/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/100802.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

             Monday, August 2, 2010, Vol. 12, No. 150


AMERICAN AIRLINES: To Pay $5 Million & Cooperate in Cartel Probe
APPLE INC: Sued for Making False Representations About iPad
AUDIO-RITE CORPORATION: Sued for Fraud and Breach of Contract
BP PLC: Beasley Allen Files Class Action Lawsuit in Alabama
COLORADO: 10th Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Sensabaugh Complaint

CONSUMER PROGRAMS: Employees File Suit Over Back Wages
DELAWARE STATE UNIV: Court Grants Class Status to Gender Suit
EMMIS COMMS: Superior Court Rejects TRO Request on Merger
EXOBOX TECHNOLOGIES: Engaged in Insider Trading, Tex. Suit Says
FERRO CORP: Continues to Indirect Purchaser Suit in California

FERRO CORP: Defends Five Indirect Purchaser Suits in Penn.
FLORIDA: School Board to Join Suit Over Age Limit Penalties
GENERAL MOTORS: Settles Class Suit on Defective Parking Brake
GRAND FORKS: 8th Circuit Upholds Dismissal of Traffic Fines Suit
HAWAII: Educ. Dept. Faces Suit Over Age Limit for SPED Services

HOECHST CELANESE: Will Pay $1 Million to Settle Class Suit
HURONIA REGIONAL: Court to Certify Suit Filed by Disabled People
LOWER MERION: Faces Second Class Suit Over Webcam Snooping
NBC UNIVERSAL: Faces Class Suit Over 'Zombie Cookies'
PPG INDUSTRIES: Defends Consolidated Antitrust Suit in Penn.

SCHOLASTIC CORP: Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Suit Pending
SEA STAR: Agrees to $18.5 Million Antitrust Settlement
SMITH & WOLLENSKY: Hourly Wage Suit Gets Class Certification
SUPER VALU: Lawyers to Get $18K in Class Action Settlement
UNITED LIFE: Preliminary Hearing on Settlement Held

VALEANT PHARMACEUTICALS: 2nd Shareholder Suit Filed in Orange Cty

* 71 Lawsuits Seeking Class Action Status Filed in 1st Half
* Securities Class-Action Suits Fall 15% Through June


AMERICAN AIRLINES: To Pay $5 Million & Cooperate in Cartel Probe
Erik Larson at Bloomberg News reports that AMR Corp.'s American
Airlines agreed to give evidence against other carriers and pay
$5 million to a group of freight shippers to settle a New York
class-action lawsuit over its role in a global price-fixing

Under the deal, American will provide witnesses, documents and
electronic data to help shippers in similar cases in Canada,
Australia, South Korea and other countries, the group's lawyer,
Michael Hausfeld, Esq., of Hausfeld & Co. LLP, said in a statement
in London last week. The agreement, filed July 26 in federal court
in Brooklyn, New York, is the first by an airline to help
prosecute the cartel claims outside the U.S., he said.

"It is an important step forward for shippers in Europe and around
the world and demonstrates that companies can act responsibly to
resolve competition disputes without resorting to excessive or
protracted litigation," Mr. Hausfeld, who is co-lead counsel in
the case, said in the statement.

The industry's freight services have been probed by the U.S. and
the European Union since 2006, leading to settlements, fines and
plea deals by airlines and executives. Earlier this month, Air
France-KLM Group agreed to pay $87 million to hundreds of freight
shippers to settle a similar class-action lawsuit in the U.S.

American, based in Fort Worth, Texas, didn't admit fault or
liability and was only added as a defendant in the case in order
to seek court approval of the proposed deal, spokesman Tim Wagner
said in an e-mail last week.

"American Airlines has done nothing wrong," Mr. Wagner said.
"Litigation is an expensive and uncertain proposition and avoiding
the cost and inconvenience of trial made paying the settlement the
best financial decision for American."

Settlement talks with American started after the EU in 2007 gave
the carrier a so-called statement of objections related to the
cartel, Mr. Hausfeld said in court papers.

Mr. Hausfeld later concluded that "while AA did face some risk of
liability, it would be difficult for plaintiffs to obtain a
judgment against it, given the evidence," according to the court

The case is In re Air Cargo Shipping Services Antitrust
Litigation, 1:06-md-01775, Eastern District of New York

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

    Michael D. Hausfeld, Esq.
    1700 K Street, NW, Suite 650
    Washington, DC 20006
    Telephone: 202-540-7200
    Facsimile: 202-540-7201
    E-mail: mhausfeld@hausfeldllp.com

APPLE INC: Sued for Making False Representations About iPad
Jacob Baltazar, Claudia Keller, John N. Browning, individually and
on behalf of others similarly situated v. Apple Inc., Case No.
10-cv-03231 (N.D. Calif. July 23, 2010), bring claims against
Apple Inc. for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, deceptive
advertising practices, breach of express and implied warranties,
and violations of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act and the
California Business & Professions Code, arising from Apple's false
representations that its iPad tablet computer was a superior
product to other tablet computers or e-readers.

The Plaintiffs say that the iPad does not function for prolonged
use either outdoors or in many other warm conditions.  Further,
the iPad overheats so quickly that it is "virtually unusable" in
certain conditions such as in direct sunlight, since it turns offs
even after just a few minutes of use.

Apple Inc. is the designer of the iPod, the iPhone and the iPad.
Plaintiffs allege that they purchased the iPad tablet computer
during the relevant time period and used the iPad, but did not
receive full value, as promised by Apple.  The iPad uses the same
operating system as the iPhone, and can run its own specific
applications as well as those developed originally for the iPhone.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Scott Edward Cole, Esq.
          Matthew R. Bainer, Esq.
          Hannah R. Salassi, Esq.
          1970 Broadway, Ninth Floor
          Oakland, CA 94612
          Telephone: (510) 891-9800
          E-mail: scole@scalaw.com

AUDIO-RITE CORPORATION: Sued for Fraud and Breach of Contract
Sima Alter, et al., individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. Audio-Rite Corporation, et al., Case No. 150154/2010
(N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty. July 23, 2010), accuses Audio-Rite
of making materially false and misleading representations (via an
extensive advertising campaign) to induce prospective students to
enroll in the school's voice writing program.

Sima Alter says Audio-Rite promised prospective students, among
other things, increased opportunity for employment, particularly
in the court reporting industry, assistance in obtaining reporting
employment during enrollment in and following graduation from
defendant's voice writing program, and better and higher paying
reporting jobs, none of which came to fruition.

Audio-Rite also falsely represented that its voice writing program
can be financed through student loans which defendant will arrange
for the benefit of students, and that its voice writing program is
a fully-accredited court reporting school.

Sima Alter claims that contrary to Audio-Rite representations, the
school's voice writing technique is not validly recognized in the
States of New Jersey and New York, is not preferred to the
traditional stenographic technique, particularly in the court
reporting industry, and that student loans secured by Audio-Rite
for students are at rates that are uncompetitive.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Charles Gershbaum, Esq.
          192 Lexington Avenue, Suite 802
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 385-2121

BP PLC: Beasley Allen Files Class Action Lawsuit in Alabama
Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles, P.C., has filed a
class action lawsuit in the Southern District of Alabama against
British Petroleum and Nalco Company. The firm represents class
representatives Glynis Wright and Janille Turner, who claim
personal injuries and property damage related to BP's oil spill
remediation activities on the Gulf Coast.

The Plaintiffs claim that BP was negligent and reckless in dumping
toxic dispersant chemicals on and adjacent to their properties.
Since the spill began, BP has dumped millions of gallons of
dispersant chemicals, either underwater, by boat or by air, to
sink the crude oil to the bottom of the ocean. One of the
chemicals used, called Corexit(R) 9500, is considered 4 times more
toxic than sweet crude oil.  Because of its toxicity to humans and
marine environments, the United Kingdom has banned its use. The
Plaintiffs claim their breathing and gastrointestinal problems, as
well as the widespread respiratory problems being experienced by
people on the Gulf Coast, are directly related to BP's use of the
toxic chemicals.

"BP is using these dispersants at an unprecedented rate not seen
in other oil disasters," says Rhon Jones, Esq., head of Beasley
Allen's Toxic Torts division.  "What you are seeing is a company
that is doing anything to keep the oil out of sight and out of
mind.  They are using these chemicals close to the shore, and
predictably, people are starting to feel the effects."

While this case marks the first spill-related personal injury suit
filed by the firm, Beasley Allen has filed a number of lawsuits in
District Courts in Alabama, Florida and Louisiana to help protect
businesses and individuals harmed by the oil spill. The first
suits were filed on behalf of Plaintiffs in the commercial fishing
and restaurant industries, as well as on behalf of Gulf Coast real
estate management companies, a commercial charter fishing guide, a
commercial fishing deckhand, and a SCUBA diving business.
Recently, Beasley Allen also filed its first case in state court,
on behalf of property owners whose investments have lost value as
a result of the oil spill.

This latest suit alleges the Defendants are liable to the
Plaintiffs and the Class for negligence and wanton misconduct, as
well as nuisance, trespass, battery and medical monitoring.

                  About Beasley Allen Law Firm

Headquartered in Montgomery, Alabama, Beasley Allen --
http://www.beasleyallen.com/-- is comprised of 44 attorneys and
more than 200 support staff. Beasley Allen is a national leader in
civil litigation, with verdicts and settlements of over $20
billion. Our environmental attorneys negotiated the largest
environmental settlement in U.S. history. At $700 million for PCB
contamination in Anniston, Alabama, involving Solutia, Monsanto
and Pharmacia, it doubled the previous benchmark in this area of
litigation. Also among the firm's successes is an $11.8 billion
verdict against ExxonMobil Corp., for breach of contract and


     Rhon E. Jones, Esq.,
     218 Commerce Street
     Montgomery, AL 36104
     Telephone: 800-898-2034
     Facsimile: 334-954-7555
     Email: rhon.jones@beasleyallen.com

COLORADO: 10th Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Sensabaugh Complaint
The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed
the dismissal of the complaint filed by Gerald Sensabaugh, a
prisoner in the custody of the Colorado Department of Corrections,
in part and remanded the case with instructions to treat the
remainder of the complaint as an attempt to initiate enforcement
proceedings under a settlement agreement related to a class

The district court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject
matter jurisdiction since the allegations in the complaint
challenge the implementation of settlement orders arising from a
class action, Montez v. Owens, No. 92-cv-0870 (D. Colo.).

Mr. Sensabaugh is a member of the class in Montez, an action
brought in the District of Colorado against the Colorado
Department of Corrections under the Americans with Disabilities
Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 on behalf
of Colorado inmates suffering from particular disabilities.  A
settlement agreement in the Montez class action was approved in
August 2003.  The settlement agreement created a procedure by
which special masters evaluate individual class members' claims
for damages.  The district court is overseeing the settlement
agreement's implementation.

A copy of the Decision is available for free at:


CONSUMER PROGRAMS: Employees File Suit Over Back Wages
Employees commenced a class action lawsuit against Consumer
Programs Incorporated for back wages alleged to be owed to
thousands of employees who work at Sears Portrait Studios and Wal-
Mart Picture Me Portrait Studios. CPI states it is the largest
portrait studio operator in North America, offering photography
services in over 3,000 locations throughout the United States.

The class action lawsuit, filed July 23 in federal court in
Wisconsin, seeks to recover back wages for all current and former
photographic-customer service agents, assistant managers and
managers nationwide who worked at any time since 2007. The suit
also seeks to change CPI's pay practices. Other portrait studios
around the country have faced lawsuits for similar illegal pay
practices, including one resulting in a multi-million dollar

The lawsuit alleges that CPI fails to pay employees for all the
time they work, including time spent preparing the studios for
upcoming photography sessions and cleaning studios at the end of
the day. In addition, the employees assert that CPI adjusts
employees' time records if they clock in more than 10 minutes
before the studios open; does not compensate them for
participating in mandatory conference calls; attending mandatory
meetings; and distributing CPI marketing materials to businesses,
hospitals, daycare centers, nursing homes, and churches.
Photographers are also required to use their own money to buy
props and toys to use in photography sessions, and are not
reimbursed for these purchases. The employees assert these pay
practices violate federal and state wage laws, including the Fair
Labor Standards Act.

The portrait studio employees are represented by the law firms of
Zimmerman Reed, PLLP, and Lockridge, Grindal, Nauen, PLLP both of
Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Anne Regan, an attorney for the employees, said that
"Unfortunately, many employers continue to violate federal and
state wage laws because they know that in this economy many
employees are afraid to assert their rights. We hope to recover
the money that is owed to all CPI portrait studio employees
nationwide by providing the means for these employees to join this
case, which will be covered by federal and state anti-retaliation


     Anne T. Regan, Esq.
     651 Nicollet Mall, Suite 501
     Minneapolis, Minnesota  55402
     Telephone: 612-341-0400
     Facsimile: 612-341-0844
     E-mail: Anne.Regan@zimmreed.com

DELAWARE STATE UNIV: Court Grants Class Status to Gender Suit
Wade Malcolm, writing for The News Journal, reports that facing a
gender discrimination lawsuit, Delaware State University needed to
prove it was expanding access to women's athletics, despite
cutting its equestrian team this year.

The university argued it had an ideal solution to offer more
opportunities to women without the strain of equestrian on its

"DSU intends to create a new women's varsity sport -- competitive
cheerleading," the university argued in a March federal court

Last month, a federal judge in Connecticut had this to say about a
similar argument: "[Cheerleading] is still too underdeveloped and
disorganized to be treated as offering genuine varsity athletic
participation opportunities for students."

For DSU, it was the second blow in as many weeks to its plan to
disband its equestrian team, raising the possibility it might be
stuck with a sport it doesn't want.

Last month, the judge presiding over its gender equity case,
Leonard P. Stark, ruled in favor of granting class-action status -
- meaning any past or present female DSU student could join the

The plaintiffs want the court to preserve the equestrian program
and force the school to comply with Title IX.

Now the university's case sits on shaky ground, legal experts

"It seems to be very similar to what's been ruled in
[Connecticut]," said Lamar Daniel, a consultant for schools
handling Title IX compliance issues.

Enacted almost 40 years ago, Title IX demands institutions provide
athletic opportunity proportional to its enrollment. If they
don't, they must at least show a history of working toward that
goal. DSU's female enrollment has hovered around 60 percent in
recent years, but only about 44 percent of its athletes are women.

Even if equestrian and cheerleading remained as varsity sports,
DSU would need to add about 110 more female athletes to achieve
the correct ratio, the plaintiffs argue.

"That's a huge gap," said Nancy Hogshead Makar, a professor of law
and the senior director of advocacy at the Women's Sports
Foundation. "It's as big as you'll see anywhere."

With those obstacles -- combined with the recent rulings on
cheerleading and class-action status -- DSU's case finds itself in
a bleak position, Daniel said, and it has little hope for success.

"That's probably what I would advise them," said Mr. Daniel, who
oversaw Title IX enforcement while working at the federal Office
of Civil Rights for 30 years. "If you cut women's sports, you
better be in proportionality."

The Connecticut decision has not affected any of the university's
immediate plans to develop a competitive cheerleading team. DSU
has invested $100,000 in the program and hired a new coach. The
team will compete as scheduled this school year, and for now the
university will consider it a varsity sport, spokesman Carlos
Holmes said.

"Cheerleading has been a part of Delaware State for a long time,
and nothing is going to change that," Mr. Holmes said. "Its status
as to whether it continues as a varsity sport will be determined
at some point."

Mr. Holmes would not comment on the pending litigation. In court
documents, DSU attorneys argue the competitive cheerleading team
would add 40 athletic opportunities for women, a gain of 20 from
those lost by disbanding equestrian.

After cutting it in January, DSU pledged to honor the scholarships
of the affected athletes. Fifteen of the 20 women
-- including lead plaintiff Caroline Foltz of Dover -- decided to
sue to save the team. The university later agreed to fund
equestrian for one more season this coming academic year. That it
will be its last is becoming more unlikely, experts said.

By granting class-action status, Stark affirmed many of the
riders' allegations have at least some merit. The cheerleading
decision in Connecticut "makes [DSU's] argument more difficult,"
said Abbe Fletman, an attorney from Flaster Greenberg representing
the plaintiffs along with the Women's Law Project.

"We're sort of boxed in," said Sam Hoff, a distinguished professor
of law studies at DSU who has studied gender equity at the
university. "Equestrian could be around for the foreseeable

For several reasons, that scenario would be a bitter pill for many
in the DSU community. Created in 2005, many felt the sport didn't
fit DSU's identity. The Dover school is the only one in its
conference -- and the only historically black institution in the
country -- with a Division I equestrian team.

"I don't think you'd find five people on DSU's campus that weren't
surprised when they announced the women's equestrian team," said
Steve Newton, president of DSU's faculty union

Many see the equestrian legal troubles as an unfortunate legacy of
former president Allen Sessoms' administration. In 2005, a faculty
steering committee, chaired by Hoff, recommended field hockey as a
better way to expand sports for females, but Mr. Sessoms later
sold the group on equestrian.

The sport has proven to be more expensive than expected, costing
close to $600,000 per year.

"Of greatest concern to DSU is the fact that so little of this
money goes to student welfare," DSU lawyers said in court
documents. "On the contrary, most of the expenses are for the
housing and care of the horses."

Mr. Daniel, the Title IX consultant, said he would have advised
against a school like DSU starting equestrian. Charlie Wilson,
president of DSU's faculty senate, said he and other faculty found
the creation of the team "curious" and regarded it as a "pet
thing" of Sessoms' administration. Sessoms, now president of the
University of the District of Columbia, did not respond to
interview requests.

Mr. Wilson said he's had several of the riders in his classes and
has even enjoyed watching them compete, but from a practical
standpoint keeping the team doesn't make budget sense.

"They're good kids, they're good students and I've enjoyed going
to watch them compete," Mr. Wilson said. "[But] I think there was
a general curiosity as to why it was picked for this university."

Plaintiffs' counsel may be reached at:

     Abbe F. Fletman, Esq.
     1600 John F. Kennedy Blvd.
     Four Penn Center, Suite 200
     Philadelphia, PA 19103
     Telephone: 215-279-9388
     Facsimile: 267-299-6865
     E-mail: abbe.fletman@flastergreenberg.com

EMMIS COMMS: Superior Court Rejects TRO Request on Merger
Radio Ink reports that a Marion County, Indiana, Superior Court
judge has ruled against class action plaintiffs who sought a
temporary restraining order to block the transaction that would
take Emmis Communications private through a merger with
Chairman/CEO Jeff Smulyan's JS Acquisition.

Judge Robyn Moberly ruled that the plaintiffs -- several lawsuits
over the transaction were consolidated last month -- "failed to
show a likelihood of success on the merits of any of the claims."
She also said the plaintiffs' allegations that Emmis shareholders
weren't given information they needed to evaluate the offer were
either inaccurate or not based on "information that a reasonable
investor would consider in deciding how to vote."

Additionally, the judge ruled that "there is no probative evidence
that insolvency or bankruptcy was likely unless the proposed
transaction is consummated or otherwise." Emmis -- which called
the judge's decision a "sweeping victory" -- said, "Despite
plaintiff's counsel's attempt to distort the deposition testimony,
there is no evidence that Emmis faces an imminent threat of
bankruptcy whether or not the proposed transaction is completed."

In regard to the plaintiffs' claims that Emmis' directors breached
of their fiduciary duties, the judge wrote that the plaintiffs "do
not direct the court to any relevant Indiana law supporting their
interpretation of the fiduciary responsibilities of directors in
an Indiana corporation." Judge Moberly also rejected conflict-of-
interest claims.

The ruling concludes, "Simply put, the plaintiffs have failed to
show that any harm they will suffer without injunctive relief
outweighs the harm that granting an injunction will cause."

EXOBOX TECHNOLOGIES: Engaged in Insider Trading, Tex. Suit Says
Courthouse News Service reports that Exobox Technologies Corp.
engaged in insider trading and was "created . . . as a sham
corporation designed to provide benefits to the attorneys,
officers, directors and brokers that participated in . . . the
reverse merger," a class claims in Harris County Court, Texas.

FERRO CORP: Continues to Indirect Purchaser Suit in California
Ferro Corporation continues to defend a suit captioned Competition
Collision Center, LLC v. Crompton Corporation, et al., Case No.
CGC-040431278, pending in the Superior Court of the State of
California for the City and County of San Francisco

On May 6, 2004, the company was named in an indirect purchaser
class action in California seeking monetary damages and injunctive
relief relating to alleged violations of the antitrust laws by the
company and others participating in the plastics additives

The suit is currently in its early stages.

No further updates were reported in the company's July 26, 2010,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.

Ferro Corporation -- http://www.ferro.com/-- is a leading global
supplier of technology-based performance materials for
manufacturers.  Ferro materials enhance the performance of
products in a variety of end markets, including electronics, solar
energy, telecommunications, pharmaceuticals, building and
renovation, appliances, automotive, household furnishings, and
industrial products.  Headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio, Ferro has
approximately 5,200 employees globally and reported 2009 sales of
$1.7 billion.

FERRO CORP: Defends Five Indirect Purchaser Suits in Penn.
Ferro Corporation continues to defend five indirect purchaser
class action lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania.

On Aug. 4, 2005, the company was named in an indirect purchaser
class action lawsuit captioned In Re Indirect Purchaser, Plastic
Additives Litigation, D.R. Ward Construction, et al., v. Rohm &
Haas Company, et al., Case No. 2:05-CV-04157-LDD, MDL No. 1684,
filed in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of

In June 2008, the Company was named in four more indirect
purchaser class action lawsuits:

     (1) Defren v. Rohm & Haas Company, et al.,
         Case No. 2:08-CV-03702-LDD, filed June 12, 2008;

     (2) Zebrowski v. Rohm & Haas Company, et al.,
         Case No. 2:08-CV-04161-LDD, filed June 23, 2008;

     (3) Burg v. Rohm & Haas Company, et al.,
         Case No. 2:08-CV-04162-LDD, filed June 30, 2008; and

     (4) Miller v. Rohm & Haas Company, et al.,
         Case No. 2:08-CV-03701-LDD, filed June 18, 2008.

The four indirect purchaser cases filed in 2008 have been
transferred to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

The suits allege violations of antitrust laws by the company and
others participating in the plastics additives industry.  The
suits are currently in their early stages.

No further updates were reported in the company's July 26, 2010,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.

Ferro Corporation -- http://www.ferro.com/-- is a leading global
supplier of technology-based performance materials for
manufacturers.  Ferro materials enhance the performance of
products in a variety of end markets, including electronics, solar
energy, telecommunications, pharmaceuticals, building and
renovation, appliances, automotive, household furnishings, and
industrial products.  Headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio, Ferro has
approximately 5,200 employees globally and reported 2009 sales of
$1.7 billion.

FLORIDA: School Board to Join Suit Over Age Limit Penalties
Tony Marrero, St. Petersburg Times staff writer, reports that
Hernando school district staffers had only just started a
presentation on strategies to meet the impending stricter class
size requirements when the School Board made a decision: We're
joining a lawsuit to fight the state's plan to levy financial
penalties against districts that don't meet the goal.

"This is an issue I'm more than comfortable fighting," board
member John Sweeney said during Tuesday's workshop.

Mr. Sweeney's four fellow board members agreed, directing attorney
Paul Carland to add a resolution onto Tuesday evening's regular
meeting agenda. The district will pay a $1,500 retainer to a
Tallahassee law firm hired by the Florida School Boards

At least three districts -- Dade, Palm Beach and Broward -- have
done the same to join a class-action suit to challenge the state's
plan to take money from districts that don't meet the stricter
class size requirements set to take effect this fall, Mr. Carland
told the board.

The suit is not challenging the amendment itself. Rather, the
complaint questions the legality of the penalty.

"It's probably a strategic battle that they're taking at this
point to attack the financial penalty rather than the lack of
funding," Mr. Carland said.

The requirements on core classes were placed in the state
Constitution after an amendment approved by voters in 2002. The
limits have been phased in since then, first by using district-
wide averages and then by schoolwide averages. The calculations
will be made at the classroom level at the start of the upcoming
school year and cap pre-kindergarten to third-grade classes at 18
students; fourth- to eighth-grade classes at 22; and high school
classes at 25.

Based on last year's student data, Hernando has nearly 2,400
classes out of compliance, Heather Martin, executive director of
business services, told the board.

That could mean a penalty of more than $3.2 million, Ms. Martin
said. Under the state's plan, money collected in penalties would
go to districts which do meet the requirements. But Mr. Sweeney,
reading a memo from FSBA director Wayne Blanton, noted that few
districts expect to be able to do so.

"Just from an equity and fairness perspective, how can you take
money from one county and give it to another county?"
superintendent Bryan Blavatt said.

To meet the goal just by hiring more teachers, the district would
have to add nearly 400 teachers at a cost of some $23.4 million,
Ms. Martin said.

Some districts that can't afford such increases in personnel costs
are facing drastic measures such as eliminating non-core classes
like music and art, cutting classes with small enrollments, and
changing attendance zones.

Hernando can't afford those new hires, either, but will likely be
able to avoid painful measures through other strategies, Ms.
Martin said.

Teachers will receive an extra pay supplement to take on
additional classes. Other staffers such as media specialists,
guidance counselors and assessment teachers who have the proper
certifications can also teach core classes.

"Many, many teachers have stepped up and are willing to do that,"
Ms. Martin said.

At the elementary grade level, classes over the cap would get a
long-term substitute as a co-teacher. That way, if a proposed
amendment on the November ballot to ease the class size
restrictions passes, the district is not locked into full teacher
contracts, she said. Hernando's new virtual school program also
will help, Ms. Martin said.

The district has set aside $4 million in the 2010-2011 budget to
help meet the class caps.

GENERAL MOTORS: Settles Class Suit on Defective Parking Brake
Bill Rochelle at Bloomberg News reports that old General Motors
Corp. agreed to settle a pre-bankruptcy class-action lawsuit based
on an allegedly defective parking brake in some GM cars and trucks
built between 1999 and 2002. If approved, the class will have an
approved unsecured claim of $12 million.

The suit began in 2005 and later was certified as a class action
by a state court in Arkansas. After GM's bankruptcy, the class
plaintiff filed a claim on behalf of the class for almost $1.5

GM had the case switched from the Arkansas state court to
bankruptcy court. The settlement ensued. The plaintiffs believe
there are 4 million class members.

Old GM sold the core business to new GM and in return received 10%
of the stock of the new company plus warrants for 15%.  The
warrants will be worth something if the new company is profitable
enough to raise the company's value to specified levels.  New GM
is 60.8%-owned by the U.S. government.

Old GM began the largest manufacturing reorganization in history
by filing under Chapter 11 on June 1, 2009. The sale was completed
on July 10, 2009. GM listed assets of $82.3 billion against debt
totaling $172.8 billion.

The case is In re Motors Liquidation Co., Case No. 09-50026,

GRAND FORKS: 8th Circuit Upholds Dismissal of Traffic Fines Suit
Dave Kolpack, writing for The Associated Press, reports that an
appeals court on Tuesday upheld a federal judge's decision to
throw out a traffic fines lawsuit in Grand Forks, North Dakota
similar to a Fargo case that resulted a more than $1 million
class-action settlement.

Bruce Mills lodged his complaint against the city of Grand Forks
after Stephanie Sauby filed -- and later won -- a lawsuit against
the city of Fargo. Both Mills and Sauby argued that their traffic
fines were higher than state law allowed.

The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that the late
U.S. District Judge Rodney Webb was correct when he said the Sauby
case was different because Fargo ignored the opinions of three
state court judges who said the fines were illegal.

Mr. Mills' attorney, Jonathan Garaas, said he believes the issues
are identical.

"It's a curious result. Really curious," Mr. Garaas said of the

Mr. Mills, of Northwood, was cited for careless driving in Grand
Forks in 2004 and fined $164. He said state law allowed for only a
$30 fine. He filed unsuccessful appeals in state district court
and the state Supreme Court.

Ms. Sauby, a West Fargo day care worker, filed her lawsuit in
January 2007, after she was cited for five traffic violations.
Judge Webb declared it a class action in December 2008. The city
of Fargo was ordered to pay about 14,000 people who filed valid
claims for reimbursement.

Mr. Mills brought his complaint in April 2008. Judge Webb
dismissed it in April 2009.

A three-judge panel of the 8th Circuit backed Webb's opinion that
Mr. Mills failed to raise any federal constitutional questions.
The city of Grand Forks "reasonably and justifiably" relied on two
state attorney general's opinions and shouldn't have been expected
to apply the district court decisions in Fargo, Judge Webb said.

The 8th Circuit agreed.

"At the time the city cited Mills for careless driving, no binding
legal precedent existed to show that the city's traffic fines
violated state law, or that the city's conduct was 'truly
irrational,'" wrote Judge Myron Bright, who lives in Fargo.

Mr. Garaas said he hasn't been able to talk to Mr. Mills about the
ruling because he's out of the country, but believes they're
likely to bring a new case in state court.

"I'm surprised that the federal constitution doesn't provide
protection, but we're confident the state constitution will," Mr.
Garaas said.

HAWAII: Educ. Dept. Faces Suit Over Age Limit for SPED Services
Mary Vorsino, writing for The Star Advertiser, reports that the
Hawaii Disability Rights Center filed a class-action lawsuit on
July 27 seeking to extend special-education services in public
schools for students until they turn 22.

The cutoff is now 20.

"The concern is that disabled students in Hawaii are being
deprived of an education after age 20," said John Dellera,
executive director of the center. "Throughout most of the country,
disabled students have the right to an education
. . . until they're 21 or 22."

The state Department of Education declined comment because
officials had not yet reviewed the lawsuit.

Mr. Dellera said the class action is about providing equitable
educational opportunities to special-education students.

General-education students who do not complete high school
programs can enroll in adult education, he said, but that option
is not open to special-education students seeking vocational or
independent-living training.

He also pointed out that only Hawaii and Maine set the cutoff for
special education at 20 years old.

Most other states set it at 21 or 22 years old.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court, seeks to stop the state
from enforcing a law passed in the last legislative session that
formally puts the age limit for students in public school at 20.

The law was passed following a federal court ruling in 2009, on a
suit filed by the center, which said special-education students
were being moved out of schools at 20 -- the state's age limit for
public schools set in the 1960s -- but that general-education
students were being given special permission by principals to stay
longer (as allowed under the old law).

"The court ordered Hawaii to treat everybody equally," Mr. Dellera

The federal government says states should provide a free education
to disabled students until they turn 22, unless the state lowers
the maximum age for all students.

Four students joined the center in the class-action suit.

Mr. Dellera estimates that hundreds of special-education students
each year could gain from the extra years of education.

HOECHST CELANESE: Will Pay $1 Million to Settle Class Suit
The law firm of Siskinds LLP on July 28 disclosed the conditional
settlement of a class action filed in the Ontario Superior Court
of Justice in February 1999 against certain defendants, including
Hoechst Celanese Corporation. Celanese has agreed to pay up to $1
million  to resolve the claims of class members related to the
alleged unsuitability of pipes made from polybutylene, and pipe
fittings made from acetal resin used in potable plumbing systems.
The allegations have not been proven, and the court has not taken
any position as to the truth or merits of the claims or defences
asserted by either side. The Defendants deny the allegations and
deny any wrongdoing or liability.

The settlement finally resolves the action pending before the
Ontario court. Commenting on the settlement, Siskinds partner
Michael Peerless said, "This is an excellent result for class
members, and we look forward to moving ahead with the
administration process in order for class members to receive
compensation. We would like to commend the Defendants for putting
this compensation program in place for Canadians."

The settlement remains conditional on approval by the Ontario
Court of Justice. A formal hearing to approve the Settlement is
currently scheduled for September 10, 2010 at 10 AM, at which time
class members may, but are not required to, attend in court for
the purposes of supporting or objecting to the proposed
Settlement. Full details can be found on the Siskinds class action
Web site at: http://www.classaction.ca/ The Settlement also
provides for the formal provision of notice to those affected by
the Settlement under the supervision of the Courts. On court
approval of the Settlement that notice will provide specific
instructions as to how class members can file claims.


     Mike Peerless, Esq.
     680 Waterloo Street
     P.O. Box 2520
     London, Ontario, Canada N6A 3V8
     Telephone: 519-660-7866
     E-mail: mike.peerless@siskinds.com

HURONIA REGIONAL: Court to Certify Suit Filed by Disabled People
The Canadian Press reports that a class-action lawsuit from
developmentally disabled people alleging decades of abuse at an
Ontario institution has been given the green light.

Ontario Superior Court Justice Maurice Cullity told the court
Wednesday there will be an order certifying the action involving
former residents of Huronia Regional Centre and their family

Mr. Justice Maurice Cullity says he will make adjustments to the
order and give his written reasons in several days.

The institution opened in 1876 under the name Orillia Asylum for
Idiots, and when it closed in March 2009, Huronia was the oldest
institution for people with a developmental disability.

Former resident Marie Slark cried a little outside court Wednesday
as she described alleged abuse, which she says consisted of
putting people in straight jackets and drugging residents.

The allegations have not been proven in court and the province
says it will not file a statement of defense until it receives a
written decision.

LOWER MERION: Faces Second Class Suit Over Webcam Snooping
Derrick Nunnally, staff writer at The Philadelphia Inquirer,
relates another student filed on Tuesday a civil lawsuit for
invasion of privacy against the Lower Merion School District and

Fatima Hasan said she received a letter from Lower Merion school
administrators that her son, Jalil, 18, had been secretly
monitored by the webcam on his school-issued laptop. But only when
Fatima Hasan saw the evidence did the scope of the spying on her
son Jalil become apparent.  There were more than 1,000 images
surreptitiously captured by the computer -- 469 webcam photographs
and 543 screen shots.  All were evidence in the case against the
Lower Merion School District and its now-abandoned electronic
monitoring policy.

"I was really shocked. I didn't know what I was walking into,"
Fatima Hasan said.  "They were all pictures of Jalil, and all Web
shots from his laptop, and that's not an easy feeling."

The suit joins one filed in February by Blake Robbins, a student
at Harriton High School, and for the first time draws in Lower
Merion High School, where Jalil Hasan was a senior. For the high-
achieving school district, the second civil suit raises the stakes
in an already-costly legal fight.

The cases are similar in their broad outlines. The electronic
monitoring began after school-issued computers were reported
missing. In both cases, the system was simply left on long after
the laptops were recovered. Hundreds of photos and screen shots
were captured on a predetermined schedule.

The photos from Jalil Hasan's computer included shots of him in
his bedroom and of other family members and friends. In a widely
published photograph, Robbins, now 16, was shown sleeping on his

According to the suit, Hasan forgot his computer in cooking class
on Dec. 18, a Friday.  A teacher turned it in to the technology
department that day.  On Dec. 21, Hasan retrieved his computer
from the technology office.

At some point that day, school officials activated the security
system.  The system kept capturing images for nearly two months
and was only deactivated after the first lawsuit was filed.

"When I saw these pictures, it really freaked me out," said Jalil
Hasan, who will attend culinary school in California in the fall.

His mother said she could not understand why the tracking system
was activated.  "What was it turned on for if you had [the
computer] in your possession?" she asked. "It never left the
school, so you could have clearly seen it."

Fatima Hasan, who owns a day-care center in the Overbrook section
of the city, said she moved to Ardmore from Philadelphia so her
son "would be in a safe environment" for high school.

"But then, when I'm looking at these pictures," she said, "and I'm
looking at these snapshots, I'm feeling like, 'Where did I send my

The district commissioned its own investigation and admitted that
the monitoring system was flawed. The two Lower Merion staffers
authorized to activate remote monitoring are on administrative

The district's investigation revealed that the webcams had been
activated 76 times in less than two years, producing more than
58,000 images. The district acknowledged that more than half the
images were created because technicians failed to turn off
tracking software after missing laptops were recovered.

Suing the district over the surveillance has not proven popular,
though the Robbins suit was filed as a potential class action and
was designed to cover every student affected. The district has
challenged the legal status, and parents of more than 500 students
signed a petition saying they wanted no part of a legal action
that would be paid for with their tax dollars.

According to the most recent estimates, the combined legal bills
and other case-related expenses from Robbins' suit have reached
about $1.2 million.

Mark S. Haltzman, who represents Hasan and the Robbins family,
said class-action status was the most efficient course, though for
the moment, both suits are filed separately.

Asked if he expected more lawsuits, Mr. Haltzman said, "I think
that each person has to decide for themselves whether they want to
come forward."

The district did not respond to the allegations in the suit, but
in a statement said "continued litigation is clearly not the right
way to proceed." It noted that new policies governing the use of
technology had been drafted.

"While the results of that investigation reveal that mistakes were
made, there is no evidence that any students were individually
targeted," the statement said.

Plaintiff's counsel may be reached at:

     Mark Haltzman
     3600 Horizon Boulevard, Suite 200
     Trevose, PA  19053
     Telephone: (215) 638-9330
     Facsimile: (215) 638-2867
     E-mail: mhaltzman@lammrubenstone.com

NBC UNIVERSAL: Faces Class Suit Over 'Zombie Cookies'
Eriq Gardner, writing for The Hollywood Reporter, relates some top
entertainment companies are being accused of secretly spying on
the online habits of their Web site users.

A new class action lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in
California targets NBC Universal, MTV Networks, Hulu, JibJab
Media, MySpace, ABC, ESPN, and Scribd.

The individual plaintiffs accuse the media companies of using
Flash cookies to "respawn" deleted HTTP cookies. In other words,
even if Internet users clear their Internet browsers of data files
tracking a user's web surfing, the companies allegedly can harvest
consumers' personal information anyway.

Many Web sites place "cookies" on visitors' computers so as to
gather information for advertising purposes. The class action
asserts that the companies fail to disclose the use of so-called
"zombie cookies" in their privacy policies.

The 119-page complaint quotes George Orwell and demands
unspecified monetary damages.

The case is Edward Valdez, et al. v. Quantcast Corporation, et
al., case no. 10-cv-05484 (Calif. C.D.), and the plaintiffs are
represented by:

     Joseph H. Malley, Esq.
     1045 North Zang Blvd.
     Dallas, TX 75208
     Telephone: 214-943-6100
     Facsimile: 214-943-6170
     E-mail: malleylaw@gmail.com

          - and -

     David C. Parisi, Esq.
     15233 Valleyheart Drive
     Sherman Oaks, California 91403
     Telephone: 818-990-1299
     Facsimile: 818-501-7852
     E-mail: dparisi@parisihavens.com

A copy of the complaint is available for free at

PPG INDUSTRIES: Defends Consolidated Antitrust Suit in Penn.
PPG Industries, Inc., continues to defend a consolidated suit
alleging that it conspired to fix the price and the terms and
conditions of sale of flat glass in the United States.

Several complaints were filed in late 2007 and early 2008 in
different federal courts naming PPG and other flat glass producers
as defendants in purported antitrust class actions.  The
complaints allege that the defendants conspired to fix, raise,
maintain and stabilize the price and the terms and conditions of
sale of flat glass in the United States in violation of federal
antitrust laws.

In June 2008, these cases were consolidated into one federal court
class action in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

In the consolidated complaint, the plaintiffs seek a permanent
injunction enjoining the defendants from future violations of the
federal antitrust laws, unspecified compensatory damages,
including treble damages, and the recovery of their litigation

No further information was disclosed in the company's July 26,
2010, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.

PPG Industries, Inc. -- http://www.ppg.com/-- is a coatings and
specialty products company.  Founded in 1883, the company serves
customers in industrial, transportation, consumer products, and
construction markets and aftermarkets.  With headquarters in
Pittsburgh, PPG operates in more than 60 countries around the
globe.  Sales in 2009 were $12.2 billion.  PPG shares are traded
on the New York Stock Exchange (symbol: PPG).

SCHOLASTIC CORP: Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Suit Pending
Scholastic Corporation's motion to dismiss a second amended class
action complaint remains pending.

The company is party to certain actions filed by each of Alaska
Laborers Employee Retirement Fund and Paul Baicu, which were
consolidated on Nov. 8, 2007.

On Sept. 26, 2008, the plaintiff sought leave of the Court to file
a second amended class action complaint, in order to add
allegations relating to the company's restatement announced in the
company's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on July 30, 2008.  The
Court thereafter dismissed the company's pending motion to dismiss
as moot.

On Oct. 20, 2008, the plaintiff filed the second amended
complaint, and on Oct. 31, 2008, the company filed a motion to
dismiss the second amended complaint, which remains pending.

The second amended class action complaint continues to allege
securities fraud relating to statements made by the company
concerning its operations and financial results between March 2005
and March 2006 and seeks unspecified compensatory damages.

No updates on this matter were reported in the company's July 26,
2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2010.

Scholastic Corporation -- http://www.scholastic.com/-- publishes
and distributes children's books and is a leader in educational
technology and related services and children's media.  Scholastic
creates quality books, print and technology-based learning
materials and programs, magazines, multi-media and other products
that help children learn both at school and at home.  The company
distributes its products and services worldwide through a variety
of channels, including school-based book clubs and book fairs,
retail stores, schools, libraries, on-air, and online.

SEA STAR: Agrees to $18.5 Million Antitrust Settlement
Joseph Bonney, writing for The Journal of Commerce Online, reports
that Sea Star Line is the third carrier to agree to a
multimillion-dollar settlement of a class-action civil antitrust
lawsuit alleging price-fixing in the U.S. mainland-Puerto Rico

The Jacksonville-based carrier agreed to pay $18.5 million to
settle allegations that carriers colluded on prices between 2002
and early 2008, when federal agents raided offices of Sea Star,
Horizon Lines and Crowley Maritime.

Horizon Lines previously agreed to a $20 million settlement and
Crowley Maritime has agreed to pay a reported $14 million. A
fourth carrier, Trailer Bridge, was dismissed from the case in

The settlement agreements aren't necessarily the last word in the
case. Individual shippers still have the ability to opt out of the
class action and pursue their own cases. Several large shippers
have had lawyers monitoring the case in U.S. District Court in San

Separately from the class-action civil antitrust lawsuit, the
Justice Department is said to be continuing a criminal
investigation that has already netted guilty pleas that have sent
three former Horizon officials and two ex-Sea Star officials to
prison for antitrust violations or obstructing justice.

SMITH & WOLLENSKY: Hourly Wage Suit Gets Class Certification
William McQuillen at Bloomberg News reports that Smith & Wollensky
must face a class action lawsuit brought by a waiter who claims
hourly workers at the steakhouse chain's Chicago restaurant are
paid less than the minimum wage.

Smith & Wollensky, a unit of closely held Patina Restaurant Group,
is accused of failing to pay the minimum, now $8.25 an hour in
Illinois, to employees who earn tips, including waitresses and
bartenders.  The lawsuit will cover those employees for earnings
since March 25, 2006, U.S. District Judge Ruben Castillo in
Chicago said July 27 in an order certifying the case as a class

Also included are workers who worked more than 40 hours a week and
were paid less than time-and-a-half.  About 140 current and former
employees may be represented by the suit, which seeks lost wages
and unspecified further damages, said Douglas Werman, an attorney
for the workers.

"Class certification is more efficient than individual suits to
deal with these common questions," Judge Castillo wrote.

Smith & Wollensky, based in New York, violated a law allowing the
payment of less than the minimum wage, or a so-called tip credit,
if tips plus wages equal the minimum, according to the complaint
filed by employee Gerald Schmidt.

The Chicago restaurant required workers to perform non-tipped
duties before opening and closing, while still paying them the
lower tip-credit hourly wage, Mr. Schmidt claimed. The company
also allowed non-tipped employees to share in the tip pool,
violating Illinois minimum-wage laws, he said.

Smith & Wollensky didn't immediately return a message seeking
comment. The company, which has restaurants in nine cities, argued
that the lawsuit was filled with "highly individualized" inquiries
and shouldn't be a class action, according to Castillo's order.

The case is Schmidt v. Smith & Wollensky LLC, Case No.
09-cv-2752 (N.D. Ill.).


     Douglas M. Werman, Esq.
     77 W. Washington, Ste. 1402
     Chicago, Illinois
     Telephone: 312-419-1008
     Facsimile: 312-419-1025

SUPER VALU: Lawyers to Get $18K in Class Action Settlement
Amelia Flood, writing for The Madison/St. Clair Record, reports
that Madison County Circuit Judge Andreas Matoesian is set to give
the final nod to the settlement of a class action suit filed last
year against the owners of the Shop n'Save grocery chain -- Super
Valu Inc.

Lead plaintiff Mary Voyles has led a class of people who were
charged more than 50 cents in check cashing fees.

The final approval hearing will be Aug. 6 at 9 a.m.

Ms. Voyles and the class allege that Super Valu's stores illegally
charged overly high fees for check cashing services. The class
filed suit last year alleging claims of consumer fraud, unjust
enrichment, violation of the Illinois Check Cashing Act, and other

The suit sought damages in excess of $50,000 per count and other

In a preliminary agreement, class members will receive $20 each
and up to $75,000 in relief.  In the event that part of the
$75,000 is left over, half will go to local food banks and the
remaining half will be returned to the defendants.  Ms. Voyles
will receive $500 as lead plaintiff.  Thomas and Peter Maag, Brian
Wendler, and Jeffrey Millar are designated class counsel. They
will receive $18,000 in legal fees.  Super Valu must also, under
the settlement, amend its business practices, although it
continues to deny the charges.

The class is made up of those who used the service between
Jan. 1, 2007 until June 10, 2009 at Super Valu's Illinois stores
including Jewel-Osco stores and Shop n'Saves.

The settlement only resolves the Illinois-based litigation against
the defendant.

Troy Bozarth, Esq., represents Super Valu.

The case is Madison case number 09-L-542.

UNITED LIFE: Preliminary Hearing on Settlement Held
Amelia Flood at The Madison/St. Clair Record reports Circuit Judge
David Hylla presided at the preliminary settlement approval
hearing Thursday in a 2001 class action brought against United
Life Insurance Company.  The Madison County class action once
encompassed a nationwide pool of car buyers who claim they
unknowingly bought credit insurance.

Lead plaintiff Christopher Booher of Wood River filed suit in 2001
alleging the insurance company committed sales fraud when it sold
credit insurance to car buyers.

The class was estimated at one point by plaintiff's counsel Daniel
Cohen of LakinChapman to include at least 60,000 car buyers

Then-Madison County Circuit Judge Phillip Kardis certified a
nationwide class in the case in 2003. Judge Kardis retired in
2005.  The case then went to then-Madison County Circuit Judge Don

Although United Life Insurance moved to decertify the class, Judge
Weber allowed the suit to continue but dropped the 44 other states
from it, leaving only an Illinois class.

The case eventually found its way to Judge Hylla, who has refereed
discovery and other disputes in the case.  The case went through
mediation in December 2009, according to case management orders in
the case file.  Two months later, parties in the suit indicated to
Judge Hylla that mediation was successful, according to a Feb. 24

Settlement documents are not yet available in the case file.

Richard Boyle, Esq., and others represent United Life Insurance.

The case is Madison case number 01-L-1824.

VALEANT PHARMACEUTICALS: 2nd Shareholder Suit Filed in Orange Cty
Alfred Haro, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v.
J. Michael Pearson, et al., Case No. 2010-00389773 (Calif. Super.
Ct., Orange Cty. July 14, 2010), accuses the Chairman and CEO of
Valeant and certain other Valeant officers and directors of self-
dealing and breach of fiduciary duties, in connection with the
individual defendants' agreement to sell Valeant to Biovail.  Mr.
Haro brings claims against Valeant, Biovail Corporation, Biovail
Americas Corp. and Beach Merger Corp. for aiding and abetting the
individual defendants' breaches of their fiduciary duties.

On June 21, 2010, Valeant and Biovail jointly announced that the
Board of directors of both companies had agreed to merge, pursuant
to which Valeant will be sold to Biovail for 1.7809 shares of
Biovail common stock and a one-time special cash dividend of
$16.77 per share, and a $1.00 per share dividend after the
consummation of the proposed acquisition.  The combined company
will be named Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc.

Mr. Haro alleges that the proposed transaction was obtained via an
unfair process and for inadequate consideration (based on the
Company's solid performance and anticipated future growth).  The
proposed transaction values Valeant's shares at $42.77 per share,
below Valeant's closing price of $45.87 on June 18, 2010, the last
trading day before the announcement of the proposed acquisition.
Additionally, the individual Defendants agreed to the proposed
acquisition without negotiating a collar to protect itself against
any fluctuation in the price of Biovail stock that would
negatively affect Valeant's shareholders.  The individual
defendants also agreed on preclusive protection devices to
discourage competing offers, including a no solicitation provision
and a termination fee of $100 million payable to Biovail if
Valeant accepted a superior unsolicited proposal, which adds "an
additional $0.75 per share to the price tag for any successful
third party bidder."

Upon completion of the proposed acquisition, Valeant, which
develops, manufactures and markets a broad range of pharmaceutical
products, will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Biovail (a
Canadian special pharmaceutical company focusing on products that
address unmet medical needs in specialty central nervous systems
orders).  Biovail Americas Corporation is a wholly owned
subsidiary of Biovail and is the parent company of Beach Merger
Corp.  BMC is operating as the "Merger Sub" in the proposed
acquisition, and upon its completion, will merge with Valeant and
cease its separate corporate existence.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Brian J. Robbins, Esq.
          Stephen J. Oddo, Esq.
          Rebecca A. Peterson, Esq.
          600 B Street, Suite 1900
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 525-3990

Coverage of Martino v. J. Michael Pearson, et al., Case No. 2010-
00389330 (Calif. Super. Ct., Orange Cty.), appeared in the Class
Action Reporter on Wednesday, July 28, 2010.

* 71 Lawsuits Seeking Class Action Status Filed in 1st Half
Joanna Chung at The Wall Street Journal reports that a decline in
lawsuits related to the credit crisis has pushed the volume of new
federal securities cases toward pre-turmoil lows, according to two

"The tide is going out . . . the securities fraud litigation wave
stimulated by the credit crisis now appears to be history," said
Joseph Grundfest, professor at Stanford Law School, which issued
one of the reports jointly with Cornerstone Research on Tuesday.

Plaintiffs filed a total of 71 lawsuits seeking class-action
status in federal courts during the first half of the year, of
which eight were related to the crisis. That compares with 84
filings during the same period last year, which included 37
crisis-related complaints.

If this pace continues, there will be about 143 lawsuits by
December, the lowest level since 2006, the year before the crisis

While the flood of litigation is receding, it likely will be years
before many cases get resolved. In recent years, securities
lawsuits, typically brought against companies by investors
alleging fraud that led to stock losses, have taken an average of
three to four years to settle.

"Two-thirds of all credit-crisis-related cases are still pending,"
said Jordan Milev, senior consultant at NERA Economic Consulting,
which on Tuesday produced another study that found the overall
volume of lawsuits down to 2007 levels.

As long as the current pace continues, the NERA study projects
plaintiffs will file about 202 federal securities class-action
cases by the end of the year, of which about 34 are expected to be
related to the crisis compared with 57 last year and 103 in 2008,
the recent peak year for such lawsuits, according to its study.

Declines in crisis litigation were partly offset, the study said,
by growth in other types of lawsuits, including those stemming
from the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

Recent judicial and legislative developments, including a Supreme
Court ruling limiting the reach of U.S. securities laws, could
have a greater role in shaping securities litigation in the
future, according to the report.

The average securities class-action settlement in the first half
of 2010 was $209 million, higher than in any prior year, according
to the NERA study, but that was largely influenced by a $7.2
billion Enron settlement that was finalized in February. Excluding
the Enron settlement, the average settlement was $24 million,
compared with the $42 million average in 2009 and slightly lower
than the 2003-2010 average settlement of $28.7 million.

Plaintiffs' attorneys earned a total of $902 million in fees and
expenses, including fees in connection with the Enron settlement,
during the first half of the year, the study said.

* Securities Class-Action Suits Fall 15% Through June
Carlyn Kolker at Bloomberg News reports that securities-fraud
class-action lawsuits fell 15% in the first half of the year from
the same period a year earlier, according to study by Stanford
University's Securities Class Action Clearinghouse and Cornerstone

"The securities fraud litigation wave stimulated by the credit
crisis now appears to be history," Stanford Law School Professor
Joseph Grundfest said in a statement.

Eight of 71 U.S. cases filed in the first half of 2010 related to
the credit crisis, the study showed. Such cases totaled 53 in all
of 2009 and 100 in 2008. Overall, the 71 total cases so far in
2010 compared with 84 in each half of last year.

Contributing to the drop this year is the lack of Ponzi scheme
cases, according to the study. There were no securities- fraud
filings stemming from such frauds like the one for which Bernard
L. Madoff is serving a 150-year prison sentence. There were 18
Ponzi-related class action filings last year.

All filings collected by the Clearinghouse and Cornerstone are in
U.S. federal courts.

New suits fell to the lowest semi-annual level since 2007. The
decline in new filings this year follows a trend that started in
2009, when there were 169 new lawsuits, compared to 223 the year

Except for 2008 each year since 2005 has seen a decrease, data
from the Class Action Clearinghouse show.

                          'Real Shift'

"It could be we are having a real shift," said John Gould, a
senior vice president at Cornerstone. "Plaintiffs will say it's
because court rulings have made it harder to file cases.
Defendants will say it's because there's less fraud going on."

He attributed the decrease in case filings in part to decreased
stock market volatility.

Four of the 71 new cases represented two-thirds of the disclosed
losses, according to the study, which didn't identify the cases.

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. was sued in April by investors for
failing to disclose information about its true financial
condition, including that it had received a notice from the
Securities and Exchange Commission about an investigation into a
mortgage investment, according to the Class Action Clearinghouse.

The company fell 13 percent in a day after being sued by the SEC
in April, according to a case summary on the clearinghouse's
website. On July 15, Goldman announced it agreed to settle the
SEC's lawsuit for $550 million.


S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Frederick, Maryland
USA.  Gracele D. Canilao, Leah Felisilda, Rousel Elaine Fernandez,
Joy A. Agravante, Ronald Sy and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2010.  All rights reserved.  ISSN 1525-2272.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior
written permission of the publishers.

Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to
be reliable, but is not guaranteed.

The CAR subscription rate is $575 for six months delivered via
e-mail.  Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof
are $25 each.  For subscription information, contact Christopher
Beard at 240/629-3300.

                * * *  End of Transmission  * * *