CAR_Public/010622.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

               Friday, June 22 2001, Vol. 3, No. 122

                              Headlines


ADVANTA LEASING: Bar Owners In Pennsylvania Sue ATM Leasing
Companies
AETHER SYSTEMS: Weiss Yourman Commences Securities Suit In S.D.
NY
CAPSTEAD MORTGAGE: Parties Trade Motions, But Court Still
Undecided
CAR PAINT LITIGATION: Auto Body Shop Files California Antitrust
Suit
DELTATHREE INC.: Bernstein Liebhard Files Securities Suit In S.D.
NY

DIGITAL IMPACT: Cauley Geller Files Securities Suit In S.D. New
York
DOLLAR GENERAL: Finklestein Thompson Commences Shareholders
Lawsuit
ECI TELECOM: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit In E.D.
Virginia
FEDERATED DEPARTMENT: Continues To Dispute Allegations In NY Suit
FIDELITY GROUP:South Carolina Residents Sue Over Unpaid Medical
Bills

FISHER-PRICE: Settles Defective Power Wheels Suit, Offers Free
Repair
GART SPORTS: Receives Third Complaints Over Wage And Hour
Violations
INFOSPACE INC.:Hagens Berman Files Securities Suit In W.D.
Washington
LONGS DRUG: Jury Awards $300T To Ex-employees For Emotional
Distress
MEN'S WEARHOUSE: Misleading Slack Advertisement Results In CA
Suit
NAVISITE INC.: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit In S.D.
NY

NET2000 COMMUNICATIONS: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Suit In NY
NETWORK COMMERCE: Cohen Milstein Files Securities Suit In W.D. WA
PURCHASEPRO.COM: Kirby McInerney Sues Over Artificially Inflated
Stock
RAYTHEON CORPORATION: Hagens Berman Files Securities Lawsuit In
Idaho
RAZORFISH INC.: Bernstein Liebhard Files Securities Suit In S.D.
NY

SILVERSTREAM SOFTWARE: Lovell And Sirota Firms File Suit In S.D.
NY
STAMPS.COM: Wolf Popper Commences Securities Suit In S.D. New
York
STAPLES INC.: Faces Consolidated Suit Over Reclassification Of
Stocks
TOBACCO LITIGATION: Govt's Opinion Of RICO Suit No Surprise To
Lawyers
VERTICALNET INC.: Schiffrin Barroway Files New York Securities
Suit

* Class Action Model, Environmental Court Would Aid Thai Legal
System


                              *********


ADVANTA LEASING: Bar Owners In Pennsylvania Sue ATM Leasing
Companies
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----
Two bar owners in Pennsylvania recently filed a class action
complaint
against leasing companies that financed automatic-teller machines
through distributor Credit Card Center of Philadelphia before it
filed
for bankruptcy protection June 6, Tribune Business News reported
Wednesday.

According to the suit, filed in Franklin County Common Pleas
Court, the
$250 check issued a month ago by Credit Card Center, intended as
rebates, bounced.

Because Credit Card Center was an agent for the leasing companies
named
in the suit, they must pay what the company reneged on, said
Chambersburg lawyer David C. Cleaver, who filed the case with
Harrisburg lawyer David A. Fitzsimons.

The suit was brought by Dilly's, of Chambersburg, and the
Stardust
Lounge in nearby Waynesboro, against the following:

     (i) Advanta Leasing Corp., a unit of Advanta Corp., which is
based
         in Spring House;

    (ii) Information Leasing Corp., of Cincinnati;

   (iii) QL Capital Inc., of Concord, Calif.;

    (iv) United Star Leasing, of Syracuse, N.Y.;

     (v) Progress Leasing, an affiliate of Progress Bank, which
is
         based in Blue Bell;

    (vi) Frontier Leasing, of Urbandale, Iowa; and

   (vii) Newcourt Financial USA, of Chicago.

The 700-member Pennsylvania Tavern Owners Association encouraged
the
suit.

"We want to get our members out of the leases because they're
being
gouged," Richard Alloway, the group's executive director, said.


AETHER SYSTEMS: Weiss Yourman Commences Securities Suit In S.D.
NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-
Weiss & Yourman filed a class action lawsuit against Aether
Systems,
Inc. (NASDAQ:AETH), its senior executives, and underwriters in
the
United States District Court, Southern District of New York, on
behalf
of investors who purchased Aether securities between October 21,
1999
and June 15, 2001.

The action, number 01 CV 5570, is pending against defendants
Aether
Systems, Inc., David S. Oros, David C. Reymann, Merrill Lynch,
Pierce,
Fenner & Smith Incorporated, BancBoston Robertson Stephens Inc.,
Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Securities Corporation, U.S. Bancorp
Piper
Jaffray Inc., Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. and Friedman,
Billing,
Ramsey & Co., Inc. Honorable Shirley Wohl Kram is the Judge
presiding
over the case.

The complaint charges defendants with violations of Sections 11,
12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b)
of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

It alleges that the October 21, 1999 and September 27, 2000
Prospectuses of shares of Aether common stock contained material
misrepresentations and/or omissions.

The complaint also alleges that defendants were responsible for
the
materially false and misleading statements and that the
underwriters of
Aether's Offerings engaged in a pattern of conduct to
surreptitiously
extract inflated commissions greater than those disclosed in the
Offerings materials.

For more information, contact: Mark D. Smilow, James E. Tullman,
and/or
David C. Katz by Phone: (888) 593-4771 or (212) 682-3025 by
E-mail:
wynyc@aol.com or by writing Weiss & Yourman, The French Building,
551
Fifth Avenue, Suite 1600, New York, New York 10176.


CAPSTEAD MORTGAGE: Parties Trade Motions, But Court Still
Undecided
-----------------------------------------------------------------
--
Court action abruptly intensified from February to May this year
as
both parties in the securities suit against Capstead Mortgage
Corporation traded motions and replies.

The Company triggered the action when it responded to the amended
complaint filed in October last year.  This move drew an
opposition
from the plaintiffs in April, which was quickly responded to by
the
defendant last May.

"We believe that we have meritorious defenses to the claims and
we
intend to vigorously defend against the actions," the Company
said in a
regulatory document it filed recently with the Securities and
Exchange
Commission.

This case traces back to 1998, when 24 purported class action
lawsuits
were filed against the Company and certain of its officers
alleging,
among other things, violations of federal securities laws by
publicly
issuing false and misleading statements and omitting disclosure
of
material adverse information regarding its business during
various
periods between January 28, 1997 and July 24, 1998.

The complaints claim that as a result of such alleged improper
actions,
the market price of the Company's equity securities were
artificially
inflated during that time period.

In March 1999 these actions were consolidated and in July 2000
the
court appointed a lead plaintiff for the group.

"We believe the resolution of these suits will not have a
material
adverse effect on our financial position," the Company said
recently.


CAR PAINT LITIGATION: Auto Body Shop Files California Antitrust
Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---
An auto body shop in California has filed a suit in federal court
claiming some of the world's largest car paint makers have
engaged in
price fixing, the Associated Press reported Wednesday.

The lawsuit alleged that repair shops have been paying
artificially
inflated prices for refinishing products because of the
anticompetitive
scheme engaged in by the paint makers.

The suit seeks money damages and an injunction barring collusion.
It
also seeks class-action status to include other auto body shops,
the
report said.

The Autobody by Caldwell, Inc. is the lone plaintiff at this time
in
the lawsuit, filed Tuesday in federal court in Newark.

The Associated Press said a federal investigation of the industry
is
also underway.

The antitrust division of the Justice Department is looking at
the
possibility of anticompetitive practices in the automotive
refinishing
industry, department spokeswoman Gina Talamona said.

Accused in the lawsuit are the following paint makers:

     (i) PPG Industries Inc. of Pittsburgh;

    (ii) Sherwin-Williams Co. of Cleveland;

   (iii) DuPont, of Wilmington, Del.;

    (iv) BASF AG of Germany, which has its U.S. subsidiary in
Mount
         Olive, N.J.; and

     (v) Akzo Nobel NV of the Netherlands, which has U.S. bases
in
         Chicago and Norcross, Ga.

The above paint makers deny any wrongdoing.


DELTATHREE INC.: Bernstein Liebhard Files Securities Suit In S.D.
NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP filed a securities class
action
lawsuit on behalf of all persons who acquired deltathree, Inc.
(NASDAQ:
DDDC) securities between November 22, 1999 and June 12, 2001.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York.

Named as defendants in the complaint are deltathree and the
following
executive officers of deltathree: Amos Sela, Mark J. Hirschhorn,
Elie
C. Wurtman, Jacob A. Davidson, Itzhak Fisher, Nir Tarlovsky,
Donald R.
Shassian, Jacob Z. Schuster, and Avery S. Fischer.

The complaint also names as defendants Lehman Brothers, Inc.,
Merrill
Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, U.S. Bancorp Piper
Jaffray
Inc., Lazard Freres & Co., LLC, and Fidelity Capital Markets, a
Division of National Financial Services Corporation, co-lead
underwriters of the Company's initial public offering of
6,000,000
shares of common stock at $15.00 per share on November 22, 1999.

The complaint charges defendants with violations of Sections 11,
12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b)
of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder,
for issuing a Registration Statement and Prospectus that
contained
material misrepresentations and/or omissions. The Prospectus was
issued
in connection with the deltathree IPO.

For more details, contact: Ms. Linda Flood, Director of
Shareholder
Relations, at Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP, 10 East 40th
Street,
New York, New York 10016 by Phone: (800) 217-1522 or 212-779-1414
or by
E-mail: DDDC@bernlieb.com.


DIGITAL IMPACT: Cauley Geller Files Securities Suit In S.D. New
York
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---
Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP filed Tuesday a class action
in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York on
behalf of purchasers of Digital Impact, Inc. (Nasdaq: DIGI)
common
stock during the period between November 22, 1999 and December 6,
2000,
inclusive.

The suit charges Digital and certain of its officers and
directors with
issuing false and misleading statements concerning its business
and
financial condition.

For additional information, contact: CAULEY GELLER BOWMAN &
COATES, LLP
through its Client Relations Department: Jackie Addison, Sue Null
or
Charlie Gastineau by Mail: P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock, AR
72221-5438
by Phone: 1-888-551-9944 by E-mail: info@classlawyer.com or visit
the
Firm's Website: www.classlawyer.com


DOLLAR GENERAL: Finklestein Thompson Commences Shareholders
Lawsuit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
--
Finkelstein, Thompson & Loughran filed a securities class action
lawsuit recently against Dollar General Corporation (NYSE: DG).
The
complaint is on behalf of shareholders who purchased the stock
between
May 12, 1998 and April 27, 2001.

The complaint alleges that the Company issued false and
misleading
financial statements and news releases about its earnings.

Specifically, on April 30, 2001, the Company admitted that it
would
delay filing its annual report for fiscal 2000, that it had begun
investigating "accounting irregularities" and that its audit
committee
was reviewing allegations of fraudulent behavior.

In addition, the company disclosed that it would need to restate
its
results for fiscal years 1998, 1999 and for the first three
quarters of
2000.

For additional information, contact: Donald J. Enright with
Finkelstein, Thompson & Loughran by Phone: 888-333-4409 or
202-337-
8000, by E-mail: dje@ftllaw.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.ftllaw.com


ECI TELECOM: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit In E.D.
Virginia
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP filed late last week a
class
action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the securities of ECI
Telecom, Ltd. (NASDAQ: ECIL) between May 2, 2000 and February 14,
2001,
inclusive.

The action is pending in the United States District Court,
Eastern
District of Virginia, Alexandria Division, located at 401
Courthouse
Square, Alexandria, Virginia, 22314, against defendants ECI
Telecom,
Doron Inbar, Avi Ben-Assayag and Jonathan B. Kolber.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and
20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated
thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to
the
market between May 2, 2000 and February 14, 2001, thereby
artificially
inflating the price of ECI securities.

For further details, contact: Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes &
Lerach LLP
through Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman by Phone:
800/320-5081
by E-mail: ecitelecomcase@milbergNY.com or visit the firm's
Website:
http://www.milberg.com


FEDERATED DEPARTMENT: Continues To Dispute Allegations In NY Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Federated Department Stores, Inc. recently said it is still
continuing
to defend the securities suits filed last year in New York by its
stockholders.

According to the Company, certain members of its senior
management were
named defendants in the five substantially identical purported
class
action complaints filed on behalf of persons who purchased shares
of
the Company between February 23, 2000 and July 20, 2000.

The Complaints were filed on August 24, August 30, September 15,
September 26 and October 6, 2000, in the United States District
Court
for the Southern District of New York.

The Complaints allege violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, on
the
basis that the Company, among other things, made false and
misleading
statements regarding its financial condition and results of
operations
and failed to disclose material information relating to the
credit
delinquency problem at Fingerhut.

"Management believes that the allegations contained in the
Complaints
are without merit and intends to defend vigorously against those
allegations," the Company said.


FIDELITY GROUP:South Carolina Residents Sue Over Unpaid Medical
Bills
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----
Eighteen months after a federal judge gave the nod for the case
to
proceed, close to a thousand South Carolinians are seeking class
action
status in a suit against Fidelity Group over its health plan, the
Tribune Business News reported Wednesday.

According to the report, workers in South Carolina have been
facing
mounting debts and credit troubles over the past three years or
more
over unpaid medical bills.

"I don't doubt there is over $1 million in unpaid medical bills,"
said
Justin S. Kahn, representing employee groups.

In its bid for class action, the suing parties said in a legal
document
that class action might be the most economical and efficient
means of
litigating in many circumstances, the report said.

But agents and administrators contend that individual claims of
employees aren't enough alike to be taken as one class.

Charles Norris, lawyer for HealthPlan Services Inc. and Third
Party
Claims Management, said there is too much dissimilarity in the
claims.

"There were different people dealing with different defendants,"
he
said.

New York-based Fidelity, the International Workers Guild, and the
National Association of Business Owners and Professionals offered
health and benefit plans in the mid-1990s.

South Carolina was one of the more active states for marketing
the low-
cost health plan, primarily sold in 1996 and 1997, the report
said.


FISHER-PRICE: Settles Defective Power Wheels Suit, Offers Free
Repair
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----
Owners of Power Wheels ride-on toy vehicles purchased before
October
22, 1998 are eligible to receive free repairs for electrical
defects
and up to $20 in compensation under a nationwide class action
settlement that has been preliminarily approved.

The settlement, announced in Bucks County, PA Common Pleas Court,
resolves six class action lawsuits pending against Fisher-Price
throughout the nation.

Under the terms of the settlement, which must be formally
approved by
the court, class members will receive free repairs and, on
submission
of a proof of claim form, up to $20 in a combination of payments
or
certificates good on a variety of Fisher-Price products.

Fisher-Price was sued by Power Wheels owners following its delay
in
repairing these toys as promised in a U.S. Consumer Product
Safety
Commission-approved recall in October 1998.

According to the CPSC, the company needed to replace electrical
connectors and fuses in its Super 6 and 12 Volt Power Wheels toys
and
provide safety checks. After the recall was announced, consumers
were
required to wait for months before repairs were finally
scheduled.

To date, Fisher-Price has repaired less than 600,000 of the
estimated
three million affected Power Wheels still in use. The settlement
provides for additional notice to the public of the availability
of
free repairs and their entitlement to claim compensation.

The settlement preceded the U.S. Consumer Product Safety
Commission's
June 6, 2001 announcement of a record setting $1.1 million fine
on
Fisher Price for its failure to report this product defect and
the
numerous warranty claims and incidents which resulted.

The fairness hearing is scheduled for September 5, 2001 at 9:30
a.m. in
the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County, Doylestown, PA.
Payments
under the settlement cannot be processed until the court
considers and
approves the settlement at the hearing.

Consumers, who wish to obtain more information, including a copy
of the
Notice or the Proof Of Claim form, can do so by calling the
Settlement
Administrator at 1-888-618-4114.


GART SPORTS: Receives Third Complaints Over Wage And Hour
Violations
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---
A third class action complaint alleging the same claims from the
two
preceding this was filed in March this year against Gart Sports
Company.

In a recent regulatory filing, the Company informed the
Securities and
Exchange Commission that the third complaint alleged the same
wage and
hour violations as that of the two complaints filed early last
year.

The first complaint filed June last year alleged violations of
the
California Labor Code, California Business and Professional Code
section 17200 and other related matters.

The complaint alleges that the Company classified certain
managers in
its California stores as exempt from overtime pay when they would
have
been classified as non-exempt and paid overtime.

The second complaint alleges that the Company failed to pay
hourly
employees in its California stores for all hours worked.

All the complaints seek compensatory damages, punitive damages
and
penalties. The amount of damages sought is unspecified.

The court recently denied motions to dismiss the first two
complaints.

"The Company intends to vigorously defend these matters and at
this
time, the Company has not ascertained the future liability, if
any, as
a result of these complaints," the Company said.


INFOSPACE INC.:Hagens Berman Files Securities Suit In W.D.
Washington
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----
Hagens Berman LLP filed a class action in the United States
District
Court for the Western District of Washington on behalf of all
purchasers of InfoSpace, Inc. common stock during the period from
January 26, 2000 through January 30, 2001.

The complaint charges InfoSpace and its founder and Chairman
Naveen
Jain with violations of the federal securities laws.
Specifically,
plaintiffs have brought claims under sections 10(b) and 20 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The complaint alleges that between January 2000 and January 2001,
Defendants disseminated false and misleading information
concerning
InfoSpace's actual FY 1999 and 2000 financial performance and
Defendants' expectations concerning InfoSpace's FY 2001 revenue
and
earnings.

Defendants' public representations were the result of Defendants'
efforts to manipulate InfoSpace's reported earnings and expected
FY
2001 performance.

For further details, contact: Hagens Berman LLP through Steve
Berman or
Karl Barth by Phone: 206/623-7292 or 888/381-2889 or by E-mail:
Karl@Hagens-Berman.com


LONGS DRUG: Jury Awards $300T To Ex-employees For Emotional
Distress
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---
In Palacio v. Longs Drug Stores, an Alameda County jury awarded
six
former employees $300,000.00 against leading drug store chain
Longs
Drug Stores for intentional infliction of emotional distress
caused by
the abusive interrogation tactics of Longs' Loss Prevention
Agents.

The jury also found that Longs Drug's conduct was despicable,
fraudulent and oppressive, but awarded no money for punitive
damages.

According to lead Counsel, Mary Shea, "We are very pleased with
this
outcome. The jury made a lot of sacrifices and we truly
appreciate
their effort. The verdict far exceeded any money Longs ever
offered in
this case or in any other case like this.

"I am very proud of my clients and my trial team. They
demonstrated
extreme courage under the most difficult circumstances," she
said.

"We were always in this to get Longs to stop abusing employees.
They
did not take action after a woman who had been interrogated
committed
suicide, or after they had received dozens of other complaints.
This
verdict is the first step in effecting change.

"We are encouraged by Longs' CEO's recent admission of wrongdoing
by
Loss Prevention and we expect that our class action suit will
make an
even bigger impact," she added.


MEN'S WEARHOUSE: Misleading Slack Advertisement Results In CA
Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-
Men's Wearhouse, Inc., in a report to the Securities and Exchange
Commission, revealed recently that a lawsuit was filed against
the
Company last May.

A lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of California for the
County
of San Diego, Cause No. GIC 767223.

The Suit, which was brought as a purported class action, alleges
several causes of action, each based on the factual allegation
that the
Company advertised and sold men's slacks at a marked price that
was
exclusive of a hemming fee for the pants.

The Suit seeks:

     (i) permanent and preliminary injunctions against
advertising
         slacks at prices which do not include hemming;

    (ii) restitution of all funds allegedly acquired by means of
any
         act or practice declared by the Court to be unlawful or
         fraudulent or to constitute unfair competition under
certain
         California statutes,

   (iii) prejudgment interest;

    (iv) compensatory and punitive damages;

     (v) attorney's fees; and

    (vi) costs of suit.

The Company believes that the Suit is without merit and the
allegations
are contrary to customary and well-recognized and accepted
practices in
the sale of men's tailored clothing.

"We intend to vigorously defend the suit," the Company said.


NAVISITE INC.: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit In S.D.
NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP filed a class action lawsuit in the
United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York on
behalf
of all purchasers of the common stock of NaviSite, Inc. (Nasdaq:
NAVI)
from October 22, 1999 through December 6, 2000, inclusive.

The complaint charges NaviSite and certain of its officers and
directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning
its
business and financial condition.

For more details, contact: Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP through Marc
A.
Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L. Berman, Esq. by Mail: Three Bala Plaza
East,
Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA  19004 by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 (toll
free)
or 1-610-667-7706 or by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com


NET2000 COMMUNICATIONS: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Suit In NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP filed Tuesday a class
action
lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Net2000
Communications, Inc. (Nasdaq: NTKK) between March 7, 2000 and
December
6, 2000, inclusive.

The action is pending in the United States District Court,
Southern
District of New York against defendants Net2000, Goldman Sachs &
Co.,
Bear Stearns & Co., Inc., Lehman Brothers, Inc., Salomon Smith
Barney,
Inc., Clayton A. Thomas, Jr., Clyde Heintzelman and Donald E.
Clarke.

The complaint alleges violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15
of the
Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act
of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

For more details, contact: Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach
LLP
through Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman by Phone:
800/320-5081
or by E-mail: net2000case@milbergNY.com


NETWORK COMMERCE: Cohen Milstein Files Securities Suit In W.D. WA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. filed a lawsuit in the
United States District Court for the Western District of
Washington on
behalf of persons who purchased Network Commerce Inc.
(Nasdaq:NWKC)
common stock during the period between Sept. 28, 1999 and April
16,
2001.

The complaint charges that Network Commerce and its Chairman and
CEO,
Dwayne M. Walker, violated Sections 11, 12(2), and 15 of the
Securities
Act of 1933, and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange
Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

The complaint alleges that defendants issued a series of
materially
false and misleading statements that were contained in various
press
releases, public statements and SEC filings, including several
prospectuses and registration statements, which had the effect of
artificially inflating the price of Network Commerce stock during
the
Class Period.

For further details, contact: Murray T.S. Lewis (mlewis@cmht.com)
or
Clarence D. Williams (cwilliams@cmht.com) Cohen Milstein Hausfeld
&
Toll, P.L.L.C. 999 Third Avenue, Suite 3600 Seattle, Washington
98104
PH.: 206/521-0080 FAX: 206/521-0080 Toll Free: 888/240-1238


PURCHASEPRO.COM: Kirby McInerney Sues Over Artificially Inflated
Stock
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Kirby McInerney & Squire has filed a class action on behalf of
purchasers of PurchasePro.com, Inc. (Nasdaq: PPRO) securities
between
March 23, 2000, and May 21, 2001.

The class action asserts claims on behalf of investors who,
during the
class period, bought PurchasePro securities directly or acquired
their
PurchasePro securities in exchange for shares, ADRs, or options
in
other companies that were acquired by PurchasePro.

The complaint charges PurchasePro and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities
Act of 1934, arising from defendants' dissemination of materially
false
and misleading financial results throughout the class period.

The complaint alleges that defendants, throughout the class
period,
misrepresented the company's financial results and prospects by -
among
other things - improperly recognizing as revenue certain payments
made
to PurchasePro by certain customers, which payments were in fact
and
substance payments for warrants to purchase PurchasePro stock
that
PurchasePro had granted to those customers in order to gain their
business.

The complaint alleges that, due to defendants' engagement in and
accounting for such revenues-for-warrants transactions,
defendants
caused PurchasePro to report artificially inflated revenues and
earnings, and that these false and misleading financial results
had the
effect of inflating the price of PurchasePro's securities.

For more information, contact: KIRBY McINERNEY & SQUIRE, LLP
through
Ira Press, Esq. or Orie Braun by Mail: 830 Third Avenue, 10th
Floor,
New York, New York 10022 by Phone: (212) 317-2300 or (888)
529-4787
(toll free)


RAYTHEON CORPORATION: Hagens Berman Files Securities Lawsuit In
Idaho
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----
Hagens Berman LLP filed a class action in the United States
District
Court for the District of Idaho on behalf of all purchasers of
Washington Group International, Inc., formerly known as Morrison
Knudsen Corporation, during the period from April 17, 2000
through
March 1, 2001.

The complaint charges Raytheon Corp, (NYSE:RTN) and certain of
its
officers with violations of the federal securities laws.
Specifically,
plaintiffs have brought claims under sections 10(b) and 20 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Raytheon
deliberately misrepresented the true financial condition of its
Raytheon Engineers & Constructors division in order to sell this
division to Washington Group at an artificially inflated price.

On April 17, 2000, the beginning of the Class Period, Raytheon
and
Washington Group each issued press releases disclosing Raytheon's
sale
of RE&C to Washington Group for a modest cash price and
Washington
Group's assumption of RE&C's liabilities of approximately $500
million.

The sales agreement, which was filed with the Securities and
Exchange
Commission on the same day, detailed the transaction, including
Raytheon's promise to reimburse Washington Group for cost
overruns from
certain projects.

Throughout the Class Period, defendants issued misleading
financial
statements for RE&C that failed to disclose massive cost overruns
of
approximately $700 million that were known to exist at the time
of the
sale transaction, but were not disclosed to investors.

On March 2, 2001, the Class Period closes with Washington Group's
shocking announcement that Raytheon was refusing to honor its
previously disclosed contractual commitments to reimburse
Washington
Group for these massive cost overruns.

Further, Washington Group announced that Raytheon's refusal to
reimburse Washington Group for these massive cost overruns placed
the
Company in a severe "near-term liquidity problems" -- including
being
in default of its senior credit facilities -- that could result
in the
bankruptcy of the Washington Group.

Following this announcement, the price of Washington Group stock
plummeted 80% from $8.00 per share to $1.65 per share, causing a
market
capitalization loss of more than $400 million to stockholders,
and more
than $200 million to bondholders.

Ultimately, these cash shortages forced Washington Group to seek
protection under the bankruptcy laws on March 14, 2001.

For more information, contact: Hagens Berman, Steve Berman or
Karl
Barth by Phone: 206/623-7292 or 888/381-2889 or by E-mail:
Karl@Hagens-
Berman.com


RAZORFISH INC.: Bernstein Liebhard Files Securities Suit In S.D.
NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------
--
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP filed a securities class
action
lawsuit on behalf of all persons who acquired RazorFish, Inc.
(NASDAQ:
RAZF) securities between April 27, 1999 and June 11, 2001.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York.

Named as defendants in the complaint are Razorfish and the
following
executive officers of Razorfish: Jeffrey A. Dachis, Craig M.
Kanarick,
Per I.G. Bystedt, Jonas S.A. Svensson, Susan Black, Carter F.
Bales,
Kjell A. Nordstrom, and John Wren.

The complaint also names as defendants Credit Suisse First Boston
Corporation, BancBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc., BT Alex. Brown
Incorporated, and Lehman Brothers, Inc., co-lead underwriters of
the
Company's initial public offering of 3,000,000 shares of common
stock
at $16.00 per share on April 27, 1999.

The complaint charges defendants with violations of Sections 11,
12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b)
of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder,
for issuing a Registration Statement and Prospectus that
contained
material misrepresentations and/or omissions.

For further details, contact: Ms. Linda Flood, Director of
Shareholder
Relations, at Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP, 10 East 40th
Street,
New York, New York 10016 by Phone: (800) 217-1522 or 212-779-1414
or by
E-mail: RAZF@bernlieb.com.


SILVERSTREAM SOFTWARE: Lovell And Sirota Firms File Suit In S.D.
NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------
--
The law firms of Lovell & Stewart, LLP and Sirota & Sirota, LLP
filed
Wednesday a class action lawsuit on behalf of all persons and
entities
who purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired the
common
stock of Silverstream Software, Inc. (NasdaqNM:SSSW) between
August 16,
1999 and May 23, 2000, inclusive.

The lawsuit asserts claims under Sections 11, 12 and 15 of the
Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated by the SEC
thereunder
and seeks to recover damages.

The action, Collegeware USA, Inc. v. Silverstream Software, Inc.,
et
al., is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of
New York, Docket No. 01-CV-5600 (GEL) and has been assigned to
the Hon.
Gerard E. Lynch, U.S. District Judge.

The complaint alleges that Silverstream Software, Inc., David R.
Skok,
its Chairman, David A. Litwack, its President and CEO, and Craig
A.
Dynes, its CFO, violated the federal securities laws by issuing
and
selling Silverstream Software common stock pursuant to the IPO
and
secondary offering without disclosing to investors that at least
two of
the lead underwriters in the IPO and secondary offering had
solicited
and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain
investors.

The complaint further alleges that defendants violated the
Securities
Act of 1933 because the Prospectuses distributed to investors and
the
Registration Statements filed with the SEC in order to gain
regulatory
approval for the Silverstream offerings contained material
misstatements regarding the commissions that the underwriters
would
derive from the IPO and secondary offering and failed to disclose
the
additional commissions.

For more information, contact the following lawyers:

  Lovell & Stewart, LLP, New York
  Christopher Lovell
  Victor E. Stewart
  Christopher J. Gray
  212/608-1900
  sklovell@aol.com

  Sirota & Sirota, LLP, New York
  Howard B. Sirota
  Saul Roffe
  212/425-9055
  info@sirotalaw.com


STAMPS.COM: Wolf Popper Commences Securities Suit In S.D. New
York
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-
Wolf Popper LLP has filed a class action lawsuit charging
Stamps.com
Inc. (NASD: STMP), Goldman Sachs & Co., Credit Suisse First
Boston
Corp., Salomon Smith Barney, Inc., BancBoston Robertson Stephens,
Thomas Weisel Partners, LLC, and Volpe Brown Whelan & Company,
LLC and
certain of Stamp.com's senior officers with violations of the
United
States securities laws.

The action was filed in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons who
purchased
Stamps.com common stock on the open market during the period June
24,
1999 through December 6, 2000 inclusive.

The complaint alleges violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15
of the
Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

For more details, contact: Wolf Popper LLP through Robert C.
Finkel by
Mail: 845 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10022-6689 by Phone:
212-451-
9620/212-759-4600 or by E-mail: IRRep@wolfpopper.com


STAPLES INC.: Faces Consolidated Suit Over Reclassification Of
Stocks
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----
Staples Inc. revealed in a recent regulatory document filed with
the
Securities and Exchange Commission that beginning March 23, 2001,
12
lawsuits were filed in Delaware Chancery Court by Staples RD
stockholders against Staples and each of its directors.

The lawsuits were subsequently consolidated into a purported
class
action entitled In re Staples, Inc. Shareholders Litigation,
Cons. C.A.
No. 18784.

The plaintiffs oppose Staples' proposal to reclassify the
Staples.com
and Staples RD series of common stock into a single class of
Staples
Common Stock.

Plaintiffs allege that the proposed reclassification violates
Delaware
General Corporation Law, Staples' contractual obligations, and
the
fiduciary duties of Staples' directors and moved for a
preliminary
injunction to prevent a shareholder vote, previously scheduled
for June
11, 2001, on the reclassification proposal.

After holding a hearing on the motion, the court decided on June
5,
2001, that the vote may proceed after the Company sets a new
record
date for the vote and makes additional disclosures regarding the
methodology used by the Board and the outside investment bankers
retained by the Board in recommending the valuation of the
Staples.com
stock for purposes of the reclassification.

The Company intends to hold a stockholders meeting to vote on the
reclassification after setting a new record date and amending the
proxy
statement in accordance with the court's opinion.

"Staples believes the plaintiffs' remaining claims for relief are
without merit and intends to defend vigorously against them," the
Company said.


TOBACCO LITIGATION: Govt's Opinion Of RICO Suit No Surprise To
Lawyers
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----
"Yesterday's announcement by the Bush Administration to enter
into
settlement negotiations with the cigarette companies regarding
the
federal government's RICO lawsuit comes as no surprise," says
Cohen,
Milstein partner Paul T. Gallagher, referring to Tuesday's
pronouncement from the White House.

Gallagher is a lead attorney in a nationwide class action lawsuit
on
behalf of young smokers.

"The manner in which the Administration's announcement was made,
including the government's purported assessment that its claims
were
weak, clearly demonstrates that the Bush Administration, like too
many
Administrations before it, is protecting the interests of the
cigarette
manufacturers over the interests of individuals who have been
defrauded
and harmed by the cigarette companies' fifty-year conspiracy,"
Gallagher said.

Attorneys Johnnie Cochran (Cochran, Cherry, Givens & Smith) and
Michael
D. Hausfeld filed their suit in May 2001.

They assert that the major tobacco companies are guilty of fraud
and
racketeering in their aggressive efforts to get young people to
buy and
continue to use cigarettes.

In response to Tuesday's announcement, Gallagher added, "The
Administration and the cigarette companies should be aware that
the
plaintiffs in our recently filed class action RICO case in the
District
of Columbia -- a case that parallels the government's RICO
claims --
will pursue their case vigorously on behalf of the real victims
of the
cigarette companies: the men, women and children who the
cigarette
companies deceived in order to hook them on a product that in
many, if
not most, cases will ultimately contribute to their death.

"Any attempt to achieve a complete and final settlement of these
claims
cannot, and will not, be successful without the active
participation
and input from these victims and their counsel," Gallagher
assured.


VERTICALNET INC.: Schiffrin Barroway Files New York Securities
Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
--
Schiffrin & Barroway filed a class action lawsuit in the United
States
District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of
all
purchasers of the common stock of VerticalNet, Inc. (Nasdaq:
VERT) from
February 11, 1999 through December 6, 2000, inclusive.

The complaint charges VerticalNet and certain of its officers and
directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning
its
business and financial condition.

For further details, contact: Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP through
Marc A.
Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L. Berman, Esq. by Mail: Three Bala Plaza
East,
Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA  19004 by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 (toll
free)
or 1-610-667-7706 or by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com


* Class Action Model, Environmental Court Would Aid Thai Legal
System
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----
Legal experts in Thailand are clamoring for an environmental
court to
deal with the more complicated cases involving conflicts over
environmental damage, a report from the Bangkok Post recently
said.

These legal experts believe adoption of the class action model
within
an environmental court also would promote movement of cases
through the
judicial system.

Resolution of legal conflicts over pollution, related health
problems
and other environmental matters are still treated as ordinary
cases,
with no recognition that special expertise is required so that
these
cases do not linger an inordinate length of time in the courts.

Most judges, observed Suthee Yoenyong of the Law Society of
Thailand,
do not have enough understanding of the various issues, both
technical
and social involved in the environmental conflicts.

Appeals Court Judge Jaran Pukditanakul supported this view of the
problem: Such cases, he said, need application of the
interdisciplinary
sciences in order to reach a decision.

For this reason, he continued, it would be better to set up a
special
unit to deal with the environmental cases.

Environmental NGO's that have registered with the Science,
Technology
and Environment Ministry should be empowered to file cases on
behalf of
damaged parties.  And the class action suit concept should also
be
introduced to allow groups of people to be represented in a
single
case, he said.

Jaran believed this could be done once the government recognized
the
need.  The bankruptcy court, he noted, was established within six
months with support from the International Monetary Fund.


                              *********

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., Trenton, New Jersey, and Beard Group,
Inc.,
Washington, D.C.  Enid Sterling, Larri-Nil Veloso and Lyndsey
Resnick,
Editors.

Copyright 2001.  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
301/951-6400.

                  * * *  End of Transmission  * * *