CAR_Public/011024.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

           Wednesday, October 24, 2001, Vol. 3, No. 208


                           Headlines


CALIFORNIA AMPLIFIER: Shapiro Haber Files Securities Suit in C.D. CA
CRITICAL PATH: Kaplan Fox Launches Securities Suit in N.D. California
DOLLAR GENERAL: Pomerantz Haudek Begins M.D. TN Securities Suit
DQE INC.: Weiss Yourman Files Securities Suit in W.D. Pennsylvania
ENRON CORPORATION: Shapiro Haber Commences Securities Suit in S.D. TX

ENRON CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit in S.D. TX
G&L REALTY: California State Court Issues TRO v Management Buyout
GENESISINTERMEDIA INC.: Levy Levy Lodges Securities Suit In C.D. CA
GENESISINTERMEDIA INC.: Rosen Law Files Securities Suit in C.D. CA
GRAND RIVER: Oklahoma Couple Awarded $60T For Flood Property Damage

INFORMATION ARCHITECTS: NC Securities Suit Dismissed With Prejudice
INSURANCE LITIGATION: Wolf Haldenstein Files N.D. GA Securities Suit
INTERVOICE-BRITE INC.: Faruqi Faruqi Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. TX
NAVISTAR INTERNATIONAL: Sued By Employees For Discriminatory Practices
LIBERATE TECHNOLOGIES: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Suit in S.D.NY

NCI BUILDING: Pomerantz Haudek Commences Securities Suit in S.D. TX
NETEASE.COM: Milberg Weiss Initiates Securities Suit In S.D. New York
NETWORK ASSOCIATES: Berman DeValerio Files Securities Suit in N.D. CA
NICE SYSTEMS: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
NORTHPOINT COMMUNICATIONS: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Suit in CA

RAZORFISH INC.: Cohen Milstein Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
SCHERING-PLOUGH CORPORATION: Kaplan Fox Files Securities Suit in NJ
STEVE MADDEN: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Suit in E.D. New York
TIFFANY'S BILLIARDS: North Raleigh Sportsbar Faces Bias Allegations
TOBACCO LITIGATION: Witnesses Testify For Plaintiffs' Case in WV Suit

VARI-L COMPANY: Kaplan Fox Initiates Securities Suit in Colorado Court
WESTPOINT STEVENS: Milberg Weiss Initiates Securities Suit in N.D. GA


                             *********


CALIFORNIA AMPLIFIER: Shapiro Haber Files Securities Suit in C.D. CA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Shapiro Haber and Urmy LLP commenced a securities class action against
California Amplifier, Inc. in the United States District Court for the
Central District of California. The suit was filed on behalf of all
persons or entities that purchased the Company's common stock from
April 7, 2000 through March 28, 2001, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that the defendants violated section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

In March 2001, the CalAmp shocked the investing public when it
announced that it was conducting an internal financial investigation in
response to the abrupt resignation of the Company's corporate
controller. The Company also stated that the fiscal year 2000 net
income may have been overstated by as much as $2.2 million.

This news caused the trading of California Amplifier common stock on
NASDAQ to be halted at $5-1/32 per share - more than 90% below its
Class period high of $59-1/4 per share.

The Company has since admitted that it overstated its net income for
the fiscal years 2000 and 2001.

For further details, contact Thomas G. Shapiro by Mail: 75 State
Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02109 by Phone: (800) 287-8119 by Fax:
(617) 439-0134 by E-mail: info@shulaw.com.


CRITICAL PATH: Kaplan Fox Launches Securities Suit in N.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP initiated a securities class action against
Critical Path, Inc. (NASDAQ: CPTH) and certain of the Company's
officers and directors in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California.  

The suit is brought on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased
the common stock of Critical Path, Inc. (NASDAQ: CPTH) between November
2, 2000 and February 1, 2001 inclusive.

The complaint charges the defendants with violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.

The Company provides e-mail hosting services to a variety of
organizations, including Internet service providers, Web hosting
companies, Web portals, and corporations.

The complaint alleges that many of these types of companies were new
and were suffering from a downturn in Internet-related funding, which
began in the spring of 2000.

The defendants also allegedly knew for months that new accounting
regulations would negate the Company's ability to continue to recognize
up front license fees in 4th Quarter 2000. Consequently, defendants
knew this would severely impair the Company's future revenue growth and
impair their ability to make future stock sales and extract future
bonuses, which were tied to the Company's performance.

However, the defendants continued to make positive, but allegedly
false, statements about the Company's business and future revenues
during 4th Quarter 2000.  As a result, the Company's stock traded as
high as $48.

On January 18, 2001 after the market closed, the Company announced that
in the fourth quarter 2000 it would report a multi-million dollar loss.
This was directly contrary to what the Company's Chief Executive
Officer had told shareholders and analysts just weeks before.

Then, on February 2, 2001, the Company announced that the their results
reported on January 18, 2001, maybe materially misstated and placed two
of its senior officers on "administrative leave."  This disclosure
shocked the market, causing the Company's stock to decline to less than
$4 per share in pre-market trading.

For more information, contact Frederic S. Fox, Joel B. Strauss or
Christine Fox by Mail: 805 Third Avenue - 22nd Floor New York, NY 10022
by Phone: (800) 290-1952 or (212) 687-1980 by Fax: (212) 687-7714 by E-
mail: mail@KaplanFox.com or visit the firm's Website: www.kaplanfox.com


DOLLAR GENERAL: Pomerantz Haudek Begins M.D. TN Securities Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP commenced a class action
suit on behalf of purchasers of Dollar General Corporation (NYSE: DG)
securities during the period between February 23, 1999 and April 27,
2001, inclusive.

The suit, filed in the United States District Court for the Middle
District of Tennessee (Nashville Division), names the Company, CEO Cal
Turner Jr. and CFO Brian M. Burr as defendants.

The suit alleges that the Company, a discount retailer of general
merchandise, violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 by reporting materially false and misleading
financial results for fiscal years 1998, 1999 and 2000.

As a result, the market price of the Company's securities was
artificially inflated throughout the class period.

On April 30, 2001, before the market opened, Dollar issued a press
release announcing that the Company "expects to delay the filing of its
annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year 2000."

The Company also revealed that it anticipated "restating its audited
financial statements for fiscal years 1998 and 1999 as well as
restating the unaudited financial information for the fiscal year 2000
as previously released" due to accounting irregularities.  The Company
also announced that their audit committee "is conducting an
investigation of these irregularities."

Dollar further indicated that it "estimates a reduction in aggregate
earnings of approximately $0.07 per share over the three-year period
from the previously reported total earnings of $1.81 per share over the
same period."

The market reaction to this news was dramatic as the Company's common
stock closed at $16.50 that same day, down $7.38, or 31%, from its
close on April 27, 2001 at $23.88.

The drop in stock price wiped out approximately $2.44 billion in market
value.

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


DQE INC.: Weiss Yourman Files Securities Suit in W.D. Pennsylvania
------------------------------------------------------------------
Weiss and Yourman commenced a securities class action on behalf of
purchasers of DQE, Inc. (NYSE: DQE) shares between December 6, 2000 and
April 30, 2001. The suit was filed in the United States District Court
for the Western District of Pennsylvania, against the Company and an
executive associated with the Company.

The complaint charges defendants with violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.

The defendants allegedly issued a series of material misrepresentations
that caused DQE common stock to trade at artificially inflated prices.
The complaint also alleges that the Company issued statements
concerning the positive impact that DQE Enterprises, Inc., the
Company's investment subsidiary, was having on their 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.

The 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.
They also failed to disclose that DQE 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 the Company's common stock dropped from $30.43
per share to $23.75 per share on extremely heavy trading volume.

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


ENRON CORPORATION: Shapiro Haber Commences Securities Suit in S.D. TX
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP initiated a securities class action suit in
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas (Houston
Division) against Enron Corporation (NYSE:ENE) and certain of its
officers and directors.  The case was filed on behalf of all purchasers
of the common stock of Enron during the period from July 13, 2001
through October 16, 2001, inclusive.

The suit alleges that the defendants violated section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.
The suit also alleges that the defendants' wrongful conduct
artificially inflated the price of the Company's common stock during
the class period.

The defendants allegedly misrepresented the facts concerning the
Company's financial transactions with two partnerships established by
the Company's Chief Financial Officer, which resulted in substantial
losses and a reduction in shareholders' equity of over $1 billion.

Enron's common stock price plummeted over 20% in just three trading
days following disclosure of the financial losses resulting from their
dealings with these partnerships.

For more information, contact Thomas G. Shapiro or Liz Hutton by Mail:
75 State Street, Boston, MA 02109 by Phone: (800) 287-8119 by Fax:
(617) 439-0134 by E-mail: cases@shulaw.com or visit the firm's WebsiteL
www.shulaw.com


ENRON CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit in S.D. TX
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities class
action on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Enron Corp.
(NYSE:ENE) between January 18, 2000 and October 17, 2001, inclusive.

The action is pending in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Texas, Houston Division against the Company and  
officers:

     (1) Kenneth Lay,

     (2) Jeffrey K. Skilling, and

     (3) Andrew Fastow

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.

The defendants allegedly issued a series of material misrepresentations
to the market between January 18, 2000 and October 17, 2001, thereby
artificially inflating the price of the Company's common stock.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that the Company issued a series of
statements concerning its business, financial results and operations
which failed to disclose:

     (i) that the Company's Broadband Services Division was
         experiencing declining demand for bandwidth and the Company's
         efforts to create a trading market for bandwidth were not
         meeting with success as many of the market participants were
         not creditworthy;

    (ii) that the Company's operating results were materially
         overstated as result of the Company failing to timely write-
         down the value of its investments with certain limited
         partnerships which were managed by the Company's chief
         financial officer; and

   (iii) that the Company was failing to write-down impaired assets on
         a timely basis in accordance with GAAP.

On October 16, 2001, the Company surprised the market by announcing
that it was taking non-recurring charges of $1.01 billion after-tax, or
($1.11) loss per diluted share, in the third quarter of 2001, the
period ending September 30, 2001.

Subsequently, the Company revealed that a material portion of the
charge related to the unwinding of investments with certain limited
partnerships that were controlled by their chief financial officer.
The Company further revealed that it would be eliminating more than $1
billion in shareholder equity as a result of its unwinding of the
investments.  As this news began to be assimilated by the market, the
price of Company common stock dropped significantly.

During the class period, Company insiders disposed of over $73 million
of their personally held common stock to unsuspecting investors.

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


G&L REALTY: California State Court Issues TRO v Management Buyout
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Los Angeles County Superior Court issued an order temporarily
enjoining the management buyout closing of G&L Realty Corp. (NYSE:GLR)
by Daniel M. Gottlieb and Steven D. Lebowitz, officers and directors of
G&L Realty Corp.

A hearing on an order to show cause why an injunction should not be
issued enjoining the closing of the management buyout is scheduled for
Friday October 26, 2001. The effectiveness of the Court's order is
conditioned upon receipt of a bond no later than 1:00 p.m., Tuesday,
October 23, 2001.

The Court's order was issued in response to the application of
shareholder plaintiffs in connection with a pending class action
against the Company and its board of directors.

The basis of the plaintiffs' application for a temporary restraining
order was that a share ownership limitation waiver granted Gottlieb and
Lebowitz on May 10, 2001 by the Company's board of directors (including
Gottlieb and Lebowitz) was unauthorized and granted in breach of the
the Company's fiduciary duties.

The effect of the share ownership limitation waiver was to allow
Gottlieb and Lebowitz to control, notwithstanding a limitation in the
Company's articles of incorporation, over 9.8 percent of the Company's
outstanding common stock upon conversion of partnership units held by
Gottlieb and Lebowitz in the company's operating partnership.

The defendants' counsel has represented that approximately 43 percent
of the Company's outstanding common stock has been voted by the
defendants in favor of the management buyout.

Based on the Company's announcement, as of October 19, 2001, proxies
representing approximately 15 percent of the Company's outstanding
common shares have been voted in favor of the buyout by persons other
than Gottlieb and Lebowitz.

Subsequent to the court's order, the special committee of G&L Realty
Corporation's board of directors responded to the most recent proposal
of a group of investors including Lyle Weisman competing with Gottlieb
and Lebowitz to acquire the outstanding common stock of the Company.

In that response, released by the Company on October 20, 2001, the
special committee represented that it was prepared to recommend to the
board of directors a transaction with the Weisman Group at a common
stock purchase price of $16.50 per share, subject to due diligence,
but, in any event, not less than $15.50 per share (consistent with the
purchase price of previous offers by the Weisman Group).

For further information, contact Darren J. Robbins or James I.
Jaconette of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes and Lerach LLP by Mail: 600
West Broadway, 1800 One America Plaza, San Diego, CA 92101-3356 by
Phone: (800) 449-4900 or visit the firm's Website: www.milberg.com


GENESISINTERMEDIA INC.: Levy Levy Lodges Securities Suit In C.D. CA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Levy and Levy PC commenced a securities class action on behalf of
purchasers of GenesisIntermedia Inc. (NASDAQ:GENI) securities during
the period between Dec. 21, 1999 and Sept. 25, 2001.

The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California, charges the Company, CEO Ramy El-Baratwi, certain of its
officers, directors and financial commentator Courtney Smith with
violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The complaint alleges that in December 1999, defendants plotted and
unleashed their scheme to inflate the price of Company shares. The
defendants gave shares worth more than $3 million to Smith who helped
send the stock soaring after agreeing to issue allegedly false,
positive recommendations for it on CNN, CNBC and Bloomberg Television.

However, the defendants allegedly concealed the payment of 216,000
shares to Smith in order to induce the purchase of Company shares and
raise tens of millions of dollars via multiple private securities
offerings.

As a result of defendants' false statements, the Company's stock price
traded at inflated levels during the class period, increasing to as
high as $25 in June 2001.  After the close of the market on Sept. 25,
2001, the Company's shares were halted pending the resolution of an
investigation.  The Company's shares remain halted and are, in essence,
worthless.

Just hours before the announcement of the investigation and "halt,"
defendant El-Batrawi sold over $1.7 million worth of his own shares.

For more information, contact Levy and Levy PC by Mail: 245 Park Avenue
39th Floor, New York, NY 10167 by Phone: (212) 792-4343 or (212) 792-
4001 by E-Mail: info@levylawfirm.com or visit the firm's Website:
www.levylawfirm.com


GENESISINTERMEDIA INC.: Rosen Law Files Securities Suit in C.D. CA
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Rosen Law Firm filed a securities class action on behalf of all
purchasers of GenesisIntermedia, Inc. (NASDAQ: GENI) publicly traded
securities during the period between December 21, 1999 and September
25, 2001.

The suit, filed in the United States District Court for the Central
District of California, charges the Company, CEO Ramy El-Batrawi,
certain of its officers and directors financial commentator Courtney
Smith with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The complaint alleges that in December 1999, defendants began an
illegal scheme to artificially increase the price of Company shares and
gave shares worth more than $3 million to Smith.  Smith conspired to
drive up the stock price by falsely promoting Company stock and issuing
bogus recommendations for it on CNN, CNBC and Bloomberg Television.

The complaint alleges the defendants concealed the payment of 216,000
shares to Smith in order to induce the purchase of Company shares and
raise tens of millions of dollars via several private securities
offerings.

As a result of defendants' false statements, the Company's stock price
traded at inflated levels during the class period, rising to as high as
$25 in June 2001. After the close of the market on September 25, 2001,
the Company's shares were halted pending a Nasdaq investigation.

Company shares have not resumed trading.

However, just hours before the announcement of the investigation and
"halt," defendant El-Batrawi allegedly sold over $1.7 million dollars
worth of his own shares.

For more information, contact Laurence Rosen by Phone: 212-532-7299 or
866-767-3653 by E-mail: lrosen@rosenlegal.com or visit the firm's
Website: www.rosenlegal.com


GRAND RIVER: Oklahoma Couple Awarded $60T For Flood Property Damage
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Associate District Judge Robert Reavis recently ruled in favor of two
homeowners against the Grand River Dam Authority, in a class-action
lawsuit that alleged property damage from flooding, according to a
recent Associated Press report.

Judge Reavis awarded $58,377 in property damage and $4,900 for the
value of a flowage easement to Randy and Dena Stoner, who charged in
their lawsuit that the Authority operated the Pensacola Dam in such a
manner that it caused flooding.

"A perpetual flowage easement in and upon the real property would
permit the intermittent flow of floodwaters on the real property during
flood periods," Judge Reavis wrote in the judgment.

The Stoners are among 115 plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit who
contend that it was the Authority's operation of the floodgates that
caused a series of 14 floods from a backwater between November 1992 and
June 1995.   

A week before the recent Stoner award, Judge Reavis awarded $75,000 for
property damage to Jeff and Carol McCool, a Miami, Oklahoma couple, the
first test case presented in the suit.

Attorneys on both sides of the issue agreed to waive the right to have
a jury hear the cases, which were tried before Judge Reavis.

"It was not a settlement," said Allen Pease, general counsel for the
Authority.  "We stipulated to the facts and, based upon that
stipulation, Judge Reavis entered a judgment on behalf of the
plaintiffs in the test cases."

The judgments can be appealed to the Oklahoma Supreme Court, Pease
said.


INFORMATION ARCHITECTS: NC Securities Suit Dismissed With Prejudice
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina
dismissed with prejudice the securities class action against
Information Architects Corporation (NASDAQ:IARC).

The Company and several of its current and former officers and
directors were named as defendants in four purported class action
lawsuits between May 14, 1999 and July 13, 1999.

The suits purport to be brought on behalf of a class of Company common
stock purchasers between November 14, 1997 and April 1, 1999 and allege
violations of the federal securities laws. The suits were later
consolidated and an amended complaint was filed in September 1999.

The Company filed a motion to dismiss the suit in January.

"We contended from the beginning that the lawsuit was without merit and
are very pleased that the final appeal was dismissed with prejudice,"
said Bob Gruder, Information Architects Chairman and CEO.

Information Architects is a content management software provider.
Its SmartCode software formats documents, catalogs, multimedia files,
and other Web content for distributing custom versions of the same
content to multiple Web sites at once.


INSURANCE LITIGATION: Wolf Haldenstein Files N.D. GA Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP commenced a securities class
action lawsuit against several securities and insurance companies in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.

The suit names as defendants:

     (1) WMA Securities, Inc.,

     (2) AEGON USA, Inc.,

     (3) Western Reserve Life Insurance Company of Ohio,

     (4) First AUSA Life Insurance Company,

     (5) AEGON Financial Services Group, Inc.,

     (6) AFSG Securities Corporation,

     (7) PFL Life Insurance Company,

     (8) AEGON USA Securities, Inc.,

     (9) AUSA Life Insurance Company, Inc.,

    (10) Bankers United Life Assurance Company, and

    (11) other "John Doe" corporate entities

The suit was filed on behalf of all persons who, from October 1, 1998
through October 1, 2001, inclusive, purchased an individual tax-
deferred variable annuity contract or who received a certificate to a
group deferred variable annuity contract, sold, marketed or
underwritten by one of the defendants, which was used to fund a
contributory (not defined benefit) retirement plan or arrangement
qualified for favorable income tax treatment pursuant to Internal
Revenue Code, including but not limited to an IRA, rollover IRA, Keogh
account or 401(k).

Excluded from the class are defendants, officers, directors, and agents
of the defendants, members of their immediate families, their legal
representatives, heir, successors or assigns, and any entity in which
any of the defendants or any excluded person has a controlling
interest.

The complaint alleges that WMA, the AEGON defendants, and other
financial institutions, violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

The above defendants also breached their fiduciary duties to plaintiff
and the other members of the class or their employers, by making
materially false and misleading statements and omissions that caused
plaintiff and other members of the class to purchase the variable
annuity contracts.

These tax-deferred variable annuities sold by defendants are never
suitable investments for tax-deferred retirement accounts because:

     (i) earnings on any investment placed in such an annuity already
         are tax-deferred; and

    (ii) purchase of a deferred annuity in an already tax-deferred
         retirement account represents a completely useless approach
         which simply increases carrying costs

For further details, contact George Peters, Robert B. Weintraub or
Daniel W. Krasner by Mail: 270 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016
by Phone: (800) 575-0735 by E-mail: classmember@whafh.com or
whafh@aol.com or visit the firm's Website: www.whafh.com. All e-mail
correspondence should make reference to AEGON/WMA.


INTERVOICE-BRITE INC.: Faruqi Faruqi Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. TX
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Faruqi and Faruqi LLP initiated a securities class action on behalf of
all purchasers of InterVoice-Brite, Inc. (NASDAQ: INTV) common stock
between October 12, 1999 and June 6, 2000, inclusive.

The suit, filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Texas, charges the Company with violations of federal
securities laws.

The Company allegedly issued a series of materially false and
misleading press releases concerning their business, its financial
results, the success of its integration with Brite and its prospects.  

As a result, the Company's stock was artificially inflated to as high
as $38.75 per share, allowing defendants to collectively sell 525,916
shares of their stock for $13.4 million in proceeds.  

On June 2000, the Company shocked the market, revealing that it would
report a loss of $0.03 to $0.05 and revenues of only $67-$68 million
for the 1st Quarter 2001 rather than the EPS of $0.22 and revenues of
$89 million defendants had led the market to expect.  

Defendants blamed the shortfall on sales people who had begun leaving
the Company in the months prior to this disclosure, some of which were
unhappy with the integrated Company.  

Defendants also claimed they had implemented new guidance from the SEC,
Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 101, Revenue Recognition in Financial
Statements earlier than planned.  

These revelations caused Company stock to plummet to as low as $5.75
per share before closing at $6.125, a decline of 85% from its class
period high on volume of 15.5 million shares.   

For more information, contact Anthony Vozzolo by Mail: 320 East 39th
Street, New York, NY 10016 by Phone: (877) 247-4292 or (212) 983-9330
by E-mail: avozz@faruqilaw.com or Srowley@faruqilaw.com or visit the
firm's Website: www.faruqilaw.com


NAVISTAR INTERNATIONAL: Sued By Employees For Discriminatory Practices
----------------------------------------------------------------------
African-American employees of Navistar International Corporation's
Indianapolis engine plant sued the Company last week, alleging numerous
instances of racial harassment and discrimination.

The suit was filed in Chicago federal court on behalf of 23 current
employees, three former employees and one job applicant.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) said in a
determination that evidence supports that black employees were harassed
and subjected to a hostile work environment due to their race.  The
EEOC report further said that the Company has failed to take effective
action to eliminate the discriminatory practices.

A spokesman for the Company declined to comment on the suit, saying it
has not yet been served on the Company.


LIBERATE TECHNOLOGIES: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Suit in S.D.NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities class
action on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Liberate
Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: LBRT) between July 27, 1999 and December 6,
2000, inclusive.

The suit, pending in the United States District Court, Southern
District of New York, names as defendants the Company and:

     (1) Credit Suisse First Boston Corp.,

     (2) BancBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc.,

     (3) Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.,

     (4) Mitchell E. Kertzman and

     (5) Nancy J. Hilker.

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.

In July 1999, the Company commenced an initial public offering of 6,
250,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $16 per
share.

In connection therewith, the Company filed a registration statement,
which incorporated a prospectus with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.  The complaint further alleges that the prospectus was
materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose, among
other things, that:

     (i) the underwrites 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 shares issued in
         connection with the IPO; and

    (ii) the underwriters had entered into agreements with customers
         whereby the underwriters 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 Floor New York, NY, 10119-0165 by
Phone: (800) 320-5081 by E-mail: liberatecase@milbergNY.com or visit
the firm's Website: www.milberg.com


NCI BUILDING: Pomerantz Haudek Commences Securities Suit in S.D. TX
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP initiated a securities
class action lawsuit against NCI Building Systems, Inc. (NYSE: NCS) on
behalf of all purchasers of Company securities from August 25, 1999 to
April 12, 2001, inclusive.

The case was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Texas, Houston Division and also names the Company's Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer as defendants.

The Complaint alleges that the Company issued materially false and
misleading information concerning the its' financial results with
respect to the financial performance for the third and fourth quarters
of fiscal 1999 and for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2000.

These false and misleading statements resulted in the inflation of the
Company's securities during the class period.

In addition, the Company announced to investors that it will restate
its financial statements for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2000,
and for the quarter ended January 31, 2001 due to improper accounting
practices. The Company also revealed that those same accounting
improprieties could result in changes to its financial statements for
the third and fourth quarters of fiscal 1999.

As a result, the Company's share price fell 32%, from a closing price
of $18.30 a share on April 12, 2001, to $12.45 on April 16, 2001.

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


NETEASE.COM: Milberg Weiss Initiates Securities Suit In S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP commenced a securities class
action on behalf of purchasers of the American Depositary Shares (ADS)
of NetEase.com, Inc. (NASDAQ:NTESE) between July 3, 2000 and August 31,
2001, inclusive.

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

     (1) King F. Lai,

     (2) William Lei Ding,

     (3) Helen Haiwen He,

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

     (5) Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc.,

     (6) Chase Securities, Inc.,

     (7) Salomon Smith Barney, Inc. and

     (8) UBS Warburg LLC. and
   
     (9) the Company

The defendants allegedly violated Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the
Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

The defendants allegedly issued a series of material misrepresentations
to the market between July 3, 2000 and August 31, 2001.

In May 2001, the Company discovered that $1 million in contracts had
been improperly reported as revenue, which would delay announcing its
financial results for the first quarter of 2001.

In June 2001, the Company announced that the revenue overstatement
appeared to affect its full year 2000 financial statements and the
amount of the overstatement would be approximately $3 million.

Then, in August, the Company finally revealed the full extent of the
overstatement and announced that it would be restating all of its year
2000 financial statements because $4.3 million in revenue had been
overstated.

The complaint alleges that the prospectus and registration statement
issued in connection with the initial public offering of NetEase.com
ADSs were materially false and misleading because they contained
artificially inflated financial results for the first quarter of 2000.

Following the IPO, defendants issued press releases announcing the
Company's quarterly 2000 and full year 2000 financial results which
were materially false and misleading because they overstated the
Company's financial performance.

For further details, 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: NetEasecase@milbergNY.com or visit the
firm's Website: www.milberg.com


NETWORK ASSOCIATES: Berman DeValerio Files Securities Suit in N.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt and Pucillo LLP commenced a
securities class action against Network Associates, Inc. (NASDAQ: NETA)
in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

The suit, filed on behalf of all investors who bought the Company's
common stock between July 19, 2000 and December 26, 2000, alleges that
the Company violated federal securities laws.

According to the complaint, the Company misled investors by recognizing
revenue when it shipped software to its distributors instead of waiting
until it was shipped to end-users.  The complaint also accused Network
Associates of "channel stuffing" - overselling to its distributors to
pad short-term results.

Last December, the company issued a press release reporting a fourth-
quarter sales shortfall of $120 million due to returns of excess
inventory by its distributors.

In addition, the Company announced that it would book revenue only
after software was shipped to end-users. The company also said it was
replacing its CEO, CFO and president.  As a result, Company shares lost
62% of their value.

For more information, contact N. Nancy Ghabai by Mail: One Liberty
Square Boston, MA 02109 by Phone: (617) 542-8300 by Fax: (617) 542-1194
Or visit the firm's Website: www.bermanesq.com


NICE SYSTEMS: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP initiated a securities class action against
Nice Systems, Ltd. (NASDAQ:NICE) and two of its officers in the United
States District Court for the District of New Jersey.

The suit is brought on behalf of persons who purchased NICE Systems,
Ltd. (Nasdaq: NICE) American Depository Shares (ADS) between February
16, 2000 and February 7, 2001 inclusive.

The complaint charges defendants with violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint also alleges that during the class
period, defendants issued materially false and misleading financial
statements for fiscal year 1999 and the first three quarters of fiscal
2000.  

Defendants improperly recognized material amounts of revenue, in
violation of generally accepted accounting principles, on among other
things, consignment "sales."

The complaint further alleges that defendants "cooked" the Company's
books in order to:

     (1) report revenues, profits and growth rates, which the Company
         had led the market to believe would be achieved in fiscal 1999
         and 2000; and

     (2) inflate the price of the Company's ADSs, which were used in
         two acquisitions during the class period which were both
         partially funded with the Company's artificially inflated
         ADSs.

Because of defendants' allegedly fraudulent practices, the Company's
securities traded at artificially inflated prices throughout the class
period.  

On February 8, 2001, the Company announced that its financial results
for fiscal year 1999 and the first three quarters of fiscal 2000 would
require restatement due to the improper recognition of revenue.

This resulted to the fall of the price of Company's ADSs of about 30%
in one day to $13.10.

For more information, contact Frederic S. Fox, Joel B. Strauss, Donald
R. Hall by Mail: 805 Third Avenue - 22nd Floor New York, NY 10022 by
Phone: (800) 290-1952 or (212) 687-1980 by Fax: (212) 687-7714 by E-
mail: mail@KaplanFox.com or visit the firm's Website: www.kaplanfox.com


NORTHPOINT COMMUNICATIONS: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Suit in CA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes and Lerach LLP commenced a securities class
action on behalf of purchasers of NorthPoint Communications Group, Inc.
(NASDAQ:NPNT; NPNTQ.OB) publicly traded securities during the period
between August 8, 2000 and November 29, 2000.

The suit, filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California, charges certain of the Company's officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

NorthPoint provides high-speed local data network services. The
Company's networks use digital subscriber line technology to transport
data at faster speeds than common dial-up modems. The Company then
markets its network and data transport services to Internet service
providers, broadband data service providers, and long-distance and
local telephone companies.

On October 26, 2000, following the close of trading, NorthPoint
announced its 3rd Quarter 2000 financial results in a press release
proclaiming that such results were the result of the Company's
"conservative revenue recognition policy."

Then, on November 20, 2000, the Company announced that it would restate
its 3rd Quarter 2000 financial statements because of accounting
misstatements that will require eliminating $6 million in revenue from
the quarter.

On November 29, 2000, Verizon Communications withdrew from a merger
agreement with NorthPoint, citing the Company's deteriorating financial
condition and false quarterly report as its reason.  As such, Verizon
would not continue to fund the Company's operations, leaving it to
operate on its own.

Company shares dropped to just pennies per share in response.

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


RAZORFISH INC.: Cohen Milstein Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll PLLC initiated a securities class
action on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Razorfish, Inc.
(NASDAQ:RAZF) between February 15, 2000 and October 5, 2000, inclusive.

The suit, filed in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York, names the Company and these individuals as
defendants:

     (1) Jeffrey A. Dachis,

     (2) Craig M. Kanarick,

     (3) Jean-Phillipe Maheu,

     (4) Michael Pehl, and

     (5) John J. Roberts

The defendants allegedly violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder,
by issuing to the investing public false and misleading statements and
press releases regarding the Company's business and financial
condition.

When the Company began to disclose the truth about its operations, the
Company's stock fell 43% in one day.

For further information, contact Daniel S. Sommers or Robert Smits by
Mail: 1100 New York Avenue, N.W. Suite 500 - West Tower Washington,
D.C. 20005 by Phone: 888-240-0775 or 202-408-4600 by E-mail:
dsommers@cmht.com or rsmits@cmht.com or visit the firm's Website:
www.cmht.com


SCHERING-PLOUGH CORPORATION: Kaplan Fox Files Securities Suit in NJ
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP lodged a class action against Schering-
Plough Corporation (NYSE:SGP) and certain of the Company's officers and
directors in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.
The suit is brought on behalf of all persons or entities that purchased
the Company's securities between March 2, 2000 and February 15, 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 also alleges that during the class period, the Company
issued three materially false and misleading earnings releases
highlighting the Company's success and continued growth.

These releases failed to disclose material facts, concerning
manufacturing difficulties at certain plants; and, that given the
Company's manufacturing difficulties, the FDA would force the Company
to curtail its operations and delay FDA approval of a significant and
new product, desloratadine.

In February 2001, the Company finally disclosed the extent of the
problems it was experiencing with its manufacturing practices and
announced that it would be reducing sales and earnings expectations for
the first quarter of 2001 and for the full-year 2001.

Additionally, the Company reported that the FDA was requiring that all
of its manufacturing deficiencies be resolved before the FDA would
grant final approval of desloratadine.

As a result, in after-hours trading, the Company's stock price sank to
$38.75 per share after closing earlier in the day at $48.32.  On
February 16, 2001, the day after the announcement, the stock opened
trading at $38.25.

For more details, contact Frederic S. Fox, Hae Sung Nam, Adam Walsh by
Mail: 805 Third Avenue - 22nd Floor New York, NY 10022 by Phone: (800)
290-1952 or (212) 687-1980 by Fax: (212) 687-7714 by E-mail:
mail@KaplanFox.com or visit the firm's Website: www.kaplanfox.com


STEVE MADDEN: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Suit in E.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Kaplan Fox and Kilsheimer LLP initiated a securities class action on
behalf of all purchasers of Steven Madden Ltd. (Nasdaq: SHOO) common
stock between November 3, 1999 and June 20, 2000, inclusive.

The suit, filed in the United States District Court for the the Eastern
District of New York, alleges that the Company and Chief Executive
Officer Steven Madden violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  

The lawsuit charges that the defendants failed to disclose material
adverse facts about the Company and defendant Madden.  Specifically,
defendants failed to disclose, among other things, that

     (1) defendant Madden had participated in a scheme to manipulate
         the market for various initial public offerings of common
         stock of certain companies and that he had done so in
         conjunction with Stratton Oakmont - a securities brokerage
         that was censured and fined by the NASD and SEC for securities
         fraud and is now defunct;

     (2) that the Company's projections of future success were lacking
         in a reasonable basis at all times because defendant Madden's
         ability to continue in his roles at the Company were subject
         to increased risk and uncertainty given his involvement in the
         aforementioned scheme; and

     (3) that, given defendant Madden's involvement in the
         aforementioned scheme, his ability to continue to operate and
         direct the operations of the Company were subject to increased
         and heightened risk in that he would be unable to continue in
         his roles at the Company and, accordingly, the Company's
         operations would be adversely affected.

On June 20, 2000, when news of defendant Madden's arrest for his
alleged involvement with a massive securities fraud reached the
securities markets, the Company's common stock fell from 13 1/8 to 11
3/16 before trading was halted on the NASDAQ.

For more information, contact Frederic S. Fox, Brigid T. Kavanaugh,
Donald R. Hall by Phone: (800) 290-1952 or (212) 687-1980 by Fax: (212)
687-7714 by E-mail: mail@KaplanFox.com or visit the firm's Website:
www.kaplanfox.com


TIFFANY'S BILLIARDS: North Raleigh Sportsbar Faces Bias Allegations
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Four African-American women recently filed a class-action lawsuit,
alleging that Tiffany's Billiards Sportsbar & International Restaurant
in North Raleigh discriminated against them last month, The News &
Observer recently reported.

The four plaintiffs are Angela Merritt, Angela King, Teresa Manns and
Stephanie Cortes, all from Raleigh.  They allege they were singled out
because one of the owners, who was acting as manager and bartender when
they ordered their drinks, assumed they would not tip because of their
race and raised the cost of their drinks in accordance with the bar's
posted non-tipping policy.

The sign setting forth this policy, reads, "Non-tippers please notice:  
There is an automatic $.50 gratuity added per drink ordered or 15%
added to your total bill."

Merritt said that the owner serving the plaintiffs said that he was
going to get their order, "but I'm gonna charge you a 15 percent tip on
your individual order because your people don't tip."

Merritt said the owner/server refused to give her a refund of the $9.50
for the drinks when she told him she was no longer comfortable in the
Sandy Forks Road establishment and wanted a return of the monies spent.

Jimmy Nguyen, who is the owner who served the four plaintiffs, told The
News and Observer that he did not recognize the women as regulars, but
he would not say how he determined they were non-tippers. He declined
repeated requests to speak further on the matter, referring to the
advice of his former attorneys, Brown Crump Vanore & Tierney of
Raleigh.

Tommy Tran, a co-owner of Tiffany's, called the matter a
"misunderstanding" and agreed to an interview at Tiffany's with the
reporting newspaper.  He, however, declined to appear at the appointed
time.

Merritt's lawyer is Judy Tseng of the law firm Kurtz & Blum in Raleigh,
whose family is originally from Taiwan.  Tseng says she sees this as an
unfortunate incident that reinforces the stereotype of friction between
Asian-American business owners and African-American customers. Nguyen
is from Du Nang, located in central Vietnam.

The plaintiffs have not yet set the amount of compensation they are
seeking.  Merritt said she is more concerned with how Nguyen will act
in the future.  "I care more about him learning his lesson and getting
some kind of diversity training or something to get rid of that
mindset," said Merritt.
  
  
TOBACCO LITIGATION: Witnesses Testify For Plaintiffs' Case in WV Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyers for West Virginia smokers have nearly completed their arguments
in the landmark class action suit against four national tobacco
companies.

250,000 healthy smokers filed the suit, asserting the tobacco industry
did not exert effort to create a "safer" cigarette and seeking that the
companies pay for annual medical monitoring tests.

Defendants in the suit are Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, Brown &
Williamson and Lorillard tobacco companies.

The lawyers presented both live witnesses and taped depositions in
their attempt to prove that the tobacco industry created a defective
product that has increased their risks for disease.

Bethesda consultant Jack Henningfield showed jurors how cigarettes are
constructed, and how cigarette smoke circulates in the body, with
nicotine traveling to the heart and brain through red blood cells.
He also contended that tobacco executives considered other "nicotine-
delivery" systems such as sprays and chewing gums but ultimately
returned to cigarettes referring to them as "pharmacologically
effective and cheap"

Pulmonologist Dominic Gaziano testified that the smoking risks do not
vanish if a smoker quits and that the tests proposed by the plaintiffs
can make treatment more effective by detecting disease early.

Former Philip Morris director of applied research William Farone
testified next, saying that the Company did not conduct biological
testing on cigarettes that were sold to consumers.

Finally, university professor Dr. David Burns said that medical
monitoring was necessary because even smokers who smoked for just five
years could have latent tumors that could develop several years later.

The plaintiffs want a medical monitoring program to test for lung
cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disorders like emphysema.
The program would provide spirometry tests for lung function beginning
at age 40, a second test at age 45 and a test every two years
thereafter. The plaintiffs also want the tobacco industry to pay for
yearly spiral or helical computed tomography scans beginning at age 50
to test for lung cancer.  Experts have testified that both tests can
catch disease at its earliest stages.

However, these experts also admitted that the tests are not part of any
medical monitoring program accepted by health or medical organizations
the way a mammogram has been accepted as an acceptable screening
program for breast cancer, for example.

The tobacco industry has contended that developing a "safe" cigarette
that people are willing to buy and smoke was impossible.  They have
said that if the plaintiffs wanted to decrease their risks of
developing a smoking-related illness, they should just quit the habit.
The witnesses also have admitted that quitting smoking is the best way
to reduce the risks of smoking.

The trial is the first medical monitoring class action lawsuit against
the tobacco industry in the country to make it to the trial stage. The
case first began in January but after a mistrial was ordered, the trial
started over in September with a new jury.


VARI-L COMPANY: Kaplan Fox Initiates Securities Suit in Colorado Court
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kaplan Fox and Kilsheimer LLP commenced a securities class action
against Vari-L Company Inc. (Nasdaq: VARL) and certain of its officers
and directors.  The suit was filed in the United States District Court
for the District of Colorado on behalf of purchasers of the Company's
common stock between December 17, 1997 and July 6, 2000, inclusive.

The lawsuit charges the Company and certain of its officers, with
violations of the federal securities laws by issuing materially false
and misleading financial statements.

On May 17, 2000, Vari-L revealed it would be restating its previously
reported financial results for the period ended December 31, 1997, and
potentially other periods as well.  In addition, during the class
period insiders sold massive amounts of stock, reaping substantial
proceeds as a result of the inflated value of Company's stock.

After the Company's announcement, Company shares fell roughly $5 per
share from their May 16 close of $16.188, to close at $11.25 on May 22,
2000, a drop of roughly 35%, as the market fully absorbed the impact of
these disclosures.

For further information, contact Frederic S. Fox, Christine M. Comas,
Hae Sung Nam by Mail: 805 Third Avenue - 22nd Floor New York, NY  10022
by Phone: (800) 290-1952 or (212) 687-1980 by Fax: (212) 687-7714 by E-
mail: mail@KaplanFox.com or visit the firm's Website: www.kaplanfox.com


WESTPOINT STEVENS: Milberg Weiss Initiates Securities Suit in N.D. GA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes and Lerach LLP commenced a securities class
action on behalf of purchasers of WestPoint Stevens Inc. (NYSE:WXS)
common stock during the period between Feb. 10, 1999 and Oct. 10, 2000.

The suit, filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Georgia, charges the Company and certain of its officers
and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The complaint alleges that to boost Company stock on February and April
1999, defendants caused the Company to report better-than-expected 4thQ
98 and 1stQ 99 results.

The Company also assured investors and analysts that:

     (1) its business remained extremely strong, demand for all of its
         products was good, its inventories were under control; and

     (2) that it remained postured to achieve revenue and EPS growth of
         5% and 20%, respectively, going forward and was increasing its
         1999 and 2000 EPS forecasts to $1.82-$1.85 and $2.10-$2.20,
         respectively.

Based on these better-than-expected 1st Quarter 1999 results and
defendants' positive commentary on the Company, the Company stock
advanced to its class period high of $37-9/16 from $25-3/8 at the
beginning of the class period.

When the Company reported its 2nd Quarter and 3rd Quarter 1999 results,
it again assured investors that its business was very strong.

It also told investors that while its inventories had increased,
especially towels, the increased towel inventory did not pose any
significant risk of loss to the Company because it was basic solid
colored goods with core value.

The Company continued to forecast strong revenue and EPS growth for the
balance of 1999 and 2000, including 2000 EPS of $2.10-$2.20.

On June 2000, defendants announced that:

     (i) the Company's Eight-Point Program would ensure strong
         performance in the future;

    (ii) momentum was building for strong prospects throughout 2000;
          
   (iii) inventory was now on target to below $400 million by year-end;
         and

    (iv) the Company was still on track to report EPS of $2.08+ and
         $2.40 in 2000 and 2001, respectively

As a result, Company stock stabilized in the $10-$15 range through the
remainder of the class period.

However, by September 2000, defendants allegedly knew that it would be
impossible for them to continue to conceal the severe deterioration in
the Company's business any longer.

They allegedly realized that once the Company reported its 3rd Quarter
2000 results, it would be apparent to the market how horrible the
Company's business was actually performing and the stock would
collapse.

In an alleged attempt to cause the stock to make a "soft landing" for
what they knew would be horrible 2000 results, defendants announced
that 3rd Quarter 2000 results would be level with 3rd Quarter 1999
results. In the same press release the Company also announced a new
licensing agreement with Disney.

The Company stock declined only slightly on this news to $11-9/16 due
to defendants' positive statements.

When the Company revealed that 3rd Quarter 2000 sales would actually
decline 3% from the prior year, with earnings of only $0.55-$0.60 per
share, lower than prior guidance.  On this news, Company stock declined
to below $9 per share.

For more details, contact William Lerach or Darren Robbins by Phone:
(800) 449-4900 by E-mail: wsl@milberg.com or visit the firm's Website:
www.milberg.com/westpoint.

                              *********

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  * * *