbed or become friable
with age, the asbestos may become airborne and spread throughout a
building.  Eventually these fibers settle and may contribute to
dusts found in a building.

The only way to know if settled dust contains asbestos is to have
the dust sampled.  To help educate people about the sampling
method for collecting an asbestos sample in settled dust, EMSL
Analytical has developed an online video describing the process.

"Correctly sampling for asbestos in settled dust is important when
trying to determine if asbestos is present," reported Ed Cahill
from EMSL Analytical, one of the largest asbestos testing
laboratories in North America.  "We hope this video informs and
educates people about the proper technique to collect a sample."

To view EMSL's asbestos in settled dust sampling instructions
video, please visit:

             http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hd49JZWfcME

EMSL provides sampling materials and testing services for asbestos
in settled dusts as well as air and bulk sampling analysis.
People wishing to have their samples tested by EMSL should visit
www.AsbestosTestingLab.com, or call (800)220-3675 or email
info@EMSL.com.

                   About EMSL Analytical, Inc.

EMSL Analytical is a nationally recognized and locally focused
provider of environmental and materials testing services and
products to professionals and the general public.  The company has
an extensive list of accreditations from leading organizations as
well as state and federal regulating bodies.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Reverses Judgment in USF&G Recovery Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
An insurance company, United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company,
having settled asbestos claims for nearly a billion dollars, seeks
to recover a share of its settlement payment from its reinsurers.
A lower court granted summary judgment for USF & G.

In an opinion dated Feb. 7, 2013, the Court of Appeals of New York
modified the lower court's order to deny summary judgment on two
issues, and otherwise affirmed the order in all other issues.  The
Court of Appeals concluded that there is an issue of fact as to
whether USF & G, in allocating the settlement amount, reasonably
attributed nothing to the so called "bad faith" claims made
against it.  The Court of Appeals also found a factual issue as to
whether certain claims were given unreasonable values for
settlement purposes. However, the Court of Appeals held that the
lower court correctly rejected the reinsurers' other defenses.

The case is UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY COMPANY, ET AL.,
Respondents, v. AMERICAN RE-INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL., Appellants,
ET AL., Defendants, No. 1 (N.Y. App. Ct.).  A copy of the Court's
Decision dated Feb. 7, 2013, is available at http://is.gd/Yzf79l
from Leagle.com.

Kathleen M. Sullivan, Esq. -- kathleensullivan@quinnemanuel.com --
at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, in New York, represents
Excess Casualty, et al., while Herbert M. Wachtell, Esq. --
HMWachtell@wlrk.com -- at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, in New
York represents American Re-Insurance.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Class Suit v. Asbestos Processing to Proceed
-------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Joseph F. Anderson of the United States District Court, D.
South Carolina, Rock Hill Division, in an order dated Feb. 7,
2013, denied, for reasons stated in open court, the motion for
summary judgment filed by defendants Asbestos Processing, LLC,
Richard H. Bishoff, PC, Richard H. Bishoff, and John Deakle, and
allowed the case captioned Odell Parker; Ruth Parker; Larry
Southern; Roy Southern; Yvonne Harris; and Barbara Patterson,
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated in the
State of South Carolina, Plaintiffs, v. Asbestos Processing, LLC;
Richard H. Bishoff, PC; Richard H. Bishoff; and John Deakle,
Defendants, C.A. No. 0:11-cv-01800-JFA (D. S.C.), to proceed.

A copy of Judge Anderson's Order is available at
http://is.gd/TTgL87from Leagle.com.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Suit Junked Due to Gov't Officials' Immunity
-------------------------------------------------------------
Judge J. Thomas Marten of the United States District Court, D.
Kansas, in a memorandum and order dated Feb. 7, 2013, granted the
motion to dismiss or for summary judgment filed by the defendant
in the case captioned BYRON SMITH, Plaintiff, v. GALLEGOS, et al.,
Defendant, Case No. 06-3061-JTM (D. Kan.), on the basis of
qualified immunity.

Byron Smith, a prisoner who was incarcerated at the United States
Penitentiary at Leavenworth, alleged that the Defendants violated
his Eighth Amendment rights and were deliberately indifferent to
his safety by exposing him to very large dosages of asbestos
fibers when he was on a work detail.

Judge Marten, in granting the Defendants' Motion, held that
government officials enjoy the protections of the qualified
immunity doctrine from liability for damages if their actions do
not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional
right.  Based on the facts presented to court, even if the facts
are presumed in his favor, Smith cannot establish that the
defendants violated a clearly established constitutional right
because, first, Smith's exposure to asbestos was not severe enough
to be considered a violation of his Eighth Amendment right to be
free from cruel and unusual punishments and, second, even if he
could prove a constitutional violation, Smith cannot establish
that the constitutional right that prison officials allegedly
violated was "clearly established," Judge Marten said.

A copy of Judge Marten's Decision is available at
http://is.gd/6UiFPzfrom Leagle.com.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ky. Court Affirms Denial of NSI's New Trial Plea
-----------------------------------------------------------------
National Services Industries, Inc., appeals from an order of the
Muhlenberg Circuit Court denying its motion for new trial
following a jury verdict in favor Frances Skaggs, individually and
as Executrix of the estate of Elliott Skaggs.  NSI maintains that
it did not receive notice that the damages trial in the case had
been re-scheduled and consequently its failure to attend that
trial should be excused and a new trial granted.  Frances Skaggs
filed the claim for damages arising out of her husband's death as
a result of his exposure to asbestos during the course of his work
with the Tennessee Valley Authority.  In the complaint, Skaggs
named NSI and other parties who were potentially liable for the
asbestos exposure.

In an opinion dated Feb. 8, 2013, the Court of Appeals of
Kentucky, although noting that the record suggests some
irregularities in the entry of the order re-scheduling the trial,
agreed with the trial court that NSI failed to present sufficient
evidence showing either that it lacked actual notice of the trial
date or that it exercised due diligence in seeking that
information. Accordingly, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial
court's denial of NSI's motion for a new trial.

The case is NATIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC., Appellant, v.
FRANCES SKAGGS, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS, EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF
ELLIOTT SKAGGS, DECEASED, Appellees, No. 2011-CA-001749-MR (Ky.
App. Ct.).  A copy of the Decision is available at
http://is.gd/vQWCvcfrom Leagle.com.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Appeals Ct. Overturns Ruling v. Dow Chemical
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Dow Chemical Company filed an appeal from judgment obtained by
appellees on their wrongful death and survivor claims against Dow.
The disposition of the appeal turns on whether Chapter 95 of the
Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code applies to the particular
facts in the case and thereby limits Dow's liability.  The
Appellees filed the action against multiple defendants following
the death of Robert Wayne Henderson. The Appellees alleged in part
that Mr. Henderson's death was caused by exposure to asbestos
products and asbestos-containing dust from various sources,
including Dow's Freeport, Texas facility.  Mr. Henderson had
performed work at the Freeport facility while employed by a Dow
contractor, Win-Way Industries, Inc.

In an opinion dated Feb. 8, 2013, the Court of Appeals of Texas,
Fifth District, Dallas, reversed the trial court's judgment
agreeing with Dow that, contrary to the trial court's ruling on
its motion for summary judgment, Chapter 95 does not distinguish
between a property owner's liability for exposures caused by the
activities of contractors and their employees, on the one hand,
and exposures caused from its own employees' activities, on the
other.  Therefore, Dow asserts, and the Court of Appeals agreed,
Chapter 95 applies to all of appellees' claims against Dow.

Dow, the Court of Appeals ruled, is entitled to judgment as a
matter of law because there was no evidence at trial that Dow had
both control over Mr. Henderson's work and actual knowledge of the
danger or condition resulting in his illness, as required by
Chapter 95, and the trial court failed, over Dow's objection, to
charge the jury as to those elements.

The case is THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY, Appellant, v. MAGDALENA
ADRIENNA ABUTAHOUN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF
THE HEIRS AND ESTATE OF ROBERT WAYNE HENDERSON, DECEASED; AND
TANYA ELAINE HENDERSON, INDIVIDUALLY IN HER OWN RIGHT AND AS NEXT
FRIEND OF ZA'QUOIA ZANICE HENDERSON, A MINOR, Appellees, No. 05-
11-01277-CV (Tex. App. Ct.).  A copy of the Decision is available
at http://is.gd/zVWjuqfrom Leagle.com.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: NY Court Denies Uncontested Labor Law Claim
------------------------------------------------------------
In the asbestos personal injury action captioned ARLENE G. CRANE,
Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of PAUL J. CRANE,
deceased, Plaintiffs, v. CRANE CO., et al. Defendants, Docket No.
190082/2011, Motion Seq. 009 (N.Y.), Judge Sherry Klein Heitler of
the Supreme Court, New York County, granted defendant National
Grid Generation, LLC's motion for leave to reargue and motion for
summary judgment only with respect to the Plaintiffs' Labor Law
Sec. 241(6) claim against it and denied the Plaintiffs' Labor Law
Sec. 241(6) claim.

Judge Heitler noted that National Grid, sued as Long Island
Lighting Company, alleged that it was not liable to the Plaintiffs
pursuant to Labor Law Sec. 241(6) and that the Plaintiffs did not
oppose LILCO's Labor Law Sec. 241(6) argument.  Accordingly, the
Court granted LILCO's motion insofar as it seeks dismissal of the
Plaintiffs' Labor Law Sec. 241(6) claim.

A copy of Judge Heitler's Decision and Order dated Feb. 7, 2013,
is available at http://is.gd/7fa2h0from Leagle.com.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Chevron Settles Colo. Class Action for $40 Mil.
----------------------------------------------------------------
David Forster, writing for Law Week Colorado, reports that a
long-running dispute between northern Colorado landowners and a
major oil company over asbestos contamination ended last month
with a $40 million settlement.

Along the way, the case drew a significant ruling from the
Colorado Supreme Court on class action certifications.

The court's October 2011 ruling upholding a trial court judge's
decision to let the case proceed as a class action dealt a setback
to Unocal, now owned by Chevron Corp.  Settlement talks began a
couple of months later.

Under the terms of the deal approved in late January by a district
court judge, Chevron will pay $32.5 million in cash to the
landowners in the class.  It will also pay $7.5 million for
asbestos cleanup and testing.


                           *********

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., Washington, D.C., USA. Noemi Irene
A. Adala, Joy A. Agravante, Valerie Udtuhan, Julie Anne L. Toledo,
Christopher Patalinghug, Frauline Abangan and Peter A. Chapman,
Editors.

Copyright 2013. 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 $775 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 A. Chapman at 215-945-7000 or Nina Novak at 202-241-8200.



                 * * *  End of Transmission  * * *