CAR_Public/020201.mbx                C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
                Friday, February 1, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 23

                            Headlines

CUSTOM BUOYANCY: Voluntarily Recalls 7T Defective Overpressure Valves
ENRON CORPORATION: Texas Will Not Play Lead Plaintiff Role in Suits
ENRON CORPORATION: Former Workers Seek Committee Status In Bankruptcy
EQUITABLE LIFE: Class Law To Sue On Behalf of Former Policy Holders
MCDONALD'S CORPORATION: Judge Allows Suit To Proceed in Florida Court

MENORAH GARDENS: New Agency Considered In Funeral Business Regulation
MICHIGAN: Woman Sues Detroit For Negligence Over Defective SS Forms
NEW MEXICO: City's Practice of Basing Water Bills On Pipe Size "Unfair"
SANTA BARBARA: Employee Files Overtime Wage Suit in CA State Court
WASHINGTON: Supreme Court Justice Blocks Children's SS Benefits Ruling

                         Securities Fraud

AMYLIN PHARMACEUTICALS: To Vigorously Defend Against Securities Suits
FIREPOND INC.: Mounting Vigorous Defense V. Securities Suits in S.D. NY
FORD MOTOR: Stays Mum on Suit Over Precious Metal Investments in NY
HIGH SPEED: Possible $300T DE Stock Purchase Suit Settlement Reached
HIGH SPEED: Vigorous Defense Forming Against Securities Suits in NY

HIGH SPEED: Faces Potential Suit From Digital Chainsaw Stockholders
IMCLONE SYSTEMS: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
INFONET SERVICES: Sued For Securities Act Violations in C.D. California
NAHC INC.: Prevails as PA Court Dismisses Consolidated Securities Suit
NCI BUILDINGS: NY Federal Court Consolidates Multiple Securities Suits

OPTICAL CABLE: Labels "Without Merit" Securities Suits in W.D. Virginia
PEDIATRIC SERVICES: $3.2M Settlement Reached In N.D. GA Securities Suit
ROYAL CARIBBEAN: Shareholders Question Tax Implications of P&O Merger
VERSANT CORPORATION: CA Federal Court Dismisses Amended Securities Suit
WILLAMETTE INDUSTRIES: Shareholders Sue Over Weyerhauser Tender Offer
WILLAMETTE INDUSTRIES: Plaintiffs Withdraw Charges V. Georgia Pacific
                            
                            *********


CUSTOM BUOYANCY: Voluntarily Recalls 7T Defective Overpressure Valves
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Custom Buoyancy, Inc. is cooperating with the US Consumer Product
Safety Commission (CPSC) by voluntarily recalling about 7,700
overpressure valves (OPV) used with buoyancy control systems.  The
overpressure valve can stick in the open position, posing a drowning
hazard to divers.  The Company has received three reports of the valves
sticking open, although no injuries have been reported.

The recalled overpressure valve is installed on buoyancy control
systems with these brand names: Diving Unlimited International
(DUI), International Divers, Ocean Management Systems, Rip Tide and
Steam Machines. Brand names and logos are printed on the epaulettes and
pockets. These buoyancy control systems come in two versions, a jacket
style and a wings style. The date code, printed on an instructional
label sewn to the buoyancy control system, is the first four numbers
after the brand name abbreviation. The first two numbers indicate the
month and the second two numbers indicate the year. The recall includes
date codes from October 2000 through June 2001. Valves with an asterisk
below the serial number are not involved in this recall.

Authorized CBI distributors sold the buoyancy control systems with
these overpressure valves nationwide from October 2000 through November
2001, for about $590.

For more information, contact the Company by Phone: (866) 790-5099
between 8 am and 5 pm PT Monday through Friday, or visit the firm's
Website: http://www.custombuoyancy.com.


ENRON CORPORATION: Texas Will Not Play Lead Plaintiff Role in Suits
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Six states and one group are vying for the lead plaintiff role in the
consolidated class action suit filed in Houston Federal Court against
bankrupt energy trader Enron Corporation by its shareholders.  However,
the State of Texas, home to thousands of laid-off workers, many of whom
lost retirement savings when the stock price plummeted, is not seeking
the lead position in the lawsuit, according to a MySanAntonio report.

According to Jeff Boyd, Texas Deputy Attorney General who is leading
the task force on the suits, Attorney General John Cornyn's office did
not apply for the lead plaintiff position in the suit because no Texas
agencies affected by the Company's plunge asked to take the lead.  Mr.
Cornyn has recused himself from the review of the Company's collapse
due to the more than $100,000 in political contributions his previous
campaigns received from Enron's political action committee and
employees.

Boyd told MySanAntonio, regarding the lead plaintiff position, "That's
a tough call, one ultimately for the client agency to make.We talked
with them about the pros and cons of doing it and we left the decision
to them."  However, the Attorney General's office is asking the Federal
Bankruptcy Trustee in the Enron case to appoint an advisory committee
of current and former Enron employees.

Spokeswoman Leslie Kjellstrand, of the Employees Retirement System of
Texas, supported Mr. Boyd's contention, saying the system did not ask
the Attorney General's office to seek the lead plaintiff's position.

Howard Goldman, spokesman for the Teacher Retirement System of Texas,
which sustained $23.3 million in Enron stock losses and $12.4 million
in unrealized bond losses, did not address the issue and said the
system plans to join others in filing "proofs of loss" in the
shareholder lawsuit.

However, Democrat Kirk Watson a candidate wishing to succeed Mr. Cronyn
as Texas's top attorney, said he would have sought the lead plaintiff
position. He told MySanAntonio, "Why are Florida, New York, Ohio and
Washington asking to be in a lead role?. They recognize, all things
being equal, that it provides them a chance to perhaps provide better
advocacy for the citizens that they represent. It is a very reasonable
approach to want to be in a quarterback position, as opposed to being
on the sidelines."

Six other states, New York City, Florida, Georgia, Ohio, Washington,
Alabama, and one group from the University of California are seeking
the lead plaintiff position.  The Federal Court will choose the lead
plaintiff next week.


ENRON CORPORATION: Former Workers Seek Committee Status In Bankruptcy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Attorneys for more than 400 current and former Enron Corporation
employees called on the US trustee responsible for administering the
Company's bankruptcy proceedings to appoint an official committee of
former employees to give them a voice, the Agence France-Presse
reported.  The employees earlier filed a class action against the
fallen energy trader, seeking to recover lost retirement assets and
claiming they were victims of a "shell game" by the Company.  

Scott Baena, an attorney for the Severed Enron Employees Coalition
said, "These Chapter 11 cases have the potential to tear the fabric of
the nation's employee retirement system."  SEEC is asking for a jury
trial for the workers' lawsuit, and is also asking for class action
certification.

He continues, "Undoubtedly, and by no choice of their own.the severed
employees are at the forefront of a battle likely to rage in the courts
and in Congress for a long time.  The severed employees are entitled to
full and complete representation in every forum where their fate is
being decided."  Currently, there is a single former employee on a 15-
member official committee of unsecured Company creditors.

Statements made recently by the new restructuring officer indicate the
importance of the 400 former employees having a real voice on the
creditors committee.  Recently, Enron named crisis management expert
Stephen Cooper as interim Chief Executive to direct its emergence from
the biggest bankruptcy in history.  Cooper, 55, who is taking over
after the resignation of Kenneth Lay, is the managing partner of Zolfo
Cooper, a corporate recovery and crisis management firm.

Mr. Cooper was also appointed chief restructuring officer and will be
joined by a team of experts from Zolfo Cooper.  "Cooper and his team
are expected to begin working immediately with Enron's current
management and its creditors committee on the company's continuing
efforts to reorganize and emerge from bankruptcy," Enron said in a
statement.


EQUITABLE LIFE: Class Law To Sue On Behalf of Former Policy Holders
-------------------------------------------------------------------
British law firm Class Law is considering the filing of a class action
against Equitable Life Insurance Society for misleading sales practices
relating to its with-profits policies.  Earlier, the Equitable Late
Joiners Action Group (ELJAG) also announced its intention to file a
separate suit against the Society in on behalf of former policyholders
who joined the Society after September 1998.

The Society was forced to close in December 2000 under the weight of
its guaranteed annuity rate (GAR) liabilities.  Plaintiffs in the suit
claim they bought policies without GARs, and were not told of the
financial difficulties faced by the Society at the time they bought
them.

Steven Alexander, the Class Law partner leading the case, told the
Telegraph that 1,600 people had joined his group action so far, and it
is open to others to join as well. About 500 of these are people in the
UK who joined the society late, while the rest live overseas and say
they were told they were in a separate fund.  Mr. Alexander states,
"Everybody's cases will be dealt with on an individual basis, but the
case will be done as a group. We will file it into the High Court in
the next two weeks. We will be getting a list of all the people who
have left the society to notify them of the case."

Spokesman Paul Weir said the suit would assert that Equitable knew of
its difficulties meeting GAR liabilities by this time, but failed to
inform new policyholders.  Charles Bellringer, Finance Director of the
Company, said, "We have been advised that it will be extremely
difficult for people who have left the society to be successful with
legal claims. We believe we have put aside enough funds to meet any
successful claims."


MCDONALD'S CORPORATION: Judge Allows Suit To Proceed in Florida Court
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Adalberto Jordan allowed a class action filed by consumers
against fast food giant McDonald's Corporation to proceed in the US
District Court in Florida, rejecting the Company's move to have it
transferred and consolidated with a class action in Illinois, where the
Company houses its headquarters.  

Florida consumers filed the suit after participating in the Company's
promotional Monopoly games.  The game rules stated the more food
consumers bought or the more times they requested game pieces, the
greater their chances of winning prizes of up to $1 million.  The suit
alleges that the Company the marketing firm than ran the contest, and
several individual defendants "rigged" the promotions in violation of
Florida's Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

Attorney for the plaintiffs, Lance A. Harke told the South Florida
Business Journal, "We want violations of Florida law to be decided in
Florida by a Florida jury. This case potentially involves everyone in
Florida who ate at McDonald's during the periods when these promotional
games were played."

The Company denies the allegations in the suit.  The plaintiffs are
requesting class certification in State Court.


MENORAH GARDENS: New Agency Considered In Funeral Business Regulation
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The effluence flowing from the "horror stories" about bodies being
buried in the wrong graves, dug up and other desecrations against the
deceased at Menorah Gardens and Funeral Chapels, has apparently swept
the Florida Legislature into action.  A House Committee charged with
the oversight of death-care businesses is considering putting the
industry under a state agency, according to a recent report by The
Miami Herald.

Efforts to regulate the funeral business and cemeteries under one
agency were discussed last year, but were thwarted by industry
opposition.  The issue was raised again, however, after families filed
a class action against the Menorah Gardens and its parent companies,  
SCI Funeral Services of Florida and the Houston-based parent, Service
Corporation International.  The Companies are being sued for problems
regarding the displacement of bodies, destruction of vaults, and more,
at the graves of hundreds of Jews at the Menorah Gardens & Funeral
Chapels cemeteries in Palm Beach and Broward Counties.

Service Corp International acquired the Menorah Garden chain in 1995 as
part of a sweeping industry consolidation trend.  It currently
owns 406 cemeteries of different denominations in the United States,
including Menorah Gardens, Forest Lawn, Riverside and others in South
Florida.

Recently, Florida's House Committee on Banking heard from the two
agencies charged with monitoring cemeteries and the funeral business,
the Department of Business and Professional Regulation and the State
Comptroller's office.  "It just disturbs me," said Representative Nan
Rich, D-Weston.  "Either they (the regulations) don't work or the
regulations are regulating the wrong things."

Senator Ken Pruitt, R-Port St. Lucie, is drafting legislation to
consolidate regulation of the entire death-care industry under the
Comptroller's office, whose regulators at present, spend most of their
time in relation to the death industry checking on the management of
state-mandated trust funds from sales of pre-need funeral and burial
services.

The Florida Funeral and Cemetery Consumer Advocacy group is lobbying
for one oversight board, as is the Association of Independent Funeral
Directors of Florida.  Consumers with complaints should be able to dial
a single 1-800 number to lodge a complaint, lobbyists for those
organizations said.

However, lobbyists with other industry organizations said they were
concerned that the problems of Menorah Gardens would impact businesses
that follow the rules and don't have problems with regulators.  "We're
deeply concerned that the issues with regards to Menorah Gardens.really
have nothing to do with the merger of these two departments," said
Douglas Stowell, who represents Funerals Inc.

Investigations into alleged improprieties by Menorah Gardens are being
conducted by several state agencies, including the Florida Department
of Law Enforcement and the State Attorney General's office.  They will
be looking at whether bodies were buried in the wrong places, whether
burials were not recorded properly and whether graves were
desecrated, said Diana Evans, Director of the Comptroller's Bureau for
Funeral and Cemetery Services.


MICHIGAN: Woman Sues Detroit For Negligence Over Defective SS Forms
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Residents of Detroit have commenced a class action suit against the
City in Wayne County Circuit Court, after thousands of Detroit
taxpayers received forms with their Social Security numbers on the
outside of the envelope, according to ClickOnDetroit.com.

Plaintiff Florinda Rodriguez filed the suit against the City and the
vendor of the forms, alleging negligence.  Her lawyer, Elizabeth
Thomson, said that about a dozen people have expressed interest in
joining the suit.

Detroit City Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick acknowledged Tuesday that the City,
not a vendor, was responsible for revealing the numbers on the outside
of the forms.


NEW MEXICO: City's Practice of Basing Water Bills On Pipe Size "Unfair"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
An Albuquerque, New Mexico resident has sued the City of Albuquerque
over a billing policy that allegedly charges water customers different
rates based on the size of utility pipes serving their homes.  The
complaint, filed in State District Court, on behalf of resident Gary W.
Williams and "all others similarly situated," requests certification as
a class action, according to an Albuquerque Journal report.

The lawsuit contends it is unfair to charge residents, without
informing them, a water rate based on the size of the pipe that runs to
their homes rather than a water rate based on how much water they use.  
The lawsuit seeks an injunction directing the City to notify people
with large pipes that they can change to a smaller pipe and,
consequently, be charged a lower rate.  The suit also asks that the
City be instructed to reimburse customers who have been charged the
higher rate.  

"We just want the consumers to be treated equally," said Cynthia Loehr,
an attorney for the plaintiffs.  The suit, she added, "challenges the
obligation of municipalities, which are unregulated utilities, to treat
all domestic consumers the same way and give notice to them that they
may be entitled to lower rates by simply changing pipe size."  
Municipalities are legally required to charge rates that are fair,
reasonable, uniform and nondiscriminatory, she said.

In previous news stories, officials have said their water billing
system is needed, because the larger capacity in some homes affects
City expenses.  The size of the City's water mains, the
pumping system and other aspects of water service are influenced by the
capacity of Albuquerque's homes, officials have said.  Most homes in
Albuquerque are connected to water mains by pipes that have a 3/4-inch
internal diameter.  However, larger pipes serve thousands of homes and
those homes are charged more under the City's billing formula.

Ms. Loehr, who is representing the plaintiffs, said their lawsuit is
not related to a proposal by City Councilor Greg Payne that would
provide full water-bill refunds to customers who were overcharged
because of a mistake in city records.

City Attorney Robert White said the City has 30 days to respond to the
complaint.  "We will review it and will be filing the City's response
on a timely basis," he said.  "I haven't even looked at the
allegations. We just got served today."


SANTA BARBARA: Employee Files Overtime Wage Suit in CA State Court
------------------------------------------------------------------
Santa Barbara Restaurant Group faces a class action filed by a former
general manager at one of the Company's La Salsa restaurants in Los
Angeles County Superior Court, alleging that approximately 100 general
managers were improperly denied overtime compensation for more than
eight hours of work per day and/or more than 40 hours per week in
violation of California law.

The Company has denied the allegations, asserting that the class
members were performing exempt management work and were therefore not
entitled to receive overtime compensation.

The Company labels the suit "without merit" and is confident that the
claim does not constitute a material adverse effect on the Company's
business or financial position. If the plaintiff is able to achieve
class certification and prevails on the merits of the case, however,
the Company says it could potentially be liable for significant
amounts.  

WASHINGTON: Supreme Court Justice Blocks Children's SS Benefits Ruling
----------------------------------------------------------------------
US Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has allowed the State of
Washington to temporarily continue taking Social Security benefits from
about 1,000 orphans and disabled children to pay for their foster care,
the Associated Press reported recently.

The State Supreme Court ruled last year that Washington's practice of
allocating those benefits had to stop, a move that would have gone into
effect this week.  However, Justice O'Connor recently decided to hold
off temporarily the lower court's ruling until the U.S. Supreme Court
receives legal briefs for an appeal.  The documents are due early next
month.

The State is hoping her decision will be extended after the briefs are
read, said Kathy Spears, Washington State Department of Social and
Health Services spokeswoman.  "This is good news for us, at least for
now," said Ms. Spears.

Rodney Reinbold of Okanogan, Washington, an attorney who filed a class
action on behalf of the children and thousands of others whose benefits
have been taken for nearly three decades, said he was disappointed that
the benefits were not finally going to their rightful owners.  He has
argued that federal law prevents Social Security from going to
creditors.

"It's the kids' money.  The State has no right to confiscate it," Mr.
Reinbold said.  "You can't do it if they are prisoners.  You can't do
it if they are mental patients.  Why would you think they can do it to
foster children?"

Under a Washingotn law, the Department has been taking more than
$600,000 a month from the Social Security benefits of children living
in foster care to help pay for their basic needs, including food,
clothing and medical care.  Ms. Spears said the State also applies for
some specific lifetime benefits for the Washington's disabled children
and would be prevented from doing so if the State Supreme Court ruling
stood.

The Department has estimated that it would lose some $7 million if it
does not get the Social Security benefits.  It argued that other states
use the benefits in similar ways.

Mr. Reinbold took the case on behalf of his neighbor, Dan Keffler, who
was orphaned.  The two proceeded through a variety of legal channels to
make sure that his grandmother, who was his guardian and appointed to
receive his Social Security payments, received those benefits, not the
State's foster care accounts.  When the case became too expensive, Mr.
Reinbold said he expanded it to a class action that he hopes eventually
will provide payments to some 7,000 people, according to his
most recent records.

State officials "are going to have to repay all the kids," Mr. Reinbold
asserted.  "They balanced the budgets on the backs of the foster
children."


                              *********


AMYLIN PHARMACEUTICALS: To Vigorously Defend Against Securities Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Amylin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. denied the allegations in a consolidated
class action filed in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of California on behalf of purchasers of the Company's stock
between February 8, 2000 and July 25, 2001, against the Company and its
chief executive officer.

The consolidated suit arose from several class actions commenced in
August 2001, alleging securities fraud in connection with various
statements and alleged omissions relating to the development of the
Company's diabetes drug SYMLIN.

The Company said that it will mount a vigorous defense against the
claims, but cannot give the assurance that it will be successful in
defending against such claims.


FIREPOND INC.: Mounting Vigorous Defense V. Securities Suits in S.D. NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Firepond, Inc. faces several securities class actions in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York, filed on
behalf of purchasers of the Company's shares between February 3, 2000
and December 6, 2000, inclusive. The suits name as defendants the
Company, certain of its directors and officers, and underwriter
FleetBoston Robertson Stephens.  

The suits allege that the Company's prospectus, incorporated in the
registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission was materially false and misleading because:

     (1) it failed to disclose that the underwriters of its initial
         public offering of securities received undisclosed and
         excessive brokerage commissions; and

     (2) it required investors to agree to buy shares of Company
         securities after the initial public offering was completed at
         predetermined prices as a precondition to obtaining initial
         public offering allocations.

The suits further allege that these actions artificially inflated the
price of the Company's stock after the initial public offering.

The Company claims the suit is "without merit" but said it cannot yet
predict the outcome with certainty.  The Company said it will
vigorously defend against the suit.


FORD MOTOR: Stays Mum on Suit Over Precious Metal Investments in NY
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Ford Motor Company refused to comment on the class action filed by a
shareholder charging the auto maker's former top management with making
a $1 billion mistake by failing to hedge positions in palladium and
other precious metals, according to a recent report by The Wall Street
Journal.  

The suit, filed in Federal Court in Manhattan, follows a $5.07 billion
fourth quarter loss posted by the Company earlier this month.  The
Company said it was forced to write down $1 billion because of the drop
in values of stocks of metals, mainly palladium, that the Company
bought in 2000 and 2001 to ensure supplies for exhaust-scrubbing
catalytic converters.

Shareholder Zachary R. Fadem contends that the Company's former chief
executive, Jacques Nasser, and its former chief financial officer,
Henry D.G. Wallace, failed to disclose the company's exposure to
speculative losses in the commodities market.  The Company allegedly
did not disclose the extent of its unhedged position in palladium and
other metals, and concealed the executives' "errors and speculation,
and Ford's true financial condition and competitive position, all in
violation of the federal securities laws," the suit claims.

Company spokesman Todd Nissen said Ford has not yet seen the lawsuit.


HIGH SPEED: Possible $300T DE Stock Purchase Suit Settlement Reached
--------------------------------------------------------------------
High Speed Access Corporation will settle for more than USD 300,000 the
consolidated securities class actions pending in Delaware Court of
Chancery relating to affiliate Charter Communications, Inc.'s offer to
purchase Company securities.

The consolidated suit arose from three suits alleging the defendants
breached their fiduciary duties owed to the Company in connection with
the making and consideration of Charter Communication's proposal.  The
suit names as defendants the Company and:

     (1) its current and former directors,

     (2) Charter Communications, Inc. (CCI) and

     (3) Paul Allen, chairman of CCI.

The suit further alleges that that the initially proposed cash purchase
price of $73 million is grossly inadequate and that "the purpose of the
proposed acquisition is to enable CCI and Allen to acquire (the
Company's) valuable assets for their own benefit at the expense of (the
Company's) public shareholders."

The Company stated in a disclosure to the Securities and Exchange
Commission that even though they believed the suit was entirely without
merit, they engaged in discussions with attorneys representing the
plaintiffs. These discussions covered financial and other changes to
the terms of the asset purchase agreement that addressed the matters
raised by the plaintiffs.

As a result of these discussions, a tentative agreement has been
reached to settle these lawsuits, embodied in a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) executed by counsel to all parties to the lawsuits,
dated as of January 10, 2002.

The MOU provides that the settlement is premised upon defendants'
acknowledgment that the prosecution of the litigations was a
"substantial causal factor" underlying their decision to condition the
asset sale on the public shareholder majority vote and was "one of the
causal factors" underlying CCI's decision to increase the consideration
to be paid to the Company in connection with the asset sale. The MOU
further provides that defendants shall, upon court approval, pay up to
$390,000, which amount will be allocated among the defendants, to
reimburse plaintiffs' counsel for the fees and expenses incurred in
pursuit of these litigations.  

The settlement is subject to confirmatory discovery, final
documentation and approval of the Delaware Chancery Court.


HIGH SPEED: Vigorous Defense Forming Against Securities Suits in NY
-------------------------------------------------------------------
High Speed Access Corporation faces a securities class action pending
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York against the Company and:

     (1) its Chief Financial Officer,

     (2) its former President,

     (3) Lehman Brothers, Inc.,

     (4) JP Morgan Securities, Inc.,

     (5) CIBC World Markets Corporation, and

     (6) Banc of America Securities, Inc.

The suit alleges that:

     (1) the Company's registration statement, dated June 3, 1999, and
         prospectus, dated June 4, 1999, for the issuance and initial
         public offering of 13,000,000 shares of Company stock to
         investors contained material misrepresentations and/or
         omissions;

     (2) the Company's four underwriters engaged in a pattern of
         conduct to surreptitiously extract inflated commissions
         greater than those disclosed in the offering materials, among
         other acts of misconduct.

The Company believes the suit is without merit and intends to
vigorously defend against the claims made therein.


HIGH SPEED: Faces Potential Suit From Digital Chainsaw Stockholders
-------------------------------------------------------------------
High Speed Access Corporation faces a potential class action from
shareholders of Digital Chainsaw, Inc., a company it acquired in August
2000 through the payment of 3,000,000 shares of its common stock.

In November 2001 and again on December 2001, the Company received a
letter from an attorney purporting to be counsel to certain former
shareholders of Digital Chainsaw, indicating that his clients, and
possibly other former Digital Chainsaw shareholders were prepared to
file a lawsuit against the Company relating the acquisition, including
claims relating to the non-payment of any earn out consideration to the
former shareholders of Digital Chainsaw.

The Company believes all of the potential claims included in the
letters are without merit, have informed the attorney of this belief,
and will vigorously defend any future suits.  


IMCLONE SYSTEMS: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP has expanded the class period
in the securities class action pending against ImClone Systems, Inc.
(NASDAQ: IMCL) in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York for federal securities violations.  The class now
includes all purchasers of the Company's securities between May 12,
2001 and January 18, 2002, inclusive against the Company and:

     (1) Robert Goldhammer, at all relevant times, Chairman of the
         Board,

     (2) Samuel Waksal, at all relevant times, President and Chief
         Executive Officer, and

     (3) Harlan Waksal, at all relevant times, Executive Vice President
         and Chief Operating Officer

The suit 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 materially false and misleading statements to
the market. The suit further alleges that during the class period, the
defendants made materially false and misleading statements about the
progress of the Company's application for Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) approval of Erbitux, its new cancer treatment drug.

Specifically, the suit alleges that on December 28, 2001, the Company
shocked the market by issuing a press release that disclosed that the
FDA had rejected its filing of a Biologics License Application (BLA)
for Erbitux. As a result, its stock price plummeted $11.15, or 20%, to
$44.10.

On January 4, 2002, The Cancer Letter reported that the FDA repeatedly
informed ImClone about the problems with the clinical trials during and
before the class period. After these additional facts were disclosed,
the Company fell further to open on January 7, 2002 at $34.96 per
share.

For more information, contact Fred Taylor Isquith, Gregory M. Nespole,
Michael Miske, George Peters or Derek Behnke 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 ImClone.  


INFONET SERVICES: Sued For Securities Act Violations in C.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Infonet Services Corporation faces multiple securities suits filed in
the United States District Court for the Central District of California
on behalf of purchasers of the Company's securities from December
16,1999 through July 31,2001, against the Company and its Chief
Executive Officer, Jose A. Collazo.

The suits allege that the Company failed to disclose material business
problems with its AUCS channel and that it disseminated false and
misleading statements regarding:

     (1) the demand for and market acceptance of its products,

     (2) the strength of its technologies,

     (3) its competitiveness, and

     (4) trends in its business  

The suit asserts claims under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933,
violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The plaintiffs also assert a count
against Mr. Collazo for violation of Section 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.

The Company expects that additional related lawsuits may be filed in
the future by separate plaintiffs on behalf of the same proposed class,
and that all related lawsuits will eventually be consolidated into a
single complaint.

The Company said it is unable to predict the outcome of this
litigation, but is confident that the suits will not have a material
adverse effect on its business.


NAHC INC.: Prevails as PA Court Dismisses Consolidated Securities Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania dismissed the consolidated securities class action pending
against health care provider NAHC, Inc. on behalf of all persons who
purchased the Company's stock during the period between April 5, 1999
through and including November 22, 1999.

The consolidated suit arose from six class actions commenced in 1999.  
The suit, which also name accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as
a defendant, is subject to the provisions of the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995.  The suit alleges that the Company and
certain of its directors and officers violated Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 by:

     (1) making false and misleading statements and omissions regarding
         the prospects of the Company's business and liquidation value;
         and

     (2) failing to timely disclose the impact of the Balanced Budget
         Act of 1997 on the long term care services business.

The suit further alleged that these statements and omissions
artificially inflated the value of the Company's stock during the class
period.

The plaintiffs also assert a violation of Section 14(a) of the Exchange
Act and Rule 14a-9 against the mentioned defendants as well as against
Wasserstein Perella & Co. in connection with the Company's proxy
statements dated August 13, 1999, as amended through September 10,
1999.  The plaintiffs allege that the defendants were negligent in
disseminating the proxy statements, which allegedly contained
materially false and misleading statements.

The plaintiffs plan to appeal the Court's decision.


NCI BUILDINGS: NY Federal Court Consolidates Multiple Securities Suits
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
consolidated several class actions filed against NCI Building Systems,
Inc. and its present officers on behalf of all purchasers of the
Company's stock during various periods ranging from August 25, 1999
through April 12, 2001.  The suits assert various claims under Section
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  

On January 10, 2002, the Court appointed a lead plaintiff for the
consolidated suit, and ordered the lead plaintiff to file a
consolidated amended complaint on or before February 1, 2002.

NCI denies the allegations in the complaints and intends to defend
itself against them. The lawsuits are at a very early stage, and the
Company cannot predict at this time the extent of its liability.


OPTICAL CABLE: Labels "Without Merit" Securities Suits in W.D. Virginia
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Optical Cable, Inc. intends to vigorously oppose several securities
class action pending in the US District Court for the Western District
of Virginia on behalf of purchasers of the Company's common stock
during the period ranging from July 31, 2000, through October 8, 2001.

The suit also names Robert Kopstein, former Chairman, President and
Chief Executive Officer, and certain officers and/or directors of the
Company during the class period as defendants and alleges that the
Company violated federal securities laws and made fraudulent and/or
negligent misrepresentations and/or omissions.

The Company labeled the suits "without merit" but said that it may
incur substantial costs in defending itself against the suits,
regardless of their merit or outcome.


PEDIATRIC SERVICES: $3.2M Settlement Reached In N.D. GA Securities Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pediatric Services of America, Inc. (Nasdaq:PSAI) will settle for
USD3.2 million the securities class action filed in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Georgia on behalf of all
persons who purchased the Company's stock from July 29, 1997 through
and including July 29, 1998.  

The suit generally alleges that prior to the decline in the price of
the Company's stock on July 28, 1998, there were violations of the
federal securities laws.  These violations arose from misstatements of
material information in and/or omissions of material information from
certain of the Company's securities filings and other public
disclosures principally related to its reporting of accounts receivable
and the allowance for doubtful accounts.

The settlement is still up for Court approval in a hearing to be
conducted on March 15, 2002, to consider the fairness, reasonableness
and adequacy of the agreement. Under the terms of the settlement, the
$3,000,000 contribution of the Company to the settlement will be fully
funded by its insurance carrier under its directors and officers
insurance policy.

Joseph D. Sansone, Chairman, President and CEO of PSAI said in a press
statement, "We are looking forward to having this matter resolved and
concentrating exclusively on executing our strategic plan."

The Company provides comprehensive pediatric home health care services
through a network of 121 offices in 22 states, including satellite and
branch offices.


ROYAL CARIBBEAN: Shareholders Question Tax Implications of P&O Merger
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Shareholders of Royal Caribbean Cruises commenced a class action in
Florida challenging a pending GBP5 billion merger with P&O Carnival and
alleging the Company misled investors about the merger's tax
implications.

The Independent reports that the UK-based P&O Carnival and the Company
are largely exempt from US taxation, but Carnival Corporation, the
American group mounting a rival bid for P&O, have raised the question
of whether the merger would create a company seen by the Internal
Revenue Service as largely American, and consequently taxable.  
Investment bank Lehman Brothers has warned that worries about how the
US tax authorities would react are "mission critical."

The two companies have dismissed the allegations, but Lehman analyst
Felicia Kantor said taxing the combined company could ruin the economic
justification for the deal. She told the Independent, "We are unable to
second guess how the US tax authorities will react."

Despite these questions, the Office of Fair Trading is expected to wave
the deal though, backing a decision by the German authorities. Only
approval from the US regulators is still to be obtained, and Carnival
would need both US and European Union clearance for its rival offer.


VERSANT CORPORATION: CA Federal Court Dismisses Amended Securities Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Northern District of
California dismissed with prejudice the amended consolidated suit filed
against Versant Corporation and certain of its present and former
officers and directors.

The consolidated suit arose from four class actions, uniformly alleging
violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, and Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5 promulgated
under the Securities Exchange Act, in connection with public statements
about the Company and its financial performance.

The suits were commenced in 1998, and were consolidated in June 1998.  
In May 22, 2000, the court dismissed the consolidated suit but allowed
the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint.  The plaintiff filed their
second amended complaint, but the court dismissed this without
prejudice.

The plaintiffs then filed a third amended complaint that was finally
dismissed with prejudice by the Court last month.


WILLAMETTE INDUSTRIES: Shareholders Sue Over Weyerhauser Tender Offer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Willamette Industries, Inc. faces a consolidated securities class
action in the Multnomah County Circuit Court against the Company and
its Board of Directors, relating to its rejection of a tender offer
from Weyerhauser, Inc.

The suits were commenced in November 2001, alleging the Company and its
Board of Directors breached fiduciary duties in rejecting Weyerhauser's
offer to buy Company shares at $55/share.  The Company and its
directors later moved to dismiss the complaints, and plaintiffs filed a
consolidated amended complaint.  

The amended complaint asserted claims for breach of fiduciary duty,
abuse of control, waste and unjust enrichment, and sought an injunction
to prevent the Company from engaging in conduct designed to deter
offers from Weyerhaeuser and requiring the Company to dismantle its
rights plan and retention benefits. The plaintiffs sought expedited
discovery in support of their request for preliminary injunctive relief
and defendants moved to stay discovery.

The Court then entered an order, staying discovery until such time as
it determines that plaintiffs have stated a claim for relief. In
response to the Court's order, plaintiffs stated that they would again
amend their complaint.

The plaintiffs soon filed a second amended complaint in December 2001.
The second amended complaint asserts derivative and class action claims
against the defendants for breach of fiduciary duty, abuse of control,
waste, and unjust enrichment.  The Company and its directors have not
yet responded to the second amended complaint.

On January 4, 2002, two Company shareholders filed another securities
suit in the same court, entitled Wyser-Pratte Management Co., Inc. v.
Swindells.  The suit made the similar allegation that the Company
directors breached their fiduciary duties and its shareholders by,
among other things, rejecting Weyerhaeuser's acquisition proposals
without engaging in good faith negotiations and without informed
consideration of Weyerhaeuser's proposals.

On January 8, 2002, plaintiffs in the second suit filed a motion for
leave to shorten time to take discovery and a motion for preliminary
injunction seeking to preliminarily enjoin:

     (1) the consummation of any business combination between the
         Company and Georgia-Pacific; and

     (2) any agreement to a termination fee with Georgia-Pacific or the
         taking of any other action that would have the effect of
         discouraging Weyerhaeuser from pursuing and consummating a
         business combination with the Company.

The Company asked the Court to consolidate both suits, while the
plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to shorten time to take discovery
before Judge Janice Wilson on January 16, 2002. The Court granted the
Company's motion to consolidate, but denied the plaintiffs' motion for
leave to shorten time to take discovery.

The Company has filed its motion to dismiss the consolidated suit on
January 18, 2002. A hearing on the motion is currently scheduled for
February 5, 2002.


WILLAMETTE INDUSTRIES: Plaintiffs Withdraw Charges V. Georgia Pacific
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs in the shareholder derivative class action against
Willamette Industries Inc. relating to the Company's plan to acquire
Georgia-Pacific, Inc. have withdrawn their charges against Georgia
Pacific before the United States District Court for the District of
Oregon last week.

The suit was commenced in December 2001, against the Company, its Chief
Executive Officer, its Board of Directors, and Georgia-Pacific,
alleging that Company Directors breached their fiduciary duties and
entrenched themselves by proceeding with a plan to acquire assets of
Georgia-Pacific and by refusing to negotiate with Weyerhaeuser. The
suit further alleged that Georgia-Pacific aided and abetted the Board's
breach of its fiduciary duties.

The suit asserts claims under Section 14(e) of the Exchange Act against
the Company's Directors, who allegedly failed to disclose the existence
of negotiations with Georgia-Pacific in a timely manner. The plaintiffs
seeks a declaration that defendants have breached their fiduciary
duties and have violated Rule 14-9(c) under the Exchange Act, an
injunction preventing the Company from consummating a transaction with
Georgia-Pacific and from thwarting Weyerhaeuser's tender offer.

Plaintiffs moved for a temporary restraining order preventing any
transaction with Georgia-Pacific from going forward on January 15,
2002. The motion was withdrawn a day later.

Georgia-Pacific then moved to dismiss the charges against them, and the
plaintiffs later submitted to the Court a stipulation of dismissal of
Georgia-Pacific from this action on January 25, 2002.  The Company has
yet to answer the plaintiffs' latest motion.


                              *********


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 2002.  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  * * *