"If you do a Google search on benzene, you see a lot of advertising from attorneys nationwide. Benzene is an emerging and sexy toxic tort," Mr. Bodell said.

A number of legal successes are also driving new litigation, he noted. "There have been some big seven- or eight-figure verdicts in California and elsewhere. It always takes substantial early verdicts to drive new litigation."

Yesterday, two California attorneys were announced as the chairs of an upcoming meeting on benzene litigation.

HarrisMartin publishing said it is holding a Benzene Litigation Conference Dec. 3-4 in New York chaired by plaintiff attorney Raphael Metzger, Metzger Law Group Long Beach, Calif. and defense attorney Deidre Cohen Katz Walsworth, Franklin, Bevins & McCall Orange, Calif.

The Metzger group says on its Web site that it has "successfully litigated benzene-leukemia cases for more than a decade, obtaining more than 10 settlements/verdicts for clients in seven figures."

Mr. Bodell said his firm's best estimate is that approximately 238,000 people in the United States may have been occupationally exposed to benzene. He listed newspaper press workers, painters, printers and refinery workers as the occupations potentially exposed.

And, he said, a number of the diseases associated with benzene have a latency period of five to 10 years, so the potential pool of exposed workers is much larger.

"How big is it? We don't know," Mr. Bodell added.

Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) is the disease most commonly associated with benzene exposure. "A number of studies have shown a fairly strong link between benzene exposure and AML," he said. Multiple myeloma (MM), though not as prevalent, is also being cited, as well as non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Mr. Bodell noted that benzene exposures are not just occupational. "The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) says benzene is the most significant air toxin of which cancer risk can be estimated."

Because of these factors, he predicted further benzene-related litigation in the future, but cautioned: "It's not yet clear whether there is gold in benzene. We'll have to see."

Peter Suranyi, vice president, claims and liability management, Swiss Reinsurance America Corporation said among other mass torts, lead has reached an interesting point in the last several years. "But it is hard to say where it will go."

Citing recent news stories about lead-based paint in toys manufactured in China, Mr. Suranyi said it was significant that large U.S. toy manufacturers are petitioning the federal government to establish safety standards for all toys marketed in the U.S.

Mr. Suranyi noted that after failing to prevail under product liability law, attorneys more recently have been pursuing public nuisance claims against lead paint manufacturers, an area that potentially could expand the coverage implications for insurers.

A landmark case in Rhode Island decided in February 2006 held three lead paint manufacturers liable under this theory. "The Rhode Island case essentially determined that the manufacturers used lead-based paint for so long it created a public nuisance. That's one of the novel theories used by the plaintiff's bar to try to defeat defenses available under well-established product law," he said.

But while the Rhode Island case was a wake-up call to businesses, Mr. Suranyi said significant legal hurdles remain to judgments against manufacturers and their insurers. He cited three recent court decisions in New Jersey, Missouri, and Ohio that rejected the public nuisance theory that had succeeded in Rhode Island.

Gary Wingo, vice president, Analysis Research Planning Consulting, told actuaries that said that welding rod suits are not growing as a class. "The welding rod plaintiffs have had only marginal success in court over the past few years," he said.

Mr. Wingo noted that since January 2006, the total number of cases pending against welding rod manufacturers has dropped by more than 50 percent and all five of the welding fume trials in 2006 resulted in a defense verdict.

Notwithstanding these factors, CAS said, panelists agreed that actuaries need to work closely with their claims departments to monitor how many insureds might be exposed to any litigation related to benzene, lead paint, or welding rods.