CAR_Public/010731.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

               Tuesday, July 31 2001, Vol. 3, No. 148

                              Headlines


ADAPTEC INC.: Strong Defense To Be Made If Dismissal Motion Is Denied
CHORDIANT SOFTWARE: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit In S.D. NY
CLARENT CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Brings Securities Suit In S.D. NY
COMPAQ COMPUTER: Rulings On Two Texas Securities Suits Still Pending
CONCUR TECHNOLOGIES: Weiss & Yourman Sues IPO Underwriter In S.D. NY

DOLLAR TREE:CA Store Manager Sues For Overtime Pay, Seeks Class Status
EXTREME NETWORKS: Marc Henzel Sues IPO Underwriters In S.D. New York
GLOBAL CROSSING: Cauley Geller Begins Securities Suit In S.D. New York
GREAT WEST: London Life Announces An Estimated $180M Settlement
HUTCHINSON CENTER: Federal Agency Investigates Cancer Clinical Trials

JAPAN: U.S. Lawmaker Supports 'Comfort Women' Suit In Washington D.C.
LOOKSMART LTD.: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit In S.D. NY
LOUISIANA-PACIFIC: Faces Washington Suit Over 'Nature Guard' Product
NET2PHONE INC.: Cauley Geller Files Securities Suit In S.D. New York
ON SEMICONDUCTOR: Wolf Haldenstein Begins Securities Suit In S.D. NY

PJ AMERICA: `Papa John's' Franchisee Settles Shareholders Suits
RUSSIA: Payments For Ex-Nazi Slave-Laborers To Be Made By End Of July
SCIENTIFIC-ATLANTA: Wolf Popper Files Securities Suit In N.D. Georgia
TRAVELERS SEPARATE: Trial Has Yet To Be Set For Four-Year Old Suit
VALUE AMERICA: Marc Henzel Begins Securities Suit In S.D. New York

* Insurance Claims Of Holocaust Victims' Heirs Still A Long Shot



                              *********


ADAPTEC INC.: Strong Defense To Be Made If Dismissal Motion Is Denied
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Adaptec, Inc. declared in a recent regulatory filing with the
Securities and Exchange Commission that it will mount a strong defense
should a motion to dismiss a securities suit be decided unfavorably.

The Company's motion is still undecided by the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District Of California and has been pending since October
last year.

The suit alleges that the Company made false and misleading statements
at various times during the period between April 1997 and January 1998
in violation of federal securities laws.

The Company believes the class action lawsuit is without merit.

Adaptec is known in the industry as a Company that brings Darwinian
theory to the technology realm, providing tools that keep computer
networks adjusting and evolving.

Adaptec dominates the market for small computer system interface
technology, which lets several peripherals connect to one adapter card.

Its clients include Compaq, Dell, IBM, and other hardware makers.


CHORDIANT SOFTWARE: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit In S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Marc S. Henzel filed a securities class action lawsuit
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York on behalf all persons who acquired Chordiant Software, Inc.
(Nasdaq: CHRD) securities between February 14, 2000 and December 6,
2000.

Named as defendants in the complaint are Chordiant and the following
executive officers of Chordiant: Samuel T. Spadafora, Steven R.
Springsteel, Joseph F. Tumminaro, Oliver D. Curme, Kathryn C. Gould and
Mitchell Kertzman.

The complaint also names as defendants the following underwriters of
Chordiant's IPO: FleetBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc., BancBoston
Robertson Stephens International Limited, Dain Rauscher Incorporated,
and Thomas Weisel Partners, LLC.

The complaint charges defendants with violations of the Securities Act
of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for issuing a
Registration Statement and Prospectus that contained materially false
and misleading information and failed to disclose material information.

The Prospectus was issued in connection with Chordiant's initial public
offering of 4.5 million shares of common stock at $18.00 per share that
was completed on or about February 14, 2000.

The complaint alleges that the Prospectus was false and misleading
because it failed to disclose:

     (i) the Underwriter Defendants' agreement with certain investors
         to provide them with significant amounts of restricted
         Chordiant shares in the IPO in exchange for exorbitant and
         undisclosed commissions; and

    (ii) the agreement between the Underwriter Defendants and certain
         of its customers whereby the Underwriter Defendants would
         allocate shares in the IPO to those customers in exchange for
         the customers' agreement to purchase Chordiant shares in the
         after-market at pre-determined prices.

For more details, contact: The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel by Mail:
210 West Washington Square, Third Floor Philadelphia, PA 19106 by
Phone: 888-643-6735 or 215-625-9999 by Fax: 215-440-9475 by E-mail:
Mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182


CLARENT CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Brings Securities Suit In S.D. NY
------------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Marc S. Henzel filed recently a securities class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District
of New York on behalf all persons who acquired Clarent Corporation
(Nasdaq: CLRN) securities between July 1, 1999 and July 2, 2001.

Named as defendants in the complaint are Clarent and the following
executive officers of Clarent: Jerry Shaw-Yau Chang, Richard J. Heaps,
Michael F. Vargo, Wen Chang Ko, and Syaru Shirley Lin.

The complaint also names as defendants the following underwriters of
Clarent's IPO: Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation, BancBoston
Robertson Stephens, Inc., Thomas Weisel Partners, LLC, and U.S. Bancorp
Piper Jaffray, Inc.

The complaint charges defendants with violations of the Securities Act
of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for issuing a
Registration Statement and Prospectus that contained materially false
and misleading information and failed to disclose material information.

The Prospectus was issued in connection with Clarent's initial public
offering of 4,000,000 shares of common stock at $15.00 per share that
was completed on or about July 1, 1999.

The complaint alleges that the Prospectus was false and misleading
because it failed to disclose:

     (i) the Underwriter Defendants' agreement with certain investors
         to provide them with significant amounts of restricted Clarent
         shares in the IPO in exchange for exorbitant and undisclosed
         commissions; and

    (ii) the agreement between the Underwriter Defendants and certain
         of its customers whereby the Underwriter Defendants would
         allocate shares in the IPO to those customers in exchange for
         the customers' agreement to purchase Clarent shares in the
         after-market at pre-determined prices.

For additional details, contact: The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel by
Mail: 210 West Washington Square, Third Floor Philadelphia, PA 19106,
by Phone: 888-643-6735 or 215-625-9999 by Fax: 215-440-9475 by E-mail:
Mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182.


COMPAQ COMPUTER: Rulings On Two Texas Securities Suits Still Pending
--------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. computer maker Compaq Computer Corporation informed the Securities
and Exchange Commission recently that no definite court decisions have
been handed down yet on two securities class actions pending since 1998
and 1999.

According to the Company, an appeal to the Fifth Circuit Appellate
Court regarding the class certification of the 1998 suit is still
undecided.

A motion to dismiss the 1999 suit has remained pending since the
Company filed it last March.

The 1998 suit accuses the company of withholding information and making
misleading statements about channel inventory and factoring of
receivables in order to inflate the market price of Compaq's common
stock and further alleges that certain of the individual defendants
sold Compaq common stock at the inflated prices.

Class members in this case include individuals who purchased Compaq
common stock from July 10, 1997 through March 6, 1998.

Meanwhile, the 1999 suit was brought on behalf of purchasers of Compaq
common stock between January 27, 1999 and April 9, 1999.

Plaintiffs claim that certain defendants and Compaq issued a series of
materially false and misleading statements concerning Compaq's
prospects in 1999.

Both suits assert claims under various provisions in the Securities Act
of 1933 and Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Named as defendants in the suit are current and former officers and
directors of the Company.

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas,
Houston Division is trying both cases.


CONCUR TECHNOLOGIES: Weiss & Yourman Sues IPO Underwriter In S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Weiss & Yourman filed recently a class action lawsuit on behalf of
investors who purchased Concur Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ:CNQR),
securities between December 16, 1998 and December 6, 2000.

This action is pending in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York against defendant BancBoston Robertson
Stephens, Inc.

The complaint charges defendant with violations of Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

It alleges that the Registration Statement dated December 13, 1998 and
the Prospectus dated December 16, 1998 for the issuance and initial
public offering of 3,100,000 shares of Concur common stock, contained
material misrepresentations and/or omissions.

Defendant is an underwriter of the Offering, who engaged in a pattern
of conduct to surreptitiously extract inflated commissions greater than
those disclosed in the Offering materials, among other acts of
misconduct.

As alleged in the complaint, the SEC is investigating underwriting
practices in connection with several other initial public offerings.

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


DOLLAR TREE:CA Store Manager Sues For Overtime Pay, Seeks Class Status
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dollar Tree Stores, Inc. disclosed in a recent Securities and Exchange
Commission report that a California store manager sued the Company
recently seeking overtime compensation in addition to his salary.

The Company, known for selling all its merchandise for only $1 a piece,
also said the suit is requesting certification as class action on
behalf of all California store managers.

The California store manager who instituted the suit alleges that he
should have been classified as a non-exempt salaried employee, and,
therefore, should have received overtime compensation in addition to
his salary.

"We will vigorously defend ourselves in this matter. At this stage in
the litigation it is too early to predict our ultimate liability, if
any, related to these allegations," the Company said.

The suit was served on the Company July 19 and is currently pending in
a California state court.

Dollar Tree operates more than 1,700 discount stores in 36 states that
sell a changing mix of housewares, toys, seasonal items, food and
candy, health and beauty aids, party goods, gifts, and books -- all
priced at $1.

Stores are located in high-traffic strip centers anchored by mass
merchandisers and supermarkets, as well as in small towns.


EXTREME NETWORKS: Marc Henzel Sues IPO Underwriters In S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Marc S. Henzel commenced recently a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court, Southern District of New
York on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Extreme Networks Inc.
(Nasdaq: EXTR) between April 8, 1999 and December 6, 2000, inclusive.

The action alleges the following underwriting firms -- which were co-
lead underwriters of Extreme Networks' initial public offering -- as
defendants: Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc., BancBoston Robertson Stephens
Inc., and Lehman Brothers Inc.

The complaint alleges violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

On or about April 8, 1999, Extreme Networks commenced an initial public
offering of 7,000,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering
price of $17 per share.

In connection therewith, Extreme Networks filed a registration
statement, which incorporated a prospectus, with the SEC.

The complaint further alleges that the Prospectus was materially false
and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that:

     (i) the defendants had solicited and received excessive and
         undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for
         which the defendants allocated to those investors material
         portions of the restricted number of Extreme Networks shares
         issued in connection with the Extreme Networks IPO; and

    (ii) the defendants had entered into agreements with customers
         whereby the defendants agreed to allocate Extreme Networks
         shares to those customers in the Extreme Networks IPO in
         exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional
         Extreme Networks shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined
         prices.

For more details, contact: The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel by Mail:
210 West Washington Square, Third Floor Philadelphia, PA 19106 by
Phone: (888) 643-6735 or (215) 625-9999 by Fax: (215) 440-9475 by E-
mail: Mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182


GLOBAL CROSSING: Cauley Geller Begins Securities Suit In S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP commenced recently a class action in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
on behalf of purchasers of Global Crossing Ltd. (Nasdaq: GX) securities
during the period between August 13, 1998 and December 6, 2000,
inclusive.

The complaint charges the following 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:  

     (i) Saloman Smith Barney, Inc.,

    (ii) Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith

   (iii) Goldman Sachs & Co.,

    (iv) Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc.,

     (v) Bear, Stearns & Co.,

    (vi) Credit Suisse First Boston Co.,

   (vii) Lehman Brothers Inc.

  (viii) John M. Scanlon,

    (ix) David Lee,

     (x) Barry Porter,

    (xi) Abbott Brown and

   (xii) Dan J. Cohrs

On or about August 13, 1998, Global Crossing commenced an initial
public offering of 21,000,000 of its shares of common stock at an
offering price of $19 per share.

In connection therewith, Global Crossing filed a registration
statement, which incorporated a prospectus, with the SEC.

The complaint further alleges that the Prospectus was materially false
and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that:

     (i) the Underwriter Defendants had solicited and received
         excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors
         in exchange for which the Underwriter Defendants allocated to
         those investors material portions of the restricted number of
         Global Crossing shares issued in connection with the Global
         Crossing IPO; and

    (ii) the Underwriters Defendants had entered into agreements with
         customers whereby the Underwriter Defendants agreed to
         allocate Global Crossing shares to those customers in the
         Global Crossing IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed
         to purchase additional Global Crossing shares in the
         aftermarket at pre-determined prices.

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 (toll free) or by E-mail: info@classlawyer.com


GREAT WEST: London Life Announces An Estimated $180M Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------
Great West Life & Annuity Insurance Co.'s subsidiary London Life
announced recently that it has inked an agreement to settle all class
actions related to the availability of policyholder dividends to pay
future premiums.

In a recent regulatory filing with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, the company estimates future settlement benefits to amount
to $180 million.

The Company has set aside $20 million in their reserve accounts to
cover the administration of the settlement.  

The settlement agreement requires approval by the courts in British
Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec.

Great-West is Canada's largest insurance organization. The company is a
top provider of life, disability, and health insurance.  

Through subsidiary London Life, Great-West is also No.1 in individual
life insurance in Canada.


HUTCHINSON CENTER: Federal Agency Investigates Cancer Clinical Trials
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal investigators from the Office for Human Research Protection are
looking into the clinical trials conducted at the Fred Hutchinson
Cancer Research Center that has resulted in 20 deaths and suits filed
in Seattle, the Associated Press reported.

Hutchinson spokeswoman Susan Edmonds confirmed that the Center had
received a letter from the agency asking specific questions about the
experiments and seeking the submission by the Center of supporting
material.

The Seattle Times, earlier, reported that the 20 blood cancer patients
had died prematurely in a test of experimental drugs, called Protocol
126.

The goal of the test was to prevent graft-versus-host-disease after
radiation, chemotherapy and a bone-marrow transplant for blood cancers.  

The Times reported the Center's doctors held financial interests in the
experimental drugs used in Protocol 126, and that records indicated
that patients were not fully informed of risks and alternatives. The
report also stated patient-consent forms typically failed to emphasize
the risks of graft failure or to mention the risks of relapse and new
cancers, or to tout a safer alternative.

The Center responded that it did nothing wrong in treating cancer
patients in Protocol 126, but admitted it had given incorrect
information to one patient in Protocol 681, which explored the use of
high-dose chemotherapy drugs for breast-cancer patients.

A federal class action lawsuit is currently pending in the U.S.
District Court in Seattle filed by the families of the patients who had
died in the tests, the Associated Press reported.
  

JAPAN: U.S. Lawmaker Supports 'Comfort Women' Suit In Washington D.C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The class action suit filed in a federal court in Washington, D.C.
against the government of Japan by 15 women forced into sexual slavery
by the Japanese Imperial Military between 1932 and 1945 received
support recently from a U.S. solon.

According to a recent Agence France-Presse report, Representative
Charles Lane of Illinois is prepared to introduce a resolution in
Congress calling on Japan to formally issue an "unambiguous apology"
and immediately pay reparations to the comfort women.

Eun Sook Lee of Young Koreans United called the resolution "timely and
important" after the U.S. Justice Department filed a statement of
interest urging the suit's dismissal on the ground that the court does
not have jurisdiction and may not hear the case.  

The lawsuit has based its authority to file in the federal court on the
Alien Tort Claims Act, a federal law granting foreign citizens the
right to sue for abuses of international law in U.S. courts.

Japan has filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the statute of
limitations has expired and that it is protected by sovereign immunity,
among other points.  

A hearing on the motion has been scheduled for August 1 in the District
Court.

Representative Lane, in his remarks about his resolution, said that
there is no statute of limitations on crimes against humanity.    

  
LOOKSMART LTD.: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit In S.D. NY
------------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP began recently a class action
lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the securities of LookSmart, LTD.
(NASDAQ:LOOK) between August 19, 1999 and December 6, 2000, inclusive.

The action is pending in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York against defendants Goldman Sachs & Co.
and BancBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc.

The complaint alleges violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

On or about August 19, 1999, LookSmart commenced an initial public
offering of 7,700,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering
price of $12 per share.

In connection therewith, LookSmart filed a registration statement,
which incorporated a prospectus, with the SEC.

The complaint further alleges that the Prospectus was materially false
and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that:

     (i) defendants had solicited and received excessive and
         undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for
         which defendants allocated to those investors material
         portions of the restricted number of LookSmart shares issued
         in connection with the LookSmart IPO; and

    (ii) defendants had entered into agreements with customers whereby
         defendants agreed to allocate LookSmart shares to those
         customers in the LookSmart IPO in exchange for which the
         customers agreed to purchase additional LookSmart shares in
         the aftermarket at pre-determined prices.

As alleged in the complaint, the SEC is investigating underwriting
practices in connection with several other initial public offerings.

For more information, contact: Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman
by Mail: One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl. New York, NY, 10119-0165 by
Phone: (800) 320-5081 by E-mail: LookSmartcase@milbergNY.com or visit
the firm's Website: www.milberg.com


LOUISIANA-PACIFIC: Faces Washington Suit Over 'Nature Guard' Product
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Louisiana-Pacific Corporation disclosed recently that it is facing a
class action suit in Washington over its Nature Guard cement shakes
product.

In a SEC regulatory document, the Company revealed that the putative
suit was filed on behalf of a purported class of individuals nationwide
owning structures on which Nature Guard cement shakes were installed as
roofing.

The suit filed last June 13 alleges negligence, unfair business
practices, false advertising, breach of warranties, fraud and other
theories related to alleged defects associated with the cement shakes.

The Superior Court of Washington, County of Snohomish is trying the
case.

The Company believes that it has substantial defenses and intends to
defend this action vigorously.

Louisiana-Pacific makes building and lumber products and controls about
950,000 acres of timberland in North America, primarily in Texas and
Louisiana.

It also operates manufacturing plants in Canada, Chile, Ireland, and
the US.

The company also produces pulp for the paper industry and cellulose
insulation.


NET2PHONE INC.: Cauley Geller Files Securities Suit In S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP late last week filed a class action
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York on behalf of purchasers of Net2Phone, Inc. (Nasdaq: NTOP)
securities during the period between July 29, 1999 and December 6,
2000, inclusive.

The complaint charges the following 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:

     (i) Net2Phone,

    (ii) Bear Stearns & Co. Inc.,

   (iii) BancBoston Robertson Stephens,

    (iv) Goldman Sachs & Co.,

     (v) Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc.,

    (vi) Howard S. Balter and

   (vii) Ilan S. Slasky

On or about July 29, 1999, Net2Phone commenced an initial public
offering of 5,400,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering
price of $15 per share.

In connection therewith, Net2Phone filed a registration statement,
which incorporated a prospectus, with the SEC.

The complaint further alleges that the Prospectus was materially false
and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that:

     (i) Bear Stearns, Robertson Stephens, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan
         Stanley had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed
         commissions from certain investors in exchange for which Bear
         Stearns, Robertson Stephens, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley
         allocated to those investors material portions of the
         restricted number of Net2Phone shares issued in connection
         with the Net2Phone IPO; and

    (ii) Bear Stearns, Robertson Stephens, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan
         Stanley entered into agreements with customers whereby Bear
         Stearns, Robertson Stephens, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley
         had agreed to allocate shares to those customers in the
         Net2Phone IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to
         purchase additional Net2Phone shares in the aftermarket at
         pre-determined prices.

For more details, 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 (toll free) or by E-mail: info@classlawyer.com


ON SEMICONDUCTOR: Wolf Haldenstein Begins Securities Suit In S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP filed a class action lawsuit
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York, on behalf of purchasers of On Semiconductor Corporation (Nasdaq:
ONNN) between April 27, 2000 and December 6, 2000, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities
laws by issuing and selling ONNN common stock pursuant to the April 27,
2000 IPO without disclosing to investors that some of the underwriters
in the offering, including the lead underwriters, had solicited and
received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that in exchange for the excessive
commissions, defendants allocated ONNN shares to customers at the IPO
price.

To receive the allocations (i.e., the ability to purchase shares) at
the IPO price, the underwriters' brokerage customers had to agree to
purchase additional shares in the aftermarket at progressively higher
prices.

The requirement that customers make additional purchases at
progressively higher prices as the price of ONNN stock rocketed upward
(a practice known on Wall Street as 'laddering') was intended to drive
ONNN's share price up to artificially high levels.

This artificial price inflation enabled both the underwriters and their
customers to reap enormous profits by buying stock at the IPO price and
then selling it later for a profit at inflated aftermarket prices.

For more information, contact: Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz
LLP by Mail: 270 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016 by Phone:
800-575-0735 (Fred Taylor Isquith, Esq., Gregory Nespole, Esq., Thomas
Burt, Esq., Gustavo Bruckner, Esq., or George Peters) by E-mail:
classmember@whafh.com or visit the firm's Website: www.whafh.com


PJ AMERICA: `Papa John's' Franchisee Settles Shareholders Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Barely four months following its filing in March, PJ America, Inc.
announced that it has settled the shareholders suits currently pending
in Delaware.

According to a SEC regulatory document filed by the Company recently, a
settlement agreement was inked with the plaintiffs last July 19.

All parties agreed in a memorandum of understanding to the following
stipulations:

     (1) the lawsuits were a material factor considered by the Investor
         Group in determining to raise the per Share consideration to
         $8.75,

     (2) to use their best efforts to execute and seek court approval
         of a definitive settlement agreement without any admission of
         any breach of fiduciary duty or other wrongdoing on the part
         of the defendants, and

     (3) not to oppose an application by plaintiffs' counsel for
         attorney fees and expenses not to exceed $185,000 in the
         aggregate.

The Investor Group, led by board chairman Richard Sherman and CEO
Douglas Stephens, owns 40 percent of the company.  The Group is
planning to acquire the rest.

At least four shareholders suits were filed from March 23 to 26 this
year in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware in and for New
Castle County alleging that the Group's proposal was unfair to the
Company's public stockholders.

In addition, the shareholders claim that some or all of the individual
defendants breached their fiduciary duties to the Company's public
stockholders and seeking injunctive relief and damages in connection
with the proposal.

The company is the largest franchisee of Papa John's pizza delivery and
carryout restaurants, operating about 170 units in nine states and
Puerto Rico.


RUSSIA: Payments For Ex-Nazi Slave-Laborers To Be Made By End Of July
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Russian Foundation for Mutual Understanding and Reconciliation will
begin distributing 835 million German marks ($376 million) this month,
as compensation to former Nazi-era slave laborers in the former Soviet
Union.

According to The St. Petersburg Times, the first 2,000 payments are
expected to be received by the end of July.

Earlier this year, Russian and German funds signed an agreement to
distribute the payments that are part of the 10 billion marks ($4.4
billion) that Germany agreed to give survivors of Nazi slavery from the
Soviet Union, Poland and the Czech Republic.  

The payments were authorized after U.S. courts agreed to dismiss class
action suits brought against German firms on behalf of Nazi slave-labor
victims.

German corporations and taxpayers are funding the compensation
payments.

The first payments will go to people of declining years who were held
in ghettoes or prison camps.

"They will receive the largest amounts, 15,000 marks each," said
Lyudmila Narusova, head of the foundation's oversight council, at a
press conference recently.  

She said the fund has registered 10,000 such people.

"The next level of compensation," said Narusova, "will range from 1,500
to 10,000 marks, depending on the category of work performed.  The
largest amount will go to those who worked in mines, and less will be
paid to those who worked in agriculture and for private companies."


SCIENTIFIC-ATLANTA: Wolf Popper Files Securities Suit In N.D. Georgia
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Scientific Atlanta, Inc. (NYSE: SFA) and its CEO, James McDonald and
its CFO, Wallace Haislip, have been charged with violations of the
United States securities laws by a client of Wolf Popper LLP, in a
class action lawsuit brought in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of Georgia.

The lawsuit was brought on behalf of all persons who purchased
Scientific Atlanta securities on the open market during a period
beginning on April 19, 2001 through July 19, 2001, inclusive.

Scientific Atlanta and the Individual Defendants, McDonald and Haislip,
are charged with making false and misleading statements regarding the
Company's performance, specifically relating to demand for the
Company's cable television and telecommunications products, and the
booking of orders for those products.

On April 19, 2001 the Company, and McDonald in particular, stated in a
press release announcing its third-quarter results that they expected
continuing strength and growth in the Company's business.

The Company further indicated the strength of the demand for its
products in its quarterly filing with United States Securities and
Exchange Commission on May 11, 2001, by stating that it had increased
its production capacity.

Shortly after these statements were made the Individual Defendants sold
over 775,000 shares of Scientific Atlanta stock, at prices that were
artificially inflated due to defendants' false and misleading
statements.

The net aggregate proceeds from these sales totaled in excess of $40
million. The Individual Defendants sold these shares between $55.00 and
59.75 per share, at artificially inflated prices.

On April 19, 2001 the Defendants announced their results for the
fourth-quarter and fiscal year 2001, including bookings of $507 million
in the quarter, which represented a decrease of over $205 million from
bookings of $712.6 million in the third-quarter of 2001.

The defendants' statements regarding the continuing strength of
Scientific Atlanta's business through the fourth-quarter were
materially false and misleading, which was demonstrated by the 28.8
percent decline in bookings between the third and fourth quarters.

As a result of this enormous shortfall in bookings Scientific Atlanta's
stock was punished severely. The stock fell 34 percent, down $12.08 per
share to $23.

For more information, contact: James A. Harrod, Esq. by Phone:
212.451.9642 or 877.370.7703 (toll free) by Mail: 845 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10022-6689 by E-Mail: IRRep@wolfpopper.com or visit the
firm's Website: www.wolfpopper.com


TRAVELERS SEPARATE: Trial Has Yet To Be Set For Four-Year Old Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Travelers Separate Account Ten For Variable Annuities revealed
through recent SEC filings that no legal proceedings have been set for
a four-year old class action suit pending against the Company.

In March 1997, the purported class action entitled Patterman v. The
Travelers, Inc., et al. was commenced in the Superior Court of Richmond
County, Georgia.

It alleges violations of the Georgia RICO statute and other state laws
by an affiliate of the Company, Primerica Financial Services, Inc. and
certain affiliates.

Discovery commenced in May last year, but since then no further legal
proceedings have been instituted related to the suit.

"Defendants intend to vigorously contest the litigation," the Company
said in its SEC report.


VALUE AMERICA: Marc Henzel Begins Securities Suit In S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Marc S. Henzel filed a class action in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf
of purchasers of Value America, Inc. (Nasdaq: VUSQE) common stock
during the period between April 8, 1999 and December 6, 2000,
inclusive.

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.

On or about April 8, 1999, Value America commenced an initial public
offering of 5.5 million of its shares of common stock at an offering
price of $23 per share.

In connection therewith, Value America filed a registration statement,
which incorporated a prospectus, with the SEC.

The complaint further alleges that the Prospectus was materially false
and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that:

     (i) BancBoston Robertson Stephens had solicited and received
         excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors
         in exchange for which Robertson Stephens allocated to those
         investors material portions of the restricted number of Value
         America shares issued in connection with the Value America
         IPO; and

    (ii) Robertson Stephens had entered into agreements with customers
         whereby Robertson Stephens agreed to allocate Value America
         shares to those customers in the Value America IPO in exchange
         for which the customers agreed to purchase additional Value
         America shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices.

For more information, contact: The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel by
Mail: 210 West Washington Square, Third Floor Philadelphia, PA 19106,
by Phone: (888) 643-6735 or (215) 625-9999 by Fax: (215) 440-9475 by E-
mail: Mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182.


* Insurance Claims Of Holocaust Victims' Heirs Still A Long Shot
----------------------------------------------------------------
The heirs of Holocaust victims, many of the latter having purchased
prewar life insurance policies, believed for a while that they had
reason to hope they would receive the support necessary to recover as
beneficiaries under these policies.  

A number of states in the United States, for example, passed
legislation and engaged in various administrative efforts to help the
Holocaust heirs seek redress under such insurance policies.  

But the hopes of these heirs have remained unfulfilled in the main;
their story in Massachusetts, for example, being the story of Holocaust
heirs elsewhere in the United States, according to a recent Associated
Press report.

In the spring of 1998, State of Massachusetts then-acting Governor Paul
Cellucci announced that the state would help the hundreds of heirs of
Holocaust victims living in Massachusetts recover life insurance claims
owed them since World War II.  

The State Division of Insurance sent letters to Jewish organizations,
set up a Web site and made claims packets available.  

However, the insurance division says it knows of only two Holocaust
heirs in Massachusetts who have been paid claims -- the claims, in this
instance, totaling about $125,000.

But the heirs' hopes, in Massachusetts and other states as well, were
lifted with the formation of the International Commission on Holocaust
Era Insurance Claims, headed by former U.S. Secretary of State Lawrence
Eagleburger, to find and process their claims.   

The Commission was formed under pressure from U.S. insurance regulators
and a class action suit seeking $2 billion.  

As a next step, the Massachusetts insurance division began to refer
Holocaust heirs to the Commission, which had set aside $220 million to
pay the insurance claims.

The Commission, funded by five European insurance companies -- Allianz,
AXA, Generali, Winterthur and Zurich, all of which have stakes in the
U.S. financial services market -- has been criticized by some Jewish
groups for failing to settle claims while spending 10 times more on
salaries, hotel bills and other administrative costs than it has paid
Holocaust heirs.

Indeed, the Commission's claims settlement record has not been stellar.  

Former Washington State Insurance Commissioner Deborah Senn wrote in a
report that "[t]he deck is stacked against claimants, resulting in the
overwhelming denial of claims, even those which are well documented."  

At the end of last year, less than one percent of the 60,219 claims
submitted to the Commission had resulted in settlement offers,
according to Senn's report.

Massachusetts state senator Cynthia Creem, a Newton Democrat, wants her
state to follow the example of California, Washington, Minnesota, New
York and Florida by passing a law to force insurers to disclose
policies sold in Europe before World War II.  

Her bill would suspend insurance companies' licenses to do business in
Massachusetts if they don't file the lists of the policies with the
state.  

The bill has passed through the Insurance Committee, but has not been
voted upon by the full legislature.

Several insurance companies are fighting the existing California law
mandating such disclosure.  

The companies say that data protection laws forbid client information
from being given to a third party without the client's consent.  

This is a position, which could leave a Holocaust heir without access
to the best evidence of his/her claim.

And in Florida, last year, a federal appeals court nullified a similar
Florida law, which called for fines of $1,000 a day for noncompliance
with the disclosure provision.


                              *********

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  * * *