/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/090306.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Friday, March 6, 2009, Vol. 11, No. 46 Headlines ADZILLA INC: Faces Calif. Suit For Tracking Users' Web Activity ALABAMA: State Officials Sued Over Severe Overcrowding at Prison ECLIPSE AVIATION: Faces Employees' Suit in Del. Over Lay-Offs EXTENDICARE HEALTH: Minn. Court Dismisses Consumer Fraud Lawsuit NCR Corp: Settles Workers' Lawsuits Over "Off-The-Clock" Work PPG INDUSTRIES: Ruling Allows Pa. Age Bias Case to Move Forward REYNOLDS AMERICAN: Awaits Ruling on Bid to Amend "Cleary" Action REYNOLDS AMERICAN: ETS Suit Still Stayed Pending "Scott" Appeal REYNOLDS AMERICAN: Faces Ga. Smokers' Suit Over RICO Violations REYNOLDS AMERICAN: Motions in Suit Over ERISA Violations Pending REYNOLDS AMERICAN: "Parsons" Personal Injury Suit Remains Stayed REYNOLDS AMERICAN: Reports No Activity to "Jones" Suit in Mo. REYNOLDS AMERICAN: "Smith" Suit Over Price Fixing in Discovery REYNOLDS AMERICAN: "Stewart" Lawsuit Over Cigarette Ad Pending REYNOLDS AMERICAN: Suit Over FLSA Violations Still in Discovery REYNOLDS AMERICAN: Unit Awaits Ruling on Bid in "Romero" Suit STERLING FINANCIAL: Reaches $10.25M Settlement in Pa. Litigation UBS FINANCIAL: Court Grants Motion in HealthSouth-Related Case UNITED STATES: Faces Mass. Suit Over Temporary Protective Status WEST VIRGINIA: DHHR, Official Faces Lawsuit Over Medicaid Plan New Securities Fraud Cases BARCLAYS BANK: Coughlin Stoia Files N.Y. Securities Fraud Suit GENERAL ELECTRIC: Harwood Feffer Files Securities Fraud Lawsuit INTREPID POTASH: Bronstein Gewirtz Announces Stock Suit Filing OPPENHEIMER CHAMPION: Cohen Milstein Files Securities Fraud Suit OPPENHEIMER CHAMPION: Labaton Sucharow Files N.Y. Stock Lawsuit TRIAD GUARANTY: Dyer & Berens Files N.C. Securities Fraud Suit Asbestos Alerts ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Spencer's Petition Denied in Case v. Bragg ASBESTOS LITIGATION: U.S. Steel Facing 450 Lawsuits at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: AK Steel Facing 437 Injury Suits at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 26,235 Claims Ongoing v. Harsco at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Foster Wheeler Cites $6.6M Claims Provision ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Foster Wheeler Records $355.78Mil Liability ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Foster Wheeler Cites 130,760 Claims in U.S. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Foster Wheeler Sees $24.8M Insurance Asset ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Foster Wheeler's U.K. Units Face 357 Claims ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Corning Facing 10T Cases with 41,500 Claims ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Claims v. Lincoln Drop to 21,020 at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Board Ruling Reversed in Seminerio's Claim ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Viad Summary Judgment Bid Denied on Jan. 13 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Federal-Mogul Cites No Liability at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cooper Cites 23,688 Abex Claims at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cooper Records $815.1M Liability at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cooper Cites $192.3M Receivable at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Navigators Has $16.68M Reserves at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: CNA Records 1,302 Policyholders at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: MeadWestvaco Facing 591 Lawsuits at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Old Orchard Facing 8,000 Actions from Vapor ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Claims v. CBS Decrease to 68,520 at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Fluor Corp. Still Facing Exposure Lawsuits ASBESTOS LITIGATION: A. O. Smith Facing 6,990 Claims at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Injury Lawsuits Still Ongoing v. Flowserve ASBESTOS LITIGATION: RLI Corp. Pays $31M for A&E Through Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ITT Corp. Facing 103,006 Claims at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Exposure Lawsuits Still Ongoing v. Eastman ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Skilled Healthcare Records $5Mil Liability ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Sunoco, Inc. Subject to Exposure Lawsuits ASBESTOS LITIGATION: FirstEnergy Still Facing Exposure Lawsuits ASBESTOS LITIGATION: OfficeMax Inc. Still Facing Injury Actions ASBESTOS LITIGATION: CMS Energy Cites $36M Dec. 31 ARO Liability ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Chicago Bridge Has 1,400 Claims at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Anadarko Continues to Face Injury Lawsuits ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Trial in Claim v. Pride Slated for Oct. '09 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Exposure Cases Still Ongoing v. CenterPoint ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Appeal Court Upholds Ruling in Bakkie Case ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Regal Beloit Subject to Exposure Lawsuits ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Leslie Facing 968 Active Claims at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Leslie Records $19.2M Liability at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Spence & Hoke Still Facing Exposure Actions ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Leslie Spends $8.31MM for Claims at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Phelps Dodge Still Facing Exposure Lawsuits ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cliffs Natural Units Facing Injury Lawsuits ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Exposure Suits Still Ongoing v. Olin, Units ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Southern Company Cites $9.5M ARO at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cleco Records $200T for Cleanup at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Huntsman Still Party to "Premises" Lawsuits ASBESTOS LITIGATION: PSE&G Cites $8MM Abatement Asset at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Transocean Still Has Suits in Miss. Courts ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Transocean Unit Has 1,008 Suits at Dec. 31 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 222 Lawsuits Ongoing v. Midwest Generation ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Mine Safety Faces Product Liability Actions ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Mine Safety Involved in Century Litigation ASBESTOS LITIGATION: IDEX, 5 Units Facing Lawsuits in 33 States ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 17,854 Claims Ongoing v. Albany at Feb. 6 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 8,607 Claims Ongoing v. Brandon at Feb. 6 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Albany Still Facing Suits From Mount Vernon ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Congoleum Corp. Case Dismissed on Feb. 26 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 16 Claims Filed Feb. 16-20 in Madison Court ASBESTOS LITIGATION: EPA Coordinator Questioned in Grace Lawsuit ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 800 New Cases Expected in Australia in 2009 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hardie Closing Submissions Held on March 1 ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Enterprise Owner Charged for False Records ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Council Fined GBP17,600 for Safety Breaches ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Lawyers Seek Transfer of MDL Cases to State ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hairston's Suit Filed v. 38 Firms in Texas ********* ADZILLA INC: Faces Calif. Suit For Tracking Users' Web Activity --------------------------------------------------------------- Adzilla, Inc [New Media], Conducive Corp., Continental Visinet Broadband, Inc., and Core Communications, Inc. are facing a purported class-action lawsuit in California for allegedly violating the privacy of Web users by tracking their online activity. The suit captioned, "Simon v. Adzilla, Inc [New Media] et al., Case No. 3:2009-cv-00879," was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Feb. 27, 2009 by Susan Simon. Ms. Simon alleges that Adzilla, her Internet service provider Continental Visinet Broadband, and other companies acted together to violate a host of laws, including the federal wiretap law. She is seeking class-action status for the case. According to Ms. Simon, she first noticed Adzilla in June 2007, when she realized that her Internet service provider was assigning her different IP addresses from those it used previously. Ms. Simon investigated and determined that the new addresses belonged to Adzilla, which was now tracking her online. "An outside entity, one with which plaintiff was entirely unfamiliar, was accessing and searching plaintiff's web log activities," she alleged in her lawsuit. The lawsuit does not allege that Adzilla served her any ads, only that it tracked her. Ms. Simon said in her complaint that she was never notified about the tracking and didn't consent to it. The suit is "Simon v. Adzilla, Inc [New Media] et al., Case No. 3:2009-cv-00879," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Judge Maxine M. Chesney, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs are: Alan Himmelfarb, Esq. (Consumerlaw1@earthlink.net) Kamberedelson, LLC 2757 Leonis Boulevard Vernon, CA 90058 Phone: 323-585-8696 Fax: 323-585-8696 - and - Joseph H. Malley, Esq. (malleylaw@gmail.com) Law Office of Joseph H. Malley, PC 1045 North Zang Boulevard Dallas, TX 75208 Phone: 214-943-6100 ALABAMA: State Officials Sued Over Severe Overcrowding at Prison ---------------------------------------------------------------- MONTGOMERY, AL, February 26, 2009 -- SCHR Press Release -- Attorneys from the Southern Center for Human Rights filed a federal class action lawsuit on behalf of people incarcerated at Donaldson Correctional Facility in Bessemer, Alabama. The case, "Hicks v. Hetzel," names Warden Gary Hetzel, Alabama Department of Corrections (ADOC) Commissioner Richard Allen, and Governor Bob Riley as Defendants. The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama. The Plaintiffs have asked the ADOC to reduce the population at Donaldson to the number the facility was designed to hold. William E. Donaldson Correctional Facility ("Donaldson") opened in 1982 as the West Jefferson Correctional Facility, with a capacity of 700 medium and minimum security prisoners. The prison was subsequently expanded, giving it a designed capacity of 968 men. The number of men confined at Donaldson has more than doubled over the years. As of December 2008, Donaldson was at 173.7% capacity, holding 1,681 men. Because of overcrowding, three men are crammed into cells that were designed for two. These cells measure approximately 8 x 12 feet. Men do not have enough room to sit upright on their beds or to dress. When it rains, water pours through the ceiling. The smell of feces often permeates the cells, and overflowing toilets back up into adjoining cells. In the summer months, the heat becomes unbearable. Without room for movement, men must often remain in their locked cells, lying on sweat- dampened mattresses. Prisoners are packed so tightly into cellblocks that the tension and volatility results in weekly stabbings, fights, and assaults. Prisoners report that stabbings and beatings have left them with slit throats, punctured livers, pierced lungs, partial blindness, paralysis, and other injuries, as well as psychological trauma. The potential for violence is exacerbated by the absence of appropriate security measures, the ready availability of weapons, the flourishing drug trade in which some officers are involved, the absence of industry, the dearth of activities, and the dilapidated condition of prison buildings. In the last two months, there have been a number of critical incidents at Donaldson. For example, on February 18, a prisoner committed suicide by hanging; on February 2, a prisoner was stabbed; on January 28, a prisoner was hospitalized after being beaten by a group of other prisoners; on December 24, a prisoner was stabbed twelve times, suffering two punctured lungs; on December 23, an officer slammed a prisoner's head into the wall after the prisoner objected to the officer using the word "n-----;" in a separate incident on the same day, an officer punched a handcuffed prisoner in the face, bloodying his nose; and on December 12, a handcuffed prisoner was beaten unconscious by an officer with a history of using excessive force and participating in illegal activities. This level of violence is not unusual for Donaldson. The following is a snapshot of some of the incidents that have been reported to the Southern Center for Human Rights over the last three years: * On September 7, 2008, a prisoner was stabbed 11 times. * On June 6, 2008, an officer hit Ricardo Swift's arm repeatedly with a baton, causing his arm to fracture and requiring him to undergo surgery. * On April 16, 2008, Alphonso Lark was stabbed and cut in the face with a box cutter. * On February 15, 2008, a prisoner was stabbed, requiring him to undergo a surgical procedure to drain fluid from his brain. * In August 2007, a prisoner was stabbed 5-6 times and suffered two collapsed lungs. * In June 2007, David Carter was knifed in the chest with the blade barely missing his heart. * In May 2007, Dana Davis was nearly killed when another prisoner cut his throat and stabbed him over ten times with a foot-long knife. His lung collapsed. He was airlifted to UAB hospital. * In January 2007, a prisoner was stabbed. The knife punctured his liver and he suffered a collapsed lung during emergency surgery. * In November 2006, a prisoner was stabbed by another prisoner. He is now paralyzed and confined to a wheelchair. * In November 2006, Leo Beverly was stabbed and suffered a punctured lung. * In August 2006, a prisoner was stabbed in the neck. He is now partially paralyzed. * In January 2006, Arthur Lee Scruggs was dragged into a cell, beaten, mutilated, and stabbed over 20 times, causing his death. * Plaintiffs contend that reducing the prison population statewide is key to creating a safe and humane environment for both prisoners and officers at Donaldson and at other state prisons. "Without an immediate reduction in the population at Donaldson, the health and wellbeing of both prisoners and officers will remain in jeopardy," said Melanie Velez, one of the attorneys for the Plaintiffs. Conditions at Donaldson are such that even those men who seek to follow the rules and stay out of trouble are pulled into the fray. Plaintiff John Hicks, for example, was sitting in a prison day room when a prisoner he did not know assaulted him with a broom handle, blinding him in one eye. Plaintiff Charles Malec was asleep in his bunk when a prisoner slashed his face with a razor from his temple to his neck. At the time, there was no officer present in the dorm. "There are many men at Donaldson who want to change their lives for the better," said Sarah Geraghty, an attorney for the Plaintiffs. "But the goals of redemption and rehabilitation suffer when prisoners must remain in a constant state of vigilance to protect their physical safety." A copy of the complaint is available free of charge at: http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?3a18 For additional information, contact: Sarah Geraghty, Esq. (sgeraghty@schr.org) Melanie Velez, Esq. (mvelez@schr.org) Phone: 404/688-1202 (office) or (404) 909-7079 ECLIPSE AVIATION: Faces Employees' Suit in Del. Over Lay-Offs ------------------------------------------------------------- Eclipse Aviation Corp. is facing a purported class-action filed by two former employees who are claiming that they were laid off without the notice required by law, KRQE reports. The suit was filed in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on March 2, 2009 by Annette Varela and John J. Dimura, who had both requested that the court certify the lawsuit as class-action for other laid-off employees. KRQE reported that Ms. Varela worked at the company's Albuquerque headquarters, and Mr. Dimura worked at an Albany, N.Y., service facility. Both were laid off when the company stopped operations in February 2009. Both claim the company terminated their employment without a 60 days' written notice required under the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act. Mr. Dimura also claims the company violated a similar New York state law that requires 90 days' notice. The plaintiffs claimed the company could have reasonably foreseen the layoffs and closings, but did not provide the warning. They are asking for back pay and benefits that would have been covered during the 60-days' notice, plus attorneys' fees, reports KRQE. Eclipse Aviation filed for Chapter 11 in November 2008 and announced it was going to be purchased by a European-based company, but financing for the purchase fell through. Chapter 11 allows a company to hold it creditors at bay while it works out a reorganization plan to continue in business, according to the KRQE report. EXTENDICARE HEALTH: Minn. Court Dismisses Consumer Fraud Lawsuit ---------------------------------------------------------------- Last update: 9:20 p.m. EST March 4, 2009 -- MARKHAM, ONTARIO, March 4, 2009 (MARKET WIRE via COMTEX) -- Extendicare Real Estate Investment Trust ("Extendicare REIT") (CA:EXE.UN) announced that a federal district court judge ruled that a class action lawsuit, brought against Extendicare Health Services, Inc. and Extendicare Homes, Inc. (collectively "Extendicare"), two wholly owned U.S. based subsidiaries of Extendicare REIT, was improper and ordered the case dismissed in its entirety. The court stated that the lawyer-driven complaint "failed to identify any solid ground on which the Plaintiff could stand in this litigation." The lawsuit was originally filed on October 28, 2008 in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. The suit asserted claims under several Minnesota consumer protection statutes and was premised upon an allegation that Extendicare had misrepresented the quality of its services to the residents of its Minnesota skilled nursing facilities. The plaintiff brought the action on behalf of all current and former residents for the period 2002 through 2008. The Honorable Donovan W. Frank rejected all of the class action claims, and held that that the plaintiff's allegations "are so general and unspecific they cannot serve as the basis for a claim." Judge Frank further prohibited the plaintiff's attorneys from attempting to re-file the lawsuit with amended allegations because, given the weakness of the claim, it "would not likely be fruitful." Extendicare viewed this lawsuit as little more than an attempt by plaintiffs' lawyers to pressure Extendicare into settlement and generate attorneys' fees, and argued this to the court. Judge Frank's ruling appears to vindicate Extendicare's position. Extendicare remains committed to continuing to provide quality care to its residents. Extendicare REIT � http://www.extendicare.com/-- is a leading North American provider of long-term and short-term senior care services through its network of owned and operated health care facilities. It employs 39,100 qualified and experienced staff dedicated to helping people live better through a commitment to quality service that includes post-acute care, rehabilitative therapy and home health care services. Its 266 senior care facilities in North America have capacity for approximately 30,000 residents. NCR Corp: Settles Workers' Lawsuits Over "Off-The-Clock" Work ------------------------------------------------------------- NCR Corp. settled two class-action lawsuits that were filed by California and Illinois employees who allege that NCR owed employees for "off-the-clock" work they were not paid for, as well for working through unpaid meal and rest breaks in violation of law, Jacob Dirr of The Dayton Business Journal reports. According to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the lawsuits were filed in March and October last year and were settled late February 2009, which resulted in at least $12 million in company costs. The lawsuits pertained to "customer engineers," who provide installation and repairs on equipment NCR sells, such as Automated Teller Machines (ATMs). Court documents obtained by the Dayton Business Journal states that NCR automatically deducted pay for lunch breaks, even though the engineers � who do not report to a centralized office � often work through lunch because of job demands. Also, according to the documents, NCR maintained a policy and practice of paying employees without regard to the number of hours actually worked and required them to work off-the-clock without pay. California NCR employees filed the March lawsuit and employees at Chicago-based NCR subsidiary First Level Technology LLC filed in October. In all, about 26 employees joined in the two lawsuits. PPG INDUSTRIES: Ruling Allows Pa. Age Bias Case to Move Forward --------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Arthur J. Schwab of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania has ruled that PPG Industries Inc. erred by forcing fired workers to sign waivers barring them from suing the company for age discrimination, of Jason Cato of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reports. In an order signed on Feb. 26, 2009, Judge Schwab adopted the recommendations of a special master handling a 2007 civil lawsuit in which five former employees accused PPG of firing them for being too old and costly, according to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reported that Judge Schwab's decision paves the way for him to certify the suit as a class- action case that could be joined by other fired PPG employees and allow the case to go to trial. Joyce Gannon of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette previously reported that five former employees of PPG Industries Inc. filed a class- action complaint alleging the company pressured them and other workers to retire or resign because of their age (Class Action Reporter, May 29, 2007). The same five plaintiffs who are in their 50s and early 60s also charged the company of age discrimination last year with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The complaint filed in the U.S. District Court in Pittsburgh, Penn. alleges: * PPG didn't give them salary, bonuses, vacation time, and insurance as well as pension benefits because they were forced to leave before their retirement age; * during the past 10 years the company has put in place aggressive workforce reductions that targeted older employees who had higher salaries and were close to retirement; * senior management of PPG instilled a corporate-wide mentality that the older employees were 'not pulling their weight'; * older employees often were dismissed without notice and without explanation; * in some cases, PPG fabricated poor performance reviews of older employees they wanted to terminate; and * the pattern of discrimination began when Raymond LeBoeuf assumed the positions as chairman and chief executive officer and retired in 2005. The plaintiffs in the case -- with their ages at the time of its filing in May 2007 -- are: Linda K. Austin, 56, of Richland; Arthur C. Rupert, 58, of Cheswick; Larry L. Campbell, 61, of Raleigh, N.C.; Wade C. Bittner, 52, of Union Grove, N.C.; and Kenneth J. Hunt, 58, of Irmo, S.C., according to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review report. Their lawsuit accuses PPG of violating the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act by firing hundreds of employees, beginning in the late 1990s, based on their age to save money. When fired, the employees claim, they were forced to sign waivers stating they would not sue the company for any reason, including age discrimination. If they did, PPG threatened to recoup any severance and sue for legal fees. Downtown lawyer Kevin P. Lucas, Esq., the special master appointed in the case, determined those waivers were not legal to which Judge Schwab agreed, reports the Pittsburgh Tribune- Review. Bruce C. Fox, Esq. of Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel LLP, which is presenting the plaintiffs, told the Pittsburgh Tribune- Review that with the ruling as many as 200 additional former PPG employees could join the lawsuit. For more details, contact: Bruce C. Fox, Esq. Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel LLP One Mellon Center, Suite 5240, 500 Grant Street Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219 Phone: 412-288-2462 Cell Phone: 412-352-6216 Fax: 412-566-1508 Web Site: http://www.obermayer.com REYNOLDS AMERICAN: Awaits Ruling on Bid to Amend "Cleary" Action ---------------------------------------------------------------- A ruling is pending on the plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint in a class-action lawsuit styled, "Cleary v. Philip Morris, Inc.," which names Reynolds American, Inc.'s subsidiary, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., as a defendant. In the case filed in June 1998, and pending in Circuit Court, Cook County, Illinois, the plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification on Dec. 21, 2001, in an action brought against major U.S. cigarette manufacturers, including RJR Tobacco and Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. The case is brought on behalf of persons who have allegedly been injured by: (1) the defendants' purported conspiracy pursuant to which defendants concealed material facts regarding the addictive nature of nicotine, (2) the defendants' alleged acts of targeting its advertising and marketing to minors, and (3) the defendants' claimed breach of the public right to defendants' compliance with the laws prohibiting the distribution of cigarettes to minors. The plaintiffs request that the defendants be required to disgorge all profits unjustly received through its sale of cigarettes to plaintiffs and the class, which in no event will be greater than $75,000 per each class member, inclusive of punitive damages, interest and costs. On March 27, 2006, the court dismissed count V, public nuisance, and count VI, unjust enrichment. On July 11, 2006, the plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification. This case has been virtually dormant; however, class counsel has indicated the intent to file an amended complaint and renew activity in the case. As a result, the court has vacated all scheduling orders pending further action by the plaintiffs and a ruling on their motion to amend, according to the company's Feb. 23, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008. Reynolds American, Inc. -- http://www.reynoldsamerican.com/-- is a holding company. It has two business segments: RJR Tobacco and Conwood. RAI's wholly owned subsidiaries include R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co., Inc.; Lane, Limited; R.J. Reynolds Global Products, Inc.; and Conwood Co., LLC, Conwood Sales Co., LLC; Scott Tobacco LLC; and Rosswil LLC, which are collectively referred to as the Conwood companies. The RJR Tobacco segment consists of the primary operations of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. The Conwood segment consists of the Conwood companies and Lane. RAI's wholly owned operating subsidiaries Santa Fe and GPI, among others, are included in All Other. REYNOLDS AMERICAN: ETS Suit Still Stayed Pending "Scott" Appeal --------------------------------------------------------------- The class-action suit styled, "Young v. American Tobacco Co., Inc.," which names Reynolds American, Inc.'s subsidiary, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, as a defendant, remains stayed pending the outcome of the appeal in the case tagged "Scott v. American Tobacco Co., Inc." The ETS class-action lawsuit was filed against U.S. Cigarette manufacturers, including RJR Tobacco and Brown & Williamson Holdings, Inc., and parent companies of U.S. Cigarette manufacturers, including R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Holdings, Inc. The "Young" case filed in November 1997, in Circuit Court, Orleans Parish, Louisiana, is an ETS class action on behalf of all residents of Louisiana who, though not themselves cigarette smokers, have been exposed to secondhand smoke from cigarettes which were manufactured by the defendants, and who allegedly suffered injury as a result of that exposure. The plaintiffs seek to recover an unspecified amount of compensatory and punitive damages. On Oct. 13, 2004, the trial court stayed this case pending the outcome of the appeal in Scott v. American Tobacco Co., Inc., according to the company's Feb. 23, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008. Reynolds American, Inc. -- http://www.reynoldsamerican.com/-- is a holding company. It has two business segments: RJR Tobacco and Conwood. RAI's wholly owned subsidiaries include R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co., Inc.; Lane, Limited; R.J. Reynolds Global Products, Inc.; and Conwood Co., LLC, Conwood Sales Co., LLC; Scott Tobacco LLC; and Rosswil LLC, which are collectively referred to as the Conwood companies. The RJR Tobacco segment consists of the primary operations of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. The Conwood segment consists of the Conwood companies and Lane. RAI's wholly owned operating subsidiaries Santa Fe and GPI, among others, are included in All Other. REYNOLDS AMERICAN: Faces Ga. Smokers' Suit Over RICO Violations --------------------------------------------------------------- Reynolds American, Inc. faces a purported class-action suit filed on behalf of Georgia smokers under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. The suit styled, "Peoples v. Reynolds American, Inc.," was filed on Nov. 17, 2008 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, on behalf of Georgia smokers claiming that the company, Altria and Lorillard, and/or their affiliates wrongfully influenced the federal government's National Cancer Institute not to recommend CT scans as a routine lung cancer screening test for smokers. The plaintiffs claim that the NCI's failure to endorse the test leads insurers to deny reimbursement and persuades doctors not to order the tests as a result. The plaintiffs seek a variety of damages, including alleged contemplated damages under RICO, punitive damages, attorney's fees, interest and costs. The defendants have moved to dismiss the case based on the plaintiffs failure to state a claim meeting the basic prerequisites of RICO, according to the company's Feb. 23, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008. Reynolds American, Inc. -- http://www.reynoldsamerican.com/-- is a holding company. It has two business segments: RJR Tobacco and Conwood. RAI's wholly owned subsidiaries include R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co., Inc.; Lane, Limited; R.J. Reynolds Global Products, Inc.; and Conwood Co., LLC, Conwood Sales Co., LLC; Scott Tobacco LLC; and Rosswil LLC, which are collectively referred to as the Conwood companies. The RJR Tobacco segment consists of the primary operations of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. The Conwood segment consists of the Conwood companies and Lane. RAI's wholly owned operating subsidiaries Santa Fe and GPI, among others, are included in All Other. REYNOLDS AMERICAN: Motions in Suit Over ERISA Violations Pending ---------------------------------------------------------------- Various motions are pending in the class-action suit alleging that the Reynolds American, Inc. entities, which are named as defendants, violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). On May 13, 2002, in "Tatum v. The R.J.R. Pension Investment Committee of the R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company Capital Investment Plan," an employee of RJR Tobacco filed a class- action suit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, alleging ERISA violations by the defendants, RJR, RJR Tobacco, the RJR Employee Benefits Committee and the RJR Pension Investment Committee. The actions about which the plaintiff complains stem from a decision made in 1999 by RJR Nabisco Holdings Corp., renamed Nabisco Group Holdings Corp. (NGH), to spin off RJR, thereby separating NGH's tobacco business and food business. As part of the spin-off, the 401(k) plan for the previously related entities had to be divided into two separate plans for the now separate tobacco and food businesses. The plaintiff contends that the defendants violated ERISA by not overriding an amendment to RJR's 401(k) plan requiring that, prior to Feb. 1, 2000, the stock funds of the companies involved in the food business, NGH and Nabisco Holdings Corp., be eliminated as investment options from RJR's 401(k) plan. In his complaint, the plaintiff requests, among other things, that the court require the defendants to pay as damages to the RJR 401(k) plan an amount equal to the subsequent appreciation that was purportedly lost as a result of the liquidation of the NGH and Nabisco funds. The district court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss on Dec. 10, 2003. On Dec. 14, 2004, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed and remanded the case for further proceedings. On Jan. 20, 2005, the defendants filed a second motion to dismiss on other grounds. On March 7, 2007, the court granted the plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint and denied all pending motions as moot. On April 6, 2007, the defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint. On May 31, 2007, the court granted the motion in part and denied it in part, dismissing all claims against the RJR Employee Benefits Committee and the RJR Pension Investment Committee. The remaining defendants, RJR and RJR Tobacco, filed their answer and affirmative defenses on June 14, 2007. On June 28, 2007, the plaintiff filed a motion to amend the complaint to add as parties defendant the six members of the RJR Pension Investment Committee and the RJR Employee Benefits Committee. On March 13, 2008, the court denied this motion. On Nov. 19, 2007, the plaintiff filed a motion for class certification, which the court granted on Sept. 29, 2008. Court ordered mediation occurred on July 10, 2008, but no resolution of the case was reached. On May 29, 2008, the defendants filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, which asked the court to dismiss the claims asserted by class members who voluntarily transferred their 401(k) investments from the NGH and Nabisco funds before Jan. 31, 2000. That motion remains outstanding. On Sept. 18, 2008, each of the plaintiffs and the defendants filed motions for summary judgment. A decision is pending. On Jan. 9, 2009, the defendants filed a motion to decertify the class, which also remains pending, according to the company's Feb. 23, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008. Reynolds American, Inc. -- http://www.reynoldsamerican.com/-- is a holding company. It has two business segments: RJR Tobacco and Conwood. RAI's wholly owned subsidiaries include R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co., Inc.; Lane, Limited; R.J. Reynolds Global Products, Inc.; and Conwood Co., LLC, Conwood Sales Co., LLC; Scott Tobacco LLC; and Rosswil LLC, which are collectively referred to as the Conwood companies. The RJR Tobacco segment consists of the primary operations of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. The Conwood segment consists of the Conwood companies and Lane. RAI's wholly owned operating subsidiaries Santa Fe and GPI, among others, are included in All Other. REYNOLDS AMERICAN: "Parsons" Personal Injury Suit Remains Stayed ---------------------------------------------------------------- The personal injury class-action suit styled, "Parsons v. A C & S, Inc.," which names several Reynolds American, Inc. entities as defendants, remains stayed by the bankruptcy proceedings of various defendants. In the case filed in February 1998, in Circuit Court, Ohio County, West Virginia, the plaintiff sued asbestos manufacturers, U.S. cigarette manufacturers, including R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Brown & Williamson Holdings, Inc., and parent companies of U.S. cigarette manufacturers, including R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Holdings, Inc., seeking to recover $1 million in compensatory and punitive damages individually and an unspecified amount for the class in both compensatory and punitive damages. The class is brought on behalf of persons who allegedly have personal injury claims arising from their exposure to respirable asbestos fibers and cigarette smoke. The plaintiffs allege that Mrs. Parsons' use of tobacco products and exposure to asbestos products caused her to develop lung cancer and to become addicted to tobacco. The case has been stayed pending a final resolution of the plaintiffs' motion to refer tobacco litigation to the judicial panel on multi-district litigation filed in In Re: Tobacco Litigation in the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. On Dec. 26, 2000, three defendants, Nitral Liquidators, Inc., Desseaux Corporation of North American and Armstrong World Industries, filed bankruptcy petitions in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, In re Armstrong World Industries, Inc. Under section 362(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, the Parsons case is automatically stayed with respect to all defendants, according to the company's Feb. 23, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008. Reynolds American, Inc. -- http://www.reynoldsamerican.com/-- is a holding company. It has two business segments: RJR Tobacco and Conwood. RAI's wholly owned subsidiaries include R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co., Inc.; Lane, Limited; R.J. Reynolds Global Products, Inc.; and Conwood Co., LLC, Conwood Sales Co., LLC; Scott Tobacco LLC; and Rosswil LLC, which are collectively referred to as the Conwood companies. The RJR Tobacco segment consists of the primary operations of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. The Conwood segment consists of the Conwood companies and Lane. RAI's wholly owned operating subsidiaries Santa Fe and GPI, among others, are included in All Other. REYNOLDS AMERICAN: Reports No Activity to "Jones" Suit in Mo. -------------------------------------------------------------- The class-action lawsuit captioned, "Jones v. American Tobacco Co., Inc.," which names several Reynolds American, Inc. entities as defendants, is proceeding in the Circuit Court, Jackson County, Missouri. The case was originally filed in December 1998, in Circuit Court, Jackson County, Missouri, the defendants removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri on Feb. 16, 1999. The action was brought against the major U.S. Cigarette manufacturers, including R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Brown & Williamson Holdings, Inc., and parent companies of U.S. cigarette manufacturers, including R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Holdings, Inc., on behalf of tobacco product users and purchasers on behalf of all similarly situated Missouri consumers. The plaintiffs allege that their use of the defendants' tobacco products has caused them to become addicted to nicotine. The plaintiffs seek to recover an unspecified amount of compensatory and punitive damages. The case was remanded to the Circuit Court on Feb. 17, 1999. There has been limited activity in this case, according to the company's Feb. 23, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008. Reynolds American, Inc. -- http://www.reynoldsamerican.com/-- is a holding company. It has two business segments: RJR Tobacco and Conwood. RAI's wholly owned subsidiaries include R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co., Inc.; Lane, Limited; R.J. Reynolds Global Products, Inc.; and Conwood Co., LLC, Conwood Sales Co., LLC; Scott Tobacco LLC; and Rosswil LLC, which are collectively referred to as the Conwood companies. The RJR Tobacco segment consists of the primary operations of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. The Conwood segment consists of the Conwood companies and Lane. RAI's wholly owned operating subsidiaries Santa Fe and GPI, among others, are included in All Other. REYNOLDS AMERICAN: "Smith" Suit Over Price Fixing in Discovery -------------------------------------------------------------- Discovery is ongoing in the class-action case styled, "Smith v. Philip Morris Cos., Inc.," according to Reynolds American, Inc.'s Feb. 23, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008. The case was filed in February 2000, in the District Court, Seward County, Kansas, against the major U.S. Cigarette manufacturers, including R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Brown & Williamson Holdings, Inc., and parent companies of U.S. cigarette manufacturers, including R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Holdings, Inc. The court granted class certification on Nov. 15, 2001, in the action seeking to recover an unspecified amount in actual and punitive damages. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants participated in a conspiracy to fix or maintain the price of cigarettes sold in the United States. The parties are currently engaged in discovery. Reynolds American, Inc. -- http://www.reynoldsamerican.com/-- is a holding company. It has two business segments: RJR Tobacco and Conwood. RAI's wholly owned subsidiaries include R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co., Inc.; Lane, Limited; R.J. Reynolds Global Products, Inc.; and Conwood Co., LLC, Conwood Sales Co., LLC; Scott Tobacco LLC; and Rosswil LLC, which are collectively referred to as the Conwood companies. The RJR Tobacco segment consists of the primary operations of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. The Conwood segment consists of the Conwood companies and Lane. RAI's wholly owned operating subsidiaries Santa Fe and GPI, among others, are included in All Other. REYNOLDS AMERICAN: "Stewart" Lawsuit Over Cigarette Ad Pending -------------------------------------------------------------- The class-action case styled, "Stewart v. RJR Tobacco," which names Reynolds American, Inc.'s subsidiary, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., as a defendant, is still in a preliminary phase. In December 2007, nine states (California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Washington) sued RJR Tobacco claiming that an advertisement published in a magazine the prior month violated the Master Settlement Agreement's ban on the use of cartoons. The states asserted that the magazine's content adjacent to a Camel gatefold advertisement included cartoon images prohibited by the MSA and that certain images used in the Camel ad itself were prohibited cartoons. In Stewart v. RJR Tobacco, a class-action filed in California state court against the magazine's publisher, Wenner Media, and RJR Tobacco claiming the mention of bands in the magazine- created content violated their right of publicity. The plaintiffs seek compensatory and punitive damages. The case is still in a preliminary phase, according to the company's Feb. 23, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008. Reynolds American, Inc. -- http://www.reynoldsamerican.com/-- is a holding company. It has two business segments: RJR Tobacco and Conwood. RAI's wholly owned subsidiaries include R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co., Inc.; Lane, Limited; R.J. Reynolds Global Products, Inc.; and Conwood Co., LLC, Conwood Sales Co., LLC; Scott Tobacco LLC; and Rosswil LLC, which are collectively referred to as the Conwood companies. The RJR Tobacco segment consists of the primary operations of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. The Conwood segment consists of the Conwood companies and Lane. RAI's wholly owned operating subsidiaries Santa Fe and GPI, among others, are included in All Other. REYNOLDS AMERICAN: Suit Over FLSA Violations Still in Discovery --------------------------------------------------------------- A collective action complaint against Reynolds American, Inc. subsidiary, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is still in the discovery phase. On March 19, 2007, in "Marshall v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.," the plaintiff filed a collective action complaint against RJR Tobacco in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri. The allegations include failure to keep accurate records of all hours worked by RJR Tobacco's employees and failure to pay wages and overtime compensation to non-exempt retail representatives. The total number of current or former retail representatives participating is 469, including those who have opted in the Marshall case and subsequent lawsuits filed in New York and California. Two new cases alleging violations of the FLSA and other state law wage and hour claims were filed in February 2008: -- Radcliffe v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., filed on Feb. 14, 2008, in federal court in California, was served on May 9, 2008; and -- Dinino v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., filed on Feb. 29, 2008, in federal court in New York, served on April 18, 2008. The Dinino and Radcliffe matters have been transferred to the Missouri court in conjunction with the already pending Marshall case due to the similarity of issues to be resolved. The plaintiffs in the Dinino and Radcliffe matters failed to move for class certification on the state law claims. On Dec. 22, 2008, RJR Tobacco's motion for partial summary judgment was granted. The court ruled that the plaintiffs' commutes from their homes to their first assignment of the day, and their commutes from their last assignments of the day to their homes, are non-compensable. On Feb. 5, 2009, the court denied the plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration on this issue or, in the alternative, plaintiffs' request for certification for interlocutory appeal. The case is still in the discovery phase. Mediation was held on Feb. 3, 2009, but the parties were unable to reach a resolution, according to the company's Feb. 23, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008. Reynolds American, Inc. -- http://www.reynoldsamerican.com/-- is a holding company. It has two business segments: RJR Tobacco and Conwood. RAI's wholly owned subsidiaries include R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co., Inc.; Lane, Limited; R.J. Reynolds Global Products, Inc.; and Conwood Co., LLC, Conwood Sales Co., LLC; Scott Tobacco LLC; and Rosswil LLC, which are collectively referred to as the Conwood companies. The RJR Tobacco segment consists of the primary operations of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. The Conwood segment consists of the Conwood companies and Lane. RAI's wholly owned operating subsidiaries Santa Fe and GPI, among others, are included in All Other. REYNOLDS AMERICAN: Unit Awaits Ruling on Bid in "Romero" Suit ------------------------------------------------------------- Reynolds American, Inc.'s subsidiary, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., awaits a ruling on its petition of writ of certiorari in the class-action suit styled, "Romero v. Philip Morris Cos., Inc." The case was filed in April 2000 in District Court, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico, against major U.S. cigarette manufacturers, including R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Brown & Williamson Holdings, Inc., and parent companies of U.S. Cigarette manufacturers, including R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Holdings, Inc. The court granted class certification on May 14, 2003, in the action, which seeks to recover an amount not to exceed $74,000 per class member in actual and punitive damages, exclusive of interest and costs. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants conspired to fix, raise, advance and/or stabilize prices for cigarettes in the State of New Mexico from at least as early as Jan. 1, 1998, through the present. On June 30, 2006, the court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment. On Nov. 18, 2008, the New Mexico Court of Appeals reversed the grant of summary judgment in favor of RJR Tobacco, B&W and Philip Morris. On Jan. 7, 2009, RJR Tobacco filed a petition of writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court of the State of New Mexico. RJR Tobacco awaits a ruling on that petition, according to the company's Feb. 23, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008. Reynolds American, Inc. -- http://www.reynoldsamerican.com/-- is a holding company. It has two business segments: RJR Tobacco and Conwood. RAI's wholly owned subsidiaries include R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co., Inc.; Lane, Limited; R.J. Reynolds Global Products, Inc.; and Conwood Co., LLC, Conwood Sales Co., LLC; Scott Tobacco LLC; and Rosswil LLC, which are collectively referred to as the Conwood companies. The RJR Tobacco segment consists of the primary operations of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. The Conwood segment consists of the Conwood companies and Lane. RAI's wholly owned operating subsidiaries Santa Fe and GPI, among others, are included in All Other. STERLING FINANCIAL: Reaches $10.25M Settlement in Pa. Litigation ---------------------------------------------------------------- A $10.25 million settlement was reached in a consolidated class- action lawsuit over the collapse of Sterling Financial Corp. in a fraud scandal two years ago, Patrick Burns of the Intelligencer Journal reports. The settlement will go to investors who bought stock during a three-year period that ended in May 2007, when a massive fraud was uncovered at a Sterling subsidiary and shares plunged 40 percent, according to the Intelligencer Journal report. The Intelligencer Journal reported that the settlement, which was filed on March 2, 2009, will be reviewed at a hearing before Judge Lawrence F. Stengel. It covers shareholders who bought Sterling stock between April 27, 2004, and May 24, 2007. Case Background In 2007, the company's stock price collapsed after the company reported it had uncovered major fraud at Equipment Finance, LLC, a commercial finance subsidiary of Sterling Financial, which has since agreed to be acquired by The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. This event triggered the filing of several class-action complaints in May, June and July 2007 in the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and for the Southern District of New York related to Equipment Finance (Class Action Reporter, July 3, 2008). In October 2007, the lawsuits filed in New York were transferred to the Pennsylvania Court for coordinated pretrial proceedings. In February 2008, the plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint on behalf of those who purchased Sterling common stock during the period from April 27, 2004, through May 24, 2007. This complaint names Sterling, Bank of Lancaster County, N.A. (a predecessor to a bank subsidiary of Sterling), Equipment Finance, and members of their management as defendants. The plaintiffs allege violations of the federal securities laws, including allegations that Sterling's public statements and filings fraudulently omitted information and included fraudulent misrepresentations about the improprieties at Equipment Finance as well as about their impact on Sterling's earnings and related matters. The plaintiffs assert that the price for Sterling stock was fraudulently inflated during the class period due to the alleged omissions and misrepresentations, and seek unspecified damages, interest, attorneys' fees and costs. As a result of PNC Financial Services Group's acquisition of Sterling, PNC may be responsible for indemnifying individual defendants in connection with this lawsuit. Upon consolidation in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the lawsuits soon fell under the caption, "In Re: Sterling Financial Corporation Securities Litigation, Case No. 2:2007-md-01879." The suit is "In Re: Sterling Financial Corporation Securities Litigation, Case No. 2:2007-md-01879," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge Lawrence F. Stengel, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs is: Mario Alba, Jr. Cauley Geller Bowman & Rudman LLP 200 Broadhollow Rd. Suite 406 Melville, NY 11747 Phone: 631-367-7100 Representing the defendants is: Eric C. Bosset, Esq. (ebosset@cov.com) Covington & Burling LLP 1201 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20004-2401 UBS FINANCIAL: Court Grants Motion in HealthSouth-Related Case -------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Karon O. Bowdre of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted a motion by UBS Financial Services, Inc. in a purported securities fraud class-action lawsuit against HealthSouth Corp. executives and advisers responsible for the company's $2.2 billion accounting fraud, Ben Hallman of Am Law Litigation Daily. In a ruling issued in Feb. 26, 2009, granted a motion for summary judgment filed by UBS Financial, HealthSouth's primary outside financial adviser, in the matter, "In re HealthSouth Corp. Securities Litigation, Master File No. CV-03-BE-1500-S." The purported securities fraud class-action lawsuit was led by the Retirement Systems of Alabama, the pension fund for state employees, according to the Am Law Litigation Daily report. A copy of the court ruling is available free of charge at: http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?3a17 UNITED STATES: Faces Mass. Suit Over Temporary Protective Status ---------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, former president George W. Bush, Secretary Michael Chertoff, Gov. Janet Napolitano, and Secretary Tom Ridge are facing a purported class-action lawsuit in Massachusetts that is aiming to compel the U.S. government to grant Temporary Protective Status (TPS) to parents who were airlifted by the U.S. military along with their American-born children during the height of the Liberian civil war, Gardea V. Woodson of The Liberian Journal reports. The suit captioned, "Krua v. United States Department of Homeland Security et al., Case No. 1:2009-cv-10081," was filed on Jan. 16, 2009 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts System by Torli H. Krua, the executive director of the Boston-based Universal Human Rights International (UHRI). According to Mr. Krua, the lawsuit is intended to also remedy the deteriorating conditions and extreme personal difficulties that have complicated the lives of many young American citizens of African descent airlifted to safety by the U.S. military from "Liberia's bloodbath and the claws of the war lords." He said the goal is to ensure that "equal protection under the law" is applied evenly to all. In a release issued recently, Mr. Krua also said Sierra Leoneans who were previously granted TPS because of their American children are similarly experiencing tough times in the bitter winter season of America, reports The Liberian Journal. Mr. Kruah states, "The class-action lawsuit does not apply to those who are already on TPS but rather those who were denied TPS/DED status over the years." The release disclosed that the suit was filed on the day Barack Obama took the Oath of Office as America's 44th President. "They have experienced no change," the release said, making reference to President Obama's campaign slogan of changing the way Washington DC does things, adding "In this harsh 2009 winter weather, these American citizens who were airlifted from the heat of a civil war in Africa, languish in cold basements across America." Mr. Krua alleged that although these people are in America, they are being threatened by inadequate access to the basic human needs of food, clothing and shelter pointing out that in violation of basic American values, these young Americans were torn apart and inadequately separated from their siblings and families during the airlift six years ago, according to The Liberian Journal report. A full text of the lawsuit is available free of charge at: http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?3a19 WEST VIRGINIA: DHHR, Official Faces Lawsuit Over Medicaid Plan -------------------------------------------------------------- The West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources and its head, Secretary Martha Walker, are facing a purported class- action lawsuit regarding the West Virginia Medicaid Basic Health Plan, Tony Rutherford of Huntingtonnews.net reports. The suit captioned, "D.W. et al. v. Walker, Case No. 2:09-cv- 00060," was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia on Jan. 21, 2009. It cites two children -- who are listed as plaintiffs in the litigation -- as examples of the deficiencies of the program. To protect privacy, the individuals are referred to by their initials, according to the Huntingtonnews.net report. D.W. after diagnosis with a hearing impairment has been deprived treatment by a hearing specialist. The West Virginia Medicaid Basic Health Plan does not cover those costs. D.W. has been removed from public schools and still has not received hearing and counseling services as prescribed. T.G. has allergies and asthma. He developed a sinus infection. The Basic plan will pay for only four prescriptions per month per child. T.G. was prescribed a steroid, antibiotic and inhaler, along with his continuing medications. The plan would not pay for the inhaler which cost about $180. The lawsuit alleges that new conditions placed on the child's Medicaid program deprive them of essential services and thus violated a federal statute. The plaintiffs seek to have the court invalidate the program through a declaratory judgment for violation of Title XIX of the Social Security Act, reports Huntingtonnews.net. The suit is "D.W. et al. v. Walker, Case No. 2:09-cv-00060," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, Judge Joseph R. Goodwin, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs are: Daniel F. Hedges, Esq. (dan@msjlaw.org) MOUNTAIN STATE JUSTICE, INC. Suite 200 1031 Quarrier Street Charleston, WV 25301 Phone: 304/344-3144 Fax: 304/344-3145 - and - M. Jane Perkins, Esq. (perkins@healthlaw.org) NATIONAL HEALTH LAW PROGRAM 211 North Columbia Street Chapel Hill, NC 27514 Phone: 919/968-6308 Fax: 919/968-8855 Representing the defendants is: Charlene A. Vaughan, Esq. (Charlene.A.Vaughan@wv.gov) OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL State Capitol Complex Building 3, Room 210 Charleston, WV 25305 Phone: 304/558-2131 Fax: 304/558-0947 New Securities Fraud Cases BARCLAYS BANK: Coughlin Stoia Files N.Y. Securities Fraud Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- Wed, 04 March 2009 21:16:14 GMT -- SAN DIEGO -- (Business Wire) Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP ("Coughlin Stoia") (http://www.csgrr.com/cases/barclayspreferred/) announced that a class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons who acquired the American Depositary Shares, Series 2 ("Preferred Stock") (NYSE:BCS-P) of Barclays Bank Plc ("Barclays Bank") pursuant and/or traceable to a false and misleading registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with the Company's April 2006 offering of the Company's Preferred Stock representing 6.625% Dollar-Denominated Non-Cumulative Callable Preference Shares, Series 2 (the "Offering"). The complaint charges Barclays Bank, its senior insiders, Barclays Plc ("Barclays") and the underwriters of the Offering with violations of the Securities Act of 1933. Barclays Bank is a major global financial services provider engaged in retail and commercial banking, credit cards, investment banking, wealth management and investment management services. The complaint alleges that defendants consummated the Offering pursuant to a false and misleading Registration Statement and Prospectus (collectively, the "Registration Statement"), selling 30 million shares at $25 per share (including the over-allotment), for proceeds of over $750 million. Then, in August 2008, Barclays announced huge multi-billion dollar impairment charges associated with its exposure to mortgage-related securities. Notwithstanding these huge write- downs, Barclays' securities, including the Preferred Stock, did not decline appreciably due to Barclays' assurances it did not require additional capital after raising �4.5 billion in a share sale in July. However, in mid-November 2008, Barclays was forced to acknowledge that it would indeed need to raise additional capital, and the price of the Preferred Stock fell to as low as $8.30 per share. According to the complaint, the Registration Statement for the Offering was false and misleading because it omitted the following true facts: -- Barclays' portfolio of mortgage-related securities was impaired to a much larger extent than had been disclosed; -- defendants failed to properly record losses for impaired assets; -- Barclays' internal controls were inadequate to prevent the Company from improperly reporting its mortgage- related investments; and -- Barclays was not as well capitalized as represented and would have to continually raise additional capital, which would dilute current holders and those investors purchasing Preferred Stock in the Offering. Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all persons who acquired the Preferred Stock of Barclays Bank pursuant and/or traceable to the Registration Statement issued in connection with the Company's April 2006 Offering (the "Class"). For more details, contact: David A. Rosenfeld, Esq. (djr@csgrr.com) Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP Phone: 800-449-4900 or 619-231-1058 Web site: http://www.csgrr.com/cases/barclayspreferred/ GENERAL ELECTRIC: Harwood Feffer Files Securities Fraud Lawsuit --------------------------------------------------------------- NEW YORK, March 4, 2009 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The law firm of Harwood Feffer LLP announces that it filed a class action lawsuit on March 3, 2009 on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of General Electric Company (the "Company") (NYSE:GE) during the period January 23, 2009 through February 27, 2009, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The action is pending in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleges that on January 23, 2009, the Company's Chairman and CEO, Jeffrey Immelt, stated unequivocally that GE would maintain its quarterly $.31 per share dividend, having sufficient cash on hand and cash flow to achieve that goal. Then on February 27, 2009, GE suddenly announced it was cutting the dividend to $.10 per share. On the first trading day after the dividend reduction announcement, GE shares fell from $8.51 per share the previous trading day to close at $7.60 per share. The shares have continued to plummet, currently trading at $6.30 per share, an almost 30% plunge. During the Class Period, Mr. Immelt sold over 52,000 shares of GE stock at $11.10 per share and other officers of the Company sold over 380,000 shares at that same price. Mr. Immelt then repurchased 50,000 shares after the announcement at between $7.51 and $8.30 per share. As a result, Mr. Immelt and the other officers violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing false and misleading statements or knowingly or recklessly failing to know of those statements, sold GE shares at inflated prices based on those statements. For more information, contact: Robert I. Harwood, Esq. (rharwood@hfesq.com) Samuel K. Rosen, Esq. (srosen@hfesq.com) Daniella Quitt, Esq. (dquitt@hfesq.com) Harwood Feffer LLP 488 Madison Avenue New York, New York 10022 Phone: 877-935-7400 Website: http://www.hfesq.com INTREPID POTASH: Bronstein Gewirtz Announces Stock Suit Filing -------------------------------------------------------------- NEW YORK, NY -- (Marketwire) -- 03/04/09 -- Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado on behalf of those who purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of Intrepid Potash, Inc. (NYSE: IPI) ("Intrepid" or the "Company") pursuant and/or traceable to the Company's Initial Public Offering (the "IPO") on April 21, 2008 (the "Class"). The complaint charges Intrepid and certain of its current and former executive officers with violations of federal securities laws. The complaint alleges that the Prospectus and Registration Statement contained false and misleading statements and in addition failed to disclose that the Company's President and Chief Operating Officer ("COO") had not received a B.A. from the University of Colorado or a M.S. degree from Loyola Marymount University. On February 11, 2009, the Fraud Discovery Institute revealed that the Company's President and COO misrepresented his academic credentials in the Registration Statement issued in connection with the Company's IPO. In response to the news, shares of common stock declined $1.52 per share to close at $22.00 per share on that day, which represented a cumulative loss of approximately 31% of the value of the Company's shares at the time of its IPO. No Class has yet been certified in the above action. For more details, contact: Peretz Bronstein, Esq. Eitan Kimelman (eitan@bgandg.com) Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC Phone: 212-697-6484 Web site: http://www.bgandg.com/ OPPENHEIMER CHAMPION: Cohen Milstein Files Securities Fraud Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- March 4, 2009 3:44 PM EST -- WASHINGTON -- (BUSINESS WIRE) -- The law firm Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC ("Cohen Milstein") has filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased shares of Oppenheimer Champion Income Fund ("Champion Fund" or the "Fund") (NASDAQ:OPCHX; NASDAQ:OCHBX; NASDAQ:OCHCX; NASDAQ:OCHNX; NASDAQ: OCHYX), which were offered by OppenheimerFunds, Inc. ("OppenheimerFunds"), in connection with the Fund's January 26, 2007 and January 25, 2008 offerings (the "Offerings"). The complaint charges the Champion Fund, OppenheimerFunds and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Securities Act") and the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the "Investment Act"). The Champion Fund is an open-ended fixed income mutual fund launched and managed by OppenheimerFunds. In particular, the complaint alleges that due to defendants' false and misleading statements, investors purchased shares in the Fund. Unknown to investors, the Champion Fund began to alter its investment style in late 2006 and began to significantly increase its risk in the hopes of seeking higher returns, including by dramatically increasing its use of derivative instruments, purchasing highly unstable mortgage- related and corporate bonds and significantly increasing its leverage exposure. According to the complaint, defendants concealed that the Champion Fund had increased its risk exposure in the hopes of higher returns such that investors remained unaware of the heightened risk of investing in the Fund. It is also alleged that, beginning in July 2008, the Champion Fund's shares declined in tandem with other high-yield fund shares as the credit crunch exposed the poor underlying fundamentals of the financial sector's mortgage risk management and problems with structured finance vehicles. As a result of these concerns, the Fund's shares began to slide. Then, beginning in mid-September 2008 with the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and American International Group, Inc. and continuing through December 2008, the Fund began to acknowledge the serious deterioration in its portfolio. The complaint alleges that as a result of these disclosures, the price of the Fund's shares collapsed. According to the complaint, the true facts which were omitted from the Registration Statements and Prospectuses for the Offerings were as follows: -- the Fund was no longer adhering to its objective to not take on any undue risk, but in an effort to achieve greater yields was pursuing riskier instruments; -- the Fund's internal controls were inadequate to prevent defendants from taking on excessive risk; -- the extent of the Fund's liquidity risk due to the illiquid nature of a large portion of the Fund's portfolios was omitted; -- the extent of the Fund's risk exposure to derivatives and other high risk instruments was concealed; and -- the extent of the Fund's leverage exposure was misstated. For more details, contact: Steven J. Toll, Esq. (stoll@cmht.com) Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. 1100 New York Avenue, N.W. West Tower, Suite 500 Washington, D.C. 20005 Phone: (888) 240-0775 or (202) 408-4600 OPPENHEIMER CHAMPION: Labaton Sucharow Files N.Y. Stock Lawsuit --------------------------------------------------------------- NEW YORK, March 4, 2009 (GlobeNewswire via COMTEX) -- Labaton Sucharow filed a class action lawsuit on March 4, 2009 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of all purchasers or holders of the Oppenheimer Champion Income Fund ("Champion Fund") (OPCHX, OCHBX, OCHCX, OCHNX, OCHYX) between August 7, 2006 and December 9, 2008, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The lawsuit was filed against OppenheimerFunds, Inc., Oppenheimer Champion Income Fund ("Champion Fund"), OppenheimerFunds Distributor, Inc. and certain officers and trustees ("Defendants"). This action seeks to pursue remedies under the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Securities Act"), the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"), and the Investment Company Act of 1940 ("Investment Company Act"). The Complaint alleges as follows: due to defendants' positive, but false, statements, investors purchased and/or continued to hold shares in Oppenheimer Champion Income Fund. The Champion Fund was a typical high-yield bond fund until late 2006 when it altered its investment style and began to significantly increase its risk in the hopes of seeking higher returns, including by dramatically increasing its use of derivative instruments, purchasing highly unstable mortgage- related and corporate bonds, and significantly increasing its leverage exposure. Defendants concealed that the Champion Fund had increased its exposure with these excessively risky bets in the hopes of higher returns, such that investors remained unaware of these additional risk exposures. According to the Complaint, the true facts which were omitted from the Registration Statements/Prospectuses were known by the defendants but concealed from the investing public during the Class Period. The Champion Fund was no longer adhering to its objective to not take on any undue risk, but in an effort to achieve greater yields was pursuing riskier instruments and the Champion Fund's internal controls were inadequate to prevent defendants from taking on excessive risk. The Champion Fund's liquidity risk was concealed, its risk exposure to derivatives and other high risk instruments was concealed, and its leverage exposure was misstated. For more details, contact: Alan I. Ellman, Esq. (aellman@labaton.com) Labaton Sucharow LLP Phone: 212-907-0887 Fax: 212-883-7087 Web site: http://www.labaton.com TRIAD GUARANTY: Dyer & Berens Files N.C. Securities Fraud Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- March 04, 2009: 02:16 PM ET -- Marketwire -- Dyer & Berens LLP announced that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina on behalf of certain investors of Triad Guaranty Inc. ("Triad" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: TGIC) who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company's common stock between October 26, 2006 and November 10, 2008, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The complaint charges Triad and certain of its senior officers with violations of the federal securities laws. The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants made false and misleading statements to the market about the Company's business and financial condition. For example, defendants failed to disclose that: -- the Company was not adequately accounting for its loss reserves in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, causing its financial results to be materially misstated; -- the Company failed to engage in proper underwriting practices for its book of business related to insurance written in 2006 and 2007, including the insurance related to its Alt-A and pay-option adjustable rate mortgage products; -- the Company had far greater exposure to anticipated losses and defaults related to its book of business related to insurance written in 2006 and 2007, including its Alt-A and pay-option ARM portfolios, than it had previously disclosed; -- the Company lacked effective internal controls to detect fraud and misrepresentations in the underwriting process; and -- the Company failed to disclose the true risks associated with its ability to continue to write new business and, given rating downgrades and capital limitations, the Company would be forced to liquidate its Canadian subsidiary and stop writing new insurance policies and transition the business to run-off. As a result of defendants' false statements, Triad stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period reaching as high as $58.45 per share in January 2007. Beginning in late August 2007 and continuing throughout 2008, Triad began to acknowledge serious issues surrounding its exposure to anticipated losses and defaults related to its book of business for its Alt-A and pay-option ARM products written in 2006 and 2007 due to a failure to engage in proper underwriting practices, resulting in a decline in Triad's stock price. On November 10, 2008, Triad issued its financial results for the third quarter of 2008, reporting a net loss for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 of $160.1 million. On this news, Triad's stock price dropped to close at $0.70 per share on November 11, 2008. Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of Triad investors. For more details, contact: Jeffrey A. Berens, Esq. (jeff@dyerberens.com) 682 Grant Street Denver, CO 80203 Dyer & Berens LLP Phone: (888) 300-3362 or (303) 861-1764 Web site: http://www.DyerBerens.com Asbestos Alerts ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Spencer's Petition Denied in Case v. Bragg ---------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, denied Fernando Spencer's petition, in a case involving asbestos filed against Warden M. Thomas Bragg. The case is styled Fernando Spencer, Petitioner-Appellant v. Warden M. Thomas Bragg, Respondent-Appellee. Judges Patrick E. Higginbotham, James L. Dennis, and Edward Charles Prado entered judgment in Case No. 07-51452 on Feb. 18, 2009. Mr. Spencer, federal prisoner #10714-180, appealed the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas' dismissal of his petition without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. The district court held that Mr. Spencer's claims, which related to his alleged exposure to asbestos, lack of proper medical treatment, retaliation, and the loss of legal notes, related to the conditions of his confinement. Because success on these claims would not result in Mr. Spencer's accelerated release from prison, the district court held that they were not cognizable. Mr. Spencer argued that his application was proper because he was challenging the execution of his sentence and he sought accelerated release from prison. He contended that the loss of his legal notes negatively impacted his proceeding, which he asserted could have resulted in his release from prison. Therefore, he argued that accelerated release was appropriate relief in this proceeding. Accordingly, the Appeals Court affirmed the district court's judgment dismissing the s 2241 petition without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. Mr. Spencer's motion for release pending appeal was denied. Fernando Spencer of Anthony, N.M., pro se. Eduardo R. Castillo, Esq., U.S. Attorney's Office, Western District of Texas in El Paso, Tex., represented Mr. Bragg. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: U.S. Steel Facing 450 Lawsuits at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- United States Steel Corporation, as of Dec. 31, 2008, faced 450 active asbestos-related cases involving about 3,050 plaintiffs (claims), according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. As of Sept. 30, 2008, the Company was a defendant in about 415 active cases involving about 3,020 plaintiffs. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 7, 2008) At Dec. 31, 2007, the Company faced 325 active cases involving about 3,000 plaintiffs. During 2008, settlements and dismissals resulted in the disposition of about 400 claims and the Company paid about US$13 million in settlements. New filings added about 450 claims. During 2007, settlements and dismissals resulted in the disposition of about 1,230 claims and the Company paid about US$9 million in settlements. New filings added about 530 claims. Almost 2,600, or about 85 percent, of the 3,050 claims at Dec. 31, 2008 are pending in jurisdictions, which permit filings with massive numbers of plaintiffs. Of these claims, about 1,550 are pending in Mississippi and about 1,050 are pending in Texas. These asbestos cases allege various respiratory and other diseases based on alleged exposure to asbestos. The Company is currently a defendant in cases in which a total of about 190 plaintiffs allege that they are suffering from mesothelioma. In every asbestos case in which the Company is named as a party, the complaints are filed against numerous named defendants and generally do not contain allegations regarding specific monetary damages sought. Historically, about 89 percent of the cases against the Company did not specify any damage amount or stated that the damages sought exceeded the amount required to establish jurisdiction of the court in which the case was filed. Jurisdictional amounts generally range from US$25,000 to US$75,000. Headquartered in Pittsburgh, United States Steel Corporation is an integrated steel producer with major production operations in North America and Europe. The Company has annual raw steel production capability of 31.7 million net tons (24.3 million tons in North America and 7.4 million tons in Europe). ASBESTOS LITIGATION: AK Steel Facing 437 Injury Suits at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- AK Steel Holding Corporation says that, as of Dec. 31, 2008, its subsidiary AK Steel Corporation faced 437 pending asbestos- related lawsuits, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. As of Dec. 31, 2007, about 426 asbestos-related lawsuits were pending against AK Steel. (Class Action Reporter, March 7, 2008) Since 1990, the Company (or its predecessor, Armco Inc.) has been named as a defendant in numerous lawsuits alleging personal injury as a result of exposure to asbestos. Most of these lawsuits have been filed on behalf of people who claim to have been exposed to asbestos while visiting the premises of a current or former AK Steel facility. About 40 percent of these premises suits arise out of claims of exposure at a facility in Houston that has been closed since 1984. About 137 of the 437 cases pending at Dec. 31, 2008 in which AK Steel is a defendant include specific dollar claims for damages in the filed complaints. Those 137 cases involve a total of 2,534 plaintiffs and 17,488 defendants. In these cases, the complaint typically includes a monetary claim for compensatory damages and a separate monetary claim in an equal amount for punitive damages, and does not attempt to allocate the total monetary claim among the various defendants. About 121 of the 137 cases involve claims of US200,000 or less, eight involve claims of between US$200,000 and US$5 million, five involve claims of between US$5 million and US$$15 million, and three involve claims of US$20 million. In each case, the amount described is per plaintiff against all of the defendants, collectively. During 2008, the Company recorded 41 new claims filed and 39 claims disposed of. The total amount paid in settlements was US$700,000. During 2007, the Company recorded 71 new claims filed and 138 claims disposed of. Total amount paid in settlements was US$400,000. Since the onset of asbestos claims against AK Steel in 1990, five asbestos claims against it have proceeded to trial in four separate cases. All five concluded with a verdict in favor of AK Steel. Headquartered in West Chester, Ohio, AK Steel Holding Corporation's operations consist of seven steelmaking and finishing plants that produce flat-rolled carbon steels, including premium quality coated, cold-rolled and hot-rolled products, and specialty stainless and electrical steels that are sold in slab, hot band, and sheet and strip form. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 26,235 Claims Ongoing v. Harsco at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Harsco Corporation, as of Dec. 31, 2008, had 26,235 pending asbestos personal injury claims filed against it, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. As of Sept. 30, 2008, the Company had 26,236 pending asbestos- related personal injury claims. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 21, 2008) The Company has been named as one of many defendants (about 90 or more in most cases) in legal actions alleging personal injury from exposure to airborne asbestos over the past several decades. In their suits, the plaintiffs have named as defendants many manufacturers, distributors and installers of numerous types of equipment or products that allegedly contained asbestos. The Company has never been a producer, manufacturer or processor of asbestos fibers. Any component within a Company product which may have contained asbestos would have been purchased from a supplier. Most of the asbestos complaints pending against the Company have been filed in New York. Almost all of the New York complaints contain a standard claim for damages of US$20 million or US$25 million against about 90 defendants, regardless of the individual plaintiff's alleged medical condition, and without specifically identifying any Company product as the source of plaintiff's asbestos exposure. Of the pending cases as of Dec. 31, 2008, about 25,728 were pending in the New York Supreme Court for New York County in New York State. The other claims, totaling 507, are filed in various counties in a number of state courts, and in certain Federal District Courts (including New York), and those complaints generally assert lesser amounts of damages than the New York State court cases or do not state any amount claimed. As of Dec. 31, 2008, the Company has obtained dismissal by stipulation or summary judgment prior to trial in 17,892 cases. As of Dec. 31, 2008, the Company has been listed as a defendant in 443 Active or In Extremis asbestos cases in New York County. Headquartered in Camp Hill, Pa., Harsco Corporation provides industrial services and engineered products. The Company's operations fall into two reportable segments: Harsco Infrastructure (formerly Access Services) and Harsco Metals (formerly Mill Services), plus an "all other" category labeled Harsco Minerals & Rail. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Foster Wheeler Cites $6.6M Claims Provision ---------------------------------------------------------------- Foster Wheeler AG's net asbestos-related provision was US$6,607,000 during the fiscal year ended Dec. 26, 2008, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. Net asbestos-related gain was US$6,145,000 during the fiscal year ended Dec. 28, 2007. Foster Wheeler Ltd.'s net asbestos-related provision was US$1,725,000 during the fiscal quarter ended Sept. 26, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 21, 2008) During the fiscal quarter ended Sept. 28, 2007, net asbestos- related gain was US$8,633,000. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 21, 2008) With its operational headquarters in Clinton, N.J., Foster Wheeler AG is an engineering and construction contractor and power equipment supplier delivering technically advanced, reliable facilities and equipment. The Company employs over 14,000 professionals with expertise dedicated to serving clients through one of its two primary business groups. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Foster Wheeler Records $355.78Mil Liability ---------------------------------------------------------------- Foster Wheeler AG's long-term asbestos-related liability was US$355,779,000 as of Dec. 26, 2008, compared with US$376,803,000 as of Dec. 28, 2007, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. Foster Wheeler Ltd.'s long-term asbestos-related liability was US$334,142,000 as of Sept. 26, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 21, 2008) The Company's long-term asbestos-related insurance recovery receivable was US$281,540,000 as of Dec. 26, 2008, compared with US$324,588,000 as of Dec. 28, 2007. The Company's long-term asbestos-related insurance recovery receivable was US$287,695,000 as of Sept. 26, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 21, 2008) Some of the Company's U.S. and U.K. subsidiaries are defendants in numerous asbestos-related lawsuits and out-of-court informal claims pending in the United States and the United Kingdom. Plaintiffs claim damages for personal injury alleged to have arisen from exposure to or use of asbestos in connection with work allegedly performed by the subsidiaries during the 1970s and earlier. With its operational headquarters in Clinton, N.J., Foster Wheeler AG is an engineering and construction contractor and power equipment supplier delivering technically advanced, reliable facilities and equipment. The Company employs over 14,000 professionals with expertise dedicated to serving clients through one of its two primary business groups. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Foster Wheeler Cites 130,760 Claims in U.S. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Foster Wheeler AG's subsidiaries in the United States faced 130,760 open asbestos claims during the fiscal year ended Dec. 26, 2008, compared with 131,340 claims during the fiscal year ended Dec. 28, 2007, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. Foster Wheeler Ltd.'s subsidiaries in the U.S. faced 130,370 open asbestos-related claims during the fiscal quarter and nine months ended Sept. 26, 2008, compared with 132,810 claims during the fiscal quarter and nine months ended Sept. 28, 2007. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 21, 2008) During the year ended Dec. 26, 2008, the Company recorded 4,950 claims filed, 5,530 claims resolved, 84,830 claims not valued in the liability, and 45,930 open claims valued in the liability. During the year ended Dec. 28, 2007, the Company recorded 5,140 claims filed, 9,690 claims resolved, 66,040 claims not valued in the liability, and 65,300 open claims valued in the liability. Of about 130,760 open claims at Dec. 26, 2008, the Company's subsidiaries are respondents in about 30,400 open claims wherein the Company has administrative agreements and are named defendants in lawsuits involving about 100,360 plaintiffs. About 62 percent of the suits do not specify the monetary damages sought or merely recite that the amount of monetary damages sought meets or exceeds the required jurisdictional minimum in the jurisdiction in which suit is filed. About 11 percent request damages ranging from US$1,000 to US$50,000; about 20 percent request damages ranging from US$51,000 to US$1 million; about six percent request damages ranging from US$1,001,000 to US$10 million; and the remaining one percent request damages ranging from US$10,001,000 to, in a very small number of cases, US$50 million. Total U.S. asbestos-related assets were US$284.8 million as of Dec. 26, 2008, compared with US$326.2 million as of Dec. 28, 2007. Total U.S. asbestos-related liabilities were US$385.3 million as of Dec. 26, 2008, compared with US$403.3 million as of Dec. 28, 2007. The amount paid for asbestos litigation, defense and case resolution was US$70.6 million in fiscal year 2008, US$86.7 million in fiscal year 2007, and US$83.3 million in fiscal year 2006. In fiscal year 2008, proceeds from settlements with the Company's insurers exceeded payments made by US$16.8 million. Through Dec. 26, 2008, total cumulative indemnity costs paid were about US$658 million and total cumulative defense costs paid were about US$286.3 million. As of Dec. 26, 2008, total asbestos-related liabilities were comprised of an estimated liability of US$158 million relating to open (outstanding) claims being valued and an estimated liability of US$227.3 million relating to future unasserted claims through fiscal year-end 2023. The overall historic average combined indemnity and defense cost per resolved claim through Dec. 26, 2008 has been about US$2,700. With its operational headquarters in Clinton, N.J., Foster Wheeler AG is an engineering and construction contractor and power equipment supplier delivering technically advanced, reliable facilities and equipment. The Company employs over 14,000 professionals with expertise dedicated to serving clients through one of its two primary business groups. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Foster Wheeler Sees $24.8M Insurance Asset ---------------------------------------------------------------- Foster Wheeler AG, as of Dec. 26, 2008, estimated the value of its unsettled asbestos insurance asset related to ongoing litigation in New York state court with its subsidiaries' insurers at US$24.8 million. Foster Wheeler Ltd., as of Sept. 26, 2008, estimated the value of its unsettled asbestos insurance asset related to ongoing litigation in New York state court with its units' insurers at US$23.3 million. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 21, 2008) The litigation relates to the amounts of insurance coverage available for asbestos-related claims and the proper allocation of the coverage among the subsidiaries' various insurers and its subsidiaries as self-insurers. Over the last several years, certain of the Company's subsidiaries have entered into settlement agreements calling for insurers to make lump-sum payments, as well as payments over time, for use by the Company's subsidiaries to fund asbestos- related indemnity and defense costs and, in certain cases, for reimbursement for portions of out-of-pocket costs previously incurred. In fiscal year 2008, the subsidiaries reached agreements to settle their disputed asbestos-related insurance coverage with three additional insurers. As a result of these settlements, the Company recorded a gain of US$36.1 million in fiscal year 2008. In fiscal year 2006, the Company was successful in its appeal of a New York state trial court decision that previously had held that New York, rather than New Jersey, law applies in the above coverage litigation with the subsidiaries' insurers, and as a result, the Company increased its insurance asset and recorded a gain of US$19.5 million. On Feb. 13, 2007, the subsidiaries' insurers were granted permission by the appellate court to appeal the decision to the New York Court of Appeals, the state�s highest court. On Oct. 11, 2007, the New York Court of Appeals upheld the appellate court decision in the Company's favor. The Company had net cash inflows of US$16.8 million as a result of insurance settlement proceeds in excess of the asbestos liability indemnity payments and defense costs during fiscal year 2008. The Company expects to fund a total of US$26.5 million of the asbestos liability indemnity and defense costs from its cash flows in fiscal year 2009, net of the cash expected to be received from existing insurance settlements. With its operational headquarters in Clinton, N.J., Foster Wheeler AG is an engineering and construction contractor and power equipment supplier delivering technically advanced, reliable facilities and equipment. The Company employs over 14,000 professionals with expertise dedicated to serving clients through one of its two primary business groups. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Foster Wheeler's U.K. Units Face 357 Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- Foster Wheeler AG's subsidiaries in the United Kingdom, as of Dec. 26, 2008, faced 357 claims alleging personal injury arising from exposure to asbestos, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. To date, 904 claims have been brought against the Company's U.K. subsidiaries. Certain of Foster Wheeler Ltd.'s subsidiaries in the U.K. faced 347 open asbestos-related claims as of Sept. 26, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 21, 2008) As of Dec. 26, 2008, the Company recorded total liabilities of US$37.8 million comprised of an estimated liability relating to open (outstanding) claims of US$8.4 million and an estimated liability relating to future unasserted claims through year 2023 of US$29.4 million. Of the total, US$2.8 million was recorded in accrued expenses and US$35 million was recorded in asbestos-related liability on the consolidated balance sheet. An asset in an equal amount was recorded for the expected U.K. asbestos-related insurance recoveries, of which US$2.8 million was recorded in accounts and notes receivable-other and US$35 million was recorded as asbestos-related insurance recovery receivable on the consolidated balance sheet. The liability estimates are based on a U.K. House of Lords judgment that pleural plaque claims do not amount to a compensable injury and accordingly, the Company has reduced its liability assessment. If this ruling is reversed by legislation, the total asbestos liability and related asset recorded in the U.K. would be about US$51.5 million. With its operational headquarters in Clinton, N.J., Foster Wheeler AG is an engineering and construction contractor and power equipment supplier delivering technically advanced, reliable facilities and equipment. The Company employs over 14,000 professionals with expertise dedicated to serving clients through one of its two primary business groups. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Corning Facing 10T Cases with 41,500 Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- Corning Incorporated faces about 10,300 other cases (about 41,500 claims) alleging injuries from asbestos and similar amounts of monetary damages per case, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. The Company and PPG Industries, Inc. each own 50 percent of the capital stock of Pittsburgh Corning Corporation (PCC). Over a period of more than two decades, PCC and several other defendants have been named in numerous lawsuits involving claims alleging personal injury from exposure to asbestos. On April 16, 2000, PCC filed for Chapter 11 reorganization in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. At the time PCC filed for bankruptcy protection, there were about 12,400 claims pending against the Company in state court lawsuits alleging various theories of liability based on exposure to PCC's asbestos products and typically requesting monetary damages in excess of one million dollars per claim. On March 28, 2003, the Company announced that it had reached agreement with the representatives of asbestos claimants for the resolution of all current and future asbestos claims against it and PCC, which might arise from PCC products or operations (2003 Plan). The 2003 Plan would have required the Company to relinquish its equity interest in PCC, contribute its equity interest in Pittsburgh Corning Europe N.V. (PCE), a Belgian corporation, contribute 25 million shares of Corning common stock, and pay a total of US$140 million in six annual installments (present value US$131 million at March 2003), beginning one year after the plan's effective date, with 5.5 percent interest from June 2004. In addition, the 2003 Plan provided that the Company would assign certain insurance policy proceeds from its primary insurance and a portion of its excess insurance. On Dec. 21, 2006, the Bankruptcy Court issued an order denying confirmation of the 2003 Plan. Several parties, including the Company, filed motions for reconsideration. These motions were argued on March 5, 2007, and the Bankruptcy Court reserved decision. On Jan. 10, 2008, some of the parties in the proceeding advised the Bankruptcy Court that they had made substantial progress on an amended plan of reorganization (Amended PCC Plan) that resolved issues raised by the Court in denying the confirmation of the 2003 Plan and that would therefore make it unnecessary for the Bankruptcy Court to decide the motion for reconsideration. On March 27, 2008 and May 22, 2008, the parties further informed the Bankruptcy Court on the progress toward the Amended PCC Plan. The parties filed a partial tentative plan on Aug. 8, 2008. The parties continued to inform the Bankruptcy Court of the status of their discussions on the Amended PCC Plan. The complete proposed Amended PCC Plan and its ancillary documents were filed with the Bankruptcy Court on Jan. 29, 2009. The proposed Amended Plan would require the Company to make one payment of US$100 million one year from the date the Amended PCC Plan becomes effective and certain conditions are met and five additional payments of US$50 million each on subsequent anniversaries of the first payment, subject to credits applicable under certain circumstances to the Company's final US$50 million payment. The Amended PCC Plan does not include non-PCC asbestos claims that may be or have been raised against the Company, which has recorded an additional US$150 million for those claims in its estimated asbestos litigation liability. The Company's non-current liabilities for asbestos litigation were US$662 million as of Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$169 million as of Dec. 31, 2007. Headquartered in Corning, N.Y., Corning Incorporated has five business segments: Display Technologies, Telecommunications, Environmental Technologies, Specialty Materials and Life Sciences. The Company manufactures and processes products at more than 51 plants in 15 countries. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Claims v. Lincoln Drop to 21,020 at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lincoln Electric Holdings, Inc., at Dec. 31, 2008, was a co- defendant in cases alleging asbestos induced illness involving claims by 21,020 plaintiffs, which is a net decrease of 6,095 claims from those previously reported, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. At Sept. 30, 2008, the Company was a co-defendant in cases alleging asbestos induced illness involving claims by 27,115 plaintiffs, which is a net decrease of 819 claims from those previously reported. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 7, 2008) In each instance, the Company is one of a large number of defendants. The asbestos claimants seek compensatory and punitive damages, in most cases for unspecified sums. Since Jan. 1, 1995, the Company has been a co-defendant in other similar cases that have been resolved as follows: 34,460 of those claims were dismissed, 11 were tried to defense verdicts, four were tried to plaintiff verdicts, one was resolved by agreement for an immaterial amount, and 553 were decided in favor of the Company following summary judgment motions. Headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio, Lincoln Electric Holdings, Inc. manufactures and resells welding and cutting products. The Company's welding product offering also includes regulators and torches used in oxy-fuel welding and cutting. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Board Ruling Reversed in Seminerio's Claim ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York, reversed the Workers' Compensation Board's ruling, stating that an employer's workers' compensation carrier was not entitled to reimbursement from the Special Disability Fund, in an asbestos claim filed by Lucille Seminerio for her deceased husband. The case is styled In the Matter of the Claim of Lucille Seminerio, Claimant v. Glen Partitions, Inc., et al., Appellants and Special Disability Fund, Respondent. Workers' Compensation Board, Respondent. Judges Anthony V. Cardona, Karen F. Peters, Robert S. Rose, John A. Lahtinen, and Anthony T. Kane entered judgment in the case on Feb. 26, 2009. Mr. Seminerio's disability due to occupational disease was established in August 1988 for asbestos-related pleural disease and in June 1996 for asbestosis. The employer's workers' compensation carrier duly filed a notice of claim seeking reimbursement from the Special Disability Fund for Mr. Seminerio's disability benefits. In 1997, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) found that the establishment of occupational disease for the dust disease of asbestosis rendered the Special Disability Fund subject to liability to the carrier for reimbursement under Workers' Compensation Law. Mr. Seminerio later developed lung cancer and died in September 2003. On Feb. 5, 2004, Mrs. Seminerio filed a claim for death benefits. In August 2006, Mr. Seminerio's death was determined to be causally related to his established occupational disease of asbestosis and the WCLJ awarded Mrs. Seminerio death benefits and funeral expenses. The carrier appealed. The Board affirmed, finding that the carrier was not entitled to reimbursement for the payment of death benefits because it failed to comply with Workers' Compensation Law by filing a separate notice of claim. This appeal followed. The June 29, 2007 Workers' Compensation Board ruling was reversed and the matter remitted to the Workers' Compensation Board for further proceedings not inconsistent with the Supreme Court's decision. Gregory J. Allen, State Insurance Fund in New York, in which Charlotte Flynn, Esq., represented the appellants. Steven M. Licht, Special Funds Conservation Committee in Albany, N.Y., in which Jill Waldman, Esq., represented Special Disability Fund. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Viad Summary Judgment Bid Denied on Jan. 13 ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Superior Court of Connecticut, Judicial District of Fairfield, denied Viad Corporation's motion for summary judgment in an asbestos-related lawsuit filed by David H. Fortier. The case is styled David H. Fortier et al. v. A.O. Smith Corp. et al. Judge Trial Referee David W. Skolnick entered judgment in Case No. FBTCV065005849S on Jan. 13, 2009. Mr. Fortier claimed to be suffering from mesothelioma as a result of his exposure to asbestos, while in the U.S. Navy from June 1968 through September 1972. His time in the Navy was confined to the U.S.S. Fulton through the end of 1968, and the aircraft carrier U.S.S. Forrestal from March 1969 through his date of discharge in 1972. Mr. Fortier contended that, through a series of corporate mergers and product line acquisitions, Viad had legal liability for his illness, as a successor in interest to the Griscom- Russell Company whose products were present on board the Enterprise and to which he was exposed during his term of service. The case was removed to the Superior Court by Viad. Viad's motion for summary judgment as against Mr. Fortier was denied. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Federal-Mogul Cites No Liability at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Federal-Mogul Corporation, as of both Dec. 31, 2008 and Dec. 31, 2007, had not recorded an asbestos-related liability, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. All asbestos-related personal injury claims against the Company will be addressed by the U.S. Asbestos Trust or the U.K. Asbestos Trust in accordance with the terms of the Company's confirmed Plan of Reorganization and the Company Voluntary Arrangements (CVAs), and those claims will be treated and paid in accordance with the terms of the Plan, the CVAs, and their related documents. All asbestos property damage claims against the Company have been compromised and resolved through the Plan and the CVAs. During the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, the Company recorded US$225 million as payment from the U.S. Asbestos Trust. During the year ended Dec. 31, 2007, the Company recorded US$140 million as payment to the U.S. Asbestos Trust. Headquartered in Southfield, Mich., Federal-Mogul Corporation supplies technology and innovation in vehicle and industrial products. The Company serves original equipment manufacturers (OEM) of automotive, light commercial, heavy-duty, industrial, agricultural, aerospace, marine, rail, and off-road vehicles, as well as the worldwide aftermarket. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cooper Cites 23,688 Abex Claims at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Cooper Industries, Ltd., at Dec. 31, 2008, recorded 23,688 pending asbestos-related claims that are part of its obligation to Pneumo-Abex Corporation (Pneumo), according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. At Sept. 30, 2008, the Company recorded 25,125 pending asbestos- related claims that are part of its obligation to Pneumo Abex Corporation. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 21, 2008) In October 1998, the Company sold its Automotive Products business to Federal-Mogul Corporation. These discontinued businesses (including the Abex Friction product line obtained from Pneumo in 1994) were operated through subsidiary companies, and the stock of those subsidiaries was sold to Federal-Mogul under a Purchase and Sale Agreement dated Aug. 17, 1998 (1998 Agreement). In conjunction with the sale, Federal-Mogul indemnified the Company for certain liabilities of these subsidiary companies, including liabilities related to the Abex Friction product line and any potential liability that the Company may have to Pneumo under a 1994 Mutual Guaranty Agreement between the Company and Pneumo. On Oct. 1, 2001, Federal-Mogul and several of its affiliates filed a Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition. The Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware confirmed Federal-Mogul's plan of reorganization and Federal-Mogul emerged from bankruptcy in December 2007. As part of Federal-Mogul's Plan of Reorganization, the Company and Federal-Mogul reached a settlement agreement that was subject to approval by the Bankruptcy Court resolving Federal- Mogul's indemnification obligations to the Company. On Sept. 30, 2008, the Bankruptcy Court issued its final ruling denying the Company's participation in the proposed Federal-Mogul 524(g) trust resulting in implementation of the previously approved Plan B Settlement. As part of its obligation to Pneumo for any asbestos-related claims arising from the Abex Friction product line (Abex Claims), Cooper has rights, confirmed by Pneumo, to significant insurance for such claims. From Aug. 28, 1998 through Dec. 31, 2008, a total of 146,175 Abex Claims were filed, of which 122,487 claims have been resolved. During the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, 2,641 claims were filed and 8,403 claims were resolved. Since Aug. 28, 1998, the average indemnity payment for resolved Abex Claims was US$2,072 before insurance. A total of US$147.7 million was spent on defense costs for the period Aug. 28, 1998 through Dec. 31, 2008. As a result of the Sept. 30, 2008 Bankruptcy Court ruling, the Company adjusted its accounting in the third quarter of 2008 to reflect the separate assets and liabilities related to the on- going activities to resolve the potential asbestos related claims through the tort system. The Company recorded income from discontinued operations of US$16.6 million, net of a US$9.4 million income tax expense, in the third quarter of 2008 to reflect a Plan B Settlement. Headquartered in Houston, Cooper Industries, Ltd.'s electrical products segment makes circuit protection equipment, lighting fixtures, wiring devices, and other power management and distribution equipment for residential, commercial, and industrial use. The Company's other main business segment makes power tools for the industrial market and hand tools for the do- it-yourself and commercial markets. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cooper Records $815.1M Liability at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Cooper Industries, Ltd., as of Dec. 31, 2008, estimates that the liability for pending and future asbestos-related indemnity and defense costs for the next 45 years will be US$815.1 million, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. The amount included for unpaid indemnity and defense costs is not significant at Dec. 31, 2008. The estimated liability is before any tax benefit and is not discounted as the timing of the actual payments is not reasonably predictable. However, a discounted value would likely be about 60 percent or less of the US$815.1 million liability recorded. While it said it believes that its estimated liability for pending and future indemnity and defense costs represents the best estimate of its future obligation, the Company utilized scenarios that it believed were reasonably possible that indicate a broader range of potential estimates from US$735 million to US$950 million (undiscounted). As of Sept. 30, 2008, the Company estimated that the asbestos- related liability for pending and future indemnity and defense costs for the next 45 years will be US$816.8 million. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 21, 2008) Headquartered in Houston, Cooper Industries, Ltd.'s electrical products segment makes circuit protection equipment, lighting fixtures, wiring devices, and other power management and distribution equipment for residential, commercial, and industrial use. The Company's other main business segment makes power tools for the industrial market and hand tools for the do- it-yourself and commercial markets. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cooper Cites $192.3M Receivable at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Cooper Industries, Ltd.'s asbestos-related receivable for recoveries of costs from insurers, as of Dec. 31, 2008, amounted to US$192.3 million, of which US$74.6 million relate to costs previously paid or insurance settlements, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. The Company's receivable for recoveries of costs from insurers was US$192.3 million, as of Sept. 30, 2008, of which US$72.7 million related to costs previously paid or insurance settlements. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 21, 2008) As of Dec. 31, 2008, the Company, through Pneumo-Abex LLC, has access to Abex insurance policies with remaining limits on policies with solvent insurers in excess of US$750 million. Insurance recoveries reflected as receivables in the balance sheet include recoveries where insurance-in-place agreements, settlements or policy recoveries are probable. The Company's arrangements with the insurance carriers defer certain amounts of insurance and settlement proceeds that the Company is entitled to receive beyond 12 months. About 90 percent of the US$192.3 million receivable from insurance companies at Dec. 31, 2008 is due from domestic insurers whose AM Best rating is Excellent (A-) or better. Headquartered in Houston, Cooper Industries, Ltd.'s electrical products segment makes circuit protection equipment, lighting fixtures, wiring devices, and other power management and distribution equipment for residential, commercial, and industrial use. The Company's other main business segment makes power tools for the industrial market and hand tools for the do- it-yourself and commercial markets. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Navigators Has $16.68M Reserves at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Navigators Group, Inc.'s net asbestos-related reserves totaled US$16,683,000 during the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$16,717,000 during the year ended Dec. 31, 2007. The Company's net loss and loss adjustment expense reserves for its asbestos exposures were US$16,661,000 for the nine months ended Sept. 30, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 7, 2008) The Company's gross asbestos-related reserves were US$21,774,000 during the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$23,194,000 during the year ended Dec. 31, 2007. The Company's exposure to asbestos liability stems from marine liability insurance written on an occurrence basis during the mid-1980s. The reserves for asbestos exposures at Dec. 31, 2008 are for: -- One large settled claim for excess insurance policy limits exposed to a class action suit against an insured involved in the manufacturing or distribution of asbestos products being paid over several years (two other large settled claims were fully paid in 2007); -- Other insureds not directly involved in the manufacturing or distribution of asbestos products, but that have more than incidental asbestos exposure for their purchase or use of products that contained asbestos; and -- Attritional asbestos claims that could be expected to occur over time. Substantially all of the Company's asbestos liability reserves are included in its marine loss reserves. The ceded asbestos paid and unpaid recoverables were US$8.9 million at Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$10.5 million at Dec. 31, 2007. During 2007, the Company increased its provision for uncollectible reinsurance for asbestos losses by US$1.6 million, which was recorded in incurred losses. Also in 2007, the Company settled demands for arbitration with two asbestos reinsurers. Also included in reinsurance recoverable for paid and unpaid losses is about US$8.9 million due from reinsurers in connection with the Company's asbestos exposures of which US$4.8 million is due from Equitas (a separate United Kingdom authorized reinsurance company established to reinsure outstanding liabilities of all Lloyd's members for all risks written in the 1992 or prior years of account). The remaining reinsurance recoverable amounts for asbestos losses are due from various domestic and international reinsurers with no one balance greater than US$600,000 due from a single reinsurer. Headquartered in New York, The Navigators Group, Inc. is an international insurance holding company focusing on specialty products within the overall property/casualty insurance market. The Company's underwriting segments consist of insurance company operations and operations at Lloyd's of London. The Company's largest product line and most long-standing area of specialization is ocean marine insurance. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: CNA Records 1,302 Policyholders at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- CNA Financial Corporation recorded 1,302 policyholders with active asbestos accounts at Dec. 31, 2008, compared with 1,289 policyholders at Dec. 31, 2007, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. At Dec. 31, 2008, the Company recorded 57 policyholders with settlement agreements and 1,245 other policyholders with active accounts. At Dec. 31, 2007, the Company recorded 68 policyholders with settlement agreements and 1,238 other policyholders with active accounts. Headquartered in Chicago, CNA Financial Corporation's core property and casualty insurance operations are reported in two business segments: Standard Lines and Specialty Lines. The Company's insurance products include commercial property and casualty coverages. Non-core insurance products include life and accident and health insurance; retirement products and annuities; and property and casualty reinsurance. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: MeadWestvaco Facing 591 Lawsuits at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- MeadWestvaco Corporation, as of Dec. 31, 2008, faced 591 asbestos-related lawsuits, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. As of Sept. 30, 2008, the Company faced about 480 asbestos- related lawsuits. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 7, 2008) The Company has been named a defendant in asbestos-related personal injury litigation. These suits also name many other corporate defendants. All of the claims against the Company resolved to date have been concluded before trial, either through dismissal or through settlement with payments to the plaintiff that are not material to the Company. At Dec. 31, 2008, the Company had recorded litigation liabilities of US$21 million, a significant portion of which relates to asbestos. Headquartered in Glen Allen, Va., MeadWestvaco Corporation is a global packaging company that provides packaging solutions to the healthcare, personal and beauty care, food, beverage, tobacco, media and entertainment, and home and garden industries. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Old Orchard Facing 8,000 Actions from Vapor ---------------------------------------------------------------- Brunswick Corporation's subsidiary, Old Orchard Industrial Corp., faces more than 8,000 asbestos lawsuits involving claims of asbestos exposure from products manufactured by Vapor Corporation (Vapor), a former subsidiary that the Company divested in 1990. Virtually all of the asbestos suits involve numerous other defendants. The claims generally allege that Vapor sold products that contained components like gaskets, which included asbestos, and seek monetary damages. Neither the Company nor Vapor is alleged to have manufactured asbestos. Several thousand claims have been dismissed with no payment and no claim has gone to jury verdict, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 24, 2009. In a few cases, claims have been filed against other Brunswick entities, with most of these suits being either dismissed or settled for nominal amounts. Headquartered in Lake Forest, Ill., Brunswick Corporation manufactures and markets recreation products including boats, marine engines, fitness equipment and bowling and billiards equipment. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Claims v. CBS Decrease to 68,520 at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- CBS Corporation had about 68,520 asbestos claims as of Dec. 31, 2008, compared with 72,120 claims as of Dec. 31, 2007 and 73,310 claims as of Dec. 31, 2006, according to the Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 25, 2009. The Company had 69,280 pending asbestos claims as of Sept. 30, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 7, 2008) The Company is a defendant in lawsuits claiming various personal injuries related to asbestos and other materials, which allegedly occurred principally as a result of exposure caused by various products manufactured by Westinghouse, a predecessor, generally prior to the early 1970s. Westinghouse was neither a producer nor a manufacturer of asbestos. The Company is typically named as one of a large number of defendants in both state and federal cases. In most of the asbestos lawsuits, the plaintiffs have not identified which of the Company's products is the basis of a claim. Claims against the Company in which a product has been identified principally relate to exposures allegedly caused by asbestos-containing insulating material in turbines sold for power-generation, industrial and marine use, or by asbestos containing grades of decorative micarta, a laminate used in commercial ships. During 2008, the Company received about 6,030 new claims and closed or moved to an inactive docket about 9,630 claims. The Company's total costs for settlement and defense of asbestos claims after insurance recoveries and net of tax benefits were about US$15 million in 2008 and US$17.5 million in 2007. Filings include claims for individuals suffering from mesothelioma, lung cancer, other cancers, and conditions that are substantially less serious, including claims brought on behalf of individuals who are asymptomatic as to an allegedly asbestos-related disease. Claims identified as cancer remain a relatively small percentage of asbestos claims pending at Dec. 31, 2008. Headquartered in New York, CBS Corporation is a television broadcasting and production company. The Company also operates about 40 TV stations around the United States owns 50 percent of The CW Network. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Fluor Corp. Still Facing Exposure Lawsuits ---------------------------------------------------------------- Fluor Corporation continues to be a defendant in various lawsuits wherein plaintiffs allege exposure to asbestos fibers and dust due to work that the Company may have performed at various locations. The Company has substantial third party insurance coverage to cover a significant portion of existing and any potential cost, settlements or judgments, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 25, 2009. Headquartered in Irving, Tex., Fluor Corporation is a holding company that owns the stock of a number of subsidiaries. Acting through these subsidiaries, the Company provides engineering, procurement, construction and maintenance as well as project management services on a global basis. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: A. O. Smith Facing 6,990 Claims at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- A. O. Smith Corporation and its subsidiaries, as of Dec. 31, 2008, faced active asbestos-related lawsuits involving 6,990 claims, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 25, 2009. The Company or its subsidiaries have been named as a co- defendant in lawsuits alleging personal injury as a result of exposure to asbestos integrated into certain of the Company's or its subsidiaries' products or premises. The Company and its subsidiaries have never manufactured asbestos. The Company and its subsidiaries have made no payment in most of the cases closed to date. The rest of the resolved cases have settled for amounts that are not material to the Company. Most of the costs of defense and settlements have been paid in part by insurance, and the Company said it believes it has adequate insurance coverage to cover its exposure. Headquartered in Milwaukee, A. O. Smith Corporation manufactures water heating equipment and electric motors, serving residential, commercial and industrial end markets principally in the United States with a growing international presence. The Company is comprised of two reporting segments: Water Products and Electrical Products. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Injury Lawsuits Still Ongoing v. Flowserve ---------------------------------------------------------------- Flowserve Corporation is still a defendant in pending lawsuits (which include, in many cases, multiple claimants) that seek to recover damages for personal injury allegedly caused by exposure to asbestos-containing products manufactured and distributed by the Company in the past. Asbestos-containing materials incorporated into any of the Company's products were encapsulated and used as components of process equipment, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 25, 2009. The Company said it believes that a high percentage of the claims are covered by applicable insurance or indemnities from other companies. Headquartered in Irving, Tex., Flowserve Corporation is a manufacturer and aftermarket service provider of comprehensive flow control systems. The Company develops and manufactures precision-engineered flow control equipment like pumps, valves and seals. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: RLI Corp. Pays $31M for A&E Through Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- RLI Corp. made net asbestos- and environmental-related net loss and loss adjustment expense (LAE) payments of US$31,067,000 from inception-to-date at Dec. 31, 2008 (US$25,453,000 from inception-to-date at Dec. 31, 2007). The Company's net unpaid losses and LAE were US$45,176,000 during the end of Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$38,693,000 during the year ended Dec. 31, 2007. The Company is subject to environmental site cleanup, asbestos removal, and mass tort claims and exposures through its commercial umbrella, general liability, and discontinued assumed casualty reinsurance lines of business. The Company's A&E and mass tort exposure is limited, relative to other insurers, as a result of entering the affected liability lines after the insurance industry had already recognized environmental and asbestos exposure as a problem and adopted appropriate coverage exclusions. During 2008, payment activity was more than the Company experienced in 2007, which was not surprising given the increased amount of case reserve activity during 2007. However, the Company did not observe a corresponding decrease in case reserves, as gross case reserves decreased by US$4.8 million while net case reserves increased by about US$500,000. Much of the reported adverse development can be tied to a small number of claims. Two related asbestos claims from the Company's assumed reinsurance book accounted for US$2.7 million in gross emergence and US$2.1 million in net emergence with large payments being made. During 2007, while payment activity was less than it experienced in 2006, the Company experienced an unusual amount of case reserve activity. About two-thirds of the increase in net reserves was from case reserve adjustments. An insurance company the Company reinsured in the early 1980s and that went into liquidation in 1986 reported a number of claims in 2007. The largest of these involves asbestos. Because of this situation, the Company posted total net case reserves of US$2.9 million. Also, a US$2.2 million reserve adjustment was made on a 1983 asbestos related claim because the coverage layers below the Company's excess policy had been exhausted. COMPANY PROFILE: RLI Corp. 9025 North Lindbergh Drive Peoria, Ill. 61615 United States Tel. No.: (309) 692-1000 Description: RLI Corp. underwrites selected property and casualty insurance through major subsidiaries collectively known as RLI Insurance Group. The Company conducts operations through three insurance companies: RLI Insurance Company, Mt. Hawley Insurance Company, and RLI Indemnity Company. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: ITT Corp. Facing 103,006 Claims at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ITT Corporation faced 103,006 open asbestos-related claims as of Dec. 31, 2008, compared with 102,568 claims as of Dec. 31, 2007, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 25, 2009. As of Dec. 31, 2008, about 6,332 new claims were filed and 5,894 claims were closed. As of Dec. 31, 2007, about 4,147 claims were filed and 12,181 claims were closed. As of Sept. 30, 2008, the Company faced about 104,000 open claims. (Class Action Reporter, Oct. 31, 2008) The Company, including its subsidiary Goulds Pumps, Inc., has been joined as a defendant with other companies in product liability lawsuits alleging injury due to asbestos. These claims allege that the Company's products sold prior to 1985 contained a part manufactured by a third party, e.g., a gasket, which contained asbestos. In certain other cases, it is alleged that former ITT companies were distributors for other manufacturers' products that may have contained asbestos. The Company's estimated accrued costs, net of expected insurance recoveries, for the resolution of all of these pending claims were US$27.6 million as of Dec. 31, 2008 and US$24.8 as of Dec. 31, 2007. Headquartered in White Plains, N.Y., ITT Corporation, with 2008 sales and revenues of US$11.7 billion, provides high-technology engineering and manufacturing engaged directly and through its subsidiaries. The Company designs, manufactures, and sells engineered products. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Exposure Lawsuits Still Ongoing v. Eastman ---------------------------------------------------------------- Eastman Chemical Company and its operations are still parties to, or targets of, lawsuits, claims, investigations and proceedings related to exposure to asbestos. No further asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 25, 2009. Headquartered in Kingsport, Tenn., Eastman Chemical Company manufactures and sells chemicals, plastics, and fibers. The Company has 11 manufacturing sites in seven countries. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Skilled Healthcare Records $5Mil Liability ---------------------------------------------------------------- Skilled Healthcare Group, Inc. recorded a US$5 million liability, which related to estimated costs to remove asbestos that is contained within its facilities, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 29, 2009. Of the US$5 million liability, US$1.6 million was recorded as a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle, net of tax benefit. The removal of asbestos-containing materials includes primarily floor and ceiling tiles from the Company's pre-1980 constructed facilities. If it was to experience a 10 percent increase in its estimated future cost of remediation, the Company's recorded liability of US$5.4 million would increase by US$500,000. The Company's long-term asbestos abatement liability was US$5,343,000 as of June 30, 2008, compared with US$5,252,000 as of Dec. 31, 2007. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 15, 2008) Headquartered in Foothill Ranch, Calif., Skilled Healthcare Group, Inc. provides integrated long-term healthcare services through its skilled nursing companies and rehabilitation therapy business. As of Dec. 31, 2008, the Company owned or leased 75 skilled nursing facilities and 21 assisted living facilities, together comprising about 10,500 licensed beds. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Sunoco, Inc. Subject to Exposure Lawsuits ---------------------------------------------------------------- Sunoco, Inc. is still subject to legal and administrative proceedings over allegations of exposures of third parties to toxic substances like asbestos and benzene. No further asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 29, 2009. Headquartered in Philadelphia, Sunoco, Inc. is a petroleum refiner and marketer and chemicals manufacturer with interests in logistics and cokemaking. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: FirstEnergy Still Facing Exposure Lawsuits ---------------------------------------------------------------- FirstEnergy Corp. is still a defendant in pending asbestos litigation involving multiple plaintiffs and multiple defendants, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 25, 2009. In addition, asbestos and other regulated substances are, and may continue to be, present at the Company's facilities where suitable alternative materials are not available. The Company said it believes that any remaining asbestos at its facilities is contained. Headquartered in Akron, Ohio, FirstEnergy Corp.'s utilities provide electricity to 4.5 million customers in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey. The Company's domestic power plants have a total generating capacity of more than 14,120 MW, most generated by coal-fired plants. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: OfficeMax Inc. Still Facing Injury Actions ---------------------------------------------------------------- Over the past several years and continuing in 2009, OfficeMax Incorporated continues to face cases where the plaintiffs allege asbestos-related injuries from exposure to asbestos products or exposure to asbestos while working at job sites. The claims vary widely and often are not specific about the plaintiffs' contacts with the Company. None of the claimants seeks damages from the Company individually. Many of the cases filed against the Company have been voluntarily dismissed, although it has settled some cases. The settlements it has paid have been covered mostly by insurance. To date, no asbestos case against the Company has gone to trial, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 25, 2009. Headquartered in Naperville, Ill., OfficeMax Incorporated provides office supplies and paper, print and document services, technology products and solutions and furniture to large, medium and small businesses, government offices, and consumers. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: CMS Energy Cites $36M Dec. 31 ARO Liability ---------------------------------------------------------------- CMS Energy Corporation's asset retirement obligation for asbestos abatement was US$36 million at Dec. 31, 2008 and Dec. 31, 2007, compared with US$35 million at Dec. 31, 2006. No other asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 25, 2009. COMPANY PROFILE: CMS Energy Corporation One Energy Plaza Jackson, Mich., 49201 United States (517) 788-0550 Description: CMS Energy Corporation's utility, Consumers Energy Company, has a generating capacity of 9,300 MW (primarily fossil-fueled) and distributes electricity and natural gas to about 3.5 million customers in Michigan. The Company sells wholesale electricity, natural gas, and other commodities. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Chicago Bridge Has 1,400 Claims at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Chicago Bridge & Iron Company N.V., at Dec. 31, 2008, was a defendant in 1,400 asbestos-related claims, according to the Company's 2008 annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. At Sept. 30, 2008, the Company faced about 1,400 pending asbestos-related claims. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 7, 2008) The Company is a defendant in lawsuits wherein plaintiffs allege exposure to asbestos due to work it may have performed at various locations. The Company has never been a manufacturer, distributor or supplier of asbestos products. Through Dec. 31, 2008, the Company has been named a defendant in lawsuits alleging exposure to asbestos involving about 4,700 plaintiffs, and of those claims, about 3,300 have been closed through dismissals or settlements. Through Dec. 31, 2008, the claims alleging exposure to asbestos that have been resolved have been dismissed or settled for an average settlement amount per claim of about US$1,000. At Dec. 31, 2008, the Company had accrued US$2.4 million for liability and related expenses. Headquartered in The Hague, The Netherlands, Chicago Bridge & Iron Company N.V. is an engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) company. The Company has about 19,000 employees in more than 80 locations. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Anadarko Continues to Face Injury Lawsuits ---------------------------------------------------------------- Anadarko Petroleum Corporation continues to face personal injury claims, including claims by employees of third-party contractors alleging exposure to asbestos, silica and benzene while working at refineries (previously owned by predecessors of acquired companies) located in Texas, California and Oklahoma. No other asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 25, 2009. Headquartered in The Woodlands, Tex., Anadarko Petroleum Corporation is an independent oil and gas exploration and production company, with 2.28 billion barrels of oil equivalent (BOE) of proved reserves as of Dec. 31, 2008. The Company's three operating segments are: Oil and gas exploration and production, Midstream, and Marketing. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Trial in Claim v. Pride Slated for Oct. '09 ---------------------------------------------------------------- An October 2009 trial is set for one of the claimants in asbestos-related litigation ongoing against Pride International, Inc. Since 2004, certain of the Company's subsidiaries have been named, along with numerous other defendants, in several complaints that have been filed in the Circuit Courts of the State of Mississippi by several hundred individuals that allege that they were employed by some of the named defendants between about 1965 and 1986. The complaints allege that certain drilling contractors used products containing asbestos in their operations and seek an award of unspecified compensatory and punitive damages. Nine individuals of the many plaintiffs in these suits have been identified as allegedly having worked for the Company. Headquartered in Houston, Pride International, Inc. is an offshore drilling contractor operating, as of Feb. 2, 2009, a fleet of 44 rigs, consisting of two deepwater drillships, 12 semisubmersible rigs, 27 jackups and three managed deepwater drilling rigs. Operations are conducted in crude oil and natural gas basins, including South America, the Gulf of Mexico, West Africa, the Mediterranean Sea, the Middle East and Asia Pacific. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Exposure Cases Still Ongoing v. CenterPoint ---------------------------------------------------------------- CenterPoint Energy, Inc. or its subsidiaries continue to be defendants in suits filed by a number of individuals who claim injury due to exposure to asbestos. Some of the claimants have worked at locations owned by the Company, but most existing claims relate to facilities previously owned by the Company's subsidiaries. In 2004, the Company sold its generating business, to which most of these claims relate, to Texas Genco LLC, which is now known as NRG Texas LP. Under the terms of the arrangements regarding separation of the generating business from the Company and its sale to NRG Texas LP, ultimate financial responsibility for uninsured losses from claims relating to the generating business has been assumed by NRG Texas LP. However, the Company has agreed to continue to defend those claims to the extent they are covered by insurance maintained by the Company, subject to reimbursement of the costs of such defense from the purchaser. Headquartered in Houston, CenterPoint Energy, Inc.'s utilities distribute natural gas to more than three million customers in six states and electricity to 1.9 million customers on the Texas Gulf Coast. The Company also operates 69,000 miles of gas pipeline, and it has gas gathering and storage operations. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Appeal Court Upholds Ruling in Bakkie Case ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Court of Appeal, First District, Division 2, California, upheld a ruling of the San Francisco County Superior Court, in an asbestos-related lawsuit initially filed by David Bakkie against Union Carbide Corporation and other defendants. The case is styled Terry Bakkie, Plaintiff and Respondent v. Union Carbide Corporation, Defendant and Appellant. Judges James R. Lambden, Paul R. Haerle, and James A. Richman entered judgment in Case No. A121627 on Feb. 27, 2009. This was the second appeal in this case. In the first, the Appeal Court considered and rejected various objections to a jury verdict awarding Mr. Bakkie, a dying mesothelioma sufferer, US$3,223,450 for medical and economic damages and US$1.2 million in non-economic damages for the one-year period between Mr. Bakkie's diagnosis and the verdict. The claim of error that the Appeal Court upheld was the contention of Union Carbide that the US$14.1 million of future non-economic damages for the period of Mr. Bakkie's remaining life expectancy was excessive and the consequence of improper argument by Mr. Bakkie's trial counsel. The Appeal Court ordered a new trial solely on this item of damages unless Mr. Bakkie accepted a reduction to US$3.1 million. Mr. Bakkie died during the pendency of the first appeal. His son Terry took his place as his father's successor-in-interest, and is the sole respondent to this appeal. Terry Bakkie accepted the reduction and submitted a proposed judgment for a net total of US$4,451,814.75. Over repeated objection by Union Carbide that this amount was inflated by about US$650,000 because it was based upon an incorrect calculation of settlements received by Terry Bakkie from other defendants, the trial court filed Terry Bakkie's proposed judgment. Union Carbide appealed. The Appeal Court concluded that Union Carbide's objection was well taken. The Appeal Court therefore modified the judgment by reducing the amount of net economic damages from US$2,779,601.22 to US$2,130,652.06, and affirmed. Lloyd F. LeRoy, Esq., and Gilbert Purcell, Esq., of Brayton Purcell, LLP in Novato, Calif., represented Terry Bakkie. James Stengel, Esq., of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe in New York, and George Alan Yuhas, Esq., of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe in San Francisco, represented Union Carbide Corporation. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Regal Beloit Subject to Exposure Lawsuits ---------------------------------------------------------------- Regal Beloit Corporation is still party to litigation, including product warranty and liability claims, contract disputes and environmental, asbestos, employment and other litigation matters. The Company's products are used in various industrial, commercial and residential applications that subject it to claims that the use of its products is alleged to have resulted in injury or other damage. No other asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the Company's annual report for the year ended Dec. 27, 2008. Headquartered in Beloit, Wis., Regal Beloit Corporation manufactures commercial, industrial, and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) electric motors, electric generators and controls, and mechanical motion control products. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Leslie Facing 968 Active Claims at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- CIRCOR International, Inc.'s subsidiary, Leslie Controls, Inc., as of the end of fiscal 2008, faced 968 active, unresolved asbestos-related claims filed in California, Texas, New York, Massachusetts, West Virginia, Rhode Island and 24 other states. About 502 of these claims involve claimants allegedly suffering from (or the estates of decedents who allegedly died from) mesothelioma. As of the end of the third quarter of 2008, Leslie faced 972 active, unresolved asbestos-related claims in California, Texas, New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and 25 other states. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 14, 2008) Acquired by the Company in 1989, Leslie has been and continues to be named as a defendant in product liability actions brought on behalf of individuals who seek compensation for their alleged exposure to airborne asbestos fibers. In some instances, the Company also has been named individually and as alleged successor in interest in these cases. In addition to these claims, Leslie remains a named defendant in about 4,700 unresolved asbestos-related claims filed in Mississippi. On Oct. 12, 2007, a Los Angeles state court jury rendered a verdict that, if allowed to stand, would result in a liability to Leslie of about US$2.5 million. Although Leslie accrued a liability in the third quarter of fiscal 2007 for this verdict, both Leslie and the other defendant against whom the judgment was rendered have appealed this verdict. The Company said it believes there are strong grounds for either significantly reducing the amount of the award or for requiring a new trial. In addition, Leslie has accrued an incremental US$1.3 million liability related to an earlier verdict for which an appeal is pending and there is US$500,000 in accrued interest for both adverse verdicts. During 2008, there were 688 asbestos claims filed and 427 claims resolved with respect to Leslie. For the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, Leslie's gross asbestos indemnity and defense costs totaled US$18 million of which US$9.7 million was paid by insurance. This compares to US$26 million gross asbestos indemnity and defense costs paid in 2007 of which US$18.4 million was paid by insurance. During the year ended Dec. 31, 2007, Leslie noted 482 cases filed, 267 cases resolved and dismissed, and 707 open cases (of which 338 were open mesothelioma cases). Headquartered in Burlington, Mass., CIRCOR International, Inc. designs, manufactures, and distributes valves and related fluid- control products and certain services to various end-markets for use in applications to optimize the efficiency and ensure the safety of fluid-control systems. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Leslie Records $19.2M Liability at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- CIRCOR International, Inc.'s subsidiary, Leslie Controls, Inc., recorded total asbestos liabilities of US$19.2 million, compared with US$16.8 million as of Dec. 31, 2007. The US$19.2 million liability as of Dec. 31, 2008 is comprised of US$12.3 million for existing claims, US$4.3 million related to adverse verdicts and US$2.6 million for incurred but unpaid legal costs. Leslie's asbestos-related liabilities were US$19.8 million as of Sept. 28, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 14, 2008) Asbestos related insurance receivable amounts totaled US$10.8 million (US$6.1 million short-term and US$4.7 million long-term) as of Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$11.9 million as of Dec. 31, 2007. The US$10.8 million receivable as of Dec. 31, 2008 is comprised of US$6.3 million for existing claims, US$2.7 million related to adverse verdicts and US$1.8 million for incurred but unpaid legal costs. Net asbestos liability was US$8.48 million as of Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$4.86 million as of Dec. 31, 2007. As of Dec. 31, 2008, the Company said it believes that the aggregate amount of indemnity (on a cash basis) remaining on Leslie's primary layer of insurance was about US$8.5 million. After giving effect to an accrual for adverse verdicts currently on appeal, the remaining amount of Leslie's primary layer of insurance is US$6.3 million. Headquartered in Burlington, Mass., CIRCOR International, Inc. designs, manufactures, and distributes valves and related fluid- control products and certain services to various end-markets for use in applications to optimize the efficiency and ensure the safety of fluid-control systems. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Spence & Hoke Still Facing Exposure Actions ---------------------------------------------------------------- Two of CIRCOR International, Inc.'s subsidiaries: Spence Engineering Company, Inc. and Hoke, Inc., continue to face asbestos-related claims. The Company acquired Spence's stock in 1984 and Hoke's stock in 1998. Headquartered in Burlington, Mass., CIRCOR International, Inc. designs, manufactures, and distributes valves and related fluid- control products and certain services to various end-markets for use in applications to optimize the efficiency and ensure the safety of fluid-control systems. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Leslie Spends $8.31MM for Claims at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- CIRCOR International, Inc.'s subsidiary, Leslie Controls, Inc., recorded net pre-tax asbestos expense of US$8,311,000 as of Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$7,534,000 as of Dec. 31, 2007. Asbestos charges are associated with Leslie subsidiary in the Instrumentation and Thermal Fluid Controls segment. The increase in 2008 from 2007 was the result of lower insurance recoveries and higher gross defense expenses offset by lower indemnity and adverse verdict costs. The Company's current asbestos liability was US$9,310,000 as of Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$9,697,000 as of Dec. 31, 2007. Long-term asbestos liability was US$9,935,000 as of Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$7,062,000 as of Dec. 31, 2007. Headquartered in Burlington, Mass., CIRCOR International, Inc. designs, manufactures, and distributes valves and related fluid- control products and certain services to various end-markets for use in applications to optimize the efficiency and ensure the safety of fluid-control systems. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Phelps Dodge Still Facing Exposure Lawsuits ---------------------------------------------------------------- Freeport-McMoran Copper & Gold Inc.'s subsidiary Phelps Dodge Corporation and other units, since 1990, face product liability or premises lawsuits claiming injury from exposure to asbestos. The asbestos was contained in electrical wire products produced or marketed many years ago, or from asbestos at certain Phelps Dodge properties, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 26, 2009. Headquartered in Phoenix, Freeport-McMoran Copper & Gold Inc. mines copper, gold, and molybdenum. Assets include the Grasberg minerals district in Indonesia, mining operations in North and South America, and the Tenke Fungurume development project in the Democratic Republic of Congo. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cliffs Natural Units Facing Injury Lawsuits ---------------------------------------------------------------- Cliffs Natural Resources Inc.'s entities continue to contest asbestos-related claims filed against them. Those entities, The Cleveland-Cliffs Iron Company and/or The Cleveland-Cliffs Steamship Company, have been named defendants in 484 actions brought from 1986 to date. These cases were brought by former seamen in which the plaintiffs claim damages under federal law for illnesses allegedly suffered as the result of exposure to airborne asbestos fibers while serving as crew members aboard the vessels previously owned or managed by Company entities until the mid- 1980s. All of these actions have been consolidated into multidistrict proceedings in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, whose docket now includes a total of over 30,000 maritime cases filed by seamen against ship-owners and other defendants. All of these cases have been dismissed without prejudice, but can be reinstated upon application by plaintiffs' counsel. The claims against the Company's entities are insured in amounts that vary by policy year. However, the manner in which these retentions will be applied remains uncertain. The Company's entities continue to contest these claims and have made no settlements on them. Headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio, Cliffs Natural Resources Inc. (f/k/a Cleveland-Cliffs Inc) is an international mining and natural resources company. The Company produces iron ore pellets in North America, supplies direct-shipping lump and fines iron ore out of Australia, and produces metallurgical coal. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Exposure Suits Still Ongoing v. Olin, Units ---------------------------------------------------------------- Olin Corporation and its subsidiaries continue to face legal actions (including proceedings based on alleged exposures to asbestos) incidental to its past and current business activities. No other asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the Company's annual report for the year ended Dec. 31, 2008. Headquartered in Clayton, Mo., Olin Corporation has two segments: Chlor Alkali Products and Winchester. Chlor Alkali Products makes and sells chlorine and caustic soda, sodium hydrosulfite, hydrochloric acid, hydrogen, bleach products and potassium hydroxide. Winchester makes sporting ammunition, reloading components, small caliber military ammunition and components, and industrial cartridges. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Southern Company Cites $9.5M ARO at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Southern Company has US$9.5 million asset retirement obligations related to asbestos removal, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Feb. 26, 2009. Headquartered in Atlanta, The Southern Company distributes electricity. The Company operates regulated utilities Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power, which combined have a generating capacity of almost 43,000 MW and serve about 4.4 million electricity customers in the southeastern United States. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cleco Records $200T for Cleanup at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Cleco Power LLC's liability for removal of asbestos is estimated at US$200,000 at Dec. 31, 2008 and Dec. 31, 2007, according to Cleco Corporation's 2008 annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Cleco Power is a Company subsidiary. Headquartered in Pineville, La., Cleco Corporation is a public utility holding company which holds investments in several subsidiaries, including Cleco Power and Midstream, which are its operating business segments. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Huntsman Still Party to "Premises" Lawsuits ---------------------------------------------------------------- Huntsman Corporation continues to be named as a "premises defendant" in asbestos exposure cases, typically claims by non- employees of exposure to asbestos while at a facility. Where a claimant's alleged exposure occurred before the Company's ownership of the relevant "premises," the prior owners generally have contractually agreed to retain liability for, and to indemnify the Company against, asbestos exposure claims. Upon service of a complaint in one of these cases, the Company tenders it to the prior owner. During the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, the Company tendered 21 such cases, resolved 73 cases, and had 1,140 unresolved cases at the end of the year. During the year ended Dec. 31, 2007, the Company tendered 21 such cases, resolved 196 cases, and had 1,192 unresolved cases at the end of the year. The Company has never made any payments with respect to these cases. As of Dec. 31, 2008, it had an accrued liability of US$16 million relating to these cases and a corresponding receivable of US$16 million relating to its indemnity protection with respect to these cases. Certain cases in which the Company is a "premises defendant" are not subject to indemnification by prior owners or operators. During the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, the Company record eight such cases filed, four cases resolved, and 43 unresolved cases at the end of the year. During the year ended Dec. 31, 2007, the Company recorded 52 cases filed, 55 cases resolved, and 39 cases unresolved at the end of the year. The Company paid gross settlement costs for asbestos exposure cases that are not subject to indemnification of nil during the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, US$3 million during the year ended Dec. 31, 2007, and nil during the year ended Dec. 31, 2006. Headquartered in Salt Lake City, Huntsman Corporation is a chemical manufacturer comprised of four segments: Polyurethanes, Materials and Effects, Performance Products and Pigments. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: PSE&G Cites $8MM Abatement Asset at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Public Service Electric and Gas Company recorded US$8 million regulatory asset for asbestos abatement as of Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$9 million as of Dec. 31, 2007. Headquartered in Newark, N.J., Public Service Electric and Gas Company is a regulated public utility providing transmission and distribution of electric energy and natural gas in New Jersey. The Company is a subsidiary of Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Transocean Still Has Suits in Miss. Courts ---------------------------------------------------------------- Several subsidiaries of Transocean Ltd. continue to face asbestos lawsuits filed in the Circuit Courts of the State of Mississippi. In 2004, several of the Company's subsidiaries were named in 21 complaints involving about 750 plaintiffs that alleged personal injury arising out of asbestos exposure in the course of their employment by some of these defendants between 1965 and 1986. The complaints also named as defendants certain subsidiaries of TODCO and certain subsidiaries of Sedco, Inc. to whom the Company may owe indemnity. Further, the complaints named other unaffiliated defendant companies, including companies that allegedly manufactured drilling related products containing asbestos. The complaints alleged that the defendants used asbestos- containing products in connection with drilling operations and included allegations of negligence, strict liability, and claims allowed under the Jones Act and general maritime law. The plaintiffs generally sought awards of unspecified compensatory and punitive damages. The Special Master who was appointed to oversee these cases required that each plaintiff file a separate amended complaint for each such individual plaintiff and then he dismissed the original 21 complaints. The Company said it believes that it may have a direct or indirect interest in 44 of the resulting complaints. Headquartered in Vernier, Switzerland, Transocean Ltd. provides offshore contract drilling services for oil and gas wells. As of Feb. 3, 2009, the Company owned, had partial ownership interests in or operated 136 mobile offshore drilling units. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Transocean Unit Has 1,008 Suits at Dec. 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- An unnamed subsidiary of Transocean Ltd., as of Dec. 31, 2008, was a defendant in 1,008 asbestos-related lawsuits, according to the Company's 2008 annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. As of Sept. 30, 2008, the subsidiary faced about 1,031 asbestos- related lawsuits. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 21, 2008) The subsidiary is involved in lawsuits arising out of its involvement in the design, construction and refurbishment of major industrial complexes. The operating assets of the subsidiary were sold and its operations discontinued in 1989, and the subsidiary has no remaining assets other than the insurance policies involved in its litigation, funding from settlements with the primary insurers and funds received from the cancellation of certain insurance policies. The subsidiary has been named as a defendant, along with numerous other companies, in lawsuits alleging personal injury as a result of exposure to asbestos. Some of these lawsuits include multiple plaintiffs and the Company estimates that there are about 2,973 plaintiffs in these lawsuits. For many of these lawsuits, the Company has not been provided with sufficient information from the plaintiffs to determine whether all or some of the plaintiffs have claims against the subsidiary, the basis of any such claims, or the nature of their alleged injuries. The first of the asbestos-related lawsuits was filed against this subsidiary in 1990. Through Dec. 31, 2008, the amounts expended to resolve claims (including both attorneys' fees and expenses, and settlement costs) have not been material, and all deductibles with respect to the primary insurance have been satisfied. The subsidiary continues to be named as a defendant in additional lawsuits. The subsidiary has in excess of US$1 billion in insurance limits. Headquartered in Vernier, Switzerland, Transocean Ltd. provides offshore contract drilling services for oil and gas wells. As of Feb. 3, 2009, the Company owned, had partial ownership interests in or operated 136 mobile offshore drilling units. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 222 Lawsuits Ongoing v. Midwest Generation ---------------------------------------------------------------- Midwest Generation LLC, at Dec. 31, 2008, had 222 asbestos- related cases for which it was potentially liable and that had not been settled and dismissed, according to the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 2, 2009. The Company had recorded a US$52 million liability at Dec. 31, 2008 related to this matter. At Sept. 30, 2008, the Company recorded 208 asbestos cases for which it was potentially liable and that had not been settled and dismissed. It had recorded a US$53 million liability at Sept. 30, 2008 related to this matter. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 28, 2008) The Company entered into a supplemental agreement with Commonwealth Edison Company and Exelon Generation Company LLC on Feb. 20, 2003, to resolve a dispute regarding interpretation of its reimbursement obligation for asbestos claims under the environmental indemnities set forth in the Asset Sale Agreement. Under this supplemental agreement, the Company agreed to reimburse Commonwealth Edison and Exelon Generation for 50 percent of specific asbestos claims pending as of February 2003 and related expenses less recovery of insurance costs, and agreed to a sharing arrangement for liabilities and expenses associated with future asbestos-related claims as specified in the agreement. Commonwealth Edison and the Company apportion responsibility for future asbestos-related claims based upon the number of exposure sites that are Commonwealth Edison locations or Company locations. The obligations under this agreement are not subject to a maximum liability. The supplemental agreement had an initial five-year term with an automatic renewal provision for subsequent one-year terms (subject to the right of either party to terminate); under the automatic renewal provision, it has been extended until February 2010. The Company recorded an undiscounted liability for its indemnity for future asbestos claims through 2045. During the fourth quarter of 2007, the liability was reduced by US$9 million based on updated estimated losses. Headquartered in Chicago, Midwest Generation, LLC sells wholesale electricity to markets in the Midwest. The Company has a generating capacity of more than 5,470 MW from its six coal- fired power plants in Illinois. It also oversees the operation of the Fisk and Waukegan on-site generating plants which have 305 MW of capacity. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Mine Safety Faces Product Liability Actions ---------------------------------------------------------------- Various lawsuits and claims, primarily product liability claims (including asbestos-related) are pending against Mine Safety Appliances Company. The Company is named as a defendant in 2,600 lawsuits, primarily involving respiratory protection products allegedly manufactured and sold by the Company. Collectively, these suits represent a total of about 12,600 plaintiffs. About 90 percent of these lawsuits involve plaintiffs alleging they suffer from silicosis, with the remainder alleging they suffer from other or combined injuries, including asbestosis. These lawsuits typically allege that these conditions resulted in part from respirators that were negligently designed or manufactured by the Company. Headquartered in Pittsburgh, Mine Safety Appliances Company develops, manufactures, and supplies products for health and safety protection. Products include self-contained breathing apparatus, gas masks, gas detection instruments, head protection, respirators, thermal imaging cameras, fall protection, and ballistic helmets and body armor. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Mine Safety Involved in Century Litigation ---------------------------------------------------------------- Mine Safety Appliances Company is involved in coverage litigation, including asbestos-related, with Century Indemnity Company. The Company has sued Century in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pa., alleging that Century breached five insurance policies by failing to pay amounts owing to the Company. The Pennsylvania court has denied a motion by Century to stay or dismiss the Pennsylvania lawsuit in favor of a New Jersey action. The court also denied certain preliminary motions filed by both parties to narrow the issues in dispute. The Company filed a motion to compel discovery, which was granted by the court in October 2008, and Century has begun to comply with that order. It is expected that additional motions will be filed during discovery. Headquartered in Pittsburgh, Mine Safety Appliances Company develops, manufactures, and supplies products for health and safety protection. Products include self-contained breathing apparatus, gas masks, gas detection instruments, head protection, respirators, thermal imaging cameras, fall protection, and ballistic helmets and body armor. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: IDEX, 5 Units Facing Lawsuits in 33 States ---------------------------------------------------------------- IDEX Corporation and five of its subsidiaries face lawsuits claiming various asbestos-related personal injuries, allegedly as a result of exposure to products made with components that contained asbestos, according to the Company's 2008 annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 2, 2009. Claims have been filed in Alabama, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Asbestos components were acquired from third party suppliers, and were not manufactured by any of the subsidiaries. To date, most of the Company's settlements and legal costs, except for costs of coordination, administration, insurance investigation and a portion of defense costs, have been covered in full by insurance subject to applicable deductibles. Most of the claims resolved to date have been dismissed without payment. The balance has been settled for various insignificant amounts. One case has been tried, resulting in a verdict for the Company's business unit. Headquartered in Northbrook, Ill., IDEX Corporation is an applied solutions company specializing in fluid and metering technologies, health and science technologies, dispensing equipment and fire, safety and other diversified products. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 17,854 Claims Ongoing v. Albany at Feb. 6 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Albany International Corp. was defending against 17,854 asbestos-related claims as of Feb. 6, 2009, compared with 18,385 claims as of Oct. 27, 2008, and 18,462 claims as of July 25, 2008. The Company is a defendant in suits brought in various courts in the United States by plaintiffs who allege that they have suffered personal injury as a result of exposure to asbestos- containing products previously manufactured by the Company. The Company produced asbestos-containing paper machine clothing synthetic dryer fabrics marketed during the period from 1967 to 1976 and used in certain paper mills. As of Feb. 6, 2009, about 12,428 of the claims pending against the Company were pending in Mississippi. Of these, about 11,870 are in federal court, at the multidistrict litigation panel, either through removal or original jurisdiction. In addition to the 11,870 Mississippi claims pending against the Company at the MDL, there are about 888 claims pending against the Company at the MDL removed from various U.S. District Courts in other states. On May 31, 2007, the MDL issued an administrative order that required each MDL plaintiff to provide detailed information regarding the alleged asbestos-related medical diagnoses. The order does not require exposure information with this initial filing. The deadline for submission of such filings was Dec. 1, 2007. On Dec. 23, 2008, the MDL issued another administrative order providing a mechanism whereby defendants could seek dismissals against plaintiffs who failed to comply with the prior administrative order. The deadline for those motions was Jan. 31, 2009 with hearings to be scheduled thereafter. As of Feb. 6, 2009, the remaining 5,426 claims pending against the Company were pending in states other than Mississippi. The Company's insurer, Liberty Mutual, has defended each case and funded settlements under a standard reservation of rights. As of Feb. 6, 2009, the Company had resolved, by means of settlement or dismissal, 22,593 claims. The total cost of resolving all claims was US$6,758,000. Of this amount, US$6,713,000, or 99 percent, was paid by the Company's insurance carrier. The Company has about US$130 million in confirmed insurance coverage that should be available with respect to current and future asbestos claims, as well as additional insurance coverage that it should be able to access. Headquartered in Albany, N.Y., Albany International Corp. makes paper machine clothing. The Company produces about 45 percent of the monofilament yarn used in its paper machine clothing and relies on independent suppliers for the remainder. It markets these products to paper mills through a direct sales staff. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 8,607 Claims Ongoing v. Brandon at Feb. 6 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Brandon Drying Fabrics, Inc., an Albany International Corp. affiliate, was defending against 8,607 asbestos-related claims as of Feb. 6, 2009, compared with 8,664 claims as of Oct. 27, 2008, and 8,672 claims as of July 25, 2008. Brandon, a subsidiary of Geschmay Corp., which is a subsidiary of the Company, is also a separate defendant in many of the asbestos cases in which the Company is named as a defendant. The Company acquired Geschmay, formerly known as Wangner Systems Corporation, in 1999. Brandon is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Geschmay. In 1978, Brandon acquired certain assets from Abney Mills, a South Carolina textile manufacturer. Among the assets acquired by Brandon from Abney were assets of Abney's wholly owned subsidiary, Brandon Sales, Inc., which had sold dryer fabrics containing asbestos made by its parent, Abney. It is believed that Abney ceased production of asbestos-containing fabrics before the 1978 transaction. As of Feb. 6, 2009, Brandon has resolved, by means of settlement or dismissal, 8,969 claims for a total of US$152,499. Brandon's insurance carriers initially agreed to pay 88.2 percent of the total indemnification and defense costs related to these proceedings, subject to the standard reservation of rights. The remaining 11.8 percent of the costs had been borne directly by Brandon. During 2004, Brandon's insurance carriers agreed to cover 100 percent of indemnification and defense costs, subject to policy limits and the standard reservation of rights, and to reimburse Brandon for all indemnity and defense costs paid directly by Brandon related to these proceedings. As of Feb. 6, 2009, 6,821 (or about 79 percent) of the claims pending against Brandon were pending in Mississippi. Headquartered in Albany, N.Y., Albany International Corp. makes paper machine clothing. The Company produces about 45 percent of the monofilament yarn used in its paper machine clothing and relies on independent suppliers for the remainder. It markets these products to paper mills through a direct sales staff. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Albany Still Facing Suits From Mount Vernon ---------------------------------------------------------------- Albany International Corp. continues to be both a direct defendant and as the "successor in interest" to Mount Vernon Mills in asbestos-related cases. The Company acquired certain assets from Mount Vernon in 1993. Certain plaintiffs allege injury caused by asbestos-containing products alleged to have been sold by Mount Vernon many years before the acquisition. Mount Vernon is contractually obligated to indemnify the Company against any liability arising out of such products. The Company denies any liability for products sold by Mount Vernon before the acquisition of the Mount Vernon assets. Under its contractual indemnification obligations, Mount Vernon has assumed the defense of these claims. On this basis, the Company has successfully moved for dismissal in a number of actions. Headquartered in Albany, N.Y., Albany International Corp. makes paper machine clothing. The Company produces about 45 percent of the monofilament yarn used in its paper machine clothing and relies on independent suppliers for the remainder. It markets these products to paper mills through a direct sales staff. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Congoleum Corp. Case Dismissed on Feb. 26 ---------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey, on Feb. 26, 2009, entered an order dismissing Congoleum Corporation's bankruptcy case, according to a Company report, on Form 8-K, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 4, 2009. On Feb. 26, 2009, the Bankruptcy Court rendered an opinion on the motion of First State Insurance Company and Twin City Fire Insurance Company for summary judgment denying confirmation of the amended joint plan of reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code of the Company, the Official Asbestos Claimants' Committee (ACC) and the Official Committee of Bondholders for Congoleum (Bondholders' Committee), et al. On Feb. 27, 2009, the Company and the Bondholders' Committee appealed the Order of Dismissal to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. On March 3, 2009, an order was entered by the Bankruptcy Court granting a stay of the Bankruptcy Court's Order of Dismissal until 20 days after a final non-appealable decision affirming the Order of Dismissal. Headquartered in Mercerville, N.J., Congoleum Corporation makes flooring products for residential and commercial use, including resilient sheet flooring (linoleum or vinyl flooring), do-it- yourself vinyl tile, and commercial flooring. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 16 Claims Filed Feb. 16-20 in Madison Court ---------------------------------------------------------------- During the week of Feb. 16, 2009 through Feb. 20 2009, about 16 new asbestos-related lawsuits were filed in Madison County Circuit Court, Ill., The Madison St. Clair Record reports. These claims are: -- (Case No. 09-L-0125) Larry and Sharon Garvin of Texas claim Mr. Garvin developed mesothelioma after his work as a laborer and a trainman during various times. Randy L. Gori, Esq., and Barry Julian, Esq., of Gori, Julian and Associates in Alton, Ill., represent the Garvins. -- (Case No. 09-L-0133) David W. Gauthier of Colorado, at various times, a laborer, an operator, and foreman, claims lung cancer. Elizabeth V. Heller, Esq., and Robert Rowald, Esq., of Goldenberg, Heller, Antognoli and Rowland in Edwardsville, Ill., represent Mr. Gauthier. -- (Case No. 09-L-0124) Michael D. and Paulette Guye of Arizona claim Mr. Guye developed mesothelioma after his work as a parts delivery person, as a laborer and joiner, as a radiological technician, and as a purchasing agent. The suit says Mr. Guye was also exposed to asbestos fibers through his father's work as a laborer and joiner. Elizabeth V. Heller, Esq., and Robert Rowland, Esq., of Goldenberg, Heller, Antognoli and Rowland in Edwardsville, Ill., represent the Guyes. -- (Case No. 09-L-0151) Eileen Harry of Virginia claims her deceased husband, Mark Harry, developed mesothelioma after his work as an engineer and a laborer at various locations throughout Illinois, California and Washington. John A. Barnerd, Esq., and Amy E. Garrett, Esq., of SimmonsCooper in East Alton, Ill., represent Mrs. Harry. -- (Case No. 09-L-0145) Christine Hartsock of North Carolina claims her deceased husband, Randall Hartsock, developed mesothelioma after his work as a clerk and carpet and flooring installer at various locations throughout Illinois, Pennsylvania and North Carolina. Christopher R. Guinn, Esq., Christopher J. Levy, Esq., Perry J. Browder, Esq., and John A. Barnerd, Esq., of SimmonsCooper in East Alton, Ill., represent Mrs. Hartsock. -- (Case No. 09-L-0135) Bobby Joe Holder of Illinois, a caster, brass worker, furnace chipper and mold repairman at locations throughout Illinois, claims asbestosis. John A. Barnerd, Esq., and W. Brent Copple, Esq., of SimmonsCooper in East Alton, Ill., represent Mr. Holder. -- (Case No. 09-L-0150) Joyce Hunter of Indiana claims lung cancer on behalf of her deceased husband, Paul Hunter, who was a steel mill laborer. G. Michael Stewart, Esq., and Jill Price, Esq., of SimmonsCooper in East Alton, Ill., represent Mrs. Hunter. -- (Case No. 09-L-0144) James Jump of Indiana, a cement mason and laborer in Illinois, Alabama and Louisiana, claims mesothelioma. Christoher R. Guinn, Esq., Christopher J. Levy, Esq., Perry J. Browder, Esq., and John A. Barnerd, Esq., of East Alton, Ill., represent Mr. Jump. -- (Case No. 09-L-0149) Victor F. Nelson of Illinois, a worker for the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy and for Construction Supply Retail, claims mesothelioma. Andrew O'Brien, Esq., Christopher Thoron, Esq., Christina J. Nielson, Esq., Bartholomew J. Baumstark, Esq., and Gerald J. FitzGerald, Esq., of the O'Brien Law Firm in St. Louis represent Mr. Nelson. -- (Case No. 09-L-0148) Wanda and Larry Paul of Ohio claims Mrs. Paul developed mesothelioma after her work as a laborer. Randy L. Gori, Esq., and Barry Julian, Esq., of Gori, Julian and Associates in Alton, Ill., represent the Pauls. -- (Case No. 09-L-0134) George O. Pursley of Ohio, who served in the U.S. Navy, worked as a laborer at a lumber yard, at the U.S. postal service and as a barber, claims mesothelioma. Elizabeth V. Heller, Esq., and Robert Rowland, Esq., of Goldenberg, Heller, Antognoli and Rowland in Edwardsville, Ill., represent Mr. Pursley. -- (Case No. 09-L-0152) Lynne Quintana of Colorado claims mesothelioma on behalf of her deceased husband, Jose Quintana, who worked as a laborer and pipefitter throughout Illinois, Colorado, Oklahoma and Montana. John A. Barnerd, Esq., and Amy E. Garrett, Esq., of SimmonsCooper in East Alton, Ill., represent Mrs. Quintana. -- (Case No. 09-L-0147) James F. Ross of Texas, a worker at Scott Air Force Base, a clutch replacer on several family cars, a building remodeler, a gas station owner and a brake and maintenance man, claims lung cancer. James F. Kelly, Esq., and Jeffery A.J. Miller, Esq., of Brent Coon and Associates represent Mr. Ross. -- (Case No. 09-L-0137) Michael L. Stephens of Kentucky claims the deceased John M. Stephens developed mesothelioma after his work in the U.S. Navy. Richard L. Saville Jr., Esq., Ethan A. Flint, Esq., and David J. Page, Esq., of Alton, Ill., represent Michael L. Stephens. -- (Case No. 09-L-0129) Patty L. Stuck of Missouri, a former cook, an assistant and clerk typist a wireman, a cake supply seller, an ammo packer and a helper and sweeper, claims mesothelioma. She also was exposed to asbestos fibers through her deceased husband, Thomas Stuck, who worked as a machinist and as a shade tree mechanic. Randy L. Gori, Esq., of Gori, Julian and Associates in Alton, Ill., represents Mrs. Stuck. W. Mark Lanier, Esq., Patrick N. Haines, Esq., R. Craig Bullock, Esq., and J. Kyle Beale, Esq., of The Lanier Law Firm in Houston will serve of counsel. -- (Case No. 09-L-0139) Angela Thomas of Illinois claims her deceased mother, Francis Bates, developed mesothelioma after her work as a cashier, as a harness wirer, as an order selector, as a cab driver, as a welder, as a shade tree mechanic and as a carpenter and drywaller. Randy L. Gori, Esq., of Gori, Julian and Associates in Alton, Ill., represents Mrs. Thomas. W. Mark Lanier, Esq., Patrick N. Haines, Esq., and R. Craig Bullock, Esq., of The Lanier Law Firm in Houston will be serving of counsel. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: EPA Coordinator Questioned in Grace Lawsuit ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lawyers for W. R. Grace & Co., on March 3, 2009, continued the interrogation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Paul Peronard in the asbestos case filed against Grace in court in Missoula, Mont., The Seattle Times reports. The suit alleged that the Company and five of its former officials knowingly tried to conceal asbestos hazards in the northwestern town of Libby, Mont. Mr. Peronard became the EPA's on-scene coordinator nearly 10 years ago in Libby. Grace used to operate a Libby vermiculite mine laced with asbestos that became dispersed in the community. Mr. Peronard testified earlier that misinformation from a Grace spokesman derailed EPA efforts to gauge the scope of asbestos contamination in Libby and to develop a cleanup plan targeting the town's most contaminated areas, the Missoulian reported. Mr. Peronard added Grace evaded EPA requests for information by not supplying corporate documents that explained how the company provided asbestos-tainted mine waste for use on school running tracks in Libby. Defense lawyers said that based on EPA instructions, Grace was not required to provide those documents. Grace and the five officials are accused of conspiring to violate federal air-quality requirements and obstruct justice. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 800 New Cases Expected in Australia in 2009 ---------------------------------------------------------------- According to a Herald Sun article, about 800 new asbestos- related disease cases are estimated to be recorded in Australia in 2009, up from 600 in 2005 and 400 in 1995. However, Professor Bruce Robinson from the National Centre for Asbestos Related Diseases warns the situation will rise for another five to 10 years. The number of mesothelioma patients has doubled at some Victorian hospitals in the past two years, while asbestos- related claims make up almost a quarter of all common law cases heard in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is operating under orders to fast-track asbestos litigation so victims can have justice before they die, nine months from diagnosis for most mesothelioma patients. Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre oncologist Dr. Ben Solomon said the hospital had four mesothelioma patients two years ago but now treats more than 10, partly because of improved treatment through the drug Alimta. But for most sufferers there remains no effective medication. Maurice Blackburn lawyer Jane McDermott said the firm's asbestos claims had doubled in two years. She said, "Australia imported and used the most asbestos in the 1970s, so with the 40-year lead time this peak of 2020 is alarming." Peter Gordon, whose firm Slater and Gordon handles 80 percent of asbestos cases, warns of a new wave of victims with office workers, DIY enthusiasts and people who walked past the Hardie factory when they were children diagnosed 40 years after limited exposure. Mr. Gordon said, "Without any doubt it's Australia's worst industrial disaster in terms of people killed. It has no rival." ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hardie Closing Submissions Held on March 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Closing submissions in the Australian Securities and Investments Commission lawsuit against 10 former James Hardie Industries N.V. directors were held on March 1, 2009 in the New South Wales Supreme Court, the Brisbane Times reports. The law firm of Allens Arthur Robinson and Hardie's public relations department were the focus of the hearing. The high standing of Allens was emphasized, while James Hardie's former head of public relations, Greg Baxter, was named as "the real culprit" responsible for a February 2001 media release about a new asbestos compensation trust. The defendants also said the ASIC had failed to prove its threshold claim that the board saw and approved the release. The commission alleges Hardie issued two misleading documents with the intention of thwarting government intervention on behalf of sufferers of asbestos diseases. The release, which it says contained unjustified "unequivocal assurances" that the trust was adequately funded; and a July 2001 information memorandum about Hardie's shift to the Netherlands. Tom Bathurst, QC, for former directors Michael Brown, Michael Gillfillan, Meredith Hellicar and Martin Koffel, said the memorandum was prepared by the late Peter Cameron. A draft August 2001 letter to the court about the Netherlands move was "a very clear indication" of Allens' advice, Mr. Bathurst said. Bret Walker, SC, for former general counsel Peter Shafron, said Mr. Baxter, who was called as an ASIC witness, had tried to disown "his personal responsibility" to the board for media releases. Mr. Walker said the "social" need to explore the events of the case had been addressed by the 2004 Special Commission of Inquiry headed by David Jackson, QC. Peter Wood, for former director Dan O'Brien, said there was intensive work on the media release in the 24 hours after the board meeting by Allens partner David Robb, Mr. Baxter and other Hardie line managers. ASIC's barrister, Tony Bannon, SC, said the defendants who chose to give evidence offered "testimony punctuated by discreditable attempts to deny the inevitable consequences of the documentary trail." The defendants included the former chief financial officer Phillip Morley and former directors Mr. Brown, Mr. Gillfillan, Ms. Hellicar, Mr. Koffel, and Peter Willcox. Those who chose not to appear were the former chief executive Peter Macdonald, Mr. Shafron, Mr. O'Brien and former director Greg Terry. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Enterprise Owner Charged for False Records ---------------------------------------------------------------- Janet M. Otten, owner of Enterprise Construction Co. Inc., admitted to falsifying signatures on asbestos inspection reports that were submitted to the St. Louis County Department of Health, infoZine reports. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources filed the case against the 45-year-old Ms. Otten of Webster Groves, Mo. Ms. Otten was operating without the proper certification as well as forging the name of a Missouri-certified inspector to bypass statutory requirements for asbestos work. Ms. Otten pleaded guilty in St. Louis County Circuit Court to four counts of forging environmental reports. DNR staff compiled the documentation submitted by Ms. Otten and presented the evidence to the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney for action. Asbestos inspections must be done by inspectors certified by the DNR. Ms. Otten forged the signature of a certified inspector on at least four reports. Asbestos inspections must be done before demolition of buildings subject to state and federal asbestos regulations takes place. Ms. Otten was placed on five years probation and ordered to have no further involvement in any asbestos-related businesses. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Council Fined GBP17,600 for Safety Breaches ---------------------------------------------------------------- The City of Edinburgh Council was fined GBP17,600 for allowing workers to be exposed to asbestos at Castlebrae High in Edinburgh, NEWS.scotsman.com reports. Council staff failed to properly check for asbestos at the school. Instead, builders they hired for the job pointed it out to them. After initially asking a licensed contractor for a quote, the local authority opted for a cheaper, unqualified firm to carry out the work. That company � Dalkeith Demolition Ltd (DDL) � went on to send untrained workers to remove the asbestos and leave fragments of the material lying on grass outside the school. New procedures have also been introduced in a bid to prevent a repeat of the costly mistakes which, on Feb. 26, 2009, landed both the council and a contractor in court. Both admitted a series of failures under the Health and Safety at Work Act and Control of Asbestos Regulations at Edinburgh Sheriff Court, with DDL picking up an GBP11,333 fine. Investigations are now under way within the city council to establish how the mistake happened in the first place. So far, no one has been disciplined over the incident, but it is understood this could form part of the investigation process. Councilor Gordon Mackenzie, the city's finance leader, said, "I am disappointed that the proper procedures were not followed. The council takes health and safety issues very seriously and we have now strengthened our procedures." Work was being carried out to build a new corridor in the science department of the school when asbestos was discovered. Work was immediately stopped and the council hired DDL to remove the material after selecting the company from an old database, which showed the license it had held until 2003. DDL sent workers along the following day without proper protective clothing or training, and they removed the asbestos while other people were nearby and left bits of it on lying on the grass outside the school. A Health and Safety Executive investigation found the council had failed to keep a clear record of the type of asbestos and its whereabouts in the school, leading to a number of workmen potentially being exposed to it. In 2002, the council was fined GBP7500 in 2002 after asbestos was found in Parsons Green Primary in Duddingston, Scotland. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Lawyers Seek Transfer of MDL Cases to State ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Motley Rice of Mount Pleasant, S.C., urged federal Judge Eduardo Robreno to remand tens of thousands of asbestos-related lawsuits from Multidistrict Litigation courts to state courts where they started, The Madison St. Clair Record reports. Judge Robreno presides over about 58,000 asbestos suits from all around the nation by special assignment of the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. The average suit names 56 defendants, so the suits contain more than three million distinct claims. Judge Robreno ordered solid information behind all three million claims, but so far asbestos lawyers have provided no basis for about half the claims. Motley Rice wants him to reconsider the order and rule that defendants should not have removed the suits from state and federal courts for multi district litigation, or MDL. On Dec. 1, 2008, John Herrick, Esq., of Motley Rice, wrote, "When a plaintiff is dying of mesothelioma, lung cancer or even asbestosis, the delay attendant to the MDL process creates a particularly strong incentive for defendants to use removal as a weapon. "Since removal and transfer to the MDL will almost always mean that the plaintiff will die before his trial date, defendants have a powerful reason to pursue them, or at the very least to extort a dismissal." Mr. Herrick recommended granting all pending motions to remand cases to state courts. He recommended grouping cases from mass screening sessions for prompt settlement conferences. In response, Marcy Croft, Esq., of Jackson, Miss. called Mr. Herrick's motion "a thinly veiled ploy to force defendants to consider for settlement thousands of meritless, and likely fraudulent, non-malignant, screened claims." In 2008, Ms. Croft moved to dismiss cases that lacked specific claims, but Judge Robreno ruled that he would not sign a blanket order. He invited defendants to tell him exactly which cases he should dismiss, and he set 12 hearings from April 2009 through June 2009 to hear their motions. Magistrates under Judge Robreno's direction have set 10 conferences in April 2009 to assess qualifications of plaintiff experts. ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hairston's Suit Filed v. 38 Firms in Texas ---------------------------------------------------------------- Raymond Hairston Jr., on Feb. 20, 2009, filed an asbestos- related lawsuit against 38 defendant corporations in Orange County District Court, Tex., The Southeast Texas Record reports. Lou Thompson Black, Esq., represents Mr. Hairston. According to the plaintiff's original petition, companies like Viacom Inc., General Electric Company, and Zurn Industries knew that the asbestos products they manufactured would hit the market without inspection for defects. The suit says the defendants have been in possession of medical and scientific data exposing the health risks of asbestos for decades, but conspired among themselves to suppress the information. Mr. Hairston is suing for physical pain and suffering in the past and future, mental anguish in the past and future, lost wages, loss of earning capacity, disfigurement in the past and future, physical impairment in the past and future, and past and future medical expenses, including home care costs. He also seeks punitive and exemplary damages. Case No. A090093 has been assigned to Judge Pat Clark of the 60th Judicial District. ********* A list of Meetings, Conferences and Seminars appears in each Wednesday's edition of the Class Action Reporter. Submissions via e-mail to carconf@beard.com are encouraged. Each Friday's edition of the CAR includes a section featuring news on asbestos-related litigation and profiles of target asbestos defendants that, according to independent research, collectively face billions of dollars in asbestos-related liabilities. ********* S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Frederick, Maryland USA. Glenn Ruel S. Senorin, Stephanie T. Umacob, Gracele D. Canilao, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 2009. All rights reserved. ISSN 1525-2272. This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior written permission of the publishers. Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but is not guaranteed. The CAR subscription rate is $575 for six months delivered via e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof are $25 each. For subscription information, contact Christopher Beard at 240/629-3300. * * * End of Transmission * * *