/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/091120.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Friday, November 20, 2009, Vol. 11, No. 230
Headlines
AUTO BODY ASSOC: Jury Returns $15 Mil. Verdict Against Hartford
BJ'S WHOLESALE: Inks $9.3 Mil. Settlement of Overtime Suit
BOEING CO: Dreamliner Complaint Filed in N.D. Ill. Available
COMPUCREDIT CORP: "Fee Harvesting" Lawsuit Filed in Cook County
EMIGRANT CAPITAL: N.Y. Shareholder Suit Challenges Jolt Co. Deal
KIMKINS DIET: Class Certification Approved in Calif. Lawsuit
KUDELSKI SA: Notice from Class Counsel to OpenTV Shareholders
MILBERG LLP: Variable Annuity Life Investor Says Law Firm Goofed
MPS GROUP: Shareholders Sue in Fla. To Get More Money from Adecco
R.J. REYNOLDS: Class Action Lawsuit Makes "Camel Cash" Demand
SCOTIABANK: Moves for Dismissal of Employee Overtime Suit
SOUTHWESTERN BELL: Mo. Suit Alleges Misuse of Motor Vehicle Data
TOBACCO LITIGATION: Fitch Sees Robust Tobacco Cash Flow in 2010
New Securities Fraud Cases
CARTER'S INC: Holzer Holzer Files Shareholder Suit in N.D. Ga.
Asbestos Litigation
ASBESTOS ALERT: Hawaiian Electric Cites $23M ARO at Sept. 2009
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Thomas Cites $900T for Remediation at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Consolidated Edison, Units Face Exposure Cases
ASBESTOS UPDATE: ConEd Still Facing 100 Steam Main Rupture Cases
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Sterlite Ind. Revises Asarco Offer on Sept. 10
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hartford Has $1.940B Net Liability at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fresenius Still Involved in Sealed Air Actions
ASBESTOS UPDATE: AK Steel Holding Still Party to Exposure Cases
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Skilled Healthcare Records $5.462Mil Liability
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Graham Corp. Still Involved in Exposure Actions
ASBESTOS UPDATE: NL Industries Still Has Pending Exposure Cases
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 129.3T Claims Ongoing v. Foster Wheeler in U.S.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Foster Wheeler Records $25.9Mil Insurance Asset
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 371 Claims Ongoing v. Foster Wheeler U.K. Units
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Enbridge Records $7.3M for Cleanup at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Iowa Court Upholds Ruling in Van Fossen Lawsuit
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Denies Kirks, Wiersma's Motions to Remand
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court OKs Prewett Remand Bid in Foster Wheeler
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Huntsman Facing Claims as "Premises Defendant"
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Lincoln Electric Faces 17,466 Cases at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: TRW Automotive Still Subject to Exposure Cases
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Briggs & Stratton Involved in Liability Actions
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Transocean Ltd. Still Has Cases in Mississippi
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Transocean Unit Facing 1,045 Suits at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hanover Records $14.7MM Net Reserve at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Odyssey Cites $333.47M Losses, LAE at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: IDEX Corporation, 6 Units Facing Exposure Cases
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cooper Records 22,977 Abex Claims at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cooper Ind. Records $797M Liability at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cooper Receivable Remains at $180M at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Sunoco, Inc. Still Subject to Exposure Actions
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Harsco Corp. Has 26,142 Open Claims at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Columbus McKinnon Corp. Cites $9.35M Liability
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 4,200 Suits Pending v. Tyco Int'l. at Sept. 25
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Markel Records $10Mil Loss Reserves at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Allstate Reserves $1.16B for Claims at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Midwest Facing 203 Exposure Actions at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Penn Millers Cites $2.27M Liability at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Katy Industries Still Faces 11 Suits in Alabama
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Katy Still Party to 2,700 Sterling Fluid Cases
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Lawsuits v. LaBour Pump Remain at 100 in Oct. 2
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Entrx's Current Reserves at $6.57M at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Entrx Corp. Faces 261 Pending Cases at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Entrx Cites $39.8M Future Liability at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Metalclad Still Party to ACE Lawsuit in Calif.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: RBS Global Still Party to 600 Stearns Lawsuits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Prager Unit Facing 2 Lawsuits (3,700 Claimants)
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Falk Unit Facing 190 Injury Cases (1.4T Claims)
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Zurn Unit Facing 5,800 Open Claims at Sept. 26
ASBESTOS UPDATE: RBS Global Records $271.5M Potential Liability
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Park-Ohio Facing 260 Injury Actions at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dalmine S.p.A. Has 45 Injury Claims at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Kuhles Capital Fined $71.1T for Disposal Breach
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 656 New Cases Filed in Madison County at Nov. 6
ASBESTOS UPDATE: District Court OKs ASARCO, AMC Plan on Nov. 13
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Savoy's Case v. 38 Firms Filed Nov. 5 in Texas
*********
AUTO BODY ASSOC: Jury Returns $15 Mil. Verdict Against Hartford
----------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas B. Scheffey at the Connecticut Law Tribune reports that a
Stamford, Conn., jury on Tuesday returned a $15 million verdict
in a class action brought by auto body shops against The Hartford
Insurance Co., which was accused of shutting out independent
appraisers and violating unfair trade practice laws.
The Auto Body Association of Connecticut alleged violations of
unfair trade practices law by the insurance giant, which
allegedly suppressed shop labor rates artificially by exclusively
using its own representatives to make appraisals following
accidents.
Robert Skrip, ABAC President, said in a statement: "We are
gratified that the jury agreed that The Hartford systematically
violated the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act."
The ABAC is represented by:
David A. Slossberg, Esq.
Hurwitz, Sagarin, Slossberg, & Knuff LLC
147 North Broad Street, P.O. Box 112
Milford, CT 06460-0112
Telephone: 203-877-8000
- and -
Alan Neigher, Esq.
Byelas & Neigher, local profile.
1804 Post Road East
Westport, CT 06880
Telephone: 203-259-0599
Mr. Slossberg told Mr. Scheffey the verdict a significant
consumer victory.
"We're thrilled the jury found that The Hartford suppresses labor
rates. This lawsuit was an attempt to change the way business is
done in this industry," Mr. Slossberg told BodyShopBusiness.com.
"The jury's verdict is a major victory toward that end."
"The next step is to ask the court for immediate injunctive
relief," Mr. Slossberg added. "Our team is looking forward to
crafting that request."
"We are disappointed with the verdict and plan to appeal. We
remain confident that our auto body repair program is fully
consistent with Connecticut law and provides outstanding service
to our customers," Thomas Hambrick, company spokesman for The
Hartford, told Mr. Scheffey.
Coverage of earlier proceedings in the Connecticut Supreme Court
and Connecticut Superior Court appeared in the Class Action
Reporter on July 23, 2008.
BJ'S WHOLESALE: Inks $9.3 Mil. Settlement of Overtime Suit
----------------------------------------------------------
Klafter Olsen & Lesser LLP has reached a $9.3 million settlement
in Caissie v. BJ's Wholesale Club, Inc., Case No. 08-cv-30220 (D.
Mass.) Ponsor, J.).
The settlement, which is subject to Court approval, is intended
to resolve claims that BJ's misclassified certain Mid Manager
employees as exempt from receiving overtime for hours worked in
excess of 40 hours per week.
Plaintiffs claim that they were misclassified because their
primary responsibilities included hourly duties such as loading
and unloading materials, stocking shelves and other activities
which are not exempt under federal and state overtime laws.
Under the settlement, approximately 1,500 current and former Mid
Managers employed by BJ's since November 2007 will be entitled to
make claims to share in the recovery, based on the number of
weeks they were employed by the company.
"We are very pleased with the resolution of this litigation,"
said Seth Lesser, Esq., of Klafter Olsen & Lesser LLP, attorneys
for the plaintiffs. "The employees will be able to obtain the
overtime to which they were entitled and do so within six
months."
Further details will be included in the notice that is expected
to be sent to all class members after the New Year following
Court review and approval.
The Plaintiff class is represented by:
Seth R. Lesser, Esq.
KLAFTER OLSEN & LESSER LLP
Two International Drive, Suite 350
Rye Brook, NY 10573
Telephone: (914) 934-9200
- and -
Fran L. Rudich, Esq.
KLAFTER OLSEN & LESSER LLP
1311 Mamaroneck Avenue, Suite 220
White Plains, NY 10605
Telephone: (212) 838-3333
Klafter Olsen & Lesser LLP -- http://www.klafterolsen.com/-- has
extensive expertise representing and obtaining recoveries for
employees improperly classified by their employers as exempt from
the overtime requirements of the Federal Labor Standards Act and
similar state laws. The Firm has offices in New York, Washington
D.C. and New Jersey.
The retailer is represented by:
Ellen C. Kearns, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Rosin, Esq.
CONSTANGY BROOKS & SMITH, LLP
75 Arlington Street, Suite 500
Boston, MA 02116
Telephone: (617) 849-7880
BOEING CO: Dreamliner Complaint Filed in N.D. Ill. Available
------------------------------------------------------------
As reported in the Class Action Reporter on Nov. 17, 2009, an
institutional investor sued The Boeing Company in federal
court in Illinois, accusing Boeing executives and directors of
making false and misleading statements between May 4 and June 22
about results of tests on the plane and the company's ability to
meet its production schedule.
A copy of the Complaint in City of Livonia Employees' Retirement
SYstem v. The Boeing Company, et al., Case No. 09-cv-07143 (N.D.
Ill.), is available at:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/11/18/B787.pdf
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Marvin A. Miller, Esq.
Lori A. Fanning, Esq.
MILLER LAW LLC
115 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 2910
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: 312/332-3400
- and -
Deborah R. Gross, Esq.
Robert P. Frutkin, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF BERNARD M. GROSS, P.C.
Wanamaker Bldg., Suite 450
100 Penn Square East
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Telephone: 215/561-3600
- and -
Samuel H. Rudman, Esq.
David A. Rosenfeld, Esq.
COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN & ROBBINS LLP
58 South Service Road, Suite 200
Melville, NY 11747
Telephone: 631/367-7100
- and -
Michael J. Vanoverbeke, Esq.
Thomas C. Michaud, Esq.
VANOVERBEKE MICHAUD & TIMMONY, P.C.
79 Alfred Street
Detroit, MI 48201
Telephone: 313/578-1200
A.E. Young at Courthouse News Service reports that Boeing
inflated its share price by concealing a structural defect in its
"eagerly awaited" 787 Dreamliner, misrepresenting the plane's
test results and the company's ability to meet deadlines for the
maiden flight and commercial delivery, shareholders say in a
federal class action.
When Boeing finally revealed the truth, its stock price dropped
by 12 percent in two days, the class claims.
The shareholders say Boeing had suffered scheduling problems and
canceled orders, but issued a misleading press release to
forestall more cancellations as orders for the competing Airbus
A380 were growing.
The class claims that Boeing concealed problems with the 787's
design that would delay the maiden flight and delivery. It issued
the allegedly misleading press release so it could "make a
positive presentation concerning the test results for the 787 and
the schedule for the first flight and delivery of the 787 at the
Paris Air Show" in June 2008, where it would compete for orders
with Airbus, according to the complaint.
The press release had its desired effect, the class claims, and
the price of Boeing common stock rose immediately by 2.4 percent,
to close at $41.77.
The stock price continued to rise as Boeing touted "steady
progress" toward a maiden flight and completion of the
intermediate "gauntlet phase" of testing, which simulates flight
conditions and multiple systems failures.
Boeing also claimed final assembly had begun on the first plane
destined for delivery, and continued to veil the defect and its
repercussions, the complaint alleges.
When it suddenly, and belatedly, disclosed the defect and delays,
and confessed prior knowledge of the problems, its "lack of
timely candor" and lack of a revised schedule caused an immediate
drop in its stock price, shareholders say.
A key paragraph in the complaint states: "As the date for the
maiden flight of the 787 approached, defendants made a series of
misleading statements to the market concerning the results of the
testing process for the 787 and Boeing's ability to meet the
schedule for the first flight and the delivery of the 787.
Defendants made these false and misleading statements in an
effort to: (a) forestall further cancellations of orders for the
787, particularly as the orders for its competition, the A380,
were gaining ground; (b) conceal from the market the material
fact, known to defendants, that the 787 had a structural problem
in its design that would prevent the first flight of the 787 by
June 30, 2009, and delivery in the first quarter of 2010; and (c)
enable Boeing to make a positive presentation concerning the test
results for the 787 and the schedule for the first flight and
delivery of the 787 at the Paris Air Show, scheduled for June 15-
18, 2009, at which Boeing hoped to receive additional orders for
the 787 and beat out the showing made by Airbus for its A380."
The class accuses Boeing and its executives W. James McNerney,
Jr. and Scott E. Carson of securities violations. They seek
class certification.
COMPUCREDIT CORP: "Fee Harvesting" Lawsuit Filed in Cook County
---------------------------------------------------------------
Bridget Freeland at Courthouse News Service reports that
Compucredit charged credit-card customers a $100 annual fee for a
credit line of $850, then killed its subprime credit program a
month later, according to a class action in Cook County Court.
The class claims Compucredit killed its cards after Congress
enacted the CARD Act, which restricts such "fee harvester"
programs.
The class claims Compucredit sold it "Tribute" cards and "other
'subprime' credit cards with high fees," for $100 a year plus a
$10 monthly "maintenance fee" for a credit card with an $850
limit. (The sum comes to 25.8 percent of the credit limit in
fees.)
The CARD Act, passed by Congress in March, bans unfair rate
increases and fee traps, including outrageous fees for "low-
limit" subprime cards.
Compucredit knew at the time that it had to discontinue the
"Tribute" credit card program and any similar programs, the class
claims. But it charged the annual fee anyway, knowing that it
would kill its "Tribute" program, the class claims.
Named plaintiff Deborah Davis says she was charged a $100 annual
fee and a $10 monthly fee on her Tribute card on Aug. 10. On
Sept. 11 she got a letter from Compucredit stating that it had
terminated the program and closed her account. But it said she
still be responsible for account maintenance fees. Ms. Davis
says Compucredit refused refund her annual fee.
She says that if class members do not pay the unfair fees, their
credit scores will suffer, which will "defeat the intended
purpose of the cards."
She wants restitution, damages for breach of contract and fraud,
and wants Compucredit enjoined from assessing any more fees.
A copy of the Complaint in Davis v. Compucredit Corporation, Case
No. __CH_____ (Ill. Cir. Ct., Cook Cty.), is available at:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/11/18/Credit.pdf
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel A. Edelman, Esq.
Cathleen M. Combs, Esq.
James O. Latturner, Esq.
EDELMAN, COMBS, LATTURNER & GOODWIN, LLC
120 S. LaSalle St., 18th Floor
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: 312-739-4200
EMIGRANT CAPITAL: N.Y. Shareholder Suit Challenges Jolt Co. Deal
----------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that the former CEO of The Jolt
Co. claims Emigrant Capital Corp. hurt him and common
shareholders when it took over the company and squeezed him out,
in Monroe County Court, N.Y.
KIMKINS DIET: Class Certification Approved in Calif. Lawsuit
------------------------------------------------------------
Sarah E. White at CalorieLab Calorie Counter News reports that
she's been following the Kimkins Diet for a couple of years now,
from the time it was promoted in Woman's World magazine, which
subsequently apologized for promoting the diet, through the
lawsuit brought by former adherents to the diet who say it was a
starvation plan and that the founder of the diet, Heidi Diaz,
falsely claimed to have lost weight on the plan and actually used
pictures from a Russian mail order bride website as her after
photos.
Class-Action Status Approved
Ms. White reports that she recently got word from the anti-
Kimkins site Say No to Kimkins that Fenderson, et al. v. Diaz, et
al., Caseno No. MC483005 (Calif. Super. Ct., Riverside Cty.),
against Ms. Diaz has been made into a class action in Riverside
County Superior Court in California.
The class includes anyone who signed up for an account on the
Kimkins website between January 1, 2006, and October 15, 2007.
The plaintiffs who originally started the suit are six people who
had memberships in the site, and they are suing Diaz as well as
the Kimkins.com business entity.
They contend that they were induced into becoming members of the
site through false and misleading information and are suing under
California code that calls for relief for people who've been
subject to unfair, unlawful or fraudulent business practices.
In particular, according to the announcement at Say No to
Kimkins, the plaintiffs allege:
that Diaz and Kimkins concocted a false persona, "Kim
Drake" or "Kimmer" to sell memberships to Kimkins.com
that Diaz and Kimkins misled potential members into
believing that "Kim Drake" was real by using photos of real
women and then falsely claiming that the photos depicted
"Drake" that Diaz and Kimkins posted lies about "Drake's"
purported weight loss that Diaz and Kimkins provided false
or misleading information to Woman's World magazine
that Diaz and Kimkins fabricated 41 "success stories" and
published on Kimkins.com that Diaz and Kimkins made up
celebrity endorsements that Diaz and Kimkins misused labels
and metatags to steer Internet traffic to Kimkins.com, in
violation of the law that Diaz and Kimkins misled potential
members into believing that they were buying lifetime
memberships, when in fact Diaz and Kimkins.com terminated
memberships at their whim that Diaz and Kimkins intended to
mislead potential members and assumed that potential members
would rely on her misrepresentations Diaz has denied all
wrongdoing.
About The Class
Anyone who became a member of the website during the time in
question is automatically a party to the class action, but people
can opt out of the lawsuit if desired by contacting the attorneys
who represent the class.
While the announcement makes it sound like only those people who
were personally injured by the website and diet plan can opt out
of the lawsuit, of course anyone in the class should be able to.
We find it a little fishy, too, that it's suggesting you opt out
by contacting the attorneys, since that could be a privacy
violation.
Also, Ms. White reports, the report suggests checking into the
court documents online; they are no longer available there. So if
you're a part of this class and want more information, proceed
with caution.
Coverage of this matter last appeared in the Class Action
Reporter on Oct. 23, 2007.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
John E. Tiedt, Esq.
Marc S. Hurd, Esq.
TIEDT & HURD
10370 Hernet St., Suite 300
Riverside, CA 92503
- and -
David Winter, Esq.
MOORE WINTER MCLENNAN, LP
701 N. Brand Blvd., Suite 200
Glendale, CA 91203-4232
KUDELSKI SA: Notice from Class Counsel to OpenTV Shareholders
-------------------------------------------------------------
The law firms of Berman DeValerio and Wolf Popper LLP, counsel
for the plaintiff in Foley v. Kudelski SA, et al., Case No.
09-cv-04896 (N.D. Calif.), issued this statement:
As disclosed in Amendment No. 3 to the Tender Offer
Statement of Kudelski Interactive Cayman, Ltd. and Kudelski SA,
which was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
October 30, 2009, defendants and plaintiff in the class action
titled Foley v. Kudelski SA, et al., No. C09-04896, which is
pending in federal court in San Francisco, entered into a
memorandum of understanding on October 29, 2009, settling the
action in principal. Under the terms of the memorandum of
understanding, among other things:
(A) Kudelski will not seek to have OpenTV delisted from the
NASDAQ Global Market for at least six months after the
expiration of the tender offer that was commenced by
Kudelski on October 5, 2009 (the "transaction") unless
Kudelski effectuates a redemption as specified below.
(B) If at the expiration of the transaction, Kudelski has
obtained 90% or more of the Class A shares of OpenTV
eligible to tender, Kudelski will, forthwith, cause
OpenTV to redeem the remaining OpenTV Class A shares at
the same price per share as paid to those who tendered
their Class A shares in the transaction; and
(C) If at the expiration of the transaction, Kudelski has
obtained 90% or more of the voting power of OpenTV, and
if Kudelski chooses to cause OpenTV to redeem the
remaining OpenTV Class A shares within eighteen months
of the expiration of the transaction, Kudelski will
cause OpenTV to redeem the remaining shares at least at
the same price per share as paid to those who tendered
their shares in the transaction.
As disclosed by Kudelski in their press release dated
November 13, 2009, as of November 12, 2009, OpenTV shareholders
had tendered approximately 56.3 million OpenTV shares of the
approximately 93.5 million of the OpenTV shares not already owned
by Kudelski, or approximately 60% of those shares. Upon
acquisition of these shares, Kudelski will own approximately 91%
of the voting rights in OpenTV. Based on these figures, as of
November 12, 2009, approximately 37 million OpenTV shares not
owned by Kudelski remained outstanding. Should Kudelski acquire,
prior to expiration of the Tender Offer, 90% or more of the Class
A shares of OpenTV that were not already owned by them prior to
the transaction, as many as approximately 9.3 million shares
would then be outstanding and, under the terms of the memorandum
of understanding, Kudelski would cause those remaining shares to
be redeemed at the same price per share as paid to those who
tendered their shares in the transaction.
The memorandum of understanding also provides that Kudelski
would disclose that they do not intend to take any actions to
transform OpenTV into a passive foreign investment company and
that they would include certain additional disclosures in an
amendment to their Schedule TO, including, among other things,
detailed information concerning financial analyses that were
performed for Kudelski by Credit Suisse concerning the value of
OpenTV. These analyses include, among other things, a comparison
of multiples for selected broadcasting solution vendors with
multiples for OpenTV implied by the $1.55 per share offer price.
This information was disclosed in Amendment No. 3 to the Schedule
TO, which was filed with the SEC on October 30, 2009, and is
available at http://www.sec.gov/
MILBERG LLP: Variable Annuity Life Investor Says Law Firm Goofed
----------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip Bobbitt, a class member in Drnek v. Variable Annuity Life
Ins. Co., Case o. 01-cv-00242 (D. Ariz.), complains in Bobbitt v.
Milberg, LLC, et al., Case No. 09-cv-00629 (D. Ariz.), that the
law firm messed up in the 2001 class action lawsuit and caused
him and other investors to lose more money.
The Complaint, a copy of which is available at:
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/110209bobbittmilberg.pdf
claims that after winning class certification, Milberg missed a
host of deadlines, which led to a parade of horribles, which
ultimately led to the court granting summary judgment on behalf
of VALIC, Ashby Jones at The Wall Street Journal's Law Blog
explains.
A spokesman for Milberg told Mr. Jones the suit "has no merit
whatsoever."
Prof. Bobbitt is represented by:
Thomas A. Gilson, Esq.
Robert H. McKirgan, Esq.
LEWIS & ROCA LLP
40 North Central
Phoenix, AZ 85004
- and -
Guy M. Hohmann, Esq.
Joseph Brophy, Esq
Ryan T. Shelton, Esq.
HOMANN, TAUBE & SUMMERS, LLP
100 Congress Ave., 18th Floor
Austin, TX 78701
- and -
R. James George, Jr., Esq.
Gary L. Lewis, Esq.
GEORGE & BROTHERS, LLP
114 W. Seventh St., Suite 1100
Austin, TX 78701
MPS GROUP: Shareholders Sue in Fla. To Get More Money from Adecco
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that directors of MPS Group are
selling out too cheaply, to their own advantage, to Adecco,
shareholders say in Duval County Court, Fla.
R.J. REYNOLDS: Class Action Lawsuit Makes "Camel Cash" Demand
-------------------------------------------------------------
Karina Brown at Courthouse News Service reports that R.J.
Reynolds used "Camel Cash" coupons to double the sale of Camel
cigarettes, then ripped the bottom out of the program to avoid
redeeming "hundreds of thousands" of coupons its customers had
saved, a class claims in Federal Court.
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco doubled the sale of Camel cigarettes
through its Camel Cash coupons, which it began offering in 1991,
lead plaintiff Amanda Sateriale claims. Reynolds included a
certificate with each pack of Camel cigarettes that customers
could redeem for Camel merchandise.
Over the next 15 years, Ms. Sateriale says, Camel smokers saved
"hundreds of thousands" of certificates, then R.J. Reynolds
"abruptly discontinued" the program in 2007, leaving its
customers holding worthless paper.
Ms. Sateriale claims Reynolds killed the program when it
discovered that customers had amassed too many certificates to
make the program profitable.
Ms. Sateriale wants damages for consumer fraud.
A copy of the Complaint in Sateriale, et al. v. R.J. Reynolds
Tobacco Co. and Reynolds American, Inc., Case No. 09-cv-08394
(C.D. Calif.), is available at:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/11/18/CamelCash.pdf
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jeffrey H. Squire, Esq.
Patrick O'Donnell, Esq.
BRAGAR, WEXLER, EAGEL AND SQUIRE, P.C.
885 Third Avenue, Suite 3040
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: 212-308-5858
- and -
Lionel Z. Glancy, Esq.
Marc L. Godino, Esq.
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP
1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 311
Los Angeles, CA 90067
SCOTIABANK: Moves for Dismissal of Employee Overtime Suit
---------------------------------------------------------
David Friend at The Canadian Press reports that a lawyer for
Scotiabank (TSX:BNS) has denied allegations of a systemic problem
with the way the bank logs and pays overtime, arguing an Ontario
court it should not allow a class-action lawsuit over allegedly
unpaid work to go ahead.
And even if some employees do have legitimate claims for
overtime, their experience varies across the country, indicating
that the issue isn't consistent across the major bank's
operations, Robert Armstrong said Tuesday during a court hearing
at which a group of employees is seeking class-action
certification for their suit.
During the second day of hearings, Mr. Armstrong told the judge
he needs to consider "is this a credible situation I'm being
asked to certify? You are not a rubber stamp."
Cindy Fulawka is the lead plaintiff representing about 5,000
employees working as personal or senior bankers, financial
advisers and account managers for small businesses.
Scotiabank, Canada's most international bank, has more than
69,000 employees and operations across Canada, Latin America and
the Caribbean.
Ms. Fulawka, who has worked for the bank since 1986 but is
currently on medical leave, claims the bank was loose with its
record keeping when it came to extra work hours, resulting in
many employees working extra time they weren't being paid for.
None of the allegations have been proven in court.
On Monday Ms. Fulawka's lawyer, Louis Sokolov, told the court
that Scotiabank has a duty to record and monitor all of the hours
worked by its employees, and compensate them properly.
However, in documents filed with the court, Scotiabank said that
evidence shows that each employees claim is unique and would
require an individual investigation and consideration.
"There is no evidence that a significant number of unresolved
claims actually exist," the document from the bank's lawyers
said.
"The plaintiff has only provided the accounts of six individuals.
The validity of these claims has not been admitted by
Scotiabank."
Mr. Armstrong told the judge that Scotiabank has been unfairly
targeted by a team of lawyers who are also involved in a similar
case against CIBC that is under appeal.
He said the judge needs to consider whether the claims are a
"credible situation" or "if is this a law firm seeking to move
forward."
In June, the Ontario Superior Court dismissed a similar suit
filed by a teller against CIBC (TSX:CM) alleging unpaid overtime
to its customer service staff.
The judge in that case decided it didn't meet the test of a
class-action suit because each employee would have an individual
claim that lacked commonality with the others.
SOUTHWESTERN BELL: Mo. Suit Alleges Misuse of Motor Vehicle Data
----------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Harris at Courthouse News Service reports that Southwestern
Bell is the latest in a series of class-action defendants accused
of using misrepresentations to get confidential data from a
Department of Motor Vehicles database "for commercial purposes."
The complaint against SW Bell is the third that Kansas City
attorney Mitchell Burgess has filed for clients.
The first, Roberts, et al. v. Source for Public Data, Case No.
08-cv-04167 (W.D. Mo.) [covered in the Class Action Reporter
on July 24, 2008], was filed on July 21, 2008; the second,
Roberts, et al. v. Chexsystems Collection Agency, Inc., Case
No. 09-cv-04150 (W.D. Mo.), was filed on July 29 this year. All
three claim that the defendants violated the Federal Driver's
Privacy Protection Act by selling the restricted personal
information and by making false representations to get it.
Burgess did not return phone calls this week. But he told
Courthouse News in August that the damages could be staggering.
He said federal law allows damages of up to $2,500 a person, and
if the class includes 100,000 people, the damages could come to
$250 million.
He claims that the class could include millions of Missouri
drivers.
Mr. Burgess said Missouri cannot be sued under the statute, but
individuals who work for the state can be.
Ten DMV workers were named as defendants in the Source for Public
Data suit, including Omar Davis, the director of the Missouri
Department of Revenue.
No DMV workers were named as defendants in the Chexsystems or the
Southwestern Bell lawsuits.
The workers' inclusion means the State of Missouri could be
liable for some or all of the damages. If the plaintiffs are
successful, and Burgess gets for his clients what he demands, the
ruling theoretically could bankrupt the state.
A copy of the Complaint in Wiles, et al. v. Southwestern Bell
Telephone Company dba AT&T, Case No. 09-cv-04236 (W.D. Mo.), is
available at:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/11/18/SWBell.pdf
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Ralph K. Phalen, Esq.
1000 Broadway, Suite 400
Kansas City, MO 64105
Telephone: (816) 589-0753
- and -
Mitchell L. Burgess, Esq.
Keith C. Lamb, Esq.
BURGESS & LAMB, P.C.
1000 Broadway, Suite 400
Kansas City, MO 64105
Telephone: (816) 471-1700
- and -
Don P. Saxton, Esq.
SAXTON LAW FIRM
1000 Broadway, Suite 400
Kansas City, MO 64105
Telephone: (816) 471-1700
TOBACCO LITIGATION: Fitch Sees Robust Tobacco Cash Flow in 2010
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings expects U.S. tobacco corporate ratings to remain
stable in 2010 as the companies continue to generate sizeable
free cash flow as a result of high operating margins. The ratings
are further supported by the companies' significant liquidity
positions with respect to manageable upcoming long-term debt
maturities.
"Due to the sizable cash flow generated by industry participants,
past credit rating changes have mostly been precipitated by
events, such as adverse legal judgments and merger and
acquisition activity," said Christopher Collins, Associate
Director at Fitch. "Fitch believes that the risk of an event
being material enough to cause a change in existing tobacco
company ratings in 2010 is nominal."
Event Risks:
The following is Fitch's review of events with the greatest
ability to adversely affect ratings and the expected likelihood
of those events occurring.
(A) Menthol Exemption - Much Talk,
Little Action Expected:
The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act was signed
into law June 22, 2009 by President Barak Obama and provides the
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with authority to oversee the
tobacco industry. Additionally, the law bans flavored cigarettes,
with the exception of menthol, the most popular cigarette
flavoring in the U.S. During the passage of the bill, the
exemption proved controversial due to disproportionate use of
menthol cigarettes by minorities. As a compromise, the FDA is
tasked with developing a report on the risks of menthol flavoring
and issuing a recommendation based on its findings. The report is
currently scheduled to be published in August 2010, but the group
tasked with producing the report, the Tobacco Products Scientific
Advisory Committee, is still in the process of being staffed,
potentially delaying the report and therefore any enforcement
action. The report will be a review of studies already conducted.
Fitch expects that the committee's recommendation will be one of
three options: 1) complete ban; 2) phased ban, based on menthol
levels; or 3) status quo.
Fitch does not believe the Committee will recommend an outright
complete ban due to the several predictable adverse consequences.
Approximately 29% of cigarettes sold in the U.S. are mentholated.
State budgets, already devastated by unemployment and reduced tax
collections, would suffer further reduced tax collections. States
took in more than $16 billion from state cigarette excise taxes
in 2008. Taking the most extreme case, if menthol cigarette users
all seek illegal cigarette replacements, states would lose
approximately $5 billion in revenue. The expansion of the State
Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) financed by an
increase in the federal excise tax in April 2009 would require
funding from other sources. The Master Settlement Agreement (MSA)
payments, which totaled $8.8 billion in 2009, would be subject to
a sharp downward revision due to volume provisions. Bootlegging
of menthol cigarettes would increase exponentially. Resources
would have to be tasked to stop the illicit trade, further
straining federal and state budgets. Outside of fiscal effects,
the health effects of contraband and bootleg cigarettes are
unknown.
Clearly, Lorillard, Inc., is the most dependent upon menthol
cigarette sales and would be the most-hurt by any type of menthol
ban. Lorillard's Newport brand, a mentholated cigarette line,
accounts for over 85% of the company's cigarette volume and over
90% of its net sales. Approximately 35% of menthol cigarette
sales are Newport brand cigarettes. However, Altria Group,
Inc.'s (Altria) Philip Morris USA and Reynolds American Inc.'s
(RAI) R.J. Reynolds units would also suffer materially. Philip
Morris USA's Marlboro brand has the second largest menthol market
share, and R.J. Reynolds' Camel, Kool, and Salem brands garner
significant menthol share. Menthol cigarettes have been gaining
share, and prior to the passage of SCHIP and the increase in the
federal excise tax, had been growing in volume in contrast to
overall cigarette volumes, which have been experiencing a secular
decline in the low- to mid-single digits.
(B) Acquisitions - Lorillard, an Appealing Target,
but Difficult to Acquire for U.S. Manufacturers:
Under the assumption menthol is not banned, Lorillard is an
attractive acquisition. The company has industry-leading
operating margins, the second best-selling cigarette brand in
Newport, and leading market share in menthol. However,
Lorillard's larger domestic competitors face significant hurdles
to acquire the leading menthol cigarette manufacturer. Altria's
approximately 50% cigarette market share likely precludes it from
being an acquirer on an anti-trust basis. Fitch believes from an
anti-trust standpoint, RAI would also have a difficult time
getting an acquisition of Lorillard approved. Altria, RAI, and
Lorillard together account for roughly 90% of the U.S. cigarette
market. Additionally, if RAI were to keep its current brands, it
would have over 50% market share in menthol in a combination with
Lorillard. From a financial standpoint, the acquisition would
also be challenging for RAI. An all cash offer would be near
impossible given its balance sheet and earnings. With the need to
raise over $12 billion (Lorillard's bonds have a change of
control provision), assuming no deal premium, the combined entity
would have a pro forma leverage of almost 4 times (x). With
leverage that high, the debt would certainly be high yield.
Tobacco companies already pay an interest premium due to the
limited pool of market participants. High yield tobacco debt is
likely to have even fewer participants leading to very high
interest costs, thus making a cash offer cost prohibitive. With a
stock offer, British American Tobacco plc's (BAT) 42% stake in
RAI presents control issues. In an all-stock offer, Lorillard
shareholders would have a plurality of control, making a takeover
unattractive to RAI's management. An acquisition of Lorillard by
RAI would be very complex due to the need to acquire regulatory
approval as well as to strike the right balance between control,
interest costs of debt-financed cash, and a premium for
Lorillard's shareholders.
(C) Litigation - Outside of DOJ case,
No Major Decisions Expected:
After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
upheld most of the findings of the U.S. District Court for the
District of Columbia in United States v. Philip Morris at al (the
DOJ Case), the tobacco companies are expected to file a petition
for a writ of certiorari with U.S. Supreme Court. While the
remedies required under the 2006 ruling of U.S. District Court in
the DOJ Case are financially negligible, the findings have
implications for cases pursued by consumer plaintiffs under state
consumer fraud laws in various jurisdictions. A favorable Supreme
Court ruling in the DOJ case would prevent consumer plaintiffs'
from citing the U.S. District Court's ruling finding tobacco
companies violated civil RICO laws. The tobacco companies have
strong defenses in the consumer fraud cases, including arguments
against class certification.
The Engle cases may continue to grab headlines with multi-million
dollar damages awarded to plaintiffs, but Fitch anticipates
resolution of the Engle cases will take many years as the jury
trials are subject to post-trial motions and appeals. The Engle
cases are a result of the decertification of the Engle class
action suit by the Florida Supreme Court. In conjunction with the
decertification, the court allowed consumer plaintiffs to file
individual cases against tobacco companies using certain findings
of fact established by the court such as smoking causes various
diseases among others. Fitch expects tobacco companies to
continue to fully litigate all cases. Given the time intensive
nature of tobacco litigation, Fitch does not foresee undue risk
of an adverse judgment in the near to intermediate term.
Operational Outlook:
Operationally, 2010 will likely be a more typical year than 2009.
The industry will lap the significant federal tobacco excise tax
increase enacted April 1, 2009, which led to substantially higher
retail prices and consequently considerably elevated volume
declines.
Cigarette Prices - Nowhere to Go but Up
Due to Expected State Excise Tax Increases:
Fitch expects state excise taxes to increase at an above-average
rate due to the continuing strain on state budgets. The Center
for Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) estimates that 48 states
face budget shortfalls in fiscal 2010 of a combined total of
approximately $180 billion. Increased tobacco excise taxes will
obviously not make up for that entire shortfall as states only
collected $16.2 billion in cigarette excise taxes in 2008, but
so-called sin-taxes, excise taxes on tobacco and liquor, meet
with little political resistance, allowing governments to
somewhat offset revenue shortfalls. Additionally, as a result of
the federal excise tax increase, volumes are expected to decline
in the high single to low double-digit range in 2009, cutting
into state excise tax revenue. This will gives states
additionally impetus to increase their excise taxes, many of
which are dedicated to fund specific programs. Nine states have
increased their cigarette excise taxes year-to-date, slightly
above the annual median from 2000-2008. Twenty states increased
cigarette excise taxes in 2002 following the prior year
recession; consequently, an above average number of states are
expected to raise their excise taxes in 2010.
The economic environment combined with significant price
increases led to a trade down to value brands. With increases in
state excise taxes and no substantial improvement in
unemployment, Fitch expects the trend to continue. As of the
third quarter of 2009, discount share of cigarettes grew to 29.5%
from 27.3% for 2008. Among the large cigarette manufacturers,
RAI, with its large percentage of value brand volume, is poised
to continue to benefit from the consumer trade down. Its large
value brand Pall Mall had a 5% share in the third quarter, up
from 2.8% in the year earlier period. Lorillard has also
benefited; shipments of its value brand Maverick were up almost
52% in the third quarter from the prior year period.
Cash Flow and Uses of Cash:
The industry's cash flow from operations has historically been,
and is expected to continue to be, significant and robust. This
has allowed industry participants to return substantial amounts
of cash to shareholders through high dividend payout ratios
(Altria, RAI and Lorillard have payout ratios of 70% to 75%) and
sizable share repurchase programs. However, in 2009, neither
Altria nor RAI engaged in share repurchases. Altria conserved
cash to pay down debt after its January acquisition of UST, and
RAI used its cash to improve its liquidity position and reduce
debt. While neither has current plans for share repurchases in
2010, Fitch expects both companies to be conservative if either
chooses to return cash to shareholders via stock buybacks. RAI
has traditionally engaged in only moderate share repurchases due
to the 42% ownership stake of BAT, and Altria faces cash outlays
as a result of adverse IRS audits. On July 9, 2009, a jury ruled
unanimously in favor of the IRS' disallowing tax benefits from
certain Sale-In/Lease-Out (SILO) and Lease-In/Lease-Out (LILO)
transactions of Philip Morris Capital Corp. (PMCC), a subsidiary
of Altria. Tax benefits of SILO/LILO leases from 1996-1999
disallowed by the IRS totaled approximately $150 million,
including related interest. The company anticipates that tax
benefits, totaling $1 billion including related interest, from
2000?2003 will be disallowed by the IRS by early next year and it
may need to post $1 billion in escrow to challenge the
anticipated ruling, which Fitch expects would need to be financed
at least short-term. However, a rating action is unlikely as
credit measures have continued to improve after the $11.7 billion
acquisition of UST.
Additionally, Fitch notes that Altria continues to hold a large
stake in SABMiller plc, valued at over $10 billion, which could
potentially be monetized. PMCC did not engage in any disputed
transactions after 2003, but Altria will continue to face
exposure to IRS audits, as it claimed SILO/LILO related tax
benefits totaling $900 million including related interest from
2004 through 2009. In contrast to RAI and Altria, Lorillard is
expected to continue to repurchase shares as it adds debt to its
capital structure. Lorillard is targeting leverage of 1.5x total
debt-to-EBITDA, and for the LTM period, the company's total debt-
to-EBITDA was 0.5x with total debt of $750 million.
Fitch's current Issuer Default Rating for Altria Group, Inc. is
'BBB+'; Outlook Stable, and Fitch's current Issuer Default Rating
for Reynolds American Inc. is 'BBB-'; Outlook Stable.
New Securities Fraud Cases
CARTER'S INC: Holzer Holzer Files Shareholder Suit in N.D. Ga.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Holzer Holzer & Fistel, LLC -- http://www.holzerlaw.com/-- filed
a class action in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Georgia on behalf of purchasers of Carter's,
Inc. ("Carter's") (NYSE: CRI) common stock who purchased between
April 27, 2004 and November 10, 2009.
If you purchased shares of Carter's common stock during the Class
Period, you have the legal right to petition the Court to be
appointed a "lead plaintiff." A lead plaintiff is a
representative party that acts on behalf of other class members
in directing the litigation. Any such request must satisfy
certain criteria and be made no later than January 19, 2010. Any
member of the purported class may move the Court to serve as lead
plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do
nothing and remain an absent class member. If you are a Carter's
investor and would like to discuss a potential lead plaintiff
appointment, or your rights and interests with respect to the
lawsuit, you may contact Michael I. Fistel, Jr., Esq., or
Marshall P. Dees, Esq. via e-mail at mfistel@holzerlaw.com or
mdees@holzerlaw.com or via toll-free telephone at (888) 508-6832.
The complaint charges Carter's and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The complaint alleges that Carter's statements and filings during
the Class Period were materially false and misleading because
they misrepresented or failed to disclose that: (a) the Company
had reported certain margin support payments to major wholesale
customers in incorrect periods; (b) as a result, the Company's
financial results were overstated during the Class Period; (c)
the Company had failed to properly recognize revenue in violation
of GAAP; (d) the Company lacked adequate internal and financial
controls; and (e) that, as a result of the above, the Company's
financial statements during the Class Period were materially
false and misleading at all relevant times.
Plaintiff is represented by Holzer Holzer & Fistel, LLC and seeks
to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of Carter's common
stock during the Class Period.
Asbestos Litigation
ASBESTOS ALERT: Hawaiian Electric Cites $23M ARO at Sept. 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------
Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc.'s subsidiary, Hawaiian
Electric Company, Inc. (HECO), as of September 2009, recorded an
asbestos-related asset retirement obligation of US$23 million.
In July 2009, HECO hired a hygienist to conduct an inspection at
HECO's Honolulu power plant to determine the extent of asbestos
and lead based paint at a non-operating portion of the plant. The
inspection indicated that retired Generating Units Nos. 5 and 7
at the plant were deteriorating, and the hygienist recommended
removing the asbestos-containing materials and lead based paint.
The asbestos and lead based paint, in their current state, do not
pose any health risks as these hazardous materials are confined
to a sealed and vacant portion of the plant.
Currently, HECO intends to remove Units Nos. 5 and 7, including
abating the asbestos and lead based paint, over a five-year
period (2010 to 2014).
COMPANY PROFILE:
Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc.
900 Richards Street
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
Tel. No.: (808) 543-5662
Description:
The Company is the holding company for Hawaiian Electric Company
and some non-utility businesses. HECO (along with its utility
subsidiaries Maui Electric and Hawaii Electric Light) serves more
than 440,400 customers as the sole public electricity provider on
the islands of Hawaii, Lanai, Maui, Molokai, and Oahu.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Thomas Cites $900T for Remediation at Sept. 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Properties Group, Inc., as of Sept. 30, 2009, had accrued
about US$900,000 for estimated future costs of asbestos removal
or abatement at its City National Plaza and Brookhollow
properties.
The Company has removed or abated asbestos-containing building
materials from certain tenant and common areas at City National
Plaza and Brookhollow.
The Company continues to remove or abate asbestos from various
areas of the building structures.
Thomas Properties Group, Inc. owns, manages, leases, acquires and
develops real estate, consisting of office properties and related
parking garages, located in Southern California; Sacramento,
Calif.; Philadelphia; Northern Virginia; Houston; and Austin,
Tex. The Company is based in Los Angeles.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Consolidated Edison, Units Face Exposure Cases
---------------------------------------------------------------
Consolidated Edison, Inc. and its Utilities (Consolidated Edison
of New York, Inc. and Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc.) still
face asbestos lawsuits brought in New York State and federal
courts.
A number of plaintiffs sought large amounts of compensatory and
punitive damages for deaths and injuries allegedly caused by
exposure to asbestos at various premises of the Utilities. The
suits that have been resolved have been resolved without any
payment by the Utilities, or for amounts that were not material
to them.
In 2008, Con Edison of New York estimated that its aggregate
undiscounted potential liability for these suits and additional
suits that may be brought over the next 15 years is US$9 million.
At Sept. 30, 2009, the Company recorded US$10 million accrued
liability for asbestos suits, US$10 million regulatory assets for
asbestos suits, US$114 million accrued liability for workers'
compensation, and US$38 million regulatory assets for workers'
compensation.
At Dec. 31, 2008, the Company recorded US$10 million accrued
liability for asbestos suits, US$10 million regulatory assets for
asbestos suits, US$114 million accrued liability for workers'
compensation, and US$38 million regulatory assets for workers'
compensation.
At Sept. 30, 2009, Con Edison of New York recorded US$9 million
accrued liability for asbestos suits, US$9 million regulatory
assets for asbestos suits, US$108 million accrued liability for
workers' compensation, and US$38 million regulatory assets for
workers' compensation.
At Dec. 31, 2008, Con Edison of New York recorded US$9 million
accrued liability for asbestos suits, US$9 million regulatory
assets for asbestos suits, US$109 million accrued liability for
workers' compensation, and US$38 million regulatory assets for
workers' compensation.
Consolidated Edison, Inc.'s main subsidiary, Consolidated Edison
Company of New York, distributes electricity to more than 3.2
million residential and business customers in New York City. It
also delivers natural gas to about 1.1 million customers.
Subsidiary Orange and Rockland Utilities serves more than 427,000
electric and gas customers in three states. The Company is based
in New York.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: ConEd Still Facing 100 Steam Main Rupture Cases
----------------------------------------------------------------
About 100 lawsuits are still pending against Consolidated Edison,
Inc. concerning its subsidiary Consolidated Edison Company of New
York's steam main rupture in midtown Manhattan in July 2007.
About 100 lawsuits are pending against the Company concerning Con
Edison of New York's steam main rupture in midtown Manhattan in
July 2007. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 21, 2009)
It has been reported that one person died and others were injured
as a result of the incident. Several buildings in the area were
damaged. Debris from the incident included dirt and mud
containing asbestos.
The response to the incident required the closing of several
buildings and streets for various periods. The suits against the
Company seek unspecified compensatory and, in some cases,
punitive damages, for personal injury, property damage and
business interruption.
The Company has not accrued a liability for the suits. The
Company has notified its insurers of the incident.
Consolidated Edison, Inc.'s main subsidiary, Consolidated Edison
Company of New York, distributes electricity to more than 3.2
million residential and business customers in New York City. It
also delivers natural gas to about 1.1 million customers.
Subsidiary Orange and Rockland Utilities serves more than 427,000
electric and gas customers in three states. The Company is based
in New York.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Sterlite Ind. Revises Asarco Offer on Sept. 10
---------------------------------------------------------------
Sterlite Industries (India) Limited, on Sept. 10, 2009, revised
its offer to purchase the operating assets of Asarco LLC to
US$2.565 billion payable fully in cash, according to a Company
report, on Form 6-K, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on Nov. 2, 2009.
On Aug. 31, 2009, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court recommended to the
U.S. District Court to confirm the Parent Plan of Reorganization
(jointly proposed by Asarco Incorporated and Americas Mining
Corporation, subsidiaries of Grupo Mexico), and to reject the
Debtors Plan of Reorganization (proposed by Asarco and sponsored
by the Company's wholly owned subsidiary, Sterlite USA).
In the revised Sept. 10, 2009 offer, the Company would be the
beneficiary of 100 percent of the proceeds from the creditor's
interest in the Brownsville judgment thereby eliminating the put
option granted to Asbestos Trust and providing for full cash to
all creditors groups including asbestos creditors, allowed late
filed claims and allowed subordinated claims (which earlier were
provided a share of creditor's interest in the Brownsville
judgment).
The Company also agreed that maximum recovery from creditors'
interest in Brownsville judgment would be about US$900 million.
The U.S. Bankruptcy Court recommended to the U.S. District Court
to not consider the Sept. 10, 2009 amendment of Sterlite's offer
and in case District Court considers the amended offer, it should
still confirm the Parent Plan.
The U.S. District Court will make the final decision on which
plan proponent will be selected as the winning plan proponent for
Asarco.
A District Court hearing commenced Oct. 19, 2009 where it heard
the objections of various parties and a final decision is
expected in the current quarter.
Sterlite Industries (India) Limited produces copper in India and
manufactures continuous-cast copper rods. The Company operates
two mines in Australia, but its primary business is the operation
of India's largest copper smelting and refining plant. The
Company is based in Mumbai, India.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hartford Has $1.940B Net Liability at Sept. 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc.'s net asbestos
liability was US$1.940 billion for the three and nine months
ended Sept. 30, 2009, according to the Company's quarterly report
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Nov. 3,
2009.
The Company's net asbestos liability was US$1.997 billion during
the three and six months ended June 30, 2009. (Class Action
Reporter, July 31, 2009)
During the three months ended Sept. 30, 2009, net paid losses and
loss adjustment expenses were US$57 million.
During the nine months ended Sept. 30, 2009, net paid losses and
LAE were US$133 million and net incurred losses and LAE were
US$189 million.
The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. is a financial
holding company for a group of subsidiaries that provide
investment products and life and property and casualty insurance
to both individual and business customers in the United States
and internationally. The Company is based in Hartford, Conn.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fresenius Still Involved in Sealed Air Actions
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA continues to be engaged in
litigation with Sealed Air Corporation to confirm its entitlement
to indemnification from Sealed Air for all losses and expenses
incurred by the Company relating to pre-Merger tax liabilities
and Merger-related claims.
The Company was originally formed as a result of a series of
transactions it completed under the Agreement and Plan of
Reorganization dated as of Feb. 4, 1996, by and between W. R.
Grace & Co. and Fresenius SE (Merger).
At the time of the Merger, a Grace subsidiary known as W. R.
Grace & Co.-Conn. had, and continues to have, significant
liabilities arising out of product-liability related litigation
(including asbestos-related actions), pre-Merger tax claims and
other claims unrelated to National Medical Care, Inc. (NMC),
which was Grace's dialysis business prior to the Merger.
In connection with the Merger, W. R. Grace & Co.-Conn. agreed to
indemnify the Company, FMCH, and NMC against all liabilities of
Grace, whether relating to events occurring before or after the
Merger, other than liabilities arising from or relating to NMC's
operations. Grace and certain of its subsidiaries filed for
reorganization under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code on
April 2, 2001.
Prior to and after the commencement of the Grace Chapter 11
Proceedings, class action complaints were filed against Grace and
FMCH by plaintiffs claiming to be creditors of W. R. Grace & Co.-
Conn., and by the asbestos creditors' committees on behalf of the
Grace bankruptcy estate in the Grace Chapter 11 Proceedings,
alleging that the Merger was a fraudulent conveyance, violated
the uniform fraudulent transfer act and constituted a conspiracy.
All those cases have been stayed and transferred to or are
pending before the U.S. District Court as part of the Grace
Chapter 11 Proceedings.
In 2003, the Company reached agreement with the asbestos
creditors' committees on behalf of the Grace bankruptcy estate
and Grace in the matters pending in the Grace Chapter 11
Proceedings for the settlement of all fraudulent conveyance and
tax claims against it and other claims related to the Company
that arise out of the bankruptcy of Grace.
Under the terms of the settlement agreement as amended,
fraudulent conveyance and other claims raised on behalf of
asbestos claimants will be dismissed with prejudice and the
Company will receive protection against existing and potential
future Grace related claims, including fraudulent conveyance and
asbestos claims, and indemnification against income tax claims
related to the non-NMC members of the Grace consolidated tax
group upon confirmation of a Grace bankruptcy reorganization plan
that contains such provisions.
Under the Settlement Agreement, the Company will pay a total of
US$115 million without interest to the Grace Bankruptcy estate,
or as otherwise directed by the Court, upon plan confirmation. No
admission of liability has been or will be made.
The Settlement Agreement has been approved by the U.S. District
Court. Subsequent to the Merger, Grace was involved in a multi-
step transaction involving Sealed Air Corporation (f/k/a Grace
Holding, Inc.). The Company is engaged in litigation with Sealed
Air to confirm its entitlement to indemnification from Sealed Air
for all losses and expenses incurred by the Company relating to
pre-Merger tax liabilities and Merger-related claims.
Under the Settlement Agreement, upon confirmation of a plan that
satisfies the conditions of the Company's payment obligation,
this litigation will be dismissed with prejudice.
Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA provides dialysis services
and manufacturing and distributing products and equipment for the
treatment of end-stage renal disease (ESRD). In the United
States, the Company also performs clinical laboratory testing.
The Company is based in Bad Homburg, Germany.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: AK Steel Holding Still Party to Exposure Cases
---------------------------------------------------------------
AK Steel Holding Corporation or its predecessor, Armco Inc.,
since 1990, has been named as a defendant in numerous lawsuits
alleging personal injury as a result of exposure to asbestos.
As of Dec. 31, 2008, there were 437 such lawsuits pending against
the Company. Most of these suits have been filed on behalf of
people who claim to have been exposed to asbestos while visiting
the premises of a current or former Company 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.
Since the onset of asbestos claims against the Company in 1990,
five asbestos claims against it have proceeded to trial in four
separate cases. All five concluded with a verdict in favor of the
Company.
AK Steel Holding Corporation manufactures carbon, stainless, and
electrical steel. It sells hot- and cold-rolled carbon steel to
construction companies, steel distributors and service centers,
and automotive and industrial machinery producers. The Company is
based in West Chester, Ohio.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Skilled Healthcare Records $5.462Mil Liability
---------------------------------------------------------------
Skilled Healthcare Group, Inc.'s long-term asbestos abatement
liability was US$5,462,000 as of Sept. 30, 2009, compared with
US$5,372,000 as of Dec. 31, 2008, according to the Company's
quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on Nov. 3, 2009.
The Company's long-term asbestos abatement liability was
US$5,451,000 as of June 30, 2009. (Class Action Reporter, Aug.
21, 2009)
Skilled Healthcare Group, Inc. provides integrated long-term
healthcare services through its skilled nursing companies and
rehabilitation therapy business. The Company also provides other
related healthcare services, including assisted living care and
hospice care. The Company is based in Foothill Ranch, Calif.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Graham Corp. Still Involved in Exposure Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Corporation continues to be a defendant in certain
lawsuits alleging personal injury from exposure to asbestos
contained in products made by the Company.
The Company is a co-defendant with numerous other defendants in
these lawsuits. The claims are similar to previous asbestos suits
that named the Company as defendant, which either were dismissed
when it was shown that the Company had not supplied products to
the plaintiffs' places of work or were settled for amounts below
the expected defense costs.
The outcome of these lawsuits cannot be determined at this time.
Graham Corporation designs and manufactures custom-engineered
ejectors, vacuum systems, condensers, liquid ring pump packages
and heat exchangers. The Company is based in Batavia, N.Y.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: NL Industries Still Has Pending Exposure Cases
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Company has been named as a defendant in various lawsuits in
several jurisdictions, alleging personal injuries as a result of
occupational exposure primarily to products manufactured by the
Company's former operations containing asbestos, silica and mixed
dust.
During the first quarter of 2009, certain of these cases
involving multiple plaintiffs were separated into single-
plaintiff cases. As a result, the total number of outstanding
cases increased.
About 1,226 of these types of cases remain pending, involving a
total of about 2,800 plaintiffs. In addition, the claims of about
7,500 plaintiffs have been administratively dismissed or placed
on the inactive docket in Ohio and Indiana state courts.
The Company does not expect these claims will be re-opened unless
the plaintiffs meet the courts' medical criteria for asbestos-
related claims. The Company has not accrued any amounts for this
litigation.
To date, the Company has not been adjudicated liable in any of
these matters.
NL Industries, Inc. is engaged in the component products
(security products, furniture components and performance marine
components), chemicals (TiO2) and other businesses. The Company
is based in Dallas.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 129.3T Claims Ongoing v. Foster Wheeler in U.S.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Foster Wheeler AG's subsidiaries in the United States faced
129,300 open asbestos claims during the fiscal quarter and nine
months ended Sept. 30, 2009, compared with 130,370 claims during
the fiscal quarter and nine months ended Sept. 26, 2008.
The Company's subsidiaries in the U.S. faced 130,500 open
asbestos claims during the fiscal quarter and fiscal six months
ended June 30, 2009, compared with 130,740 claims during the
fiscal quarter and fiscal six months ended June 27, 2008. (Class
Action Reporter, Aug. 21, 2008)
During the fiscal quarter ended Sept. 30, 2009, the Company
recorded 890 new claims and 2,090 claims resolved. During the
fiscal quarter ended Sept. 26, 2008, the Company recorded 860 new
claims and 1,230 claims resolved.
During the fiscal nine months ended Sept. 30, 2009, the Company
recorded 3,230 new claims and 4,690 claims resolved. During the
fiscal nine months ended Sept. 26, 2008, the Company recorded
3,230 new claims and 3,710 claims resolved.
Total asbestos-related assets were US$254,700,000 as of Sept. 30,
2009, compared with US$284,800,000 as of Dec. 26, 2008. Total
asbestos-related liabilities were US$343,700,000 as of Sept. 30,
2009, compared with US$385,300,000 as of Dec. 26, 2009.
Foster Wheeler AG is an engineering and construction contractor
and power equipment supplier delivering technically advanced,
reliable facilities and equipment. The Company is based in Zug,
Switzerland.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Foster Wheeler Records $25.9Mil Insurance Asset
----------------------------------------------------------------
Foster Wheeler AG, as of Sept. 30, 2009, estimated the value of
its unsettled asbestos insurance asset related to ongoing
litigation in New York state court with its subsidiaries'
insurers at US$25.9 million.
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 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 the fiscal nine months ended Sept. 26, 2008, the subsidiaries
reached agreements to settle their disputed asbestos-related
insurance coverage with two insurers. As a result of these
settlements, both of which occurred prior to the third fiscal
quarter, the Company increased its asbestos-related insurance
asset and recorded a gain of US$35.9 million in the fiscal nine
months ended Sept. 26, 2008. There were no settlements with
insurers during the fiscal nine months ended Sept. 30, 2009.
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 outflows of US$16.8 million as a result
of asbestos liability indemnity payments and defense costs in
excess of insurance settlement proceeds during the fiscal nine
months ended Sept. 30, 2009.
The Company expects to fund a total of US$26.3 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.
Foster Wheeler AG is an engineering and construction contractor
and power equipment supplier delivering technically advanced,
reliable facilities and equipment. The Company is based in Zug,
Switzerland.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 371 Claims Ongoing v. Foster Wheeler U.K. Units
----------------------------------------------------------------
Foster Wheeler AG's subsidiaries in the United Kingdom faced 371
open asbestos claims as of Sept. 30, 2009, according to the
Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on Nov. 4, 2009.
To date, 926 claims have been brought against the Company's U.K.
subsidiaries.
The Company's subsidiaries in the U.K., as of June 30, 2009,
faced 363 claims alleging personal injury arising from exposure
to asbestos. To date, 916 claims have been brought against the
subsidiaries. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 21, 2009)
As of Sept. 30, 2009, the Company had recorded total liabilities
of US$42.9 million comprised of an estimated liability relating
to open (outstanding) claims of US$8.6 million and an estimated
liability relating to future unasserted claims through the fiscal
third quarter of 2024 of US$34.3 million.
Of the total, US$3.1 million was recorded in accrued expenses and
US$39.8 million was recorded in asbestos-related liability on the
consolidated balance sheet.
An asset in an equal amount was recorded for the expected U.K.
asbestos-related insurance recoveries, of which US$3.1 million
was recorded in accounts and notes receivable-other and US$39.8
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$57.9 million.
Foster Wheeler AG is an engineering and construction contractor
and power equipment supplier delivering technically advanced,
reliable facilities and equipment. The Company is based in Zug,
Switzerland.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Enbridge Records $7.3M for Cleanup at Sept. 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
Enbridge Energy Partners, L.P. recorded US$7.3 million as of
Sept. 30, 2009 (US$5.5 million as of Dec. 31, 2008) in "Accounts
payable and other" for asbestos and environmental matters.
The Company recorded US$5.7 million in "Accounts payable and
other" for asbestos and environmental cleanup as of June 30,
2009. (Class Action Reporter, July 31, 2009)
The Company recorded US$2.4 million as of Sept. 30, 2009 (US$2.8
million as of Dec. 31, 2008) in "Other long-term liabilities" for
asbestos and environmental matters.
The above amounts were primarily to address remediation of
contaminated sites, asbestos-containing materials, management of
hazardous waste material disposal, outstanding air quality
measures for certain of the Company's liquids and natural gas
assets and penalties the Company has been or expects to be
assessed.
Enbridge Energy Partners, L.P. owns the 1,900-mile U.S. portion
of the world's longest liquid petroleum pipeline. When combined
with the Canadian segment (owned and operated by Enbridge Inc.),
the pipeline system spans some 3,500 miles across North America.
The Company is based in Houston.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Iowa Court Upholds Ruling in Van Fossen Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Supreme Court of Iowa upheld the ruling of the Iowa District
Court for Woodbury County, which dismissed Roger Van Fossen's
asbestos lawsuit in favor of MidAmerican Energy Company and
Interstate Power and Light Company.
The case is styled Roger Van Fossen, Individually, and as
Personal Representative of the Estate of Ann Van Fossen,
Deceased, Appellant v. MidAmerican Energy Company and Interstate
Power and Light Company, Appellees.
Judges Marsha K. Ternus, Mark S. Cady, Michael J. Streit, David
S. Wiggins, Daryl L. Hecht, and Brent R. Appel entered judgment
in Case No. 06-1691 on Nov. 13, 2009.
In 1973, Mr. Van Fossen began working on a construction project
at the Port Neal power plant near Sioux City, Iowa. At that time,
the plant consisted of two functional power generating units, and
construction of a third unit, owned by the corporate predecessors
of MidAmerican, Iowa Power and Light (IPL), and one other power
company, was underway. A year later, MidAmerican, IPL, and 10
other power companies and municipal utilities formed an agreement
to build a fourth power generating unit which was not completed
until 1980.
MidAmerican, as the agent of the other owners, engaged Ebasco
Services as the general contractor for the construction of Units
3 and 4. The construction contracts gave Ebasco full control over
its employees and the construction of both units.
Mr. Van Fossen was employed by Ebasco as an iron-rigger on the
construction projects from 1973 to 1981. When the construction of
Units 3 and 4 was completed, Mr. Van Fossen continued working at
the Port Neal facility. He was hired by W.A. Klinger Co., a
company that contracted to provide maintenance services on all
four of the Port Neal power units.
During his employment with Ebasco, in the construction of Units 3
and 4, and while performing maintenance work on all four of the
units as an employee of Klinger until 1997, Mr. Van Fossen and
his clothing were exposed to various asbestos-containing
products. He wore his work clothes to his home where they were
regularly laundered by his wife, Ann Van Fossen.
After Mr. Van Fossen's retirement in 1997, Mrs. Van Fossen was
diagnosed with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma. After her
death, Mr. Van Fossen filed this wrongful death lawsuit against
several defendants, including MidAmerican and IPL, asserting the
defendants negligently failed to warn Mrs. Van Fossen of the
health risks associated with exposure to asbestos.
MidAmerican and IPL filed motions for summary judgment claiming
they have no liability for Mrs. Van Fossen's death because they
owed no duty to warn family members of employees of independent
contractors of the risks associated with exposure to asbestos.
After a hearing, the district court granted the motions,
concluding MidAmerican and IPL owed no legal duty to Mrs. Van
Fossen, the spouse of an independent contractor's employee, who
was exposed to asbestos at a location remote from the plant
premises.
The Supreme Court transferred Mr. Van Fossen's appeal to the
court of appeals. The court of appeals affirmed the district
court's summary judgment ruling, and the Supreme Court granted
Mr. Van Fossen's application for further review.
The work performed by Mr. Van Fossen for MidAmerican and IPL did
not involve a peculiar risk or abnormally dangerous activity.
Accordingly, the district court correctly concluded MidAmerican
and IPL owed no duty to Mrs. Van Fossen, a household member of an
independent contractor's employee.
The Supreme Court upheld the judgment of the district court.
Michael P. Jacobs, Esq., of the law firm of Rawlings, Nieland,
Probasco, Killinger, Elwanger, Jacobs, Mohrhauser, Nelson &
Early, L.L.P. in Sioux City, Iowa, and John Herrick, Esq., and
Benjamin D. Cunningham, Esq., of Motley Rice in Mt. Pleasant,
S.C., represented Mr. Van Fossen.
William R. Hughes, Jr., Esq., of Stuart, Tinley, Peters, Thorn,
Hughes, Faust & Madsen, in Council Bluffs, Iowa, and Jason
Kennedy, Esq., and Adam Jagadich, Esq., of Segal, McCambridge,
Singer & Mahoney in Chicago, represented MidAmerican Energy
Company.
Leonard T. Strand, Esq., and Kerry A. Finley, Esq., of Simmons
Perrine PLC in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, represented Interstate Power
and Light Company.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Denies Kirks, Wiersma's Motions to Remand
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, denied the
Motions to Remand filed by Dennis Kirks and Janice Wiersma in
asbestos litigation filed against General Electric Company.
The cases are styled Wilbert Kirks and Dennis Kirks, Plaintiffs
v. General Electric Company, et al., Defendants and Lee Wiersma
and Janice Wiersma, Plaintiffs v. General Electric Company, et
al., Defendants.
Dennis Kirks brought suit on Nov. 13, 2007 against numerous
defendants on behalf of Wilbert Kirks. Dennis Kirks is the
executor of Wilbert Kirks' estate. Wilbert Kirks served aboard
the USS Leyte between 1953 and 1957 as a boatswain's mate, and
allegedly was exposed to asbestos through turbines manufactured
by GE. Wilbert Kirks died from mesothelioma on May 7, 2007.
Janice Wiersma brought suit on or about Jan. 29, 2008 against
numerous defendants on behalf of Lee Wiersma. Janice Wiersma is
the executrix of Lee Wiersma's estate. Mr. Wiersma served as a
radio operator aboard the USS Wright between 1965 and 1969, and
allegedly was exposed to asbestos through turbines manufactured
by GE. Mr. Wiersma died from mesothelioma on July 1, 2007.
The Court, on Sept. 17, 2009, denied plaintiffs' motions to
remand the cases to State court.
Thomas C. Crumplar, Esq., of Jacobs & Crumplar, P.A., in
Wilmington, Del., represented the Plaintiffs.
Josette F. Spivak, Esq., of Hollstein Keating Cattell Johnson &
Goldstein P.C., in Wilmington, Del., represented General Electric
Company.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court OKs Prewett Remand Bid in Foster Wheeler
---------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington,
at Seattle, affirmed Duane and Eileen Prewett's Motion to Remand
an asbestos lawsuit filed against Foster Wheeler AG, Gould Pumps
(IPG) and other defendants.
District Judge Ricardo S. Ramirez entered judgment in Case No.
C09-0838 RSM on Sept. 9, 2009.
The Prewetts brought product liability claims in state court
arising from their exposure to asbestos related to equipment
produced by Defendants. They asserted both a claim for design
defects and for failure to warn.
Defendant Foster Wheeler removed this case to federal court. The
Prewetts argued that this case should be remanded to state court
because Foster Wheeler had failed to provide evidence.
The Court granted the Prewetts' motion and remanded the case to
King County Superior Court for further proceedings.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Huntsman Facing Claims as "Premises Defendant"
---------------------------------------------------------------
Huntsman Corporation is named as a "premises defendant" in a
number of asbestos exposure cases, typically claims by non-
employees of exposure to asbestos while at a facility.
In the past, these cases typically have involved multiple
plaintiffs bringing actions against multiple defendants, and the
complaints have not indicated which plaintiffs were making claims
against which defendants, where or how the alleged injuries
occurred or what injuries each plaintiff claimed.
Where a claimant's alleged exposure occurred prior to 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. None of the complaints in these
cases state the amount of damages being sought.
The prior owner accepts responsibility for the conduct of the
defense of the cases and payment of any amounts due to the
claimants. In its nearly 14-year experience with tendering these
cases, the Company has not made any payment with respect to any
tendered asbestos cases.
During the nine months ended Sept. 30, 2009, the Company recorded
12 cases tendered during period, 14 resolved during period, and
1,139 unresolved at end of period. During the nine months ended
Sept. 30, 2008, the Company recorded 18 cases tendered during
period, 66 resolved during period, and 1,144 unresolved at end of
period.
The Company has never made any payments with respect to these
cases. As of Sept. 30, 2009, the Company 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 nine months ended Sept. 30, 2009, the Company recorded
one such case filed, three cases resolved, and 41 unresolved
cases. During the nine months ended Sept. 30, 2008, the Company
recorded four cases filed, one case resolved, and 42 unresolved
cases.
The Company did not pay any settlement costs for asbestos
exposure cases that are not subject to indemnification during the
nine months ended Sept. 30, 2009 and Sept. 30, 2008. As of Sept.
30, 2009, the Company had an accrued liability of US$225,000
relating to these cases.
Huntsman Corporation's chemical products are applied in the
adhesives, aerospace, automotive, construction products, durable
and non-durable consumer products, electronics, medical,
packaging, paints and coatings, power generation, refining,
synthetic fiber, textile chemicals and dye industries. The
Company is based in Salt Lake City.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Lincoln Electric Faces 17,466 Cases at Sept. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Lincoln Electric Holdings, Inc., at Sept. 30, 2009, was a co-
defendant in cases alleging asbestos induced illness involving
claims by 17,446 plaintiffs, which is a net decrease of 136
claims from those previously reported.
At June 30, 2009, the Company was a co-defendant in cases
alleging asbestos induced illness involving claims by about
17,582 plaintiffs, which was a net decrease of 3,241 claims from
those previously reported. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 7, 2009)
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: 38,166 of those
claims were dismissed, 12 were tried to defense verdicts, four
were tried to plaintiff verdicts, one was resolved by agreement
for an immaterial amount and 559 were decided in favor of the
Company following summary judgment motions.
On Oct. 9, 2009, a jury returned a verdict in one such case in
favor of the Company and two co-defendants in the Common Pleas
Court of Philadelphia County, Pa.
Lincoln Electric Holdings, Inc. manufactures welding and cutting
products, including arc welding power sources, consumable
electrodes, fluxes, fume extraction equipment, robotic welding
systems, and wire feeders. The Company is based in Cleveland.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: TRW Automotive Still Subject to Exposure Cases
---------------------------------------------------------------
Certain subsidiaries of TRW Automotive Holdings Corp. are still
subject to asbestos-related claims, according to the Company's
quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on Nov. 4, 2009.
These claims seek damages for illnesses alleged to have resulted
from exposure to asbestos used in certain components sold by the
Company's subsidiaries. The Company said it believes that most of
the claimants were assembly workers at the major U.S. automobile
manufacturers.
Most of these claims name numerous manufacturers and suppliers of
various products allegedly containing asbestos.
Neither the Company's settlement costs in connection with
asbestos claims nor its annual legal fees to defend these claims
have been material in the past. The Company has been successful
in obtaining the dismissal of many cases without any payment.
TRW Automotive Holdings Corp. supplies automotive systems,
modules and components to global automotive original equipment
manufacturers and related aftermarkets. The Company is based in
Livonia, Mich.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Briggs & Stratton Involved in Liability Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Briggs & Stratton Corporation continues to be subject to various
product liability (including asbestos-related liability actions).
No other asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the Company's
quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on Nov. 4, 2009.
Briggs & Stratton Corporation produces air cooled gasoline
engines for outdoor power equipment. The Company designs,
manufactures, markets and services these products for original
equipment manufacturers (OEMs) worldwide. The Company is based in
Wauwatosa, Wis.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Transocean Ltd. Still Has Cases in Mississippi
---------------------------------------------------------------
Certain of Transocean Ltd.'s subsidiaries continue to be
defendants in asbestos exposure lawsuits in the Circuit Courts of
the State of Mississippi.
In 2004, several of the Company's subsidiaries were named in 21
complaints filed on behalf of 769 plaintiffs in the Circuit
Courts of the State of Mississippi and which claimed injuries
arising out of exposure to asbestos allegedly contained in
drilling mud during these plaintiffs' employment in drilling
activities between 1965 and 1986.
A Special Master, appointed to administer these cases pre-trial,
subsequently required that each individual plaintiff file a
separate lawsuit, and the original 21 multi-plaintiff complaints
were then dismissed by the Circuit Courts.
The amended complaints resulted in one of the subsidiaries being
named as a direct defendant in seven cases. The Company has or
may have an indirect interest in an additional 24 cases.
The complaints allege that the defendants used or manufactured
asbestos-containing products in connection with drilling
operations and have included allegations of negligence, products
liability, strict liability and claims allowed under the Jones
Act and general maritime law. The plaintiffs seek awards of
unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.
In each of these cases, the complaints have named other
unaffiliated defendant companies, including companies that
allegedly manufactured the drilling-related products that
contained asbestos.
None of the cases in which one of the subsidiaries is a named
defendant has been scheduled for trial in 2009 or 2010. Earlier
in 2009, two cases that were part of the original 2004 multi-
plaintiff suits went to trial in Mississippi against unaffiliated
defendant companies, which allegedly manufactured drilling-
related products containing asbestos. The Company was not a
defendant in either of these cases.
One of the cases resulted in a substantial jury verdict in favor
of the plaintiff, although this case has not been reviewed on
appeal. The second case resulted in a verdict completely in favor
of the defendants.
There have been no other trials involving any of the parties to
the original 21 complaints.
Transocean Ltd. provides offshore contract drilling services for
oil and gas wells. At Sept.30, 2009, the Company owned, had
partial ownership interests in or operated 135 mobile offshore
drilling units. The Company is based in Vernier, Switzerland.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Transocean Unit Facing 1,045 Suits at Sept. 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
A Transocean Ltd. subsidiary, as of Sept. 30, 2009, was a
defendant in 1,045 asbestos-related lawsuits, according to the
Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on Nov. 4, 2009.
A Company subsidiary, as of June 30, 2009, was a defendant in
about 1,056 asbestos lawsuits. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 21,
2009)
One of the Company's subsidiaries is involved in lawsuits arising
out of the subsidiary's involvement in the design, construction
and refurbishment of major industrial complexes. The operating
assets of the subsidiary were sold and its operations
discontinued in 1989, and the subsidiary has no remaining assets
other than the insurance policies involved in its litigation,
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 2,736
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 Sept. 30, 2009, the amounts expended
to resolve claims (including both attorneys' fees and expenses,
and settlement costs) have not been material, and all deductibles
with respect to the primary insurance have been satisfied.
The subsidiary continues to be named as a defendant in additional
lawsuits. The subsidiary has in excess of US$1 billion in
insurance limits potentially available to the subsidiary.
Transocean Ltd. provides offshore contract drilling services for
oil and gas wells. At Sept.30, 2009, the Company owned, had
partial ownership interests in or operated 135 mobile offshore
drilling units. The Company is based in Vernier, Switzerland.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hanover Records $14.7MM Net Reserve at Sept. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Hanover Insurance Group, Inc.'s net asbestos- and
environmental-related reserve for losses and loss adjustment
expenses were US$14.7 million at Sept. 30, 2009, compared with
US$13.9 million at Dec. 31, 2008.
The Company's gross A&E-related reserve for losses and LAE were
US$11.3 million at Sept. 30, 2009, compared with US$18.5 million
at Dec. 31, 2008.
In recent years, average A&E payments have declined modestly. As
a result of the declining payments, the Company's actuarial
indicated point estimate of A&E liability reserves was lowered
resulting in favorable reserve development of US$6.2 million
during the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2009.
As a result of its historical direct underwriting mix of
Commercial Lines policies toward smaller and middle market risks,
past A&E damage liability loss experience has remained minimal in
relation to the Company's total loss and LAE incurred experience.
In addition, the Company has established loss and LAE reserves
for assumed reinsurance pool business with A&E damage liability
of US$47.7 million at Sept. 30, 2009 and US$58.4 million at Dec.
31, 2008.
These reserves relate to pools in which the Company has
terminated its participation. However, the Company continues to
be subject to claims related to years in which it was a
participant. A significant part of the Company's pool reserves
relates to its participation in the Excess and Casualty
Reinsurance Association (ECRA) voluntary pool from 1950 to 1982.
In 1982, the pool was dissolved and since that time, the business
has been in runoff. The Company's percentage of the total pool
liabilities varied from one percent to six percent during these
years. The Company's participation in this pool has resulted in
average paid losses of about US$2 million annually over the past
10 years.
During the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2009, the Company's ECRA pool
reserves were lowered by US$6.3 million as the result of an
actuarial study completed by the ECRA pool during the quarter. In
addition, management lowered its exposure estimate on a separate
large claim within these pools by US$3.2 million during the
quarter.
The Hanover Insurance Group, Inc. provides personal and
commercial automobile, homeowners, workers' compensation, and
commercial multiple-peril insurance and professional liability
coverage. The Company is based in Worcester, Mass.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Odyssey Cites $333.47M Losses, LAE at Sept. 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
Odyssey Re Holdings Corp.'s gross unpaid asbestos-related losses
and loss adjustment expenses were US$333,475,000 during the nine
and three months ended Sept. 30, 2009, compared with
US$346,267,000 during the nine and three months ended Sept. 30,
2008.
The Company's asbestos-related gross unpaid losses and LAE were
US$342,482,000 during the three and six months ended June 30,
2009, compared with US$332,927,000 during the three and six
months ended June 30, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 28,
2009)
The Company's net unpaid asbestos-related losses and LAE were
US$212,420,000 during the nine and three months ended Sept. 30,
2009, compared with US$216,125,000 during the nine and three
months ended Sept. 30, 2008.
The Company's asbestos-related net unpaid losses and LAE were
US$220,335,000 during the three and six months ended June 30,
2009, compared with US$209,688,000 during the three and six
months ended June 30, 2008. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 28,
2009)
Exposure arises from reinsurance contracts written by Clearwater
Insurance Company prior to 1986 under which the Company has
assumed liabilities, on an indemnity or assumption basis, from
ceding companies, primarily in connection with general liability
insurance policies issued by such ceding companies.
The Company did not incur net losses and loss adjustment expenses
related to asbestos or environmental claims for the nine and
three months ended Sept. 30, 2009.
The Company's survival ratio for asbestos and environmental-
related liabilities as of Sept. 30, 2009 is seven years. The
Company's underlying survival ratio for asbestos-related
liabilities is seven years and for environmental-related
liabilities is four years.
The asbestos and environmental-related liability survival ratio
represents the asbestos and environmental reserves, net of
reinsurance, as of Sept. 30, 2009, divided by the average paid
asbestos and environmental claims for the last three years of
US$35.7 million, which are net of reinsurance.
Odyssey Re Holdings Corp. is an underwriter of reinsurance,
providing property and casualty products on a worldwide basis.
The Company offers both treaty and facultative reinsurance to
property and casualty insurers and reinsurers. It also writes
insurance in the United States and through the Lloyd's
marketplaces. The Company is based in Stamford, Conn.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: IDEX Corporation, 6 Units Facing Exposure Cases
----------------------------------------------------------------
IDEX Corporation and six of its subsidiaries are named as
defendants in lawsuits claiming asbestos-related personal
injuries, allegedly as a result of exposure to products
manufactured with components that contained asbestos.
Those 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.
Claims have been filed in jurisdictions throughout the United
States. 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.
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 built to its customers' specifications. The Company is
based in Northbrook, Ill.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cooper Records 22,977 Abex Claims at Sept. 30
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cooper Industries plc, at Sept. 30, 2009, recorded 22,977 pending
asbestos-related claims that are part of its obligation to
Pneumo-Abex Corporation.
At June 30, 2009, Cooper Industries, Ltd. recorded 23,028 pending
asbestos-related claims that were part of its obligation to
Pneumo-Abex. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 28, 2009)
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-Abex Corporation 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),
the Company has rights, confirmed by Pneumo, to significant
insurance for such claims.
Based on information provided by representatives of Federal-Mogul
and recent claims experience, from Aug. 28, 1998 through Sept.
30, 2009, a total of 147,337 Abex Claims were filed, of which
124,360 claims have been resolved at Sept. 30, 2009.
During the nine months ended Sept. 30, 2009, 1,162 claims were
filed and 1,873 claims were resolved. Since Aug. 28, 1998, the
average indemnity payment for resolved Abex Claims was US$2,085
before insurance. A total of US$159.5 million was spent on
defense costs for the period Aug. 28, 1998 through Sept. 30,
2009.
Cooper Industries plc's electrical products segment makes circuit
protection equipment, as well as lighting fixtures, wiring
devices, and other power management and distribution equipment
for residential, commercial, and industrial use. Its other main
business segment manufactures power tools for the industrial
market and hand tools for the do-it-yourself and commercial
markets. The Company is based in Dublin.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cooper Ind. Records $797M Liability at Sept. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cooper Industries plc, as of Sept. 30, 2009, estimates that the
undiscounted asbestos liability for pending and future indemnity
and defense costs for the next 45 years will be US$797 million.
As of June 30, 2009, the Company estimated that the asbestos
liability for pending and future indemnity and defense costs for
the next 45 years will be US$805 million. (Class Action Reporter,
Aug. 28, 2009)
The amount included for unpaid indemnity and defense costs is not
significant at September 30, 2009. The estimated liability is
before any tax benefit and is not discounted as the timing of the
actual payments is not reasonably predictable.
Pneumo-Abex Corporation discontinued using asbestos in the Abex
Friction product line in the 1970s and epidemiological studies
that are publicly available indicate the incidence of asbestos-
related disease is in decline and should continue to decline
steadily.
Although 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).
Cooper Industries plc's electrical products segment makes circuit
protection equipment, as well as lighting fixtures, wiring
devices, and other power management and distribution equipment
for residential, commercial, and industrial use. Its other main
business segment manufactures power tools for the industrial
market and hand tools for the do-it-yourself and commercial
markets. The Company is based in Dublin.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cooper Receivable Remains at $180M at Sept. 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
Cooper Industries plc's asbestos receivable for recoveries of
costs from insurers, as of Sept. 30, 2009, amounted to US$180
million, of which US$68.8 million relate to costs previously paid
or insurance settlements.
The Company's asbestos receivable for recoveries of costs from
insurers, as of June 30, 2009, amounted to US$180 million, of
which US$65.7 million related to costs previously paid or
insurance settlements. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 28, 2009)
As of Sept. 30, 2009, the Company, through Pneumo-Abex LLC, has
access to Pneumo-Abex Corporation insurance policies with
remaining limits on policies with solvent insurers in excess of
US$680 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$180 million receivable from insurance
companies at Sept. 30, 2009 is due from domestic insurers whose
AM Best rating is Excellent (A-) or better.
Cooper Industries plc's electrical products segment makes circuit
protection equipment, as well as lighting fixtures, wiring
devices, and other power management and distribution equipment
for residential, commercial, and industrial use. Its other main
business segment manufactures power tools for the industrial
market and hand tools for the do-it-yourself and commercial
markets. The Company is based in Dublin.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Sunoco, Inc. Still Subject to Exposure Actions
---------------------------------------------------------------
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 quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on Nov. 5, 2009.
Sunoco, Inc. is a petroleum refiner and marketer and chemicals
manufacturer with interests in logistics and cokemaking. The
Company is based in Philadelphia.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Harsco Corp. Has 26,142 Open Claims at Sept. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Harsco Corporation, as of Sept. 30, 2009, faced 26,142 pending
asbestos personal injury claims, according to the Company's
quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on Nov. 5, 2009.
There were 26,219 pending asbestos personal injury claims filed
against the Company as of June 30, 2009. (Class Action Reporter,
Aug. 28, 2009)
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.
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 these cases, 25,623 were pending in the New York Supreme Court
for New York County in New York State. The other claims, totaling
519, 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 Sept. 30, 2009, the Company has obtained dismissal by
stipulation or summary judgment prior to trial in 18,232 cases.
As of Sept. 30, 2009, the Company has been listed as a defendant
in 394 Active or In Extremis asbestos cases in New York County.
Harsco Corporation's metals segment offers metal reclamation,
slag processing, scrap management, and other services for steel
and nonferrous metals producers. This segment's units act as an
on-site service partner at about 170 locations in 35 countries.
The Company is based in Camp Hill, Pa.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Columbus McKinnon Corp. Cites $9.35M Liability
---------------------------------------------------------------
Columbus McKinnon Corporation recorded an asbestos-related
liability of US$9,350,000 as of Sept. 30, 2009, according to the
Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on Nov. 6, 2009.
The Company's asbestos-related liability remained at US$8.8
million as of June 30, 2009. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 21,
2009)
Based on actuarial information, the Company has estimated its
asbestos-related aggregate liability including related legal
costs through March 31, 2027 and March 31, 2039 to range between
US$6 million and US$17 million using actuarial parameters of
continued claims for a period of 18 to 30 years.
Of the US$9.35 million, management expects to incur asbestos
liability payments of about US$425,000 over the next 12 months.
Columbus McKinnon Corporation designs, markets and manufactures
material handling products, systems and services which
efficiently and ergonomically move, lift, position and secure
material. Key products include hoists, cranes, rigging tools
including chain and forged attachments, and actuators. The
Company is based in Amherst, N.Y.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 4,200 Suits Pending v. Tyco Int'l. at Sept. 25
---------------------------------------------------------------
Tyco International Ltd. and its subsidiaries, as of Sept. 25,
2009, faced 4,200 pending asbestos-related lawsuits, according to
the Company's annual report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on Nov. 17, 2009.
As of June 26, 2009, the Company faced about 4,700 asbestos cases
pending against it and its subsidiaries. (Class Action Reporter,
Aug. 7, 2009)
The Company and certain of its subsidiaries are named as
defendants in bodily injury lawsuits based on alleged exposure to
asbestos-containing materials. These cases involve product
liability claims based on allegations of manufacture, sale or
distribution of industrial products that either contained
asbestos or were attached to or used with asbestos-containing
components manufactured by third parties.
While the Company has observed an increase in the number of these
lawsuits over the past several years, including lawsuits by
plaintiffs with mesothelioma-related claims, a large percentage
of these suits have not presented viable legal claims and, as a
result, have been dismissed by the courts.
Of the lawsuits that have proceeded to trial since 2005, the
Company has won or settled all but one case, with that one case
returning an adverse jury verdict for about US$7.7 million, which
included both compensatory and punitive damages.
Each lawsuit typically includes several claims, and the Company
has determined that it had 5,509 claims as of Sept. 25, 2009,
6,569 claims as of Sept. 26, 2008 and 6,461 claims as of Sept.
28, 2007.
Tyco International Ltd. provides security products and services,
fire protection and detection products and services, valves and
controls and other industrial products. The Company is based in
Schaffhausen, Switzerland.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Markel Records $10Mil Loss Reserves at Sept. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Markel Corporation says the underwriting loss for both the
quarter and nine months ended Sept. 30, 2009 included US$10
million of loss reserve development on asbestos and environmental
exposures compared to US$24.9 million in both periods of 2008.
The Other segment produced an underwriting loss of US$9.5 million
for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2009 and US$5.3 million for the
nine months ended Sept. 30, 2009, compared with an underwriting
loss of US$24.3 million for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008 and
US$23.6 million for the nine months ended Sept. 30, 2008.
Markel Corporation markets and underwrites specialty insurance
products and programs to niche markets. The Company competes in
three segments of the specialty insurance marketplace: the Excess
and Surplus Lines, the Specialty Admitted and the London markets.
The Company is based in Glen Allen, Va.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Allstate Reserves $1.16B for Claims at Sept. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Allstate Corporation's reserves for asbestos claims were
US$1.16 billion at Sept. 30, 2009, compared with US$1.23 billion
at Sept. 30, 2008.
The Company's reserves for asbestos claims were US$1.19 billion
at June 30, 2009. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 28, 2009)
Net of reinsurance recoverables, the reserves amounted to US$676
million at Sept. 30, 2009, compared with US$704 million at Dec.
31, 2008.
About 61 percent at Sept. 30, 2009 and 64 percent at Dec. 31,
2008 of the total net asbestos and environmental reserves were
for incurred but not reported estimated losses.
The Allstate Corporation and its wholly owned subsidiaries,
primarily Allstate Insurance Company (AIC), are property-
liability insurance companies with various property-liability and
life and investment subsidiaries, including Allstate Life
Insurance Company (ALIC). The Company is based in Northbrook,
Ill.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Midwest Facing 203 Exposure Actions at Sept. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Midwest Generation, LLC says that there were 203 asbestos cases
for which it was potentially liable and that had not been settled
and dismissed at Sept. 30, 2009.
The Company had recorded a US$50 million liability at Sept. 30,
2009 related to this matter.
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.
As a general matter, Commonwealth Edison and the Company
apportion responsibility for future asbestos-related claims based
upon the number of exposure sites that are Commonwealth Edison
locations or Company locations. The 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.
Midwest Generation, LLC is an independent power producer with a
generating capacity of more than 5,470 MW from its six coal-fired
power plants in Illinois. The Company also oversees the operation
of the Fisk and Waukegan on-site generating plants which have 305
MW of capacity. The Company is based in Chicago.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Penn Millers Cites $2.27M Liability at Sept. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Penn Millers Holding Corporation's estimated liability for
asbestos and environmental claims is US$2,272,000 at Sept. 30,
2009, and US$2,502,000 at Dec. 31, 2008, according to the
Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on Nov. 16, 2009.
Of the amounts, a substantial portion results from the Company's
participation in assumed reinsurance pools.
Penn Millers Holding Corporation provides property and casualty
insurance products designed to meet the insurance needs of
certain segments of the agricultural industry and the needs of
small commercial businesses. The Company is based in Wilkes-
Barre, Pa.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Katy Industries Still Faces 11 Suits in Alabama
----------------------------------------------------------------
Katy Industries, Inc. is still named as a defendant in 11
lawsuits filed in state court in Alabama by a total of about 325
individual plaintiffs.
There are over 100 defendants named in each case, according to
the Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on Nov. 13, 2009.
In all 11 cases, the Plaintiffs claim that they were exposed to
asbestos in the course of their employment at a former U.S. Steel
plant in Alabama and, as a result, contracted mesothelioma,
asbestosis, lung cancer or other illness. They claim that they
were exposed to asbestos in products in the plant which were
manufactured by each defendant.
In nine of the cases, Plaintiffs also assert wrongful death
claims.
Katy Industries, Inc. is organized into one reporting segment:
Maintenance Products Group, which manufactures, imports and
distributes various commercial cleaning supplies and storage
products. The Company is based in Bridgeton, Mo.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Katy Still Party to 2,700 Sterling Fluid Cases
---------------------------------------------------------------
Katy Industries, Inc. says that Sterling Fluid Systems (USA) has
tendered about 2,700 asbestos cases to the Company for defense
and indemnification.
These cases are pending in Michigan, New Jersey, New York,
Illinois, Nevada, Mississippi, Wyoming, Louisiana, Georgia,
Massachusetts, Missouri, Kentucky, and California.
With respect to one case, Sterling has demanded that the Company
indemnify it for a US$200,000 settlement. Sterling bases its
tender of the complaints on the provisions contained in a 1993
Purchase Agreement between the parties whereby Sterling purchased
the LaBour Pump business and other assets from the Company.
Sterling has not filed a lawsuit against the Company in
connection with these matters.
The tendered complaints all purport to state claims against
Sterling and its subsidiaries. The Company and its current
subsidiaries are not named as defendants. The plaintiffs in the
cases also allege that they were exposed to asbestos and products
containing asbestos in the course of their employment.
Each complaint names as defendants many manufacturers of products
containing asbestos, apparently because plaintiffs came into
contact with various products in the course of their employment.
Plaintiffs claim that LaBour Pump Company, a former division of
an inactive subsidiary of the Company, and Sterling may have
manufactured some of those products.
With respect to many of the tendered complaints, including the
one settled by Sterling for US$200,000, the Company has taken the
position that Sterling has waived its right to indemnity by
failing to timely request it as required under the 1993 Purchase
Agreement.
With respect to the balance of the tendered complaints, the
Company has elected not to assume the defense of Sterling in
these matters.
Katy Industries, Inc. is organized into one reporting segment:
Maintenance Products Group, which manufactures, imports and
distributes various commercial cleaning supplies and storage
products. The Company is based in Bridgeton, Mo.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Lawsuits v. LaBour Pump Remain at 100 in Oct. 2
----------------------------------------------------------------
Katy Industries, Inc. says that, as of Oct. 2, 2009, there are
100 asbestos cases that remain active against LaBour Pump
Company, a former division of an inactive subsidiary of the
Company.
LaBour Pump faced about 100 active asbestos cases as of July 3,
2009. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 21, 2009)
LaBour Pump has been named as a defendant in about 400 of the New
Jersey cases tendered by Sterling Fluid Systems (USA). The
Company has elected to defend these cases, the majority of which
have been dismissed or settled for nominal sums.
Katy Industries, Inc. is organized into one reporting segment:
Maintenance Products Group, which manufactures, imports and
distributes various commercial cleaning supplies and storage
products. The Company is based in Bridgeton, Mo.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Entrx's Current Reserves at $6.57M at Sept. 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
Entrx Corporation's current reserve for asbestos liability claims
was US$6,575,000 as of Sept. 30, 2009, compared with US$7,250,000
as of Dec. 31, 2008, according to the Company's quarterly report
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Nov. 12,
2009.
The Company's current reserve for asbestos liability claims was
US$6.8 million as of June 30, 2009. (Class Action Reporter, Aug.
21, 2009)
The Company's non-current reserve for asbestos liability claims
was US$33,237,500 as of Sept. 30, 2009, compared with US$38
million as of Dec. 31, 2008.
Entrx Corporation provides insulation installation and removal
services, including asbestos abatement services, primarily on the
West Coast. Through its subsidiary, Metalclad Insulation
Corporation, the Company provides these services to industrial,
commercial and public agency clients.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Entrx Corp. Faces 261 Pending Cases at Sept. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Entrx Corporation faced 261 pending asbestos cases as of Sept.
30, 2009, compared with 271 cases as of Dec. 31, 2008, according
to the Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on Nov. 12, 2009.
Before 1975, the Company sold and installed asbestos-related
insulation materials, which has resulted in numerous claims of
personal injury allegedly related to asbestos exposure. Many of
these claims are now being brought by the children and close
relatives of persons who have died, allegedly as a result of the
direct or indirect exposure to asbestos.
From 2001 through 2008, the annual average indemnity paid on over
3,000 resolved cases has fluctuated significantly, between a low
of US$14,504 in 2006 and a high of US$54,946 in 2008, with an
overall average over that period of about US$20,900. The
indemnity paid on 160 cases resolved during the nine months ended
Sept. 30, 2009 averaged about US$29,938. The quarter ended Sept.
30, 2009, reflected an average indemnity per resolved case of
US$37,348.
In addition, direct defense costs per resolved claim have
increased from a low of US$8,514 in 2003 to a high of US$44,359
in 2008. The weighted average defense cost per resolved claim
from 2005 through 2008 was US$18,233. The new claims against the
Company have tended to have a greater potential liability and
therefore require more resources to defend. The Company is
currently projecting those costs to be about US$18,500 per claim.
Entrx Corporation provides insulation installation and removal
services, including asbestos abatement services, primarily on the
West Coast. Through its subsidiary, Metalclad Insulation
Corporation, the Company provides these services to industrial,
commercial and public agency clients.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Entrx Cites $39.8M Future Liability at Sept. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Entrx Corporation says the minimum probable insurance coverage
available to satisfy asbestos injury claims exceeds its estimated
future liability for those claims of US$39,812,500 as of Sept.
30, 2009 and US$45,250,000 as of Dec. 31, 2008.
Although defense costs are included in its insurance coverage,
the Company expended US$85,000 in the nine months ended Sept. 30,
2009 and US$118,000 in the nine months ended Sept. 30, 2008 to
administer the asbestos claims and defend the ACE Lawsuit.
There are numerous insurance carriers, which have issued a number
of policies to the Company over a period extending from 1967
through 1985 that still provide coverage for asbestos-related
injury claims. After 1985, the policies were issued with
provisions which purport to exclude coverage for asbestos related
claims.
Entrx Corporation provides insulation installation and removal
services, including asbestos abatement services, primarily on the
West Coast. Through its subsidiary, Metalclad Insulation
Corporation, the Company provides these services to industrial,
commercial and public agency clients.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Metalclad Still Party to ACE Lawsuit in Calif.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Entrx Corporation's subsidiary, Metalclad Insulation Corporation,
continues to be involved in asbestos insurance coverage
litigation filed by ACE Property & Casualty Company, Central
National Insurance Company of Omaha, and Industrial Underwriters
Insurance Company.
On Feb. 23, 2005, ACE, Central National, and Industrial
Underwriters, which are all related entities, filed a declaratory
relief lawsuit (the ACE Lawsuit) against Metalclad and a number
of Metalclad's other liability insurers, in the Superior Court of
the State of California, County of Los Angeles.
ACE, Central National and Industrial issued umbrella and excess
policies to Metalclad, which has sought and obtained from the
plaintiffs both defense and indemnity under these policies for
the asbestos lawsuits brought against Metalclad during the last
four to five years.
The ACE Lawsuit seeks declarations regarding coverage issues, but
is centrally focused on issues involving whether historical and
currently pending asbestos lawsuits brought against Metalclad are
subject to either an "aggregate" limits of liability or separate
"per occurrence" limits of liability.
The ACE Lawsuit also seeks to determine the effect of the
settlement agreement between the Company and Allstate Insurance
Company on the insurance obligations of various other insurers of
Metalclad, and the effect of the "asbestos exclusion" in the
Allstate policy.
The ACE Lawsuit does not seek any monetary recovery from
Metalclad. The ACE Lawsuit is principally about coverage
responsibility among the several insurers, as well as total
coverage.
In addition, the ACE Lawsuit may result in the Company incurring
costs in connection with obligations it may have to indemnify
Allstate under the settlement agreement. Allstate, in a cross-
complaint filed against Metalclad on in October, 2005, asked the
court to determine the Company's obligation to assume and pay for
the defense of Allstate in the ACE Lawsuit under the Company's
indemnification obligations in the settlement agreement.
The Company said it does not believe that it has any legal
obligation to assume or pay for such defense, but has accrued
US$375,000 to cover potential indemnification obligations.
Entrx Corporation provides insulation installation and removal
services, including asbestos abatement services, primarily on the
West Coast. Through its subsidiary, Metalclad Insulation
Corporation, the Company provides these services to industrial,
commercial and public agency clients.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: RBS Global Still Party to 600 Stearns Lawsuits
---------------------------------------------------------------
RBS Global, Inc. is involved in 600 lawsuits (with 3,500
claimants) over alleged personal injuries due to asbestos in
certain brakes and clutches previously made by its Stearns
division and its predecessor owners, according to the Company's
quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on Nov. 6, 2009.
Invensys plc and FMC, prior owners of the Stearns business, have
paid 100 percent of the costs to date related to the Stearns
lawsuits.
RBS Global, Inc.'s Power Transmission makes gears, couplings,
industrial bearings, flattop chain and modular conveyer belts,
aerospace bearings and seals, special components, and industrial
chain and conveying equipment. Water Management supplies
drainage, PEX piping, commercial brass and water and wastewater
treatment and control products. The Company is based in
Milwaukee.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Prager Unit Facing 2 Lawsuits (3,700 Claimants)
----------------------------------------------------------------
RBS Global, Inc.'s Prager subsidiary is a defendant in two
pending multi-defendant lawsuits relating to alleged personal
injuries due to the alleged presence of asbestos in a product
allegedly manufactured by Prager.
There are about 3,700 claimants in the Prager lawsuits, according
to the Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on Nov. 6, 2009.
To date, the Company's insurance providers have paid 100 percent
of the costs related to the Prager asbestos claims.
The Company said it believes that the combination of its
insurance coverage and the Invensys plc indemnity obligations
will cover any future costs of this suit.
RBS Global, Inc.'s Power Transmission makes gears, couplings,
industrial bearings, flattop chain and modular conveyer belts,
aerospace bearings and seals, special components, and industrial
chain and conveying equipment. Water Management supplies
drainage, PEX piping, commercial brass and water and wastewater
treatment and control products. The Company is based in
Milwaukee.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Falk Unit Facing 190 Injury Cases (1.4T Claims)
----------------------------------------------------------------
RBS Global, Inc.'s Falk unit, through its successor entity, is a
defendant in 190 lawsuits pending in state or federal court in
numerous jurisdictions relating to alleged personal injuries due
to the alleged presence of asbestos in certain clutches and
drives previously manufactured by Falk.
There are about 1,400 claimants in these suits, according to the
Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on Nov. 6, 2009.
Hamilton Sundstrand is defending the Company in these lawsuits
under its indemnity obligations and has paid 100 percent of the
costs to date.
RBS Global, Inc.'s Power Transmission makes gears, couplings,
industrial bearings, flattop chain and modular conveyer belts,
aerospace bearings and seals, special components, and industrial
chain and conveying equipment. Water Management supplies
drainage, PEX piping, commercial brass and water and wastewater
treatment and control products. The Company is based in
Milwaukee.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Zurn Unit Facing 5,800 Open Claims at Sept. 26
---------------------------------------------------------------
RBS Global, Inc.'s Zurn unit and an average of about 100 other
unrelated companies, as of Sept. 26, 2009, were defendants in
about 5,800 asbestos related lawsuits representing about 30,400
claims.
The suits allege damages in an aggregate amount of about US$15.5
billion against all defendants. Plaintiffs' claims allege
personal injuries caused by exposure to asbestos used primarily
in industrial boilers formerly manufactured by a segment of Zurn.
Zurn did not manufacture asbestos or asbestos components.
Instead, Zurn purchased them from suppliers. These claims are
being handled under a defense strategy funded by insurers.
As of Sept. 26, 2009, the Company estimates the potential
liability for asbestos-related claims pending against Zurn as
well as the claims expected to be filed in the next 10 years to
be about US$90 million of which Zurn expects to pay about US$79
million in the next 10 years on such claims, with the balance of
the estimated liability being paid in subsequent years.
RBS Global, Inc.'s Power Transmission makes gears, couplings,
industrial bearings, flattop chain and modular conveyer belts,
aerospace bearings and seals, special components, and industrial
chain and conveying equipment. Water Management supplies
drainage, PEX piping, commercial brass and water and wastewater
treatment and control products. The Company is based in
Milwaukee.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: RBS Global Records $271.5M Potential Liability
---------------------------------------------------------------
RBS Global, Inc. estimates that its available insurance to cover
its potential asbestos liability as of Sept. 26, 2009, is about
US$271.5 million.
However, principally as a result of the past insolvency of
certain of the Company's insurance carriers, certain coverage
gaps will exist if and after the Company's other carriers have
paid the first US$195.5 million of aggregate liabilities.
In order for the next US$51 million of insurance coverage from
solvent carriers to apply, management estimates that it would
need to satisfy US$14 million of asbestos claims.
Layered within the final US$25 million of the total US$271.5
million of coverage, management estimates that it would need to
satisfy an additional US$80 million of asbestos claims.
If required to pay any such amounts, the Company could pursue
recovery against the insolvent carriers, but it is not currently
possible to determine the likelihood or amount of any such
recoveries.
RBS Global, Inc.'s Power Transmission makes gears, couplings,
industrial bearings, flattop chain and modular conveyer belts,
aerospace bearings and seals, special components, and industrial
chain and conveying equipment. Water Management supplies
drainage, PEX piping, commercial brass and water and wastewater
treatment and control products. The Company is based in
Milwaukee.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Park-Ohio Facing 260 Injury Actions at Sept. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Park-Ohio Holdings Corp., at Sept. 30, 2009, was a co-defendant
in about 260 cases asserting claims on behalf of about 1,260
plaintiffs alleging personal injury as a result of exposure to
asbestos, according to the Company's quarterly report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on Nov. 9, 2009.
At June 30, 2009, the Company faced about 270 cases asserting
claims on behalf of about 1,270 plaintiffs alleging personal
injury as a result of exposure to asbestos. (Class Action
Reporter, Aug. 21, 2009)
These asbestos cases generally relate to production and sale of
asbestos-containing products and allege various theories of
liability, including negligence, gross negligence and strict
liability and seek compensatory and, in some cases, punitive
damages.
In every asbestos case in which the Company is named as a party,
the complaints are filed against multiple named defendants.
In substantially all of the asbestos cases, the plaintiffs either
claim damages in excess of a specified amount, typically a
minimum amount sufficient to establish jurisdiction of the court
in which the case was filed (jurisdictional minimums generally
range from US$25,000 to US$75,000), or do not specify the
monetary damages sought.
There are four asbestos cases involving 23 plaintiffs that plead
specified damages. In each of the four cases, the plaintiff seeks
compensatory and punitive damages based on a variety of
potentially alternative causes of action.
In three cases, the plaintiff has alleged compensatory damages in
the amount of US$3 million for four separate causes of action and
US$1 million for another cause of action and punitive damages in
the amount of US$10 million.
In the other case, the plaintiff has alleged compensatory damages
in the amount of US$20 million for three separate causes of
action and US$5 million for another cause of action and punitive
damages in the amount of US$20 million.
Historically, the Company has been dismissed from asbestos cases
on the basis that the plaintiff incorrectly sued one of the
Company's subsidiaries or because the plaintiff failed to
identify any asbestos-containing product manufactured or sold by
the Company or its subsidiaries.
Park-Ohio Holdings Corp. furnishes industrial supply chain
logistics. The Company also manufactures engineered products for
markets ranging from aerospace and defense to auto and
semiconductors. The Company is based in Cleveland, Ohio.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dalmine S.p.A. Has 45 Injury Claims at Sept. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Tenaris S.A.'s subsidiary in Italy, Dalmine S.p.A., as of Sept.
30, 2009, faced 45 asbestos-related claims, none of which are
covered by insurance, according to a Company report, on Form 6-K,
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Nov. 10,
2009.
Dalmine is currently subject to 13 civil proceedings for work-
related injuries arising from the use of asbestos in its
manufacturing processes during the period from 1960 to 1980. In
addition, another 32 asbestos related out-of-court claims have
been forwarded to Dalmine.
during the nine month period ended Sept. 30, 2009, 11 new claims
were filed, no claims were adjudicated, five claims were settled
all of which were paid, three claims were rejected, and 13 claims
were dismissed.
Aggregate settlement costs to date for the Company are EUR8.3
million (US$12.1 million).
Dalmine estimates that its potential liability in connection with
the claims not yet settled is about EUR13.1 million (US$19.1
million).
Tenaris S.A. was incorporated as a holding company in steel pipe
manufacturing and distributing operations. The Company holds,
either directly or indirectly, controlling interests in various
subsidiaries. The Company is based in Luxembourg.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Kuhles Capital Fined $71.1T for Disposal Breach
----------------------------------------------------------------
A Maricopa County Superior Court judge entered a US$71,100
judgment against Kuhles Capital, LLC for illegally disposing of
asbestos-containing materials at its landfill in Dewey-Humboldt
in Yavapai County, according to an Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality press release dated Nov. 13, 2009.
The judgment also included the Company's failure to obtain an
aquifer protection permit required for solid waste disposal
facilities at Dewey-Humboldt landfill.
The ADEQ and the Arizona Attorney General's Office filed a civil
complaint against Kuhles Capital in April 2009 for failure to
perform a thorough asbestos survey before beginning demolition
activities; handling regulated asbestos-containing materials
improperly, such as not removing them from structures before
demolition or disposing of the materials as soon as practical;
and failure to have at least one on-site employee trained in
asbestos removal regulations.
In July 2007, the Company began to close its landfill and
demolish structures on its site. ADEQ issued an Order of
Abatement in February 2008 to stop the demolition because samples
taken by the ADEQ inspectors tested positive for asbestos in
siding material, roofing paint, and floor tile at the facility.
State and Federal law requires regulated asbestos-containing
material to be wetted and covered, which inspectors did not
observe during two subsequent visits.
ADEQ's complaint also addressed other violations, including
accepting un-permitted wastes such as household waste and tires
into its landfill; and failure to monitor groundwater and
landfill gas, failure to submit a landfill closure plan to ADEQ,
and failing to maintain financial assurance for monitoring the
landfill after closure.
Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Michael Barth's ruling also
orders Kuhles Capital to comply with ADEQ's 2008 abatement order
and to provide the necessary closure and post-closure plans for
the landfill including proof of financial responsibility.
ADEQ Director Benjamin H. Grumbles said, "The judge's ruling
underscores the importance of pollution prevention and careful
management of asbestos and hazardous waste at landfills. ADEQ is
committed to working with businesses to reduce risks to Arizona's
citizens and natural resources and this ruling sends a strong
signal that it doesn't pay to put people and aquifers at risk."
Attorney General Terry Goddard said, "I am committed to working
with ADEQ and local environmental enforcement agencies to
maintain the healthy environment and quality outdoor lifestyle
that attract so many to Arizona."
ADEQ issued a Compliance Order in 2005 to stop the landfill from
accepting unpermitted waste, and a Notice of Violation in 2006
because the landfill failed to conduct waste screening and
removal as required by the Compliance Order.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 656 New Cases Filed in Madison County at Nov. 6
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Madison St. Clair Record reports that 656 new asbestos cases
have been in Madison County District Court in Edwardsville, Tex.,
as of Nov. 6, 2009, compared with 639 in 2008.
As one asbestos defense attorney put it, Madison County's
asbestos court has "turned into a processing center." The
attorney, who spoke on background, talked about the Court's 2004
standing order as among the reasons why Madison County favors
asbestos plaintiffs.
The order, signed by former Circuit Judge Nicholas Byron,
superseded a 1995 order governing all asbestos cases and came at
the height of a backlogged docket.
Among the broad dictates in the standing order, asbestos
attorneys can set trial dates more than a year and a half in
advance.
The defense attorney stated that trial dates "prompt
settlements." The attorney said that an average settlement may be
close to US$2.5 million.
The Madison County asbestos docket also is in transition, as
current asbestos Judge Daniel Stack has announced his retirement
by the end of 2010. He has indicated that three civil court
judges are being considered as his replacement.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: District Court OKs ASARCO, AMC Plan on Nov. 13
---------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen, on Nov. 13, 2009, issued
his opinion and order confirming the reorganization plan
sponsored by ASARCO Incorporated and Americas Mining Corporation,
parent companies of ASARCO LLC, according to an Asarco press
release dated Nov. 16, 2009.
In his decision, Judge Hanen stated, "This Court agrees that the
Parent's Plan is both feasible and confirmable. It offers the
creditors full payment and is more likely to close than the
Debtor's Plan."
The Court issued a channeling injunction that permanently
resolves and enjoins all present and future asbestos-related
claims against ASARCO LLC, its subsidiaries and non-debtor
affiliates like ASARCO's direct and indirect parent companies.
The reorganization plan also resolves all of ASARCO's historical
environmental and toxic tort liabilities and satisfies in full
all of the Company's outstanding bond debt. The plan is expected
to become effective in 2009.
Joseph F. Lapinsky, President and Chief Executive Officer of
ASARCO LLC, "We compliment the judges in this case for their
professionalism and effort over years to effect a resolution that
is in the best interest of all creditors.
"Our Board of Directors, employees, outside counsel and
consultants as well as the Unsecured and Asbestos Creditors and
U.S. Department of Justice working with federal and state
creditors have all worked very hard to achieve this successful
outcome."
ASARCO LLC filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on Aug. 9,
2005.
ASARCO LLC is an integrated copper mining, smelting and refining
company with about 2,500 employees. The Company operates a
smelter, three mines, associated mills and solvent extraction-
electrowinning plants in Arizona, and a refinery complex in
Texas. The Company is based in Tucson, Ariz.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Savoy's Case v. 38 Firms Filed Nov. 5 in Texas
---------------------------------------------------------------
Cleveland J. Savoy, on Nov. 5, 2009, filed an asbestos-related
lawsuit against 38 defendant corporations in Jefferson County
District Court, Tex., The Southeast Texas Record reports.
Defendants include A.O. Smith Corporation, A.W. Chesterton
Company, American Optical, AMETEK Inc., Babcock Borsig AG, Bayer
CropScience AG, Bechtel Group Inc., CBS Corporation, CertainTeed
Corporation, Cleaver-Brooks Inc., Coltec Industries, Crane Co.,
Crown Cork & Seal Company Inc., D&F Distributing, Exxon Mobil
Corporation, Fluor Enterprises, Fluor Maintenance Services, and
Foster Wheeler AG.
Defendants also include Garlock Sealing Technologies, General
Electric Company, Georgia-Pacific LLC, Goulds Pumps Incorporated,
Green Tweed, Henry Vogt Machine Co., Honeywell International
Inc., Industrial Holdings Inc., Ingersoll-Rand plc, John Crane
Inc., Kelly-Moore Paint Company Inc., Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing, Pneumo-Abex Corporation, Sepco Corp., Treco
Construction Services, Uniroyal Holdings, Washington Group
International and Zurn Industries.
Mr. Savoy worked as a carpenter in various locations, where he
says he was exposed to asbestos-containing products. This is the
second asbestos lawsuit he has filed against the companies. In
his other lawsuit, he claims a different asbestos-related injury
than in his prior complaint.
Mr. Savoy claims the defendants failed to test the asbestos-
containing products before they were introduced into the stream
of commerce, according to the suit. He says the defendant
companies were negligent by failing to timely warn him about the
dangers of asbestos.
According to the suit, Mr. Savoy says the companies also
negligently continued to manufacture the products around which he
worked, even after they were aware of the asbestos danger. He was
unaware of the hazards and defects in the asbestos-containing
products.
Mr. Savoy seeks unspecified actual and exemplary damages, plus
costs, pre- and post-judgment interest and other relief the Court
deems appropriate.
Bryan O. Blevins, Esq., and Colin D. Moore, Esq., of Provost and
Umphrey Law Firm in Beaumont, Tex., will represent Mr. Savoy.
Case No. D185-286 has been assigned to Judge Milton Shuffield,
136th District Court.
*********
S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N
Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Frederick, Maryland
USA. Gracele D. Canilao, Leah Felisilda 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 * * *