CAR_Public/011009.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Tuesday, October 9, 2001, Vol. 3, No. 197


                          Headlines


AKORN INC.: Marc Henzel Initiates Securities Suit in N.D. Illinois
COMMTOUCH SOFTWARE:  Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
COPYRIGHT LITIGATION: Court Says Freelance Writers Own Copyright
DQE INC.: Wolf Haldenstein Initiates Securities Suit in Pennsylvania
EL CAJON: Insured Homeowners Sue After Flood-Plain Map Proves Faulty

ENGAGE INC.: Schiffrin Barroway Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
ENGAGE INC.: Milberg Weiss Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. New York
FORD MOTOR: Judge Rules Ex-Employee Must Make Documents Available
GAYLORD CONTAINER: Noteholders Sue Over Temple Inland Merger
GLIATECH INC.: Kirby McInerney Commences Securities Suit in N.D. OH

GULFSTREAM AEROSPACE: Former Employees Sue For Alleged Discrimination
INTERNET SECURITY: Schiffrin Barroway Commences Securities Suit in NY
INTERNET SECURITY: Cauley Geller Commences S.D. NY Securities Suit
LEAD POISONING: NAACP To Join Lawsuit On Behalf Of Lead Poison Victims
LOUDCLOUD INC.: Weiss Yourman Initiates Securities Suit in N.D. CA

METROMEDIA FIBER: Wolf Haldenstein Commences S.D. NY Securities Suit
MONTANA: Federal Court Refuses To Remove Fee Game Hunting Ban
NEOFORMA.COM: Marc Henzel Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. New York
NICE SYSTEMS: Pomerantz Haudek Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
NOVACARE INC.: Kirby McInerney Lodges Securities Suit in E.D. PA

RACIAL PROFILING: ACLU Unveils Ads Seeking Racial Profiling Victims
SIRIUS SATELLITE: Johnson Perkinson Commence Securities Suit in VT
SOUTH CAROLINA: Senior Citizens File Suit Over 1% Sales Tax Exclusion
ZIFF-DAVIS INC.: Wolf Haldenstein Commences S.D. NY Securities Suit


                           *********


AKORN INC.: Marc Henzel Initiates Securities Suit in N.D. Illinois
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Office of Marc S. Henzel commenced a class action lawsuit in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
on behalf of all purchasers of Akorn, Inc. (Nasdaq: AKRN) securities
between February 20, 2001 and May 22, 2001, inclusive.

The complaint charges defendants with violations of federal securities
laws by, among other things, issuing a series of materially false and
misleading press releases concerning the Company's financial results
and business prospects.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that Akorn's financial statements
for the year ended December 31, 2000 were materially false and
misleading because they were not presented in conformity with Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles as well as the rules and regulations of
the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. As a result, the
price of the Company's common stock was artificially inflated
throughout the class period.

For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 210 West
Washington Square, Philadelphia, PA 19106 by Phone: 215.625.9999 or
888.643.6735 by Fax: 215.440.9475 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or
visit the firm's Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182


COMMTOUCH SOFTWARE:  Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Office of Marc S. Henzel lodged a securities class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District
of New York on behalf all persons who acquired CommTouch Software Ltd.
(NASDAQ: CTCH) securities between July 13, 1999 and December 6, 2000.

The suit names as defendants:

     (1) The Company,

     (2) U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray Inc,

     (3) Prudential Securities Incorporated, and

     (4) Warburg Dillon Read LLC, a subsidiary of UBS AG.

The complaint charges defendants with violations of 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 the Company's initial public offering of 3,000,000
shares of common stock at $16.00 per share that was completed on or
about July 13, 1999. The complaint alleges that the Prospectus was
false and misleading because it failed to disclose:

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

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

For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 210 West
Washington Square, Philadelphia, PA 19106 by Phone: 215.625.9999 or
888.643.6735 by Fax: 215.440.9475 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or
visit the firm's Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182


COPYRIGHT LITIGATION: Court Says Freelance Writers Own Copyright
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ontario Superior Court judge Peter Cumming ruled in favor of freelance
copywriters in a landmark ruling stating that freelance writers in
Canada own the copyright to articles resold through online databases.

Freelance writer Heather Robinson filed the suit against information-
based corporations like Thomson Corporation and Globemedia in 1996,
over the resale of articles she wrote that were archived in a database
with articles from other publications and resold. The $100-million suit
involved thousands of freelancers who have written for Canadian
publications.

Cumming's ruling disagreed with the information companies who have said
that the company had "collective" ownership of the articles as what was
being sold through databases was "the entire newspaper." In his 32-page
ruling, Cumming said that it was "impossible to view the reproduction
of the plaintiff's work on the Globe's various databases as
reproduction of a collective work."

Lawyer for the plaintiffs, Michael McGowan, said that the ruling meant
they have won "half" of the battle. "We've won on the central issue (of
who owns copyright to the articles)," McGowan said in an Toronto Star
Online report.  He also expressed confidence that they would win in the
other issues in the suit.

The judge did not rule on two issues:

     (1) whether freelancers who sold their work to a newspaper had
         consented to have their articles published in an online
         database, and;

     (2) who owns the copyright on news articles written by a staff
         writer

He says these issues will be sorted out in the trial.

Globemedia and Thomson both declined comment.

The ruling affects only Canadian publications that sell republication
rights and observers say the ruling will be appealed all the way to the
Supreme Court.


DQE INC.: Wolf Haldenstein Initiates Securities Suit in Pennsylvania
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP filed a securities class
action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the securities of DQE, Inc.
(NYSE:DQE) between December 6, 2000 and April 30, 2001, inclusive.
The suit was filed in in the United States District Court, Western
District of Pennsylvania against the Company and Chief Executive
Officer David Marshall.

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 December 6, 2000 and April 30, 2001, thereby
artificially inflating the price of Company securities. The complaint
also alleges that, throughout the Class Period, the Company issued
positive statements concerning the significant and positive impact that
DQE Enterprises, Inc., the Company's investment subsidiary, was having
on the Company's financial results.

During this time, the market for initial public offerings had
dramatically slowed down. Accordingly, the ability of the companies in
DQE Enterprises' investment portfolio to go public was substantially
impaired.

Defendants, however, issued a stream of positive statements concerning
the Company's operations and prospects, but failed to disclose the
impaired nature of DQE Enterprises' investments and that the Company
would not realize the investment gains that defendants had caused the
market to expect.

As a result, defendants' estimates, projections and opinions as to the
Company's operations, products, earnings and income were knowingly
lacking in a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

This information finally became publicly known on April 30, 2001, when
DQE reported its earnings for the first quarter of 2001 and revised its
earnings outlook for the full year, based in part, on the weakened
outlook for DQE Enterprises. In response to this negative announcement,
when trading resumed on May 1, 2001, the price of DQE common stock
dropped from $30.43 per share to $23.75 per share on extremely heavy
trading volume.

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: DQEcase@milbergNY.com or visit the
firm's Website: www.milberg.com


EL CAJON: Insured Homeowners Sue After Flood-Plain Map Proves Faulty
--------------------------------------------------------------------
El Cajon homeowners filed a class action suit against the city over a
mistake on a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood-plain map
that forced them to pay unnecessary flood insurance premiums. About 350
residents filed the suit in San Diego federal court, alleging that they
between $750,000 and $1 million in unwarranted flood insurance between
1997 and April 2001, when the map was corrected.

The lawsuit charges FEMA, El Cajon and West Consultants Inc. of San
Diego with negligence and seeks reimbursement plus interest from FEMA
for all premium payments.

The suit asserts that:

     (1) the city failed to give the right information about the
         neighborhood's flood controls to the consulting firm;

     (2) the firm conducted an incomplete study of the area; and

     (3) FEMA prepared the inaccurate floodplain map.

The eleven plaintiffs in the suit assert they paid $300 to $1,500 in
flood insurance premiums while their homes were wrongly considered to
be at an elevation with a 1 percent risk of flooding each year.

El Cajon City Attorney Morgan Foley expressed disappointment over the
suit, saying that the city exerted effort to help the plaintiffs and
stop the payment of unnecessary premiums. "It's sort of a slap in the
face to have them all claim that somehow we're responsible," Foley
said.

David Williams, president of West Consultants Inc., said his company
did nothing wrong, saying that city officials and local developers had
not given them the relevant information. "We're only as good as the
information we're given," he said. "And the information was not given
to us."

Attorney for the plaintiffs Terry Rizzon said that they wouldn't know
who was most responsible for the mapping error until the trial, but
insists FEMA should pay. "There was a mistake here," he said. "FEMA has
money they shouldn't have. It belongs to our people and they should
return it. It's that simple."


ENGAGE INC.: Schiffrin Barroway Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin and Barroway, LLP initiated 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 Engage, Inc.
(NASDAQ:ENGA) from July 19, 1999 through December 6, 2000, inclusive.

The suit names as defendants, the Company and its underwriters, Goldman
Sachs & Co. and Bear Stearns & Co., Inc.

On or about July 19, 1999, the Company commenced an initial public
offering of 6,000,000 of its shares of common stock, at an offering
price of $15 per share. In connection therewith, the Company filed a
registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus with the SEC.
As alleged in the complaint, the Prospectus was materially false and
misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that:

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

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

For more information, contact Marc A. Topaz or Stuart L. Berman 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 by E-mail:  
info@sbclasslaw.com or visit the firm's Website: www.sbclasslaw.com


ENGAGE INC.: Milberg Weiss Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP commenced a class action
lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Engage, Inc.
(NASDAQ:ENGA), formerly known as Engage Technologies, Inc., between
July 19, 1999 and December 6, 2000, inclusive.

The action is pending in the United States District Court, Southern
District of New York, against defendants:

     (1) Engage, Inc.,

     (2) Paul L. Schaut,

     (3) Stephen A. Royal,

     (4) David S. Wetherell,

     (5) Goldman Sachs & Co. and

     (6) Bear Stearns & Co., Inc.

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.

On or about July 19, 1999, the Company commenced an initial public
offering of 6,000,000 of its shares of common stock, at an offering
price of $15 per share. In connection therewith, the Company filed a
registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus with the SEC.

As alleged in the complaint, the Prospectus was materially false and
misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that:

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

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

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: Engagecase@milbergNY.com or visit the
firm's Website: www.milberg.com


FORD MOTOR: Judge Rules Ex-Employee Must Make Documents Available
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Wayne County Circuit judge William Giovan refused to force Ford Motor
Co. employee John Kovacs to hand over sensitive human resources
documents which the Company alleges he stole. Kovacs, a former human
resource manager with Ford Credit, reportedly had several confidential
documents that included minutes of human resource meetings and other
sensitive information regarding employees.

Kovac's attorney, James Fett wrote a letter to Ford Chairman William
Clay Ford last March, and attached the documents. The letter asked Ford
to discontinue the company's alleged discriminatory employment policies
of taking race and gender into consideration. The letter and its
attachments were subsequently made part of the public court record in a
lawsuit filed by Kovacs against Ford for suspending him with pay
shortly after the letter was sent.

Fett said Kovacs has many more documents that were not included with
the letter to Ford Jr, documents that are "embarrassing" and "They show
they have quotas and show they have a policy of not promoting white
males." Ford attorney Thomas Kienbaum accused Kovacs of stealing the
documents and Fett with publicizing them to the media and on a Web
site.

Circuit Judge William Giovan said the first he heard of the case was
Thursday and didn't know enough about it, or the documents to make a
decision. Instead, he ruled Fett must make all the documents available
to attorneys for Ford and Ford Credit and allow them to take Kovacs's
deposition.

Ford is the subject of at least two class action suits and several
other individual suits on behalf of current and former managers.
They claim the company's evaluation system favored younger, so-called
"diversity" candidates. Ford said it would discontinue its 18-month-old
system of evaluating about 18,000 managers last July.

Under the Performance Management Process, employees were graded A, B,
or C. Those receiving a C could lose bonuses and raises, and two
consecutive C grades could mean dismissal. Initially, at least 10
percent of employees were to be graded C, but that later was lowered to
5 percent.  Ford president and chief executive Jacques Nasser told
employees on July 10 the letter system was being replaced by three
designations: top achiever, achiever, and improvement required.


GAYLORD CONTAINER: Noteholders Sue Over Temple Inland Merger
------------------------------------------------------------
Gaylord Container Corporation faces a securities class action suit
filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York arising from their merger with Temple Inland, Inc.

The suit was filed by Absolute Recovery Hedge Fund, LP and Absolute
Recovery Hedge Fund, Ltd. in behalf of themselves and holders of:

     (1) the Company's 9-3/4% Senior Notes due 2007;

     (2) the Company's 9-3/8% Senior Notes due 2007

Absolute Recovery holds $500,000 in principal amount of the Company's
9-3/4% notes.

The suit names as defendants:

     (i) Gaylord Container Corporation,

    (ii) Temple-Inland, Inc.,

   (iii) Temple-Inland Acquisition Corporation, a subsidiary of Temple-
         Inland, Inc.

    (iv) State Street Bank and Trust Co., trustee for the 9-3/8% notes,

     (v) Fleet National Bank, trustee for the 9-3/4% notes.

In September 2001, Temple-Inland, Inc. and the Company entered into a
definitive merger agreement by which Temple-Inland will acquire
Gaylord. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, Temple-Inland will
begin cross-conditional tender offers for all of Company's outstanding
shares and outstanding 9-3/8% Notes, 9-3/4% Notes and 9-7/8% Senior
Subordinated Notes due 2008.

The suit alleges that the Company, which is claimed to be insolvent,
entered into the merger that improperly results in senior noteholders
being paid seventy-five cents on the dollar while common stock holders
are to receive $1.80 per share, representing a huge premium.

The complaint also alleges that noteholders are being denied the
payment in full to which they are entitled in the event of a change of
control, and that the Company's Board of Directors favors shareholders
because several Board members own significant amounts of stock. The
suit claims that the other defendants aided and abetted the Company to
commit breach of fiduciary duty by allowing them to proceed with the
merger.

Lead counsel for the plaintiffs is Steven G. Schulman of the law firm
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes and Lerach, LLP.  For more information,
contact Schulman or Seth Ottensoser by Mail: One Pennsylvania Plaza,
49th fl. New York, NY, 10119-0165 or by Phone: (212) 594-5300.

A copy of the complaint can also be viewed at the firm's Website:
www.milberg.com/gaylord/


GLIATECH INC.: Kirby McInerney Commences Securities Suit in N.D. OH
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Kirby McInerney & Squire, LLP lodged a securities class action against
Gliatech, Inc. on behalf of all investors who purchased Gliatech common
stock from May 28, 1998 through August 29, 2000.

The action is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Ohio and names as defendants:

     (1) The Company,

     (2) Thomas O. Oesterling, Chief Executive Officer and President,
         Chairman of the Board of the Directors from May 1999 until
         August 31, 2000, and

     (3) Rodney E. Dausch, Chief Financial Officer

The action asserts claims for violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5. The complaint
alleges that the defendants caused Company stock to trade at
artificially inflated prices by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations and omissions concerning the efficacy of ADCON-L,
Gliatech's principal commercial product, including the clinical data
Gliatech submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Although the FDA approved ADCON-L, the Company revealed on August 28,
2000, that the FDA had issued a report questioning the integrity of the
data submitted by the Company to the FDA. The FDA report detailed
numerous ways in which the data submitted had been altered or modified
to portray the efficacy of ADCON-L to be greater than the unmodified
data suggested.  These disclosures throwing the Company's integrity
into question, and the principal product into limbo caused the collapse
of the Company's impending merger with Guilford Pharmaceuticals.

These events caused the Company's share price to plummet 59% on August
29, 2000, shedding $15.19 per share to close at $10.19 per share.

For further details, contact Kirby McInerney & Squire LLP by Mail: 830
Third Avenue, 10th Floor New York, NY 10022 by Phone: (212) 371-6600
or (888) 529-4787 (toll-free) by Fax: (212) 751-2540 or visit the
firm's Website: www.kmslaw.com


GULFSTREAM AEROSPACE: Former Employees Sue For Alleged Discrimination
---------------------------------------------------------------------
28 former Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation employees have filed a class
action suit in Atlanta federal court against the Company saying that
they were dismissed for no reason other than "an age-motivated purge."

Woodrow E. Cosper, 54, worked at the Company for 28 years until Sept.
25, 2000, his employment anniversary, when he was fired as part of a
reduction in force instituted by the Company.

The suit asserts that the Company and its new owners, General Dynamics
Corp., fired those over 40 years old and kept younger, less-qualified
employees. The suit further alleges that the Company discriminated
further by not rehiring those workers despite promises to give them
priority consideration.

The suit contends that the terminations represented age discrimination
and retaliation, violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment
Act. The reduction in force targeted older employees, they say.
The plaintiffs asserted their rights by filing a charge of
discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,
contending that the Company retaliated against anyone who complained of
discrimination.

The EEOC investigation found circumstantial and direct evidence of the
Company's discriminatory intent, freeing the lawsuit to proceed.

CEO and President Bill Boisture denied the charges, saying that the
reduction was necessary to ensure the company's long-term competitive
advantage and its ability to serve its customers effectively.
Gulfstream spokesman Stephanie Snyder declined comment on the suit
Friday.


INTERNET SECURITY: Schiffrin Barroway Commences Securities Suit in NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin and 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 Internet Infrastructure HOLDRs Depositary Receipts
(AMEX:IIH) from February 24, 2000 through December 6, 2000, inclusive.
The suit names Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, and
Merrill Lynch & Co. as defendants.

The complaint alleges that the Internet Infrastructure Depositary
Receipts were "basket securities" whose price was directly related to,
and moved with, the price of 20 underlying securities held in the
Internet Infrastructure HOLDRs trust.

The complaint further alleges that defendants violated the federal
securities laws by issuing and selling Internet Infrastructure HOLDRs
Depositary Receipts in an IPO on February 24, 2000, pursuant to a
registration statement and prospectus that were materially false and
misleading.

The defendants allegedly failed to disclose that a substantial
proportion of the Internet Infrastructure HOLDRs trust's initial
portfolio consisted of stocks whose prices had been artificially
inflated through the use of improper practices relating to their
initial public offering, and that they therefore traded at artificially
inflated prices.

For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz or Stuart L. Berman 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


INTERNET SECURITY: Cauley Geller Commences S.D. NY Securities Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Georgia on behalf of purchasers of Internet Security Systems, Inc.
(NASDAQ:ISSX) publicly traded securities during the period between
April 1, 2001 and July 2, 2001, inclusive.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The complaint alleges that defendants made materially false and
misleading representations regarding the Company's revenues and
earnings for the first and second quarters of fiscal year 2001 which
artificially inflated the price of Company stock. Specifically, the
complaint charges that on April 18, 2001, the Company reported its 23rd
consecutive quarter of growth and claimed revenues in excess of $61
million and net income of $6.5 million or $0.15 per share.

The Company claimed that "financial performance continued to show
strength and our solid execution and focus on expense control enabled
us to meet our profit guidance provided at the beginning of the
quarter." The Company also claimed that its guidance for the second
quarter ending June 30, 2001 was to produce revenues between $64 and
$67 million and earnings in the range of $0.15 per diluted share, even
though defendants knew they could not achieve these numbers. The
Company claimed that "the public can continue to rely on the
expectations published in its earnings release and web site as being
its current expectations on matters covered, unless ISS publishes a
notice stating otherwise."

The defendants knew that their business was slowing down, because they
received financial reports on a frequent basis, and knew that they had
too many employees in view of the slowdown.

On July 2, 2001, after the quarter had ended, the Company issued a
press release in which it stated that management expected revenues in
the range of $50-52 million, not $64-67 million, and a loss per diluted
share between $0.00 to $0.02, rather than earnings of $0.15 to $0.16.
The Company released its actual numbers, and admitted that it had over
hired and over indulged on fringe benefits, travel and entertainment.
The Company also laid off 12% of its work force, confirming what its
executives had known or recklessly disregarded, that it had too many
employees and greater expenses than it could afford, given its level of
sales.

For more information, contact 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) by E-mail: info@classlawyer.com or visit the
firm's Website: www.classlawyer.com


LEAD POISONING: NAACP To Join Lawsuit On Behalf Of Lead Poison Victims
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kweisi Mfume, President and CEO of the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) today called the actions by a
group of Baltimore city landlords seeking to bar a group of lead-
affected children from suing them "outrageous, without merit and
socially irresponsible."

Mfume said the NAACP would ask the city's Circuit Court for permission
to file an amicus brief in support of plaintiffs who are suing
landlords on behalf of children who suffered from high blood lead
levels. "We are totally opposed to the landlord's lawsuit to prevent
lead poisoning victims from seeking relief under the Maryland Lead
Poisoning Prevention Program Act."

Mfume has been meeting with officials from several states to begin a
coordinated action against the lead paint industry. He is asking the
states to join the NAACP, which may file a class action lawsuit against
the industry to end the threat of lead poisoning in children.

"Some of the landlords who are trying to bar affected children from
suing them are the same landlords who opposed anti-lead paint laws when
I was a city councilman in 1981," said Mfume. "Lead paint has taken a
tremendous toll on our children, and it doesn't matter whether you live
in the inner City or suburbia. This is a civil rights issue that
affects children of all races, ethnic backgrounds and income levels."

The NAACP could file the amicus brief as early as tomorrow.


LOUDCLOUD INC.: Weiss Yourman Initiates Securities Suit in N.D. CA
------------------------------------------------------------------
Weiss and Yourman commenced a class action lawsuit against Loudcloud,
Inc. (NASDAQ:LDCL) in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California on behalf of investors who purchased Loudcloud
securities between March 8, 2001 and May 1, 2001, inclusive. The suit
names the Company, certain officers and directors, and the lead
underwriters of Loudcloud's public offering as defendants.

The complaint charges defendants with violations of the Securities Act
of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Prospectus,
declared effective by the SEC on March 8, 2001, was false and
misleading because, among other things, it failed to disclose:

     (1) Loudcloud's plans to substantially reduce its work force and
         to restructure itself shortly after the public offering;

     (2) the fact that the public offering was not raising funds
         sufficient to enable Loudcloud to reach profitability and
         accomplish the planned expansion described in the prospectus;

     (3) the imminent cancellation of a major contract to which one of
         the underwriters was a party; and

     (4) that in order to enable the public offering to go forward
         undisclosed sales of shares were made to insiders and the
         selling price of the offering was artificially maintained by
         the undisclosed sale of part of the offering to insiders

For more information, contact Weiss and Yourman by visiting the firm's
Website: www.wyca.com or by Phone: (800) 437-7918.


METROMEDIA FIBER: Wolf Haldenstein Commences S.D. NY Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Metromedia Fiber Network, Inc.
(NASDAQ:MFNX) between January 8, 2001 and July 2, 2001, inclusive.
The suit names as defendants the Company and certain of its officers
and directors.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities
laws by issuing by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to
the market between January 8, 2001 and July 2, 2001, thereby
artificially inflating the price of the Company's securities.
Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants issued multiple
press releases announcing the Company's receipt of a $350 million
credit facility from Citicorp USA, Inc. which would enable the Company
to complete the construction of an extensive fiber optic network.

These statements were materially false and misleading because
defendants failed to disclose that:

     (1) the Citicorp credit facility was contingent on the receipt of
         additional commitments for which the Comapny was experiencing
         difficulty obtaining, and

     (2) that without obtaining the credit facility the further
         development of the Company's fiber optic network would be
         significantly delayed

Thus, when on July 2, 2001, the Company revealed for the first time
that the commitment letter from Citicorp was subject to the receipt of
commitments from other lenders, the price of Company securities
plummeted causing damage to the class.

For more information, contact Fred Taylor Isquith, Gregory Nespole,
Gustavo Bruckner, Michael Miske or George Peters by Mail: 270 Madison
Avenue, New York, New York 10016 by Phone: (800) 575-0735 by E-mail:
classmember@whafh.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.whafh.com.E-mail should refer to MFNX.


MONTANA: Federal Court Refuses To Remove Fee Game Hunting Ban
-------------------------------------------------------------
A federal district judge refused to stop the state of Montana from
enforcing its ban on hunting captive game farm animals for a fee. U.S.
District Judge Don Molloy denied the request of operators of two
Montana game farms to issue an injunction against enforcement of the
fee-killing law. The law was passed in November 2000 as part of
Initiative 143, established a moratorium on new game farm licenses.

The plaintiffs, Kim and Cindy Kafka of Havre, and Pat and Connie
Corbett of Sidney, have called the I-143 "unconstitutional."
In addition to constitutional claims, the game farm operators
complained that voter turnout for the initiative was poor, and that
voters in most counties voted against it. Molloy disagreed, saying that
the public interest "is not served by granting the plaintiffs request
to authorized continued fee killing."

He also asserted that more Montanans voted for the initiative than
against it, thus indicating that the public's interest is to stop fee-
killing of game farm animals.

"Plaintiffs' complaint is mostly, though not exclusively, economic,"
Molloy wrote. "They argue that they will lose fee-killing contracts
this year; suffer injury to their reputations and good will; lose
referral clients; as well as being unable to make loan payments."
The operators also claimed that the ban imposed by the initiative
violates their Montana constitutional right to pursue employment, to
which Molloy disagreed. The judge said that the plaintiffs ".want to
equate the opportunity to pursue employment, which is a fundamental
right in Montana, with being able to run a business unfettered by state
laws and regulation,"

Finally, the game farm operators said that on balance, they suffer more
hardship from the application of the killing ban than the state would
suffer without it. That claim, Molloy said, rests on the notion that
the state' s claim that fee killing could damage Montana's hunting and
fair-chase heritage is without merit.

"Montana has a legitimate interest in protecting its hunting heritage,"
the judge wrote. "Hunting licenses and associated expenditures
contribute to local economies and also provide a significant amount of
revenue that the state uses for wildlife management," Molloy said.

The ruling does not resolve the entire lawsuit, which seeks to have the
initiative overturned. Instead, Molloy ruled only on the injunction
request that the ban of hunting game animals for a fee be suspended.


NEOFORMA.COM: Marc Henzel Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Office of Marc S. Henzel commenced a class action lawsuit in
the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, on
behalf of purchasers of the securities of Neoforma.com, Inc. (NASDAQ:
NEOF) between January 24, 2000 and December 6, 2000, inclusive.

The suit was filed against defendants:

     (1) Neoforma.com,

     (2) Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Incorporated,

     (3) Bear Stearns & Co.,

     (4) FleetBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc.,

     (5) Robert J. Zollars and

     (6) Frederick J. Ruegsegger.

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.

On or about January 24, 2000, Neoforma.com commenced an initial public
offering of 7,000,000 of its shares of common stock, at an offering
price of $13 per share. In connection therewith, the Company 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
         Neoforma.com shares issued in connection with the Neoforma.com
         IPO; and

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

For further details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 210 West
Washington Square, Philadelphia, PA 19106 by Phone: 215.625.9999 or
888.643.6735 by Fax: 215.440.9475 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or
visit the firm's Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182
   

NICE SYSTEMS: Pomerantz Haudek Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP initiated a class action
suit against Nice Systems Ltd. (Nasdaq: NICE on behalf of purchasers of
the Company's American Depository Shares (ADS) between May 3, 2000
through February 7, 2001, inclusive.

The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the District
of New Jersey and names as defendants:

     (1) The Company,

     (2) Nice Systems Inc., its subsidiary, and

     (3 Benjamin Levin, Company chairman

The defendants allegedly issued a series of materially false and
misleading statements during concerning the Company's financial results
which resulted in the inflation of Nice Systems's American Depository
Shares. In particular, it is alleged that Nice Systems presented its
financial results and financial statements in a manner that violated
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles by prematurely recognizing
revenue and overstating income. The Complaint alleges that the Company
violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 by issuing materially false and misleading information about the
Company's financial condition. As a result of these false and
misleading statements, the Company's stock traded at artificially
inflated prices during the class period.

The suit contends that the Company reported "record" revenues for the
first three quarters of 2000, which ended May 3, 2000 August 2, 2000
and September 30, 2000, respectively. Thereafter the Company announced
on December 28, 2000 that it was lowering revenue and earnings
expectations for the fourth quarter of 2000, which ended December 31,
2000.  As a result of the December 29, 2000 announcement, the price of
the Company's ADSs fell 61%.

On February 8, 2001, the Company shocked investors when it announced
before the markets opened that the Company would be restating revenue
for the first three quarters of 2000 based on a detailed analysis
performed "in the course of the yearend closing process." As a result,
the Company expected to revise revenues for the first three quarters of
2000 as follows: $34 million instead of $37.5 million, $39 million
instead of $42.9 million, and $45 million instead of $46.6 million,
respectively.

In addition, the Company announced that it was revising downward its
previously announced revenue estimate for the fourth quarter ended
December 31, 2000, and that the Company's Chairman, Benjamin Levin, had
resigned. As a result of these announcements, the price of the
Company's stock fell almost 28%.

For more details, contact Andrew G. Tolan by Phone: 1-888-4-POMLAW (1-
888-476-6529) (toll-free) by E-mail: agtolan@pomlaw.com or visit the
firm's Website: www.pomerantzlaw.com.

Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing
address and voice telephonic number.


NOVACARE INC.: Kirby McInerney Lodges Securities Suit in E.D. PA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kirby McInerney & Squire, LLP filed a securities class action against
Novacare Inc. (presently known as NAHC, Inc.) on behalf of all
investors who purchased Novacare stock between May 20, 1998, and
November 22, 1999.

The action is pending in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania and names as defendants:

     (1) Novacare, Inc.,

     (2) John Foster, Chairman,

     (3) Timothy Foster, Chief Executive Officer,

     (4) James W. McLane, President and Chief Operating Officer,

     (5) Robert E. Healy, Jr. Chief Financial Officer,

     (6) Richard S. Binstein, general counsel and secretary.

The action asserts claims for violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 against the
above defendants. In addition, the action asserts claims for violations
of section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule
14a-9 against Wasserstein Perella & Co., the Company's financial
advisor. The complaint also alleges that the defendants made materially
false and misleading statements that inflated the company's reported
assets, the company's value, and consequently the price of its
securities.

During the class period, the Company was experiencing significant
business difficulties and eventually decided to sell off its operating
businesses and undergo liquidation. Nevertheless, defendants portrayed
Company stock as an attractive investment because they claimed that
Company's liquidation value (on a per share basis) was substantially
greater than the current market price for Company stock.

The complaint alleges that defendants made and distributed to the
public materially misleading statements regarding the true worth of the
Company's businesses and assets. When, the inaccuracy of defendants'
statements regarding the Company's liquidation value was revealed, the
price of Company stock fell over 75% in one day. Recent disclosures
show that the Company, in fact, has little or no liquidation value.

For more information, contact Kirby McInerney & Squire by Mail: 830
Third Avenue, 10th Floor New York, NY 10022 by Phone: (212) 371-6600 or
(888) 529-4787 by Fax: (212) 751-2540 or visit the firm's Website:
www.kmslaw.com


RACIAL PROFILING: ACLU Unveils Ads Seeking Racial Profiling Victims
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) stepped up its campaign
against racial profiling by unveiling a 16 by 60 foot billboard on the
New Jersey Turnpike seeking potential plaintiffs.

According to an Associated Press report, the billboard stands on the
turnpike's southbound spur, around 10 miles from Newark and says
"Stopped or searched by the New Jersey State Police?.You might win
money damages."

The ACLU, which represents 16 plaintiffs in two racial profiling
lawsuits, said it also plans to run newspaper and radio advertisements
in New Jersey. ACLU Coordinator King Downing says the ads are meant to
bring forth lawsuits that would help the ACLU to stop racial profiling
".once and for all."

State records, released in July, revealed that nearly half of all
drivers stopped by troopers on the turnpike from Nov. 1 through April
30 were minorities. The state has instituted measures aimed at ending
these practices.

Attorney General John Farmer called the billboard a desperate move by
the ACLU to certify a pending lawsuit as a class action. With more
plaintiffs, class-action status is more likely.


SIRIUS SATELLITE: Johnson Perkinson Commence Securities Suit in VT
------------------------------------------------------------------
Johnson & Perkinson initiated a class action lawsuit in the U.S.
District Court for the District of Vermont on behalf of purchasers of
Sirius Satellite Radio, Inc. (NasdaqNM: SIRI) stock between August 13,
1998 and December 6, 2000, inclusive. The complaint alleges violations
of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities
laws by failing to disclose facts known to them which demonstrated that
the announced commercial launch dates for the Company's satellites
required for the Company's service were impossibly ambitious.
Defendants knew, or recklessly disregarded, that it would be impossible
for the Company to offer its service commercially by the end of 2000,
as initially disclosed, or early in 2001, as subsequently disclosed.

The Complaint alleges that at all times during the class period, the
defendants issued materially false and misleading statements and press
releases concerning when the Company's service would be commercially
available. This caused the market price of Sirius common stock to be
artificially inflated and as a result, the plaintiff and the class have
suffered damages.

For more information, contact Dennis J. Johnson or Jacob B. Perkinson,
by Mail: 1690 Williston Road, South Burlington, Vermont 05403 by Phone:
1-888-459-7855 (toll-free) or by E-mail: JPLAW@adelphia.net


SOUTH CAROLINA: Senior Citizens File Suit Over 1% Sales Tax Exclusion
---------------------------------------------------------------------
A Spartanburg resident filed a class action suit against South
Carolina, the State Revenue Department and several retailers over  
senior citizen sales tax exclusion privileges. C. Bruce Littlejohn
filed the suit in behalf of South Carolinians 85 years or older,
claiming that he and his peers failed to receive the 1% exclusion from
sales tax.

According to state law, South Carolinians ages 85 and older don't have
to pay the 1 percent sales tax imposed by the 1984 Educational
Improvement Act. Retailers are required to rebate the 1 percent tax for
those residents.

The General Assembly last year added to the law a requirement that
retailers display a sign near the cash register notifying consumers of
their rights about the exemption. Danny Brazell, spokesman for the
State Revenue Department, says there were some problems with some
retailers who were unaware of the law or who refused to participate.

More than 2,500 Horry and Georgetown county residents ages 85 and older
could get part of a $7.5 million sales tax refund if they qualify and
if they choose to participate in a class action suit.
To be eligible, participants had to reside in South Carolina between
Aug. 1, 1998, and July 31, 2001. A legal notice will be published
statewide in major newspapers, including The Sun News, on Sunday,
informing those who qualify how to file a claim. Claims must be filed
by March. Distribution of the refunds will begin in July.

Eligible participants should write A. Camden Lewis at Lewis Babcock &
Hawkins, P.O. Box 11208, Columbia, SC 29211. Include a name, current
address and telephone number.


ZIFF-DAVIS INC.: Wolf Haldenstein Commences S.D. NY Securities Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP lodged a class action lawsuit
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York, on behalf of purchasers of Ziff Davis, Inc. (NYSE:ZDZ) between
March 30, 1999 and December 6, 2000, inclusive. The suit names as
defendants the Company certain of its officers and directors, and its
underwriters.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities
laws by issuing and selling Company common stock pursuant to the March
30, 1999 IPO without disclosing to investors that some of the
underwriters in the offering had solicited and received excessive and
undisclosed commissions from certain investors. Specifically, the
complaint alleges that in exchange for the excessive commissions,
defendants allocated Company shares to customers at the IPO price.

To receive the allocations at the IPO price, the underwriters'
brokerage customers had to agree to purchase additional shares in the
aftermarket at progressively higher prices. The alleged requirement
that customers make additional purchases at progressively higher prices
as the price of Ziff stock rocketed upward was intended to drive Ziff'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 further detail, contact Fred Taylor Isquith, Thomas Burt, Gustavo
Bruckner, Michael Miske or George Peters by Mail: 270 Madison Avenue,
New York, New York 10016 by Phone: (800) 575-0735 by E-mail:
classmember@whafhc.com or visit the firm's Website:  www.whafh.com.
E-mail should refer to Ziff.

                               *********

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, Aurora Fatima
Antonio 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 240/629-3300.

                  * * *  End of Transmission  * * *