/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/111021.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

           Friday, October 21, 2011, Vol. 13, No. 209


APPLE INC: Accused of Constraining eBook Market Competition
BEST BUY: Jan. 2012 Trial Set for Price Match Guarantee Suit
BP PLC: TNK-BP Holding May Take Part in Shareholder Class Action
CENTRAIS ELETRICAS: Damages Suit vs. Furnas Still Pending
CENTRAIS ELETRICAS: Suits by Cabeco Associations Remain Pending

CNINSURE: Faces Shareholder Class Action in New York
DISCOVER CARD: Awaits OK of Payment Protection Fee Suit Settlement
FORD MOTOR: Faces Class Action Over Diesel Engine Defects
GOOGLE INC: Law Firm Won't Pursue SuperPoke Pets Class Action
LEXUS OF ENGLEWOOD: Sued in N.J. Over Defective HVAC Evaporators

PENSON WORLDWIDE: Class Action Lead Plaintiff Deadline Nears
SCHNEIDER LOGISTICS: Workers File Class Action Over Abuses
TOYOTA MOTOR: Judge Slashes Attorney Fees in Prius Settlement
U-HAUL: Faces Class Action in California Over Unpaid Overtime
VALENCIA COUNTY, NM: Sued for Violating Rights of Some Inmates

                        Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: South Tyneside Woman's Death Linked to Exposure
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Grimshaw Family Awarded GBP48T in Compensation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: DEP to Issue Fines Over Wilton Demolition Site
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Lodge Repairs to Focus on Asbestos, Electrical
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hazard Uncovered at Corona Kindergarten School

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Discovered at Gordon House in Jamaica
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Crane Co. Summary Judgment OK'd in Davis Action
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ill. Appeals Court Flips Ruling in Holmes Case
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Issues Split Rulings in Mt. Hawley Action
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Wash. Court Issues Split Decision in Eastwood

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Denies Lindstrom Summary Judgment Motion
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Affirms TKK USA's Summary Judgment Motion
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Mossburg Action v. 28 Firms Filed in St. Clair
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Velan Legal Costs Surged From $2.2MM to $2.7MM
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Firemen Tackle Asbestos-Roof Fire in Capernwray

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Defendant Seeks Dismissal in Krohn Case in Ill.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cape Breton Worker Fined C$1,000 Safety Breach
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Insurance Firms' Action Junked in Payout Claim
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Colo. Landlord Faces Sentence for Safety Breach
ASBESTOS UPDATE: NSW Police Seeks Contractors to Clean Up Sites

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Found in 8 South Korea School Grounds
ASBESTOS UPDATE: ACT Officials Still Waiting for Talks on Hazard
ASBESTOS UPDATE: UK Schools Comply With Asbestos Management Laws
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Calif. Court OKs Remand Bid in Savelesky Action
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Texas Court Affirms Pre-Trial Ruling in Emmite

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court OKs Dismissal of Federal-Mogul Trust Case
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Appeals Court Vacates Board's Decision in Gibbs
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Whisnant Asbestos Case to Continue Another Year
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cork Worker's Family Awarded EUR190T in Payout
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Teasdale Family Calling for Action on Asbestos

ASBESTOS UPDATE: GST Appeals Decision Denying Information Access
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Disposed Near Carlisle, England Site
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Illegal Dismissal Case v. U-Haul Filed Oct. 14
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Phillips Family Calling for Action on Asbestos


APPLE INC: Accused of Constraining eBook Market Competition
Steven Rivers, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Macmillan, Simon & Schuster, Hachette Book Group,
HarperCollins Publishers, Penguin Group (USA), Inc., and Apple
Inc., Case No. 3:11-cv-05080 (N.D. Calif., October 17, 2011)
alleges that the Publisher Defendants engineered a scheme with
Apple to constrain competition in the consumer retail market for
electronic books.

The Publisher Defendants' conspiracy with Apple to raise, fix,
stabilize, and maintain the retail consumer prices of eBooks is a
per se violation of the Sherman Act, Mr. Rivers contends.  He
notes that prior to the Defendants' illegal agreements, both
eBooks and print books were sold primarily via the wholesale-
distribution model that had been in place for decades.  He asserts
that under that model, retail booksellers often competed with each
other by lowering the price to consumers.

Mr. Rivers is a resident of California.  He said that he has been
injured because he paid an artificially high and anticompetitive
price as a result of the unlawful conduct alleged in the lawsuit
affecting the price of the purchased eBooks.

Apple is a California corporation.  Hachette is the United States
subsidiary of France-based Hachette Livre.  HarperCollins is a
subsidiary of News Corporation.  Macmillan is a subsidiary of
Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holtzbrinck, GMbH, based in Germany.
Simon & Schuster is a subsidiary of CBS Corporation.  Penguin is
the United States subsidiary of England's Pearson PLC.  The
Defendants do business throughout the country, including the sale
or delivery of substantial quantities of eBook readers and eBooks.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Eric H. Gibbs, Esq.
          Elizabeth C. Pritzker, Esq.
          Amy M. Zeman, Esq.
          601 California Street, 14th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94108
          Telephone: (415) 981-4800
          Facsimile: (415) 981-4846
          E-mail: ehg@girardgibbs.com

BEST BUY: Jan. 2012 Trial Set for Price Match Guarantee Suit
A class action certified in March 2009 against Best Buy for a
class of New York consumers who were denied valid price matches
under Best Buy's advertised "Price Match Guarantee" will go to
trial in federal court starting January 23, 2012, according to the
judge overseeing the case.

The class is comprised of New York residents who, from January 10,
2002, to the present, made a purchase at Best Buy and within 30
days after the purchase (14 days for computers, monitors, notebook
computers, printers, camcorders, digital cameras and radar
detectors) presented a lower price from a competitor of Best Buy
for the product purchased and were denied the price match request.
The Court certified the class of New York residents in March 2009.

According to the plaintiffs, despite Best Buy's Price Match
Guarantee, which it advertises in stores, on flyers, and through
television and newspaper advertisements, Best Buy has an internal
policy designed to discourage or deny valid price matches,
particularly those which shoppers try to make based on cheaper
prices at competitive warehouse stores, or where the competitor's
price for the product is 5% or less of the Best Buy mark-up.
Plaintiffs allege that Best Buy uses a bonus structure which
incentivizes its employees to deny price matches.

Price matches may be good for sales, but they cut into the margin
of Best Buy substantially, so the company attempts to limit or
curtail margin erosion from the practice by denying valid price
matches.  The claims asserted are violations of New York Consumer
Fraud Act, General Business Law ("GBL") Section 349, and unjust

Despite the defendant's multiple attempts to decertify the class,
the Court reconfirmed certification of the New York consumer class
and has set a jury trial date for January 23, 2012.  If plaintiffs
prevail, New York residents denied a valid price match would have
a potential claim.

In addition, the Court certified an injunction class, thus
allowing the plaintiffs to obtain an injunction of the deceptive
practice, a remedy expressly allowed if the jury finds that Best
Buy violated New York's GBL Section 349.  Under the statute, each
injured class member could also receive $50 per person if they
cannot demonstrate their actual damages.

The class action litigation attorneys of Kantrowitz, Goldhamer &
Graifman P.C. -- http://www.kgglaw.com-- offer comprehensive
representation to clients throughout Rockland County, NY and
Bergen County, NJ.  If you are in need of legal help visit our
Web site or call us at (800) 660-7843.

BP PLC: TNK-BP Holding May Take Part in Shareholder Class Action
Torrey Clark, writing for Bloomberg News, reports that OAO TNK-BP
Holding, Russia's third-biggest oil producer, may join a lawsuit
brought by minority shareholders after the collapse of parent
company BP Plc's planned alliance with state-run OAO Rosneft.

The board will consider taking part in the suit filed through the
Tyumen arbitration court in Siberia at an Oct. 24 meeting, the
Moscow-traded unit of BP's joint venture with a group of
billionaires said on Oct. 18 in a regulatory filing.

Minority investor Andrey Prokhorov last month called on TNK-BP
Holding and shareholders to participate in an RUR87 billion ($2.8
billion) class action suit against the U.K explorer.  BP failed to
notify its Russian shareholders about the proposed share swap and
Arctic exploration alliance with Rosneft that ended in failure, he

Mr. Prokhorov, who owns 0.0000106 percent of TNK-BP Holding,
failed to meet the 1% ownership threshold needed to sue the board
directors after the Tyumen court rejected his request to extend an
Oct. 11 deadline, BP said last week.  Mr. Prokhorov's lawyers
declined to say if any other shareholders had joined in the
initial claim.

"The prerogative of deciding TBH participation in these legal
proceedings lies within the exclusive jurisdiction of the board of
directors of TNK-BP Holding and does not involve participation of
the company's management," TNK-BP Holding said in an e-mailed

Mikhail Fridman, a billionaire shareholder through Alfa Group, is
TNK-BP's interim chief executive officer, and German Khan, another
Alfa Group founder, is executive director.  Alfa is part of the
AAR group that owns half of TNK-BP.

The deal fell apart in May after a challenge from BP's billionaire
partners, who said a shareholder agreement gave the venture
exclusive rights to pursue the project.

Mr. Prokhorov is also seeking RUR409 billion from BP and BP
Russian Investments Ltd. in damages, representing the increase in
the price of the Rosneft stake that BP had planned to acquire in
the share swap and estimated lost earnings, according to his
lawyers.  The hearing in the Tyumen court is due on Nov. 11.

The claims are "legally absurd," said Vladimir Buyanov, a Moscow-
based spokesman for BP.

CENTRAIS ELETRICAS: Damages Suit vs. Furnas Still Pending
In 2001, ten municipalities of the State of Minas Gerais and a
local commerce association brought a class action regarding
environmental damages caused by the Furnas Centrais Eletricas
S.A.'s hydroelectric plant Sao Jose da Barra.  Furnas is a
subsidiary of Centrais Eletricas Brasileiras S.A.  The claim
alleges that the level of the reservoir is decreasing because of
the excessive and irregular use of water for energy production
purposes.  The claim also alleges that the low levels of water in
the reservoir are detrimental to tourism in the area and that as a
result the regional economy has been adversely affected.  The
claim is for financial compensation of approximately R$1 billion,
although the majority of the municipalities originally involved
have already withdrawn from the claim.  Proceedings are currently
in progress to determine the court in which the claim will be

No further updates were reported in the Company's October 17,
2011, Form 20-F filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the year ended December 31, 2010.

The Company says it has not made any provision in respect of this
litigation as it considers the risk of an unfavorable decision on
these lawsuits to be remote.

CENTRAIS ELETRICAS: Suits by Cabeco Associations Remain Pending
In 2002 and 2003, two associations of the community of Cabeco
brought independent class actions regarding environmental damages
caused by Companhia Hidro Eletrica do Sao Francisco (Eletrobras
Chesf), a generation and transmission subsidiary of Centrais
Eletricas Brasileiras S.A. (Eletrobras).  The Cabeco community is
located in a river island in the estuary of the Sao Francisco
River.  Both associations alleged that the hydroelectric plants
disturbed the normal flow of the river and resulted in a decline
in fishing activity and the gradual disappearance of the river
island.  The court held that any motion filed for an interlocutory
appeal must be postponed until a final judgment is delivered.

On August 9, 2010, the Company lodged a motion requesting the
clarification of this decision.  This motion was rejected in
September 2010.  The Company subsequently filed a request for
reconsideration of the decision that the interlocutory appeal be
postponed, which was also rejected by the judge on October 18,
2010.  The monetary compensation requested is R$100 million in
each case.  The Company says it has not made any provision in
respect of this litigation as it considers the risk of an
unfavourable decision on this lawsuit to be possible.

No further updates were reported in the Company's October 17,
2011, Form 20-F filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the year ended December 31, 2010.

CNINSURE: Faces Shareholder Class Action in New York
Courthouse News Service reports that shareholders claim China-
based CNinsure and its top three officers juggled the books and
the share price fell by 24% in 2 days when it was revealed,
according to a class action filed in Manhattan.

DISCOVER CARD: Awaits OK of Payment Protection Fee Suit Settlement
Discover Card Execution Note Trust is awaiting court approval of
its settlement to resolve the lawsuits relating to its payment
protection fee product, according to the Company's October 17,
2011, Form 10-D filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the monthly distribution period September 1, 2011,
to September 30, 2011.

As of April 30, 2011, there were eight putative class action cases
pending in relation to the sale of Discover's payment protection
fee product.  Each of these lawsuits challenges Discover's
marketing practices with respect to marketing its payment
protection fee product to its cardmembers under various state laws
and the Truth in Lending Act.  The plaintiffs seek monetary
remedies including unspecified damages and restitution, attorneys'
fees and costs, and various forms of injunctive relief including
an order rescinding the payment protection fee product enrollments
of all class members.  All of the cases have been transferred to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.  In
June 2011, Discover and class counsel entered into a preliminary
global settlement of all of the pending class actions.  The
settlement is subject to judicial approval.

FORD MOTOR: Faces Class Action Over Diesel Engine Defects
Courthouse News Service reports that Ford's 6.0 liter Power Stroke
diesel engines have a litany of defects, and Ford won't back up
its warranty, according to a class action in B.C. Supreme Court.

A copy of the Complaint in Marshall v. Ford Motor Company, et al.,
Case No. VLC-S-S-116870 (B.C. Sup. Ct.), is available at:


The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James M. Poyner, Esq.
          408-145 Chadwick Court
          North Vancouver, BC V7M 3K1
          E-mail: info@poynerbaxter.com

GOOGLE INC: Law Firm Won't Pursue SuperPoke Pets Class Action
Liz Gannes, writing for AllThingsD, reports that as much as avid
users of Slide's SuperPoke Pets yelled, begged and left angry blog
comments, a law firm that had been exploring a class action
lawsuit over Google's shutdown of their much-loved game has
declined to take on the case.

Chicago-based class action specialist Freed & Weiss -- which had
been collecting complaints from SuperPoke Pets users upset about
the loss of their virtual goods and carefully cared-for online
pets -- notified the users on Oct. 18 that it thought its chances
of winning were slim.

That's because, though players invested much money in the game and
had been previously assured that it wouldn't shut down, Slide and
Google's terms of service seem to cover their actions.  Plus,
after all the outcry, Google agreed to offer a standalone app
called SPP Lite that allows users to keep their pets alive with
some limited functionality.

"We have appreciated hearing from many of you and, while this is
unfair and unjust, there are just some situations where there is
not a likelihood of recovery in the U.S. Court system and we have
found that to be the case here," Freed & Weiss said.

Another law firm, Edelson McGuire, appears to still be collecting
complaints from SuperPoke Pets users.

LEXUS OF ENGLEWOOD: Sued in N.J. Over Defective HVAC Evaporators
Courthouse News Service reports that a federal class action claims
Lexus vehicles from 2006 have defective HVAC evaporators whose
coating peels off and blows into the cars as toxic aluminum

A copy of the Complaint in Yu, et al v. Lexus of Englewood, et
al., Case No. 11-cv-_____, docketed as Doc. 13145 in Case No. 33-
av-00001 on Oct. 17, 2011 (D. N.J.), is available at:


The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Bruce H. Nagel, Esq.
          NAGEL RICE, LLP
          103 Eisenhower Parkway
          Roseland, NJ  07068
          Telephone: (973) 618-0400 ext. 110
          E-mail: bnagel@nagelrice.com

PENSON WORLDWIDE: Class Action Lead Plaintiff Deadline Nears
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. reminds investors of the important
October 24, 2011 lead plaintiff deadline in the securities class
action brought on behalf of investors who purchased the common
stock of Penson Worldwide, Inc. during the period between
February 10, 2011 and August 4, 2011, inclusive, seeking to
recover damages for violations of federal securities laws.

To join the Penson class action, visit the firm's Web site at
http://rosenlegal.comor call Phillip Kim, Esq. or Laurence Rosen,
Esq., toll-free, at 866-767-3653; you may also e-mail
pkim@rosenlegal.com or lrosen@rosenlegal.com for information on
the class action.

According to the Complaint, during the Class Period, Penson
concealed from investors that: (a) the Company had approximately
$96 million in receivables, of which approximately $43 million
were collateralized by illiquid securities and therefore unlikely
to be collected; (b) the Company's assets (Nonaccrual Receivables)
were materially overstated and should have been written down; (c)
as a result, the Company overstated its income and EBITDA
(earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization
and stock-based compensation, and excluding certain non-operating
expenses); and (d), the Company's financial statements were not
prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no
later than October 24, 2011.  A lead plaintiff is a representative
party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the
litigation.  If you wish to join the litigation, or to discuss
your rights or interests regarding this class action, please

          Phillip Kim, Esq.
          Laurence Rosen, Esq.
          Toll-Free: 866-767-3653
          E-mail: pkim@rosenlegal.com
          Web site: http://rosenlegal.com

The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation.

SCHNEIDER LOGISTICS: Workers File Class Action Over Abuses
Dave Jamieson, writing for Huffington Post, reports that a group
of workers at a California warehouse handling goods bound for
Walmart stores have filed a class-action lawsuit claiming they've
been working under abusive conditions.

Everardo Carrillo and five other low-wage employees who've worked
at the Riverside County, Calif., warehouse run by Walmart
contractor Schneider Logistics, allege that they've been routinely
shortchanged on their paychecks, required to work in dangerously
hot conditions and threatened with termination when they've
complained to superiors.

The suit names as defendants Schneider and three of its
subcontractors who supply temporary labor to the facility.
Walmart itself is not being sued, though the suit says workers in
the warehouse load and unload exclusively Walmart products.
According to the suit, most of the workers there are Latino
immigrants who do not speak English and have no education beyond
middle school.

The workers "spend their workdays performing strenuous, unskilled
physical labor in an environment where the temperature often
exceeds 90 degrees," the suit alleges.  When workers questioned
their paychecks, their bosses "routinely responded with threats of
retaliation and actual retaliation, including by sending the
inquiring workers home without pay, refusing to give them work the
next day . . . and imposing other forms of discipline on them."

The lawsuit comes on the heels of a handful of alleged labor law
violations filed last week against two temporary labor agencies at
the facility.  Labor Commissioner Julie A. Su told HuffPost last
week that in addition to many workers not being given proper
paystubs, some may not have been paid for all the time they had
worked.  She said the charges marked the beginning of an "in-
depth" investigation of the companies operating inside the

"Warehouses are one example of the ever-increasing contracting out
of labor," Ms. Su said of subcontracting.  "It's difficult for
enforcement, and in many instances it's a deliberate effort to
avoid compliance."

Walmart, the largest retailer in the country, does not directly
employ anyone at the warehouse.  Asked about the commission's
allegations last week, Dan Fogleman, a Walmart spokesman, told
HuffPost that the company is "not involved in this matter."  He
added, "The contracts we have in place with third parties require
that they follow the law, and that's something we fully expect."

Schneider was sued earlier this year by workers at a similar
facility in Illinois who claimed they weren't paid what they were
owed.  A spokeswoman for Schneider said in a statement on the
California investigation, "We believe that we are in full
compliance with applicable laws and regulations.  We expect our
vendors to fulfill their responsibilities as well."

According to the lawsuit, most of the workers in the warehouse
used to be directly employed by Schneider, earning between $12 and
$17 per hour with benefits.  But over the course of the last five
years, the proportion of direct hires in the warehouse has
steadily dropped to about 25%, while pay has fallen as well,
workers allege.  The lawsuit accuses the companies of carrying out
"an unlawful scheme" to depress wages through outsourcing.

In February 2010, the employers at the warehouse switched the
workers from an hourly pay rate to a "piece rate" plan, in which
they were paid for the number of truck containers that they loaded
or unloaded, according to the suit.  The workers claim that they
were told they would earn "much more money" under the new scheme,
but that in fact their earnings dropped. (Piece rate work is
perfectly legal, so long as it abides by minimum wage and other
labor laws.)

"No matter how much effort a worker devotes to filling or
unloading a given truck container, if that container is not
completely filled or unloaded by the end of the worker's shift,
the worker will not be paid," the suit claims.

Sheheryar Kaoosji, who works for the advocacy group Warehouse
Workers United, claims that the employers haven't explained
exactly how the piece rate plan works and that workers don't
understand how their pay breaks down.

"It's not a question of education," Mr. Kaoosji said of the
confusion. "We have lawyers who don't even understand it."

The Riverside facility is part of a large warehouse network in the
Inland Empire area of California.  The network serves as a gateway
of sorts for products coming in from China; from there they ship
out to distribution centers throughout the country.  According to
Mr. Kaoosji, many of the country's major retailers have large
facilities in the area.

Mr. Kaoosji said the work is physically demanding, and
temperatures can rise to over 90 degrees inside.  Throughout the
day, he said, workers must go in and out of steel containers
loading and unloading products.

"Those boxes are sitting in the sun all day," Mr. Kaoosji said.

Last month, the Allentown Morning Call published a lengthy expose
of brutal working conditions at a distribution center for the
online retailer Amazon.  Workers said they had to deal with
increasing productivity demands and unbearable heat inside the
warehouse.  On some days, ambulances waited outside the facility
in the likelihood that workers would suffer from heat exhaustion.

TOYOTA MOTOR: Judge Slashes Attorney Fees in Prius Settlement
Amanda Bronstad, writing for The National Law Journal, reports
that a federal judge in Los Angeles struck down the proposed
attorney fees in a class action settlement against Toyota Motor
Corp. over Prius headlights, calling the $4.7 million request
"highly unreasonable" for a case with "narrow, not complex" legal

"This could not be a simpler case," said U.S. District Judge
Manuel Real, who granted final approval of the settlement, which
he estimated at more than $3.8 million, but reduced the fee
request to 20% of that value, or $766,000.

He questioned why so many firms were involved in the first place,
saying, "There was no need for five firms to be involved."

Eric Gibbs, a partner at San Francisco's Girard Gibbs, lead
counsel for the plaintiffs, said he was pleased to see the
settlement approved despite the reduced fee award.  "My firm
worked hard to get the settlement benefit for the class," he said.
"As for the fee award, we'll need to sit down and weigh the
court's comments against the record that that court has before it,
and use that preface to evaluate what our next steps ought to be."

"Toyota worked in good faith to resolve this matter in the
interest of customer satisfaction, so we are pleased that Judge
Real approved the settlement, and we accept his decision on the
fees and expenses," said Toyota spokeswoman Celeste Migliore.

The settlement resolved claims in a proposed class action on
behalf of nearly 300,000 owners and lessees of Prius hybrids who
claimed that their headlights were defective because they
intermittently shut off.  The claims were unrelated to separate
litigation over sudden unintended acceleration involving Toyota
cars and light trucks.  Toyota faces nearly 300 lawsuits in
multidistrict litigation before U.S. District Judge James Selna in
Santa Ana, Calif., regarding those claims.

The settlement resolved claims on behalf of U.S. consumers of
model-year 2006 through 2009 Priuses with factory-made high-
intensity discharge headlights.  The deal would provide cash
reimbursements to class members who replaced their headlight bulbs
within five years or 50,000 miles on the road, according to court
documents.  Class members who paid for parts and labor for
replacements after five years or 50,000 miles would be repaid on a
case-by-case basis.  The settlement would extend the warranty for
class members who have yet to repair their vehicles.

During a settlement conference on Aug. 29, Judge Real said he had
a "big problem" going through the fee request submitted by five
firms: Girard Gibbs, which asked for $1.9 million; Wasserman,
Comden, Casselman & Esensten of Tarzana, Calif., which sought
$720,000; Initiative Legal Group of Los Angeles, $1.2 million;
Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll in Washington, $600,000; and Los
Angeles-based Arias Ozzello & Gignac, $250,000.

Toyota attorney Michael Mallow, a partner in the Los Angeles
office of Loeb & Loeb, questioned why so many firms were needed
and called their billing records "inherently unreliable by bloated
timekeeping, unnecessary work, and contradictory statements,"
according to a Sept. 2 court document.  He wrote that the fee
request was "grossly excessive" -- particularly since he valued
the settlement at about $3.8 million.

A more accurate request would be between $950,000 and a little
more than $1 million in fees, plus costs, he wrote.  "In such
cases, the Ninth Circuit encourages courts to guard against an
unreasonable result by cross-checking their calculations against a
second method, such as the percentage of recovery method,"
Mr. Mallow wrote.

He cited the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit's Aug. 19
ruling in the Motorola Bluetooth headsets litigation.  The 9th
Circuit rejected a settlement in that case, ruling that U.S.
District Judge Dale Fischer had failed to cross-check the amount
the plaintiffs could have demanded by billing at their usual rates
-- called the "lodestar" amount -- to what they would have
received were their fees based on a percentage of the settlement.
That settlement would have provided $100,000 in cy pres awards --
gifts to charitable organizations -- and $800,000 to the
plaintiffs' attorneys.  The class members would have received no
monetary recovery.

Mr. Gibbs, who estimated the value of the Prius settlement at more
than $4 million, wrote that the Bluetooth case was nothing like
his own, which involved "a high degree of success" for class
members.  "In other words, the relative success achieved by the
settlement indicates that this is indeed a legitimate, arm's-
length deal and not a collusive settlement," he wrote.

He added in a Sept. 2 court document that the attorney fees and
$400,000 in administrative costs should be included in the value
of the settlement.  He disputed Toyota's calculation of how much
future warranty repairs were worth.  Under such a calculation,
Mr. Gibbs wrote, the settlement amount would be closer to $6.35
million, and the plaintiffs' attorney fees would represent only 31
percent of its value.

In reducing the fee award, Judge Real cited the number of pages of
each major document filed in both cases -- one of which he called
a "form" complaint that was a "piggyback" to the first complaint.
He noted that mediation lasted just one day and that much of the
information used by plaintiffs' attorneys was in the public
record, including the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration's investigation into the alleged defect.

Based on the 6,881 hours that plaintiffs' attorneys estimated they
had billed in the case, each firm would have worked about 11 hours
a day, Judge Real said.  "The number of hours allegedly worked in
this case is striking," he said.

As for the billing records submitted, Judge Real found them "most
difficult, if not impossible, to decipher."

He noted that the case involved only two months of discovery,
making plaintiffs' attorneys more akin to "negotiation agents" for
the class than actual litigators confronting "new legal issues."
Having five firms on the case was unnecessary, he said, especially
since the three firms other than Girard Gibbs and Wasserman "had
very little to do with the litigation."

Of the $766,000 in total fees, Judge Real awarded 65% to Girard
Gibbs.  He ordered Girard Gibbs to apportion the remaining funds
to the other four firms.

U-HAUL: Faces Class Action in California Over Unpaid Overtime
Courthouse News Service reports that a Los Angeles Superior Court
class action claims U-Haul stiffs workers for overtime, takes
illegal deductions from paychecks and won't give them legally
required breaks.

VALENCIA COUNTY, NM: Sued for Violating Rights of Some Inmates
KOAT.com reports that the Valencia County is facing a class action
lawsuit featuring disturbing allegations that claim suspects were
denied their most basic civil rights after being arrested and
thrown in jail for weeks.

Lawyer Matthew Coyte said he has hundreds of examples of people
arrested in Valencia County who didn't get a fair share of

"They go to jail, and then they sit there, and they don't get a
court hearing, a lawyer appointed, a public defender. They just
sit there," Mr. Coyte said.

In a class action lawsuit filed on Oct. 17, Mr. Coyte said
authorities within the Valencia County Sheriff's Office and
officers working inside the jail violated the rights of some
inmates kept locked up without seeing a judge or an attorney.

According to the lawsuit, there are hundreds of release orders
that claimed there wasn't a complaint filed, and Mr. Coyte said it
is a violation of people's constitutional rights.

"You don't arrest someone, put them in jail without filing a
charge against them. (It's) simple as that," Mr. Coyte said.

Officials with the Valencia County Sheriff's Office said they
haven't been served, and they haven't had the chance to review the
violations alleged against their officers.  The sheriff's office
said it has no knowledge of the paperwork not getting filed.

"There's no reason that anybody would not leave the jail without
having a criminal complaint completed and done," said Capt. Gary
Hall of the Valencia County Sheriff's Office.  "Everything's left
at the jail with a copy being sent to the DA's office and the
magistrate court.  We make a run to the court every day."

Mr. Coyte said he has the paperwork to prove there's a serious
problem in Valencia County, where inmates don't have a fighting
chance as they sat behind bars.

"They know the people in the jail are without charges.  The jail
knows (the people are) in there without charges.  The officer
knows they're in there without charges because he didn't file
them," Mr. Coyte said.

Valencia County has 30 days to respond to the suit once they are
served, and Mr. Coyte said they plan on looking into the
involvement of other law enforcement agencies to see if they find
the same pattern.

                        Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: South Tyneside Woman's Death Linked to Exposure
The family of Annie Shotton, of South Tyneside, England, is
appealing for information about her husband Ernest Shotton's
working life and his contact with asbestos, The Shields Gazette

Mrs. Shotton died at the age of 80 in December 2010 from
mesothelioma.  She was diagnosed with the cancer in March 2008.

Mrs. Shotton never worked with asbestos, but Mr. Shotton was
exposed regularly during his career as an inspector for a number
of paint companies.  His job took him to shipyards across the
North East, where asbestos was used.

Mr. Shotton died in 1994, and now his son Philip is trying to find
out more about his exposure to asbestos.  After his mother's
death, Philip instructed Thompsons Solicitors for advice about

After reviewing Mrs. Shotton's working history, it became clear
she was exposed to asbestos from Mr. Shotton's work overalls.  At
the end of the working day, she would shake out the dust before
washing them in a twin tub.

Now, Thompsons would like to speak to anyone who worked alongside
Mr. Shotton in his job as an inspector for three international
paint companies.  The legal firm is interested in talking to
painters as well as other tradesmen who may have worked alongside
Mr Shotton.

Mr. Shotton had worked for International Paint Ltd, based in Low
Fell, as a paint technologist from the 1950s until 1963.  He then
worked for Lewis Berger Paints from 1963 until 1964, and then
Jotun Paints until his retirement in 1994.  During his career, his
job took him to every shipyard in the North East.

Oliver Collett, of Thompsons Solicitors, said, "Our investigations
show that Mrs. Shotton was most likely exposed to asbestos from
her husband's overalls."

Anyone who worked for or alongside colleagues at International
Paint, Jotun Paints and Lewis Berger Paints in North East
shipyards between 1950 and the late 1970s should contact Mr.
Collett on 0113 2056304.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Grimshaw Family Awarded GBP48T in Compensation
The family of a man who died after being exposed to asbestos, Reg
Grimshaw, of Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire, England, has been
awarded GBP48,000 in compensation, BBC News reports.

Mr. Grimshaw died in 2010 at the age of 88 from the lung disease
mesothelioma.  He spent his entire working life at the Tata Steel
plant, which was run by a number of companies over the years,
including the nationalized British Steel Corporation.

Current owners Tata Steel said the claim was from a "historic
exposure to a risk."

Mr. Grimshaw, who worked at the plant from 1938 until his
retirement in 1993, is believed to have been exposed to the
asbestos from the insulation lagging used on the pipework in the

Mr. Grimshaw's daughter, Lynne Goodall, said, "He went from being
fit virtually one week, carrying out his daily activities as
normally, to suddenly starting to feel breathless."

ASBESTOS UPDATE: DEP to Issue Fines Over Wilton Demolition Site
The Maine Department of Environmental Protection plans to fine two
companies -- Wilton Recycling LLC and Downeast Construction --
that allegedly broke asbestos removal laws at a contaminated
demolition site in Wilton, Maine, the Morning Sentinel reports.

Wilton Recycling and Downeast have been notified of the violations
and state officials are working to determine how much they should
pay in fines, according to Samantha Depoy-Warren, spokeswoman for
the agency.

Meanwhile, a state-licensed cleanup effort will continue to remove
the asbestos found at the complex of vacant manufacturing
buildings on Depot Street, Ms. Depoy-Warren said on Oct. 7, 2011.

Since asbestos cleanup started in late August 2011, the material
has been removed from piles of debris scattered among the
partially demolished buildings, some more than a century old.

The responsible companies are accused of breaking Maine laws.
The alleged violations happened before a federal agency reported
July 19, 2011, that construction workers and emergency responders
may have been exposed to dangerously high levels of asbestos at
the site.

After the discovery, state environmental officials investigated
and found that construction workers had been removing asbestos
without the required protective gear and equipment, according to
DEP violation notices sent to the companies.

Investigators said the companies also did not have required
asbestos inspections done before starting demolition work at the
site in April 2011, as well as failing to meet other state
guidelines for removing asbestos from a contaminated site, the
notices state.

Ms. Depoy-Warren said the severity of penalties or fines will be
based on a variety of factors.  There are some violations that are
handled without fines, depending on the circumstances, she said.

What caused the violation is typically the most important factor
in determining enforcement, with the accused facing civil charges
if they refuse to pay fines, according to Ms. Depoy-Warren.

Ms. Depoy-Warren said the DEP enforcement is also working closely
with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which has launched
a criminal investigation looking into the contamination at the

Downeast Construction voluntarily pulled its workers from the
demolition site after the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration reported finding high levels of asbestos.

Eleven firefighters and at least one police officer from Wilton
responded to a small fire on the property the day before the
federal regulatory agency reported its findings.

Wilton Recycling owns the demolition site and Downeast
Construction purchased the salvage rights, which are tied to
selling materials from the project, according to Adam Mack, who
manages from Portland the corporation that owns the site.

Asbestos cleanup started Aug. 26, 2011, at the contaminated site
after a federal agency threatened to take action against the
responsible companies, which had promptly hired an asbestos
removal company.

Ms. Depoy-Warren said the asbestos-containing material found
within the building by the removal company included 8,000 linear
feet of pipe and pipe covering, about 1,000 square feet of boiler
coverings and 4,000 square feet of floor tile.

Bob Rickett, whose asbestos removal company was hired by the site
owners, said on Oct. 6, 2011, that demolition has been cleared to
resume on certain portions of the property, where asbestos is not

Asbestos cleanup will resume inside the buildings after the
companies secure more financing, with the overall cleanup costs
likely to exceed US$150,000, Mr. Rickett said, declining to give
further details.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Lodge Repairs to Focus on Asbestos, Electrical
Electrical problems and asbestos are causing a health hazard at
The Lodge in Canberra, Australia, the Prime Minister's official
residence, the Herald Sun reports.

Such issues need urgent attention.  Prime Minister Julia Gillard
and partner, Tim Mathieson, will be forced from The Lodge for 18
months while multi-million dollar repairs are made.

Special Minister of State Gary Gray said the works could not be
put off any longer and arrangements were being made for Ms.
Gillard to live elsewhere but still maintain appropriate security.
Mr. Gray told ABC television, "The Lodge roof leaks, the plumbing
is in need of repair.  If the Lodge were a patient it would be in

"The cost in this exercise is something that we can't put our
absolute finger on.  It's a scope of work that needs to be
completed appropriately and not fixed up with a trip down to
Bunnings or Mitre10 to get a bit of sealant and a paint job."

Mr. Gray said successive governments had put off a major overhaul
of The Lodge, which was built in the 1920s.  It is a heritage
listed building and had serious structural problems.

Mr. Gray said, "There are plumbing issues and also contained
asbestos, but asbestos that does really need to be removed seeing
the containment isn't containment that is designed to last for the
next 10 or 15 years."  Mr. Gray said it was not hard to see why
governments consistently resisted fixing problems.

In June 2011, the Herald Sun revealed that about AU$112,000 worth
of renovations had been ordered because a safety review of the
40-room mansion found it was "high risk."  The bill included
AU$S66,000 for a solar hot water system.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hazard Uncovered at Corona Kindergarten School
Asbestos was discovered in Public School 143 in Corona, Queens,
N.Y., where children had been attending kindergarten classes, the
Daily News reports.

About 100 students from Public School 143 were removed from the
annex in September 2011 after water leaks threatened to disturb
asbestos in the roof beams, city officials said.

The children from the five kindergarten classes were placed in
nearby PS 307 on Sept. 23, 2011, because there was no room in the
main PS 143 building.  They are expected to stay there until
repairs on the former parochial school are completed, city
officials said.

The asbestos was discovered after teachers complained of water
damage and falling tiles from the annex ceiling, said a PS 143
educator who spoke to the Daily News on condition of anonymity.
An inspection was conducted, and the children were promptly moved
to classrooms scattered throughout PS 307, he said.

A Department of Education official said air tests in the annex did
not detect asbestos.  But as a precaution, the children and staff
were moved during repairs.

Nick Comaianni, president of the Community Education Council in
District 24, which includes Corona, said he was pleased by that

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Discovered at Gordon House in Jamaica
Heather Cook, Jamaica's Clerk to the Houses of Parliament, on
Oct. 7, 2011, told the Sunday Observer that the Parliament will
conduct their sessions at a site other than Gordon House, which
was found to contain asbestos, the Jamaica Observer reports.

Parliamentary sessions will be held offsite for at least another
month beyond mid-October 2011.  Ms. Cook added that the asbestos
was found in the Gordon House's roof "some time between the end of
August early September."

Parliament is expected to remain at its temporary home at the
Jamaica Conference Centre in downtown Kingston for at least
another month.

Parliamentary sittings resumed in early September 2011 after the
summer break outside the legislative chamber due to repair work
being done on the roof of Gordon House.  Consequently, meetings
have been held either at the Jamaica Conference Centre in downtown
Kingston or the Jamaica Manufacturer's Association headquarters on
Duke Street, with members of the public being invited to view live
broadcasts of the proceedings via the Public Broadcasting
Corporation of Jamaica due to space constraints.

House Leader Andrew Holness, addressing the issue in Parliament in
September 2011, had said the nation's parliament would have to
hold its sittings at the conference center until the end of
September 2011, or the latest, until mid-October 2011.

Speaking Friday after a meeting with the contractors on Thursday,
Ms. Cook said the discovery of the asbestos as well as the fact
that "other structural faults were found" during the course of the
repairs, has set those plans back.  In the meantime, Ms. Cook said
she had not been told of any additional cost for the extended
usage of the Conference Centre.

The repairs to the Parliamentary building which had initially been
budgeted at some JMD10 million has subsequently doubled due to the
additional repairs.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Crane Co. Summary Judgment OK'd in Davis Action
The Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle County, granted Crane
Co.'s motion for summary judgment in an asbestos-related lawsuit
filed by Wesley K. Davis.

Judge Peggy L. Ableman entered judgment in Civil Action No.
09C-08-258 ASB on June 7, 2011.

Wesley K. Davis was diagnosed with mesothelioma in June 2009.  He
asserted that his disease was caused by occupational exposures to
asbestos-containing products.  He had filed suit against various
defendants for manufacturing, installing, or distributing products
that he alleges exposed him to asbestos during his work as a
machinist's mate in the U.S. Navy from 1965 to 1969 and as a
flooring installer and equipment operator during the 1970s.

Mr. Davis' claims against moving defendant Crane Co. arose from
his four-year naval service, almost the entirety of which he spent
as a machinist's mate aboard the USS Holder.  The Holder was based
out of Norfolk, Va.  During his deposition, Mr. Davis recalled
working extensively with Crane valves throughout his time on the
Holder, where he worked in the forward engine room.

The USS Holder had been built in 1944, and Mr. Davis was unaware
of the maintenance histories of any of the existing valves he
encountered during his work.  He identified Garlock, and not
Crane, as the manufacturer of the replacement packing and gaskets
he used.  He was unable to recall the brand or manufacturer of the
external installation applied to the valves.

Crane moved for summary judgment on the basis that Mr. Davis'
testimony did not meet the product nexus standard under either
maritime or Virginia law.

Mr. Davis had not shown that asbestos-containing products supplied
by Crane were a substantial factor in causing his mesothelioma,
nor has he provided evidence of a design defect that would render
Crane liable for his exposures to other manufacturers' asbestos-
containing replacement parts or insulation.

Accordingly, Crane's motion for summary judgment was granted.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ill. Appeals Court Flips Ruling in Holmes Case
The Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District, reversed the
ruling of the Circuit Court of McLean County, in an asbestos-
related lawsuit filed Roger Holmes on behalf of Jean Holmes.

The case is styled In re the Estate of Jean Holmes, Deceased,
Roger Holmes, Special Administrator, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Pneumo
Abex, L.L.C., Sued as Its Predecessor Pneumo Abex Corporation; and
Honeywell International, Inc., Defendants-Appellants.

The panel entered judgment in Case No. 4-10-0462 on June 22, 2011.
Judge Turner delivered the judgment, Judge Appleton concurred and
Judge Knecht dissented.

In May 2006, Mr. Holmes sued Pneumo Abex, L.L.C., Honeywell
International, Inc., and others to recover damages for the
wrongful death of his mother.  In March 2009, a jury found for Mr.
Holmes and assessed damages against defendants.  In May 2009,
defendants filed post-trial motions, which the court denied.

On appeal, defendants argued they are entitled to judgment
notwithstanding the verdict because they owed no duty to Mrs.
Holmes.  The Appeal Court reversed.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Issues Split Rulings in Mt. Hawley Action
The U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, issued
split rulings in a case filed by Mt. Hawley Insurance Co. against
Dania Distribution Centre, Ltd. and others.

District Judge Marcia G. Cooke entered judgment in Case No.
09-61275-Civ on Jan. 31, 2011.

This action is a derivative of an underlying state court action in
which about 90 plaintiffs sued Lauris Boulanger, Inc., Dania
Distribution Centre, Ltd., Dania Distribution Centre, Inc., and
Dania Distribution Centre Condominium Association, Inc.

The action, Lueron Dixon, et al. v. Lauris Boulanger, et al., Case
No.: 06-05393 CA 09 had settled and the current issue is whether
there is a genuine issue of material fact that would preclude
finding that Mt. Hawley did not breach its contractual obligations
when it failed to defend and indemnify the Dania Defendants in the
Dixon lawsuit.

In March 2001, the Dania Defendants purchased about 15.5 acres of
land adjacent to residential neighborhoods in Dania Beach, Fla.
Prior to the purchase, the Dania Property was used for dredged
sand fill and as a landfill for construction and demolition
debris, medical waste, petroleum products and various chemicals.

Groundwater assessments conducted in 2000 and 2001 revealed the
presence of contaminants such as phenols, benzene, naphthalene,
methane, hydrogen sulphide, ammonia, lead, diesel fuel and
chlorinated solvents.  Soil samples collected in late November
2002 revealed that the Property had elevated levels of copper,
arsenic, barium, chromium, nickel and lead.

The levels of arsenic were 50% of the allowable levels for a
commercial property but twice the allowable levels for residential
property.  Large quantities of asbestos were also found on the
Dania Property.

On Oct. 28, 2004, Mt. Hawley issued a Commercial General Liability
Policy to Dania Distribution Centre, Ltd. and Lauris Boulanger
Inc., effective from Oct. 28, 2004 to Oct. 28, 2005.  From the
time the Dania Defendants purchased the Property in 2001, until
the filing of the Dixon lawsuit, the Dania Defendants cleared the
Property, prepared the Property for construction and developed the
Property, causing pollutants to be dispersed and discharged into
the surrounding areas.

Actual construction on the Dania Property began sometime after the
Dania Defendants applied for construction permits from the City of
Dania Beach, Fla., in September 2003.  Notwithstanding the known
presence of toxic chemicals on the Property and in the local
groundwater, the Dania Defendants admittedly failed to take any
steps toward protecting the residents, surrounding properties or
workers on the Property from contact with the hazardous

Mt. Hawley's Motion for Summary Judgment was granted.  The
Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment were denied.  All pending
Motions were denied as moot.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Wash. Court Issues Split Decision in Eastwood
The Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 2, issued split
rulings in a case involving asbestos styled Eastwood Enterprises,
Inc., an Oregon corporation, Respondent v. Tacoma School District
No. 10, a Washington School District, Appellant, Nowicki &
Associates, Inc., a Washington corporation; Now Environmental
Services, Inc., d/b/a Nowicki Environmental, a Washington
corporation, Respondents.

Judges Quinn-Brintnall, Armstrong, and Penoyar entered judgment in
Case No. 40025-1-II on June 28, 2011.  This was an appeal from
Pierce County Superior Court.

This appeal concerned a trial court's order directing the Tacoma
School District No. 10 to pay over US$235,000 in attorney fees in
a lawsuit, to which it was not a party, between two private

Eastwood Enterprises, Inc. (EEI) sued Nowicki & Associates, Inc.
and its successor in interests, NOW Environmental Services, Inc.,
for damages caused by alleged inadequate consulting work on the
remodeling of Henry Foss High School.  Although Nowicki and NOW
filed third-and fourth-party complaints against the District, no
claims against the District were adjudicated.

Despite the District not being a party to EEI's suit against
Nowicki and NOW, the trial court imposed fees against the
District, after granting Nowicki and NOW's summary judgment motion
in EEI's lawsuit.

In 2002, the District began a remodel of Henry Foss High School.
Garco Construction, Inc., served as the general contractor and
Nowicki prepared bid specifications for asbestos removal.  Garco
subcontracted with EEI to remove asbestos from the school.

Nowicki raised concerns about EEI's asbestos removal
qualifications because of problems that EEI had in previous
projects.  In spite of Nowicki's stated concerns, the District
decided to pay Nowicki to monitor EEI's performance rather than
substituting EEI's subcontract.  NOW subsequently purchased
Nowicki and assumed the consulting and monitoring duties.

In May 2005, the Department of Labor & Industries cited EEI for 29
different safety violations on the Foss High School project,
including multiple "serious" and "willful" violations.  In
response to these violations, the District required that Garco
terminate EEI's subcontract.

By August 2005, EEI submitted a US$998,643.34 claim to Garco, and
then to the District, for "extra work" costs that it had incurred.
In November 2006, after several lawsuits were filed, the District,
Garco, Garco's insurance carrier, and EEI reached a settlement

In March 2007, EEI sued Nowicki to recover costs and expenses that
the District incurred as part of the 2005-2006 litigation.  EEI
also asserted a breach of contract claim for Nowicki's allegedly
defective asbestos removal specifications that EEI relied on when
submitting its bid.  EEI later amended its complaint, adding NOW
as a co-defendant.

On Sept. 24, 2007, Nowicki filed a third party complaint against
the District alleging a right to attorney fees for defending EEI's
lawsuit.  On Dec. 18, NOW filed a fourth party complaint against
the District, alleging a similar right to attorney fees for
defending EEI's lawsuit.

All of the involved parties filed multiple summary judgment
motions over the next 20 months.  In its trial brief relating to
its second summary judgment motion against EEI, Nowicki indicated
for the first time its intent to seek attorney fees against the
District.  Ultimately, Nowicki requested to amend its third party
complaint to add as a basis for attorney fees when it also moved
for summary judgment a third time in its suit against EEI.

On Sept. 18, the trial court granted Nowicki's third summary
judgment motion in EEI's suit against Nowicki.  Accordingly, the
trial court dismissed EEI's complaint, with prejudice, and ruled
that EEI and the District were liable for Nowicki's and NOW's
attorney fees.

Nowicki and NOW voluntarily dismissed their third and fourth party
complaints because the trial court imposed attorney fees on the
District in the EEI and Nowicki/NOW lawsuit.

On October 30, the trial court held a hearing resulting in two
separate orders.  On November 24, the District appealed the
September 18 and October 30 attorney fee orders.  On June 2, 2010,
Nowicki filed its response brief and included a motion to dismiss
the District's appeal as untimely.

The Appeals Court vacated the trial court's order's insofar as
they impose joint and several liability for Nowicki's and NOW's
attorney fees on the District and the Court denied the District's
request for trial and appellate attorney fees.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Denies Lindstrom Summary Judgment Motion
The U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, denied Lindstrom
Cleaning & Construction Inc.'s motion for summary judgment in a
case styled Gary Reed and Tom Vevea, as Trustees of the Minnesota
Laborers Health and Welfare Fund et al., Plaintiffs v. EnviroTech
Remediation Services, Inc. and Lindstrom Cleaning & Construction
Inc. (d/b/a Lindstrom Restoration and Lindstrom Environmental,
Inc.), Defendants.

Judge Michael J. Davis entered judgment in Civil Action No.
09-1976 on July 1, 2011.

The Trust Funds brought the action seeking unpaid employee benefit
contributions from EnviroTech Remediation Services, Inc.  The
Funds later added Lindstrom as defendant, claiming that Lindstrom
is the alter ego or successor in interest to EnviroTech.

Lindstrom asserted that it is entitled to summary judgment because
it did not sign a collective bargaining agreement with the
laborer's union, and because successor or alter ego liability does
not attach to Lindstrom concerning any delinquent employee benefit
contributions in the case.

EnviroTech was incorporated in 2001 to provide remediation
services to property owners.  These services include the removal
of asbestos prior to renovation or demolition.  Property owners in
need of such services will work with industrial hygienist
consultants and the industry, and its procedures are regulated by
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).  Both union and
non-union workers perform this work.

EnviroTech joined the Minnesota Environmental Contractors
Association (MECA) in 2002, and thereby agreed to be bound by the
provisions of the relevant collective bargaining agreement (CBA)
between MECA and the Asbestos Workers Local 205 and Minnesota
Laborers District Council.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Affirms TKK USA's Summary Judgment Motion
The U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern
Division, granted TKK USA Inc.'s motion for summary judgment in an
asbestos-related insurance action filed against Safety National
Casualty Corporation.

The case is styled TKK USA Inc. (f/k/a The Thermos Company),
Plaintiff v. Safety National Casualty Corporation, Defendant.

District Judge James B. Zagel entered judgment in Case No.
10 C 8146 on June 29, 2011.

This case centered on whether Safety National Casualty Corporation
had a duty to reimburse its insured, TKK USA Inc. (Thermos).  The
parties had filed cross-motions for summary judgment, and no facts
are in dispute.  Thermos' motion for summary judgment was granted.
Safety National's motion for summary judgment was denied.

Safety National sold Thermos policy number AGC-4551-IL on Aug. 31,
1995.  Thermos purchased a continuation of the Safety National
Policy through Aug. 31, 1997.

On Aug. 28, 2009, Juanita M. Perkins, as Special Administrator of
the Estate of Blannie Perkins, filed a complaint against "Thermos-
King, Inc." and other defendants in the Circuit Court of the Third
Judicial Circuit of Madison County, Ill.

Mr. Perkins was an employee at the Thermos plant in Freeport,
Ill., and his last day of employment with Thermos was Feb. 10,
1997.  The underlying complaint sought damages under Illinois
common law, alleging two counts of common law negligence, and four
counts of intentional and willful misconduct by Thermos.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that Mr. Perkins was exposed
to asbestos-containing products in the course of his employment
that were supplied by Thermos and used throughout the facility.
Such exposure, it is alleged, resulted in his death from

On Oct. 14, 2009, Thermos provided notice to Safety National of
the lawsuit.  On March 23, 2010, counsel for Thermos spoke with
Safety National's claims analyst and advised her that Thermos
expected to exhaust the Safety National Policy's US$275,000 self-
insured retention in the defense of the Perkins lawsuit and
requested that Safety National provide a coverage determination.

On Aug. 25, 2010, Safety National forwarded a letter to Thermos
declining coverage under the policy.  Thermos asked that Safety
National reconsider its denial of coverage, but Safety National
maintained its position that Thermos was not entitled to coverage
under the policy.

Meanwhile, the Court denied Thermos' motion for fees.  Safety
National's cross-motion for summary judgment also was denied.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Mossburg Action v. 28 Firms Filed in St. Clair
Julie Anne Mossburg, on Sept. 23, 2011, filed an asbestos lawsuit
against 23 defendant corporations in St. Clair County Circuit
Court, Ill., The Madison/St. Clair Record reports.

Ms. Mossburg is represented by Randy L. Gori, Esq., of Gori,
Julian and Associates in Edwardsville.  Erik Karst, Esq., J. Kyle
Beale, Esq., and Matthew T. Wright, Esq., of Karst and von Oiste
in Houston will also be representing her.

In her complaint, Ms. Mossburg alleged the defendant companies
caused the recently deceased Gary James Mossburg Sr. to develop
lung cancer after his exposure to asbestos-containing products
throughout his career.

Mr. Mossburg worked as a bricklayer and tile setter at various
residential, commercial and industrial locations from 1966-2006,
according to the complaint.  As a result of his asbestos-related
diseases, he died on Jan. 27, 2010.

In her six-count complaint (St. Clair County Circuit Court Case
No. 11-L-530), Ms. Mossburg seeks economic damages of more than
US$50,000, a judgment of more than US$50,000, punitive and
exemplary damages of more than US$100,000 and compensatory damages
of more than US$50,000, plus costs and other relief the court
deems just.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Velan Legal Costs Surged From $2.2MM to $2.7MM
Tom Velan, president and CEO of Velan Inc., said that
"Administration costs increased significantly this quarter as our
legal and other costs associated with our on-going asbestos legal
proceedings increased from $2.2 million to $2.7 million,"
according to a Velan Inc. press release dated Oct. 12, 2011.

Mr. Velan continued, "Similar to some other U.S. valve
manufacturers, two of our U.S. subsidiaries have been named as
defendants in a number of pending lawsuits brought on behalf of
individuals seeking to recover damages for their alleged asbestos
exposure.  These lawsuits are related to products manufactured and
sold many years ago.

"We strongly believe that our products, which were supplied with
encapsulated asbestos packing and gaskets in accordance with valve
industry practice and customer mandated specifications, did not
contribute to any asbestos-related sicknesses.

"We will continue to vigorously defend against these claims but,
given the ongoing course of asbestos litigation in the U.S. and
the unpredictability of jury trials, it is not possible to make an
estimate of our legal and other costs related to these claims."

Headquartered in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Velan Inc. manufactures
industrial valves.  The Company employs over 1,800 people and has
manufacturing plants in 10 countries.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Firemen Tackle Asbestos-Roof Fire in Capernwray
Firefighters from Lancaster, Morecambe, Carnforth and Bolton-le-
Sands are seen putting out a fire at an asbestos roof at
Capernwray House Farm on Hobsons Lane in Capernwray, England, the
Morecambe and District News reports.

Four fire engines were called to the blaze at the industrial shed
with an asbestos roof near Carnforth on Oct. 12, 2011.  A 50-meter
cordon has been set up both due to the asbestos and because there
are gas cylinders inside the shed.

Firefighters fired water onto the roof to drive down dust
particles following the incident at 1:25 p.m.  Lancaster City
Council said Lancashire Fire Service had informed its
environmental health team about the fire, but had assured it that
the situation was under control.

The cause of the blaze is unclear at this stage.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Defendant Seeks Dismissal in Krohn Case in Ill.
James, Svajgl, Esq., an attorney for an unnamed defendant in
Richard A. Krohn's asbestos contamination case said the company is
hoping Madison County Circuit Judge Barbara Crowder will dismiss
it from the case, the Madison/St. Clair Record reports.

At a hearing Oct. 11, 2011, Mr. Svajgl said the company asked not
to be named out of fear of future lawsuits.

Mr. Krohn died in 2009.  His wife, plaintiff Mary Krohn of
Florida, claims he was diagnosed with mesothelioma due to asbestos
exposure in December 2008.  Mr. Krohn was a laborer at Clark Oil
Refinery in Blue Island, Ill., from 1957 to 1996.

Mr. Svajgl's client denies causing the illness.  Judge Crowder
will then take the arguments under advisement, look at information
on file and assess if it can be dismissed from the case.

Mr. Svajgl said, "We were one of dozens of defendants in the case,
and we don't feel we should be in it.  We did not cause this
person's illness."

Mr. Svajgl works for Segal, McCambridge, Singer & Mahoney in

Mr. Krohn's case is Madison County Case No. 10-L-817.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cape Breton Worker Fined C$1,000 Safety Breach
According to a court decision released on Oct. 12, 2011, James
Della Valle, a worker at the Cape Breton Island Housing Authority
has been fined C$1,000 for failing to protect tenants in Whitney
Pier apartments from asbestos, CBC News reports.

According to the ruling, Mr. Della Valle did not inform his
supervisor about the asbestos risk and failed to follow up to
ensure the asbestos was removed.  He was the health and safety
coordinator for the housing authority in October 2005, when a
worker found what appeared to be asbestos in some insulation that
fell from the ceiling of a housing unit in a Sydney, Nova Scotia,
Canada, complex.

Mr. Della Valle took a sample of the material for testing, which
confirmed the material in the attic was asbestos.  He took that
information to two maintenance supervisors and told them what
actions needed to be taken.

However, tenants were not immediately informed of the asbestos.
It was not until six months later, when an outside contractor
contacted provincial environment officials, that the housing
authority took action.  It sealed and in some cases removed the
asbestos in 80 housing units.

Provincial court Judge Peter Ross wrote in his Sept. 14, 2011
decision that it was "astounding" that the head of the housing
authority, Joan McKeough, was "kept in the dark" about the
asbestos for a full six months after it was first discovered.

Mr. Ross said Mr. Della Valle should have taken decisive action to
protect fellow employees and the tenants of the buildings by
contacting his supervisor with the information about the asbestos
and by following up with the maintenance workers to see whether
they had taken any action.

In 2009, the Nova Scotia Department of Community Services, which
oversees public housing, was also ordered to pay a C$10,000 fine
for not acting quickly enough to protect tenants and workers.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Insurance Firms' Action Junked in Payout Claim
The United Kingdom Supreme Court dismissed insurance companies'
legal action to scrap the right of people in Scotland to claim
damages for pleural plaques, BBC News reports.

The Court's decision will allow people with pleural plaques to
claim compensation.  Insurers previously failed to overturn the
laws at the Court of Session.

Most Scots affected by pleural plaques had worked in heavy
industry, such as shipbuilding.

In 2007, the House of Lords ruled that victims could not claim
compensation, but the Scottish government disagreed.  MSPs passed
the Damages Act in 2009, allowing claims to be made - with the
likely cost estimated at between GBP7 million and GBP9 million.

Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill said insurance firms
must now recognize the law, but industry body the Association of
British Insurers maintained the Damages Act was flawed.

Pleural plaques are not themselves a disease and have no symptoms,
but the thickening of lung membranes is an indicator of past
exposure to asbestos.  Scottish ministers argued pleural plaques
could give rise to more serious conditions, such as lung cancer,
mesothelioma or asbestosis.  However, insurance firms vigorously
attacked the legislation, alleging it infringed on human rights

The industry argued that it broke European Convention on Human
Rights provisions on property rights and constitutes unreasonable
legal interference.

However, Supreme Court justices in London dismissed an appeal by
several insurance companies -- including AXA -- against an April
2011 decision by Court of Session judges in Scotland, who rejected
argument that the legislation was unlawful.

The Supreme Court ruled that it could not be said that the
"judgment of the Scottish Parliament was without reasonable

The Supreme Court has said the judgment of the Scottish Parliament
as an elected body about what constituted the public interest,
should be respected.

In earlier cases, the Supreme Court had overturned decisions
relating to Scots law.

Nick Starling, director of general insurance and health for the
Association of British Insurers, said after the ruling, "Insurers
remain fully committed to continuing to pay compensation to people
with asbestos-related conditions, such as mesothelioma.

"The insurers brought this case because they believe that the
Damages Act is fundamentally flawed in that it ignores
overwhelming medical evidence that pleural plaques are
symptomless, and the well-established legal principle that
compensation is payable only when there is physical harm.

"We are very disappointed that the court has not found in our
favor on this important principle of law.  Insurers will now
consider carefully this judgment and what it means for them."

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Colo. Landlord Faces Sentence for Safety Breach
Jurors convicted Tom Tienda, a landlord from Pueblo, Colo., over
asbestos-related demolition violations, The Pueblo Chieftain

It took a jury of three women and nine men less than an hour to
convict Mr. Tienda on eight counts he faced, including causing a
hazardous substances spill and attempting to influence a public
official.  For each of those felonies, Mr. Tienda faces up to six
years in prison.

Mr. Tienda was also convicted on six counts of violating the air
quality control act, endangering an individual.  Each of those
felonies carries a maximum sentence of four years in prison, but
also carries a fine of up to US$50,000 for each day of the

Mr. Tienda spent weeks in May and June 2007 demolishing a house at
1504 Lake Ave. that he knew had asbestos fibers in the plaster of
its interior walls.  State and local prosecutors presented
evidence that he hired a group of day laborers, some from the
Pueblo Soup Kitchen, to work on the project without telling them
that asbestos was in the materials they were smashing to dust with
sledge hammers and shoveling into the back of a truck.

Prosecutors also said Mr. Tienda transported some of the material
to another of his properties at 603 Catalpa St. on the Lower East
Side, potentially spreading the hazardous materials spill into
other neighborhoods in the city.

State prosecutor Mike Melito told the jury that Mr. Tienda thought
with his wallet when he made the decision to tear down the house
and put seven people at risk of exposure.  Mr. Melito said Mr.
Tienda also was thinking with his wallet when he spent a year
shuffling his feet and not complying with Municipal Court orders
and directives from the Pueblo Regional Building Department to
deal with the property.

Evidence said the house had fallen into severe disrepair over the
years and witnesses said there were signs of squatters and gang
activity in the house.  Trash had been dumped inside and the
plumbing and electricity was removed.  Mr. Tienda represented
himself during the four-day trial and often seemed overmatched by
the prosecutors.

Mr. Tienda claimed his attorney told him to tear the building down
and risk a US$300 fine, but his attorney denied that and told the
jury she instructed him to comply with the Municipal Court order
or go to jail.

Mr. Tienda took the stand in his own defense on Oct. 13, 2011 and
by the end of the day, admitted to causing the hazardous materials
spill and apologized to the jury for doing it, saying he felt the
pressure of a looming jail sentence for not complying with the
Municipal Court's order.

During his closing remarks on Oct. 14, 2011, Mr. Tienda repeated
some of those same themes, going as far as asking the jury to
forgive him and telling them he would not harbor any hard feelings
toward them.

However, Mr. Melito reminded the jury that witnesses, including
Mr. Tienda's former attorney, testified that the imposition of his
jail sentence had been delayed after he provided a letter from a
licensed asbestos abatement contractor, which suggested he was
following through on what he had been ordered to do a year

District Attorney Bill Thiebaut said he was proud of the work by
Deputy District Attorney Ted D'Arcy, who assisted in Mr. Tienda's

Mr. Thiebaut said the district attorney's office worked on the
case for years with state and local health public health officers
and the attorney generals office.

District Judge David Crockenberg ordered a presentence
investigation report be made before he imposes a sentence.  Mr.
Tienda was also taken to Pueblo County Jail, but was released
later on US$5,000 bail.  He is scheduled for sentencing in
November 2011.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: NSW Police Seeks Contractors to Clean Up Sites
Superintendent Darryl Tuck of the New South Wales Police Force
says tenders have been called and contractors are being appointed
to inspect and fix more than 300 police houses and stations in
NSW's western region that were contaminated by asbestos, ABC News

The Force says all of its properties contaminated by asbestos or
lead paint will be reevaluated by next July 2012.  More than 300
police houses and stations in NSW's western region were identified
as at risk in a report finalized last February 2011.

Superintendent Tuck is visiting Dubbo, Bourke and Walgett as part
of an education tour to provide officers with information about
hazardous materials.  He said, "Now the first process took nearly
two years to undertake, from March 2008 to February 2010.

"So we're going to multiple contractors this time, a different
strategy, to try to compress that revaluation phase down to the
rest of this financial year, which is about eight months."

The Police Association of NSW is concerned repairs are not being
done quickly enough.  Western region union spokesman Robert Dunn
says warning signs have been put on houses at Nyngan and
Gulargambone, where preliminary inspections have been done.

Superintendent Tuck says work has started at properties considered
high risk.  He said, "We are actioning a number of the higher
priority jobs immediately.  We're not waiting on those and
certainly we expect that as part of the re-evaluation process we
will find a number of other properties that start to go into that
higher range and they will be actioned as we find them."

Superintendent Tuck says there is a very low health risk to
officers living in houses where fibro sheeting is in good
condition.  He said, "The risk is no greater than to other members
of the public who live in fibro houses and there are literally
thousands of those across the state."

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Found in 8 South Korea School Grounds
The South Korean Education Ministry said on Oct. 11, 2011 that
asbestos has been found in the playgrounds of eight schools and
its level is confirmed to have exceeded the permissible 0.1
percent, The Korea Herald reports.

The ministry's investigation and result-came after an
environmental group claimed they had found high levels of the
cancer-causing agent in playgrounds of the eight schools.

The schools are Yangmyung Elementary School in Seoul, Morundae
Elementary School in Busan, Gwancheon High School in Gyeonggi
Province, Seolhwa, Eumbong and Ssangyong Middle School in South
Chungcheong Province, and South Gyeongsang-based Milju Elementary
and Hadong Middle School.

"Investigation has been conducted by two public science agencies.
The result showed the playgrounds contain asbestos in higher
amount than the standard of 0.1 percent," said an official in a
joint meeting attended by related officials from the Education
Ministry, Culture Ministry and suppliers of school playground

The test confirmed that soil in the eight school playgrounds
contains the minerals olivine and serpentine, from former asbestos
mines.  The playgrounds are covered temporarily with tents to
prevent asbestos fibers from mixing with the air.

At the meeting, government officials and soil suppliers discussed
ways to dump the tainted soil and clean up.  However, they could
not reach an agreement as soil suppliers opposed shouldering the

Choi Ye-yong, a representative of the Asian Citizen's Center for
Environment and Health, said, "The soil tainted with asbestos
would have spread to other places at schools, including
classrooms.  The investigation should expand to other places at
school.  Also the authorities should strengthen monitoring process
in the future."

ASBESTOS UPDATE: ACT Officials Still Waiting for Talks on Hazard
Australian Capital Territory officials are still waiting to meet
the Federal Government to discuss the territory's asbestos
contamination crisis, The Canberra Times reports.

Senior bureaucrats from the Chief Minister's Department were due
to meet with their counterparts from the Department of Regional
Development, as the ACT tries to get the Commonwealth to take some
responsibility for the massive clean-up bills for asbestos
discoveries at old builders' dumps dating from before self-

However, the ACT Government said on Oct. 11, 2011 that the meeting
had been "deferred" until later in October 2011.  The postponement
comes a week after the latest find of the asbestos - an area the
size of a cricket pitch contaminated with asbestos pipes in
Canberra's inner north.

The discovery shut down work on the Lyneham sports fields.  The
site was sealed off as air monitoring is carried out to ensure
there is no threat to the public.  Workers on the site are being
urged to seek medical attention and the site's contractor is under
investigation over alleged breaches of work safety laws.

In April 2011, then chief minister Jon Stanhope wrote to the
Commonwealth after the discovery of at least 600,000 cubic meters
of contaminated soil -- with a potential clean-up bill of AU$D100
million -- at the East Lake development precinct in the city's
south.  Much of the waste is thought to have come from the
building of Parliament House.

Mr. Stanhope said that he was asking the Commonwealth to accept
its "residual obligations" to help clear the territory of material
dumped here before self-government.  However, the former chief
minister's pleas fell on deaf ears and the task has now fallen to
his successor, Katy Gallagher.

A spokeswoman for Deputy Chief Minister Andrew Barr said, "[Ms.
Gallagher] wrote to the Commonwealth Government in August to
follow-up on the issue of past contamination of territory lands
first raised by the former chief minister, Jon Stanhope earlier
this year in April.

"In this letter, the Chief Minister reiterated the proposal for a
high level group of Commonwealth and ACT Government officials to
develop a protocol for ensuring the land is remediated

"Officials from the Department of Regional Australia, Regional
Development and Local Government will meet with officials of the
ACT Government in October to consider options for addressing the
past contamination of territory lands, including the development
of a protocol."

In 2010, the ACT was left with an AUD20 million clean-up bill when
162,000 tons of toxic soil, mostly containing asbestos, halted
work of new housing developments at the North Weston Ponds project
in Molonglo.

A report into the asbestos crisis by the ACT's Auditor-General's
office leveled harsh criticism at five ACT government agencies
over their handling of the contamination problem which, like East
Lake and Lyneham, dated from long before self-government.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: UK Schools Comply With Asbestos Management Laws
Checks on how schools outside of local authority control are
managing asbestos have revealed that most have adequate
arrangements in place -- though 17% fell below acceptable
standards in relation to management procedures, according to a
Health and Safety Executive press release dated Oct. 14, 2011.

The HSE inspected a random sample of 164 independent, voluntary
aided and foundation schools and academies between November 2010
and June 2011.  It served notices on 28 schools requiring them to
improve arrangements for managing asbestos, and provided informal
advice to a further 110.

Enforcement action was taken over failures such as training staff
and producing written management plans, rather than because staff
or pupils were considered at significant risk of exposure.

Compliance with the Control of Asbestos Regulations (2006) in
England, Scotland and Wales was broadly similar to that found in a
survey and inspection program involving local authority-controlled
schools in 2009/10.

Asbestos which is in good condition and remains undamaged and
undisturbed does not pose any significant risk to health if it is
managed in compliance with the legal requirements and according to
HSE's published guidance.

Geoff Cox, the Head of HSE's public services sector, said, "Most
schools were able to demonstrate good levels of awareness and
compliance with the asbestos regulations and that's encouraging,
but this inspection initiative did highlight that there is still
confusion in some schools over roles and responsibilities.

"We took action where schools had fallen below acceptable
standards and we are working across the education sector to raise
awareness and find ways to make it clearer for schools to
understand their legal responsibilities.

"It is important to stress that asbestos which is properly
managed, remains undamaged and is not disturbed is not a cause for
concern.  Those most at risk of disturbing asbestos are tradesmen
or general maintenance workers so it is essential they know where
asbestos is and that there work is carefully planned and managed."

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Calif. Court OKs Remand Bid in Savelesky Action
The U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, granted
Aida Savelesky's motion to remand an asbestos lawsuit filed
against National Steel and Shipbuilding Company (NASSCO) and other

The case is styled Aida Savelesky, Plaintiff v. Allied Packing and
Supply Inc., et al., Defendants.

District Judge Susan Illston entered judgment in Case No. C 11-
01778 SI on July 1, 2011.

Mrs. Savelesky filed this lawsuit in California Superior Court on
Aug. 6, 2010.  She alleges that her husband, Allen Savelesky,
worked with asbestos and asbestos-containing products, and that
her husband then exposed her to that asbestos.  She has now been
diagnosed with mesothelioma.

NASSCO is one of three named defendants in the case.  Mrs.
Savelesky brought two claims against defendant NASSCO, one for
"Premise Owner/Contractor Liability" and one for "General
Negligence-Premise Owner/Contractor."

Mrs. Savelesky alleged that her husband was "exposed to dangerous
quantities of asbestos fibers and other toxic substances" while on
NASSCO premises, that "these asbestos fibers contaminated his
skin, hair, clothes, and shoes," and that her "exposure to
asbestos occurred as a result."

On Feb. 24, 2011, Mrs. Savelesky served NASSCO with answers to
NASSCO's second set of interrogatories, by fax and U.S. mail.
On March 15, 2011, NASSCO deposed Manville Laddie Petteys.  On
April 12, 2011, NASSCO removed this case to federal court.

The Court granted Mrs. Savelesky's administrative motion and
granted her motion to remand this case to the Superior Court for
the County of Alameda.

Dean Allan Hanley, Esq., Anya Fuchs, Esq., Benjamin David
Goldstein, Esq., and Rohit Kodical, Esq., of Paul & Hanley LLP,
Berkeley, Calif., represented Mrs. Savelesky.

Edward R. Hugo, Esq., Paul M. Bessette, Esq., Thomas J. Moses,
Esq., of Brydon Hugo & Parker, in San Francisco represented NASSCO
and the other Defendants.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Texas Court Affirms Pre-Trial Ruling in Emmite
The Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (1st Dist.), affirmed the
order of the multi-district litigation (MDL) pretrial court, which
denied Union Carbide Corporation's motion and renewed motion to
dismiss the asbestos claims made by the estate of Joseph Emmite,

The case is styled Union Carbide Corporation, Appellant v. Daisy
E. Synatzske and Grace Annette Webb, Individually and as
Representatives and Co-Executrixes of the Estate of Joseph Emmite,
Sr., Joseph Emmite, Jr., Dorothy A. Day, Vera J. Gialmalva and
James R. Emmite, Appellees.

Judges Terry Jennings and Sharp entered judgment in Case No. 01-
09-01141-CV on June 30, 2011.

In this interlocutory appeal, Union Carbide challenges the MDL
pretrial court's order denying its motion and renewed motion to
dismiss the claims made against it by appellees, Daisy E. Synatzke
and Grace Annette Webb, individually and as representatives and
co-executrixes of the estate of Joseph Emmite, Sr., Joseph Emmite,
Jr., Dorothy A. Day, Vera J. Gialmalva, and James R. Emmite
(collectively, the "Emmites"), for the wrongful death of Joseph
Emmite Sr.

Joseph's death, the Emmites alleged, was caused by his exposure to
asbestos when he worked for Union Carbide at its Texas City
facility.  In five issues, Union Carbide contends that the MDL
pretrial court erred in denying its motion and renewed motion to
dismiss the Emmites' asbestos-related injury claims on the grounds
that the Emmites, without a motion or a showing of good cause, did
not timely serve Union Carbide with a physician report, which is
required to bring such claims.

None of the physician reports that the Emmites served upon Union
Carbide satisfied various requirements of Chapter 90, including
the requirement that such a report "verify" that "pulmonary
function testing" had been performed on Joseph and the physician
making the report had interpreted the pulmonary function testing.

The Emmites contended that the requirement of such a verification
of pulmonary function testing to pursue their asbestos-related
injury claims under Chapter 90, which became effective after
Joseph had been exposed to asbestos and died, violates the Texas
Constitution's prohibition against retroactive laws.

The Appeals Court affirmed the order of the MDL pretrial court
denying Union Carbide's motion and renewed motion to dismiss the
asbestos-related injury claims of the Emmites.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court OKs Dismissal of Federal-Mogul Trust Case
The U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, upheld the ruling of the
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, which
dismissed a complaint filed by Federal-Mogul U.S. Asbestos
Personal Injury Trust.

The case is styled Federal-Mogul U.S. Asbestos Personal Injury
Trust, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Continental Casualty Company,
Defendant, Continental Insurance Company, Defendant-Appellee.

Judges Cole, McKeague, and Griffin entered judgment in Case No.
10-1290 on July 8, 2011.

Federal-Mogul U.S. Asbestos Personal Injury Trust is a trust
created by the Chapter 11 bankruptcy plan of the Federal-Mogul
Corporation.  From 1965 to 1981, a division of the Federal-Mogul
Corporation, the Vellumoid Company, manufactured and sold
automotive products containing asbestos.  Subsequently, numerous
lawsuits were filed against the Federal-Mogul Corporation for
asbestos-related injuries arising from Vellumoid's products.

Federal-Mogul Corporation's bankruptcy plan established that the
Trust bears liability for these claims.  In addition, the plan
assigned the Trust the right to insurance proceeds and coverage
under the insurance policies held by the Federal-Mogul

The Trust holds three primary-level general insurance policies
that cover it for both liability and defense costs arising out of
the Vellumoid claims, one each from Travelers Indemnity Company,
Globe Indemnity Company, and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company.

The Trust alleged that the limits of the Travelers Policy have
been exhausted, but the other two primary policies are currently
defending the Trust against the Vellumoid claims.  The policy held
by the Trust at issue here is Continental's umbrella policy SRU
3196774.  The only primary policy covering the Vellumoid claims
that is listed in the umbrella Policy's Underlying Insurance
Schedule is the Travelers Policy.

The Trust filed this action seeking declaratory relief in the
district court, claiming that the Policy requires Continental to
defend the Trust against the Vellumoid claims.  Continental moved
to dismiss the complaint.  At a hearing, the district court orally
granted Continental's motion to dismiss.  The Trust appealed.

Because the Trust has failed to state a claim upon which relief
may be granted, the Appeals Court affirmed the district court's

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Appeals Court Vacates Board's Decision in Gibbs
The U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims vacated the ruling
of the Board of Veterans' Appeals, which denied Mary S. Gibbs'
claim for entitlement to service connection for the cause of her
veteran-husband's death.

The case is styled Mary S. Gibbs, Appellant v. Eric K. Shinseki,
Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Appellee.

Judge Kramer entered judgment in Case No. No. 10-0852 on July 8,

Mrs. Gibbs appealed that part of the Board decision finding that a
preponderance of the evidence did not show a sufficient connection
between the veteran's death from lung cancer and exposure to
asbestos in service.  Mrs. Gibbs had not challenged the Board's
findings regarding other potentially service-related causes of
death and thus has abandoned those arguments on appeal.

The veteran served as a nuclear weapons storekeeper aboard the
U.S.S. Wahoo from May 1968 to February 1970.  The U.S.S. Wahoo was
a nuclear naval submarine.  The record contained evidence that the
U.S.S. Wahoo underwent a major overhaul of 17 months duration,
ending in the latter part of June 1968, during which her hull was
radically modified and the ship was lengthened by 15 feet.

A VA memorandum of May 13, 2002, indicated generally that naval
vessels were constructed using asbestos, as it attached a list of
on-ship job titles and the corresponding probability of exposure
to asbestos for each position.

The question of whether asbestos exposure contributed to the
veteran's death was referred for a VA medical opinion in 2007.
The examiner noted documentation of the U.S.S. Wahoo's
reconstruction and the appellant's contention that "during this
extensive overhaul, there was general asbestos fiber exposure
which would have affected the veteran."

The record on appeal, and the parties' pleadings, the Jan. 11,
2010, Board decision was vacated and remanded for proceedings
consistent with this decision.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Whisnant Asbestos Case to Continue Another Year
The retrial of an asbestos lawsuit filed on behalf of refinery
worker, Willis Whisnant Jr., against DuPont De Nemours has been
continued for another year, The Southeast Texas Record reports.

Since 2007, the Southeast Texas Record has reported on the
asbestos litigation filed by Caryl Richardson on behalf of her
deceased father, Mr. Whisnant.

In 2008, DuPont won a jury verdict.  However, Judge Donald Floyd,
172nd District Court, tossed out the jury's decision and granted
Mrs. Richardson's attorney Glen Morgan's motion for a new trial
without any explanation for the ruling.

The case was set to go back to trial sometime in the fall, but on
Sept. 9, 2011 Judge Floyd granted a motion for continuance,
placing the case on his September 2012 docket, court records show.

DuPont filed its unopposed motion for continuance on June 27,
2011, asking Judge Floyd to continue the case once again "because
the Supreme Court is considering a critical issue related to (his)
order in granting a new trial."

Following two appeals and numerous hearings, in July 2009, the
Texas Supreme Court ordered Judge Floyd to disclose his reasons
for granting the new trial, court records show.  The judge has yet
to give his reasons.

DuPont's motion states that the Supreme Court's ruling in the case
In re United Scaffolding "will have relevance to the order in" its
case.  The state's high court heard oral arguments on the United
Scaffolding case on Oct. 6, 2011.

Court records show that Mr. Whisnant, a former subcontractor for
DuPont, was in his late 70s when he died from mesothelioma.  Judge
Floyd signed a final judgment on April 17, 2008.

Following the no negligence verdict, Mr. Morgan, of the Beaumont
law firm Reaud, Morgan & Quinn, filed a motion for a new trial,
arguing the evidence did not support the jury's verdict.  He also
accused the Southeast Texas Record of jury tampering and of being
agents of DuPont, court papers say.

Judge Floyd granted the motion in a May 28, 2008, order, but
offered no explanation for his decision.  DuPont is represented in
part by MehaffyWeber attorney Sandra Clark, Esq., in Case No.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cork Worker's Family Awarded EUR190T in Payout
On Oct. 15, 2011, the family of John Carroll, from Knocknaheeny,
Cork, Ireland, was awarded EUR190,000 compensation for Mr.
Carroll's asbestos injuries and subsequent death in April 2009 at
the age of 61, the Irish Examiner reports.

The case was brought by Mr. Carroll's widow, Anne Carroll.  He had
been exposed to asbestos during a six-month period of work at Cork
Dockyard in 1971.  Mrs. Carroll's senior counsel, Andrew Sexton,
said Mr. Carroll worked in a number of places, including a brief
period at Cork Dockyard in 1971.

Mr. Sexton said, "In April 2009 he died of cancer. Notwithstanding
the length of time involved, they were able to link it back to a
brief period working in an asbestos environment.  To trace the
company was an achievement in itself down to the tenacious
approach of the solicitor (Cathal Lombard)."

The settlement offer in the case was made by defendant company,
Cape Ireland Ltd, of City Quay, Dublin, and formerly Cape
Insulation (Ireland) Ltd.  The settlement, approved by Ms. Justice
Elizabeth Dunne, went to Mrs. Carroll, who has five adult

While the judge approved the settlement, it was subject to the
signing of waivers by members of the wider family in respect of
EUR25,000 of the total.

Ms. Justice Dunne said she appreciated it was difficult for Mrs.
Carroll to come to court to deal with such financial matters when
it had arisen out of the loss of a loved one.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Teasdale Family Calling for Action on Asbestos
Nick Teasdale, the son of Norman Teasdale, is calling on council
chiefs to warn the elder Mr. Teasdale's former colleagues and
pupils at a school in Teesside, England, the Evening Gazette

Nick Teasdale believes others who were at the same school may have
contracted the deadly disease, which killed Norman.  Norman, a
former Stockton councilor, worked at the then Billingham Campus
School in Marsh House Avenue.

Norman was exposed to asbestos from 1962 to 1975, while working as
a woodwork and metalwork teacher.  He was diagnosed with asbestos
related pleural plaques in June 2009, but was given no advice on
how to manage it.  After his condition progressed to mesothelioma,
he pursued a compensation claim.

This was through Norman's trade union, the Association of Teachers
and Lecturers and their disease claims experts, Morrish

Norman died at the age of 72 on Oct. 12, 2010.  The claim was
finally settled in favor of his widow, representing his injuries
and the loss of earnings to his surviving family.  Although the
exposure occurred during the days of Cleveland County Council, the
claim was settled by Stockton Council, as the successor authority.

The 49-year-old Nick Teasdale believes Stockton Council should
inform former staff and pupils from that time that they may also
have been exposed.  He said, "Dad knew of at least one other
colleague from Billingham Campus who had died of mesothelioma two
years after he was diagnosed.

"I will bet there are others.  And not just the teachers either.
The students, who might only be in their fifties and sixties, were
also exposed to asbestos.  Stockton Council should let these
people know what's going on."

A Stockton Council spokesperson said, "Asbestos related diseases
are devastating and our sympathy goes to Mr. Teasdale's family.
Buildings are now managed in a very different way to how they were
in the 1960s and Seventies."

ASBESTOS UPDATE: GST Appeals Decision Denying Information Access
EnPro Industries, Inc., on Oct. 13, 2011, announced that its
Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC, subsidiary has appealed a
decision of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court recently handed down in
Pennsylvania, according to a Company press release dated Oct. 13,

The decision, by Judge Judith Fitzgerald, denied GST's motion to
gain access to the identities of thousands of asbestos claimants
who have appeared in 12 bankruptcy cases of prominent former
asbestos defendants over which Judge Fitzgerald presided.

Normally, the identities of creditors who appear in bankruptcy
cases are matters of public record.  In these cases, the
bankruptcy court required lawyers to identify their clients who
alleged claims against the bankrupts, but permitted lawyers to
file the claimants' names and the specific nature of their claims
off the public docket.

As a result, holders of tens of thousands of asbestos claims
against the 12 former defendants have been hidden from public
view.  The bankruptcy court refused to let GST have access to the
names of such asbestos claimants.

Steve Macadam, president and chief executive officer of EnPro,
said, "We are confident the judge applied the wrong legal
standard.  She failed to follow the fundamental rule that, except
in rare circumstances that don't apply here, papers filed in
federal courts are subject to public access.

"All we want is transparency - let the world see who claims injury
at the hands of bankrupt asbestos defendants and what they said
about their exposures," Mr. Macadam said.

The Company and GST are confident that with this simple
information, the public can scrutinize the claiming practices of
asbestos plaintiffs who assert claims against one set of
defendants in the tort system and against another set of former
defendants who are in bankruptcy cases or who have set up trusts
to pay claims against them.  Mr. Macadam added, "The denial of
access to this information just doesn't pass the fairness test."

A Congressional subcommittee is investigating the transparency
issue to determine whether to move forward with legislation
designed to provide simple access to the type of information the
Pennsylvania federal court is protecting.

Both the Company and GST believe that if claimants deny knowledge
of exposure to the asbestos products of bankrupt defendants when
they make claims against GST, but then turn around and make claims
against defendants in bankruptcy cases, or trusts set up to pay
claims against such defendants, both GST and the public have an
interest in knowing about it.

Rick Magee, senior vice president and general counsel of the
Company, noted that GST had previously shown the court examples of
plaintiffs who denied knowledge of exposure to the products of
bankrupt defendants in claims against GST but who swore to
contrary positions when they made claims against trusts.  He said,
"We know we have only seen the tip of the iceberg at this point.

"If claimant representatives are sincere in their claims that
concealment of evidence wasn't going on, then why are they working
so hard to keep us from gaining access to the information that
will answer the question definitively one way or the other?"

In its own bankruptcy case pending before a federal bankruptcy
judge in Charlotte, N.C., GST asserts that its gasket and packing
products, which contained encapsulated asbestos, could not have
made claimants sick and that it became a significant asbestos
defendant only after culpable co-defendants, who mined raw
asbestos or manufactured asbestos insulation, wall board or other
dangerous asbestos products, exited the state court tort systems
by filing for bankruptcy in the early 2000s.

GST, which has been a defendant in asbestos claims since the
1970s, regularly prevailed in court on asbestos claims before
those bankruptcies.  After the filings, however, the plaintiffs'
bar turned their sights on Garlock and began targeting it and
other remaining defendants while denying the culpability of
bankrupt former defendants.

Headquartered in Charlotte, N.C., EnPro Industries, Inc. is a
leader in sealing products, metal polymer and filament wound
bearings, components and service for reciprocating compressors,
diesel and dual-fuel engines and other engineered products for use
in critical applications by industries worldwide.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Disposed Near Carlisle, England Site
Asbestos, a potentially deadly substance, has been dumped in a
Carlisle, Cumbria, England, lane just yards from Jane Street,
Willowholme, a short distance from Bridge Street, News & Star

Elsie Martlew reported seeing the building rubble last Oct. 14,
2011 to Castle ward councilor Willie Whalen, who has been a
leading campaigner on asbestos related health and safety issues
for several years.

Mr. Whalen alerted council officials to his belief that asbestos
was among the rubbish on Oct. 7, 2011.  Officials responded by
cordoning off the area with a plastic tape, but no signs were put
up to warn the public of the asbestos risk.

Sainsbury, which owns the land involved, erected a fence across
the entrance to the street on Oct. 14, 2011 -- a week after Mr.
Whalen contacted the city council, and the day after the asbestos
was confirmed.

Mr. Whalen said, "When Elsie Martlew told me about what she
thought was just a case of fly-tipping, I went straight down to
have a look at it, and I knew it was asbestos because I've a
lifetime of experience with this stuff.

"I went straight down to the Civic Centre to see an environmental
health officer.  I told them what I thought it was, but agreed a
sample should be examined by a chemist.  They put a flimsy cordon
around it, but there should have been warning signs.

"Some people have parked their cars just a few yards from this
stuff, and kids could have just wandered over past the plastic
cordon.  I don't think they'd have allowed this to happen in

Mrs. Martlew, who lives nearby with her former Carlisle MP husband
Eric, branded the city council's handling of the asbestos as
"disgraceful."  She said, "They did nothing to stop children
playing there -- they just put up a plastic tape."

Councilor Ray Bloxham, portfolio holder for environment and
housing, said the asbestos was not a substance that council staff
could immediately deal with as specialist contractors would have
to be found by the landowner.  He said council officials did not
want to draw too much attention to the asbestos, attracting people
to the site.

A city council spokeswoman added, "Although we appreciate the
concerns, our officers followed the correct legal procedures.
After receiving the complaint about fly tipping they sampled the
material on the same day.

"The results came back to us on Thursday, October 13.  The land is
privately owned and we didn't have any authority, until the sample
results were received, to require the landowner to prevent access.

"We contacted them immediately and they have fenced off the area
and have made arrangements for the material to be removed legally
and safely."

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Illegal Dismissal Case v. U-Haul Filed Oct. 14
Mark Clemens, a 38-year-old former worker of U-Haul in the San
Francisco facility, on Oct. 14, 2011, sued his former employer,
claiming he was fired for complaining about asbestos, KTVU

The U-Haul facility in the Bayview is one the largest in the U-
Haul chain - six stories tall with 2,200 storage units that are
possibly full of asbestos, according to one former employee.

Mr. Clemens worked at the Bayview U-Haul for eight months and
earned a promotion to assistant manager, when his career was
suddenly cut short.  He said, "I was terminated specifically
because of asbestos, is my belief.  It's wrapped around some
piping for insulation."

A janitor found asbestos in the cleaning supply room and urged
management to deal with the issue.  That janitor was let go, and
Mr. Clemens picked up the cause.  His boss brushed him off several

Mr. Clemens said, "He acknowledged that it was in fact here, and
had been for years and years, and they had no intention of doing
anything about it."

Mr. Clemens was terminated soon after and now he's seeking lost
wages and punitive damages.

Steve Sommers, Esq., Mr., Clemens' attorney said, "What we want to
do it send a message back to U-Haul, that if you fire people for
complaining about an unsafe environment, then you're gonna feel

KTVU visited the office on Oct. 14, 2011 and was shown a storage
model.  When asked about asbestos on the top floors, KTVU was
asked to leave and told no managers were on site to respond.

Mr. Clemens said he worries that customers may be exposed without
realizing it and he fears for former colleagues, who may be too
scared to speak up.  He said, "I'd really like them to clean it
up, so all the people working here on a daily basis, and all the
people with storage units, don't get exposed to this type of
thing, because it's very devastating if it leads to cancer."

In addition to the civil court, Mr. Clemens' attorney is filing
under California Proposition 65, which requires warning notices to
go up about the asbestos and a cleanup if it cannot be contained.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Phillips Family Calling for Action on Asbestos
THE family of David Phillips, a mesothelioma sufferer from
Huntingdonshire, England, is campaigning to raise awareness of the
dangers of asbestos, Hunts Post 24 reports.

When Mr. Phillips was diagnosed with mesothelioma four years ago,
he had no idea how he contracted the fatal lung disease.  The
64-year-old Mr. Phillips, a travel agent had never knowingly
worked with asbestos, except once while in the London office of
his former company in the late 1970s.  He recalls cleaning out a
storage cupboard and emerging covered in dust.

The condition lay dormant until a few years after taking early
retirement when Mr. Phillips suffered a panic attack and was
unable to breath.  He said, "We went out for a meal with some
friends, I had a panic attack.  They bundled me into a car and
took me to Hinchingbrooke Hospital.  One of the first questions I
was asked was 'Had I ever worked with asbestos?'"

Initially, Mr. Phillips was diagnosed with pleuresy, but when six
weeks later he fell ill again, doctors conducted further tests and
discovered fluid in his lungs.  After undergoing chemotherapy,
radiotherapy and an operation to halt the progress of the cancer,
he has been told nothing more can be done.

Mr. Phillips is determined to raise awareness of mesothelioma and
the dangers of asbestos.  In 2010, he jumped 1,400 feet from a
plane to raise money for Mesothelioma UK and in 2011, his
daughter, Laura, completed the Run to the Beat half marathon in
London for the same charity.

The 31-year-old Laura has already raised more than GBP1,200 for
Mesothelioma UK, and is considering doing a 37 mile London bridges
cycle challenge in 2012.  She said, "There is not that much money
going into research.  People do not know enough about it. It is in
schools and buildings."


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.  Leah
Felisilda, Noemi Irene A. Adala, Joy A. Agravante, Julie Anne
Lopez, Christopher Patalinghug, Frauline Abangan and Peter A.
Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2011.  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  * * *