CAR_Public/020326.mbx                C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
                Tuesday, March 26, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 60

                              Headlines

ADVANTA BANK: Credit Card Holders File Suit Over Excessive Card Fees
ERIE INSURANCE: PA Court Grants Certification To Replacement Parts Suit
ESSEF CORPORATION: Appeals $7M Damage Award in Horizon Passengers Suit
FIEGER FIEGER: Family Files Suit After Firm Misses Statute Deadline
INDIAN TRUST FUND: New Contempt Charges Sought v. Interior Secretary

INDIANA: Former Johnson County Inmate Files Suit Over Strip Searches
JAPAN: Japanese Lawyers To Aid Chinese Workers In Forced Labor Suit
LAWRENCE LIVERMORE: Minority Workers To Join Race Discrimination Suit
LEVEL 3: Believes It Has Meritorious Defenses To Right-Of-Way Suits
LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES: Former Workers File Suit Over Retirement Packages

NABORS INDUSTRIES: To Settle Offshore Workers Wages Antitrust Suit
PROVIDIAN FINANCIAL: Offers $38M Settlement For Securities Fraud Suit
STONE & WEBSTER: To Pay Workers Long-Owed Overtime in Suit Settlement
TALISMAN ENERGY: Allegedly Urged Sudanese Government to Clear Villages
WOMEN'S 17: Sued For Violations of Ohio Contract, Sales Practice Laws

                            Securities Fraud

ANDRYX CORPORATION: Schoengold Sporn Commences Securities Suit in FL
ARTHUR ANDERSEN: Lawyer Invokes 5th Amendment During Suit Deposition
CALPINE CORPORATION: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
CORNELL COMPANIES: Leo Desmond Commences Securities Suit in S.D. TX
DYNACQ INTERNATIONAL: Bernstein Liebhard Lodges Securities Suit in TX

E-REX INC.: Judge Orders Special Master To Review Finance Records
GILAT SATELLITE: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in E.D. NY
L90 INC.: Brian Felgoise Commences Securities Fraud Suit in C.D. CA
L90 INC.: Charles Piven Commences Securities Fraud Suit in C.D. CA
LIGAND PHARMACEUTICALS: DE Court Dismisses Claims v. Company, Seragen

LUMENIS LTD.: Leo Desmond Initiates Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
MEDI-HUT COMPANY: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in NJ
METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Bernstein Liebhard Files Securities Suit in WA
METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Hagens Berman Commences Securities Suit in WA
METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Levy Levy Lodges Securities Suit in W.D. WA

METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Abbey Gardy Launches Securities Suit in WA
METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Cohen Milstein Lodges Securities Suit in WA
NASHUA CORPORATION: Sued For Federal Securities Violations in IL Court
NEWPOWER HOLDINGS: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
PNC FINANCIAL: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in W.D. PA

WILLIAMS COMPANIES: Stull Stull Commences Securities Suit in N.D. OK
                             
                              *********

ADVANTA BANK: Credit Card Holders File Suit Over Excessive Card Fees
--------------------------------------------------------------------
An Oregon man, in a proposed class action filed in Utah's Third
District Court, is accusing Advanta Bank Corporation of running a
scheme to rip off millions of dollars from its credit card holders, the
Associated Press recently reported.

Matthew K. Rossman contends the Company's business credit card
agreement represents that customers who make their monthly payment "on"
or before the due date can avoid additional finance and interest
charges.  However, says Mr. Rossman, the payments must be received by
6:30 am on the due date at an Advanta office in Philadelphia, PA, to
escape late charges.

As the Company does not receive the mail that early, it posts and
declares all payments received on the due date as late, a fact not
disclosed in credit-card agreements, says Mr. Rossman.  The lawsuit
further alleges that the scheme allows the Company to charge its
customers for unwarranted late fees and additional days of interest on
their average daily balance.  The suit also says that the Company
raises the interest rates of its customers for several months after
they submit a late payment.

All these practices are fraudulent, contends the lawsuit, and violate
the state's Consumer Sales Practices Act. The lawsuit asks for actual
as well as $2 million in punitive damages.

Catherine Reid, a spokeswoman for parent company, Advanta Corporation,
said the Company does not comment on litigation.


ERIE INSURANCE: PA Court Grants Certification To Replacement Parts Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas granted national class action
status in a lawsuit challenging the use of certain replacement parts
that Erie Insurance Company has specified for the repair of its
policyholders' vehicles, allowing as many as 500,000 car owners to
participate in the suit.

Judge John W. Herron certified the suit, which challenges the Company's
policies obligating it to repair damaged vehicles with parts of "like
kind and quality."  The suit alleges that the Company has failed to
comply with this obligation in repairs of "crash parts," for which the
Company has specified the use of so-called "aftermarket" parts, rather
than "original equipment manufacturer" (OEM) parts.  "Crash parts"
include, among other things, bumpers, fenders, quarter panels and other
parts of vehicles that are damaged in a collision.

"Aftermarket parts" are made by companies other than the original part
manufacturer, without the benefit of the original manufacturer's
specifications, tools, dies, stamping or production processes.
Aftermarket parts are often made from different quality steel than that
used in the original part.

The suit alleges that aftermarket parts are not of "like kind and
quality" with OEM parts, and that by specifying aftermarket parts, the
Company breached its contractual obligation to repair damaged parts
with parts of like kind and quality.  The Company stopped specifying
aftermarket sheet metal parts for repairs after February 1, 1999.

The order granting class certification defines the class as all persons
in the United States:

     (1) who have been insured by an automobile policy issued by Erie
         Insurance Company or any other member of the Erie Insurance
         Exchange;

     (2) who have made a claim at any time on or after February 2, 1994
         for vehicle repairs pursuant to their Erie insurance policies;
         and

     (3) have had non-OEM crash parts specified for their repairs.

The case is similar to one brought against State Farm in Illinois
several years ago. State Farm was found liable in that case, which is
now on appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court.

For more information, contact Joseph F. Roda of Roda & Nast, PC by
Phone: 717-892-3000, ext. 222 or by E-mail: jroda@rodanast.com


ESSEF CORPORATION: Appeals $7M Damage Award in Horizon Passengers Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Essef Corporation plans to appeal, in the US 2nd Circuit Court of
Appeals, a $7 million damage award given to passengers of its cruise
ship M/V Horizon, who allegedly were exposed to Legionnaires disease
bacteria while on the ship.

The suit, commenced against the Company, its subsidiaries, parent
corporation Celebrity Cruises and its sister company Fantasia, alleges
that the Company designed, manufactured, and marketed two sand swimming
pool filters that were installed as a part of the spa system on the
Horizon, and that the spa, and filters, contained bacteria that
infected certain passengers on cruises from December 1993 through July
1994.

The trial resulted in a jury verdict in June 2000 finding liability on
the part of the Essef defendants (70%) and its parent corporation
Celebrity and its sister company, Fantasia (together 30%). Compensatory
damages in the total amount of $2.7 million were awarded, each
defendant being accountable for its proportionate share of liability.
Punitive damages were separately awarded against the Company defendants
in the total amount of $7 million, with 60% awarded to all remaining
plaintiffs and 40% to Celebrity.

The Company and its subsidiaries filed post-trial motions challenging
the verdict, which were denied in February 2002.  



FIEGER FIEGER: Family Files Suit After Firm Misses Statute Deadline
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Geoffrey Fieger's Southfield, Michigan law firm, has been sued for
malpractice by a family that claims it lost out on an earlier lawsuit
because the firm missed the statute of limitations deadline, the
Associated Press reported recently.

The family of Homer Crockett sued Oakwood Hospital after Mr. Crockett
died, claiming the hospital failed to properly treat his impending
heart attack.  The family had retained the law firm of Fieger, Fieger,
Kenney and Johnson to handle the case.

The hospital denied any wrongdoing.  A Wayne Circuit Court mediation
panel recommended that the Detroit family receive $450,000.  "On advice
of counsel, (the family) rejected the award," the family's lawsuit
said.  Oakwood Hospital succeeded in having the lawsuit thrown out of
court without a trial on a legal technicality.  Wayne Circuit Judge
Wendy Baxter dismissed the suit because the Fieger law firm filed a
notice of intent to sue on May 14, 1998. The statue of limitations had
expired on April 10, 1998.

Harvey Heller, an attorney representing the Fieger law firm in the
civil malpractice suit, said that Geoffrey Fieger did not handle the
case.  The Crocketts, he said, were represented primarily by an
associate, Ronald Bowling, who did not return a call seeking comment.

Mr. Heller said the Crockett family would not have received, in any
event, the $450,000 award recommended by the mediation panel, because
the hospital rejected the settlement.  "The error was so obscure that
it was not discovered until well past the discovery and mediation
phase," Mr. Heller said.  "There was no breach of legal ethics.  This
is a simple blown statute of limitations case."

The Crocketts' lawyer, Lawrence Charfoos, said the legal error was
clear.  "The facts speak for themselves," he said.  "I have the highest
respect for Mr. Fieger and his firm. This is an unfortunate occurrence,
and I would just hope they would do right by the plaintiffs that they
harmed," Mr. Charfoos said.

Judge Baxter has rejected a request by the Fieger law firm to move the
case to Oakland Circuit Court.


INDIAN TRUST FUND: New Contempt Charges Sought v. Interior Secretary
--------------------------------------------------------------------
A federal judge has been asked to hold Interior Secretary Gale Norton
in contempt for charges of allowing the destruction of electronic
documents in a lawsuit over mismanaged American Indian money, the
Associated Press reported recently.

US District Judge Royce Lamberth is considering whether to find
Interior Secretary Gale Norton in contempt for failing to comply with a
court order to fix the system that manages $500 million annually in
royalties from Indian land and for concealing her department's
failures.

The plaintiffs, 300,000 American Indians, in a class action over the
department's mismanagement of the Indians' money, contend that  
electronic documents and e-mails were purged as a further cover-up.  
The contempt motion claims Ms. Norton and other Interior and Justice
officials and lawyers failed to prevent the document destruction.

"It was willful, it was systemic and it was done to cover up," said
attorney Dennis Gingold, who is representing the Indians in their
claims that the government has squandered, for decades, more than $10
billion in royalties from their land.

Last July, court-appointed investigator Alan Balaran found that the
Interior Department routinely erased e-mails despite Judge Lamberth's
orders that they be retained as evidence.  Judge Lamberth heard 29 days
of testimony earlier this year on the plaintiffs' previous contempt
requests.  A ruling could come in a few weeks.

In 1999, Judge Lamberth held President Clinton's Interior Secretary
Bruce Babbitt and his Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin in contempt,
fining them $600,000 for concealing the destruction of documents.

The Interior Department is responsible for managing royalties from
grazing, logging, mining and oil drilling on Indian land through a
system of trust funds, but plaintiffs allege the money was lost,
stolen, uncollected and generally mismanaged for more than a century.  
Ms. Norton has announced new plans for the overhaul of the way the
Indian trust funds are managed.  The plaintiffs denounced the new plans
and have asked Judge Lamberth to place the trust funds in receivership.


INDIANA: Former Johnson County Inmate Files Suit Over Strip Searches
--------------------------------------------------------------------
A former Johnson County, Indiana, jail inmate alleges in a lawsuit,
which is seeking class action status, that the jail has an
unconstitutional blanket policy of strip-searching inmates arrested on
minor, nonviolent offenses, the Associated Press reported recently.

William Alan Russell alleges that the jail violated his constitutional
rights by strip-searching him.  The Indiana Supreme Court ruled in
December of last year that inmates arrested on misdemeanor charges
cannot be strip-searched unless the jailers have a reasonable suspicion
that the inmates are concealing weapons or illegal substances.  A
federal court has ruled similarly.

Mr. Russell, 41, was arrested in connection with break-ins at Greenwood
Homes in June 2001, but the police report said nothing was stolen.  The
lawsuit alleges that when Mr. Russell was booked into the Johnson  
County jail, he was strip-searched without a reasonable suspicion,
which amounts to an unreasonable search and seizure forbidden by the
Constitution.  Mr. Russell's attorney, Bart Betteau of New Albany, has
filed nearly identical federal lawsuits against the sheriffs of
Harrison and Floyd Counties.

In July 2000, nearly 200 former inmates of the Harrison County jail
shared in a class-action settlement totaling $300,000.  Mr. Betteau
represented inmates jailed during the period from January 1997 to
January 1999, who were forced to disrobe upon their booking into jail.
The Floyd County case, which is not a class action, is presently in
District Court in Indianapolis.

Currently, the Johnson County jail does not conduct routine strip-
searches of inmates, said Jeffrey Eggers, attorney for the Johnson
County Sheriff's Department.  Mr. Eggers declined to comment on Mr.
Russell's lawsuit, however.


JAPAN: Japanese Lawyers To Aid Chinese Workers In Forced Labor Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------------
About 860 Chinese lawyers have signed a petition supporting a class
action to be heard in a Japanese court, seeking compensation for 15
Chinese victims who performed forced labor during Japan's invasion of
China in the 1930s and 1940s, the China Daily reported recently.  Only
Japanese lawyers can appear in court in cases heard in Japan, but that
is not an issue, for more than 300 Japanese lawyers have offered their
services to the Chinese plaintiffs for free.

Japanese courts have denied most of the "forced labor" class actions on
the grounds that too much time has passed.  The current suit, brought
in the Fukuoka Local Court against the Japanese government and a mining
company for which the Chinese workers were forced to work, is the only
one accepted in Japan so far.  

The case is among scores that have been filed in major Japanese cities
such as Kyoto, Tokyo and Hiroshima.  The suit is seeking $176,000 for
each of the 15 plaintiffs, as well as an apology.

The Chinese government renounced its right to claim compensation for
World War II damages in the treaty it signed with the Japanese
government in 1972.  However, that does not mean civilian victims of
Japanese war practices cannot make personal compensation claims,
according Kang Jian, a Beijing attorney involved in the case.  Chinese
lawyers are hoping the Japanese court will act fairly and issue a
judgment based on historical fact, said Yu Ning, vice-president of the
All-China Lawyers Association.

The Fukuoka Local Court is expected to issue a verdict on April 26.


LAWRENCE LIVERMORE: Minority Workers To Join Race Discrimination Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Hundreds of minority workers who claim Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory(Lab) pays them less than their white counterparts hope an
Alameda County judge in California will let them join in a class action
against their employer, the San Jose Mercury News recently reported.

A group of nine current and former laboratory employees hope to expand
the racial discrimination suit they filed in December to class action
status.  In the complaint, the group alleges that the Company
systematically pays Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders less and
ranks them lower than white employees.  The group is seeking back pay
as well as an injunction barring future discrimination.  The group also
contends that Company officials punished them after they complained
about pay and ranking discrepancies.  They allege, as well, that
performance evaluations were "unfair and inaccurate."

The plaintiffs also filed separate complaints with state and federal
fair employment agencies.  Those cases are pending.  Most of the group
is still working at the Company.

Company spokeswoman Susan Houghton said that the Company has not seen
the complaint, but that officials do want to create a fair working
environment.


LEVEL 3: Believes It Has Meritorious Defenses To Right-Of-Way Suits
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 3 Communications LLP faces two class actions filed in the US
District Court for the Southern District of Illinois and in the US
District Court for the District of Idaho, involving the Company's right
to install its fiber optic cables on the plaintiff's land.    

In general, the Company obtained the rights to construct its network
from railroads, utilities, and others, and is installing its network
along the rights-of-way so granted.  Plaintiffs in the suits assert
that they are the owners of lands over which the Company's fiber optic
cable network passes, and that the railroads, utilities, and others who
granted the Company the right to construct and maintain its network did
not have the legal ability to do so.  The suits purport to be on behalf
of a class of owners of land in multiple states over which the
Company's network passes or will pass.

The Company believes that it has substantial defenses to the claims
asserted in all of these actions, and any similar claims that may be
named in the future, and intends to defend them vigorously.


LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES: Former Workers File Suit Over Retirement Packages
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Former Lucent Technologies workers have filed a class action in federal
court in Boston, charging the Company and its union with luring them
into early retirement deals that were less generous than packages that
subsequently were offered, the Associated Press recently reported.

Paul Fici of Haverhill and Anthony Boremi of Salem, New Hampshire,
filed the $25 million lawsuit on behalf of about 450 of their fellow
retirees who accepted packages in the spring and summer of 2001.  A few
months later, more than 1,100 workers were offered and accepted a much
better package.

The suit claims that the Company and the Communication Workers Union
Local 1365 knew about the better deals when the first batch of
employees retired but did not warn them.  "Inexplicable.  Nobody can
understand why they did not inform people of this option," said Lee
Gesmer, a Boston lawyer who represents the retirees.

Gary Nilsson, secretary of the union, said the union did not deceive
workers.  "I believed wholeheartedly that they weren't going to offer a
better package," Mr. Nilsson said.  Lucent spokeswoman Mary Ward was
not aware the lawsuit had been filed.  She said, however, that the
benefits offered to workers complied with the agreements negotiated
with the unions.

The new package created a special lump sum payment, up to 234 percent
of the worker's annual salary, allowing workers to roll their buy-out
money into their 401k retirement accounts to avoid paying taxes and
extended medical, dental and life insurance benefits an extra year.  It
also increased education and training money and allowed workers within
five years of retirement age to take the deal.  None of these features
were included in the earlier buy-out offer.  The lawsuit requests for
the retirees the same compensation as the new, enhanced package, which
would total more than $25 million.

According to the lawsuit, the Company told the 450 workers that "no
better enhancement package was being considered by Lucent."  
Additionally, contends the lawsuit, the union said it was a "good deal"
and recommended that its members accept it.

Mr. Nilsson said the union tried to get the enhanced benefits for
the first wave of retirees, but Lucent refused.  However, when Lucent
downsized again in September of last year, the union lobbied for the
better benefits, and Lucent agreed.  He also said the union should have
filed charges against the Company, forcing it to give the higher buy-
out to first group retirees as well.  While Mr. Nillson said the union
had "not totally" betrayed the workers, he also said, "Absolutely," the
company had betrayed the workers.

Mr. Nilsson did not qualify for the retirement packages, but Joseph
Kanan, president of the union, accepted the enhanced benefits package.


NABORS INDUSTRIES: To Settle Offshore Workers Wages Antitrust Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Nabors Industries' offshore drilling subsidiaries agreed to settle, for
an undisclosed amount, a class action in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Texas, Galveston Division, alleging,
among other things, conspiracy to depress wages and benefits paid to
its offshore employees in the Gulf of Mexico.

The settlement amounts will be paid by the Company's subsidiaries, the
Company revealed in a disclosure to the Securities and Exchange
Commission.  In the event the settlement is not finalized, the Company
continues to believe the allegations in this lawsuit are without merit
and the Company's subsidiaries will defend vigorously the claims
brought against them.

In such event, the Company is unable, however, to predict the outcome
of this lawsuit or the costs to be incurred in connection with its
defense and there can be no assurance that this litigation will be
resolved in our favor. An adverse result or prolonged litigation could
have an adverse effect on the financial position, cash flows or results
of operations of the Company.


PROVIDIAN FINANCIAL: Offers $38M Settlement For Securities Fraud Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Credit-card issuer Providian Financial Corporation agreed to pay $38
million to settle a class action filed by shareholders who claimed the
company inflated its profit by gouging its customers during the late
1990s, The Wall Street Journal reported recently.

The proposed settlement, which still needs the approval of a federal
judge in Philadelphia, covers thousands of investors who bought the
Company's once high-flying stock between January 21 and June 4, 1999.  
Before deducting attorney fees, the settlement works out to about $1.40
a share.  The fees are expected to range between $9 million and $12
million, said New York lawyer Robert Finkel, who represented the
shareholders.  Estimates on the shareholders' damages during the
relevant period ran as high as $400 million.

The tentative agreement does not cover other class actions filed late
last year after the Company shocked Wall Street by disclosing huge loan
losses that threatened to ruin the company.  These civil complaints are
still in their preliminary stages.

The Company does not expect the settlement now awaiting approval to
affect its turnaround effort, because the entire $38 million is covered
by insurance, spokesman Alan Elias said.  The Company did not
acknowledge wrongdoing in making the settlement.


STONE & WEBSTER: To Pay Workers Long-Owed Overtime in Suit Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------------
More than 100 former employees who filed a class action against Stone &
Webster, a bankrupt Boston engineering and construction firm, will
receive payments ranging from $100 to $1,000 for unpaid overtime under
a deal that could cost the company more than $1 million, the Boston
Herald reported recently.

Under the deal approved by a Delaware bankruptcy court, workers will
get immediate payments totaling $350,000.  Individual payments depend
on the number of hours worked.  The settlement does not foreclose the
workers from seeking another $1.25 million in unpaid wages, but how
much of that they can collect depends on the bankruptcy court.  The
current deal covers only overtime worked from 1996 to 2000.

One of the former employees, Walter Sawatzky, a Hanson resident, said
he typically worked 48 hours to 60 hours per week, and at times more
than 70 hours while assigned by the Company to the Millstone Power
Plant in Connecticut.  He said he didn't know then that that he was
entitled to overtime for the extra hours.

The 131 employees of Stone & Webster, most of them engineers, were paid
on an hourly basis, but the Company failed to pay them overtime rates
for extra hours.  "As engineers, they would not ordinarily be entitled
to overtime," said Howard Brown, a Boston lawyer who represented the
workers.  "But they didn't get a salary every week, they just put down
their hours."

The suit was started by one former employee and then turned into a
class action for any of 600 others who opted to join.   The case is
unusual for a class action, because generally members of a class are
included unless they opt out, the workers' lawyer, Howard Brown, said.

Stone & Webster, which did most of its work on power plants, filed for
a Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2000.  Much of its assets were sold to the
Shaw Group Inc. of Baton Rouge, Louisiana.  Shaw also took on most of
the Company's liabilities, so there will probably be more money coming
for the workers for overtime worked during the time periods not covered
by the current settlement, Mr. Brown said.

Of the 131 workers in the class action, 15 are Massachusetts residents.  
The others reside in 24 different states and Canada.


TALISMAN ENERGY: Allegedly Urged Sudanese Government To Clear Villages
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The New York District Court recently decided, in the course of a class
action brought against the Sudan government and Talisman Energy, a
Canadian oil company operating in war-torn Sudan, to consider a
purported Sudanese government document, which indicates that Talisman
asked the Khartoum government to remove villagers from the vicinity of
its oil properties, the Associated Press reported recently.

The Financial Times said the directive, which ordered the armed forces
to "conduct cleaning up operations" in all villages in the area, is
dated May 7, 1999, two days before the Khartoum regime launched one of
the largest military offensives of the 20-year civil war. Residents of
southern Sudan filed the class action. They contend they have been hurt
by the government's military action.

The case is being considered under the Alien Tort Claims Act, which
allows foreigners to sue in US courts over violations of human rights
and other international laws.  Human right groups, as well as
investigations by the Canadian government and United Nations missions,
have said oil drilling in Sudan by foreign companies is exacerbating a
war that already has claimed about two million lives, mostly from war-
related famine.

Government troops and militia forces have destroyed villages and
displaced about 200,000 people in the western upper Nile region of
Sudan, where the oilfields are located, witnesses and human rights
groups say.  Rebel forces hostile to the Khartoum regime control most
of the region near the oilfields.

The Company has denied any complicity with the actions by government
forces fighting the rebels, and points to its long record in bringing
wells, hospitals and electricity to the region.  The Company, which
recently received a copy of the document by plaintiffs, said its
lawyers were still trying to determine its source and authenticity.  
However, Barry Nelson, a Company spokesman, was quoted by the Financial
Times as saying, "We can emphatically say the suggestions in the
alleged memo run contrary to everything that Talisman practices and
believes in Sudan."

Since the opening in 1999 of a pipeline connecting Sudan's oilfields to
the Red Sea, the country's oil income has risen to an estimated $500
million annually, an income allowing the Khartoum government to finance
independently a war estimated to cost $1 million a day.


WOMEN'S 17: Sued For Violations of Ohio Contract, Sales Practice Laws
---------------------------------------------------------------------
A trial date has been set for a proposed class action against former
workout and fitness chain Women's 17 Minute Workout and Newbolics, the
new company honoring its contracts, the Akron Beacon Journal reported
recently.  A trial is scheduled for July 22 before Stark County Common
Pleas Court, in Ohio, before Judge Lee Sinclair.  The suit alleges the
companies have violated Ohio's prepaid entertainment contract act and
the state's Consumer Sales Practice Act.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of five former members of the defunct
fitness chain and Nubolics, a new company owned by relatives of the
former company's owner.  Beth Raies, an attorney with Tzangas, Plakas,
Mannos & Recupero, said the law firm has received more than 375 phone
calls concerning the lawsuit.  Ms. Raies declined, however, to say how
many people had signed onto the lawsuit, because a confidentiality
order had been imposed by the judge.

The lawsuit also seeks to hold Jeffrey Stone, president of Workout, and
members of his family involved with Nubolics personally liable for the
debts of the corporation.  The Company's customers found the doors
shuttered in January and later learned that Nubolics would be honoring
their contracts, but would not honor the low lifetime renewal rates,
some as low as $1, that came with many of the contracts with Workout.
Some former customers, who have paid as much as $2,300 upfront for
three-year contracts with the Company, have said they do not want to go
to Nubolics, but the company is not offering refunds.

In mid-January, when only one location in Alliance was open, Nubolics
said several more would be opening within the next two months.  
Spokesman Ian Sanderson said two locations are now open, one in Canton,
and one in Akron.  The Company plans to open numerous others,
Mr. Sanderson said.

                            Securities Fraud

ANDRYX CORPORATION: Schoengold Sporn Commences Securities Suit in FL
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Schoengold & Sporn, PC initiated a securities fraud class action on
behalf of all persons or institutions who acquired common shares of
Andrx Corporation (NASDAQ: ADRX) between April 30, 2001 through and
including February 21, 2002 at artificially inflated prices due to the
defendants' materially false and misleading statements concerning its
net income and inventories.

The suit, filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of
Florida, alleges that the Company and certain of its directors and
officers violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series
of material misrepresentations to the market during the class period,
thereby artificially inflating the price of the Company's common stock.

Specifically, the suit alleges that the Company issued a series of
statements concerning its generic version of the drug Tiazacr that the
only thing holding up the drug from reaching the market was continuing
patent litigation with Biovail Corp. in connection with Tiazacr. The
defendants failed to disclose that in fact, the Company had difficulty
making a stable version of generic Tiazacr, including that it had
amended its original application to the FDA thirteen times.

When the Company announced on February 21, 2002 that the FDA had raised
"certain issues" concerning the generic Tiazacr, its stock price
dropped from $42.61 per share on February 21, 2002 to $34.96 per share
on February 22, 2002, on volume of 15,767,100, over seven times the
prior day's volume.

For more information, contact Jay P. Saltzman or Ashley Kim by Mail: 19
Fulton Street, Suite 406, New York, New York 10038 by Phone:
212-964-0046 or by E-mail: Shareholderrelations@spornlaw.com


ARTHUR ANDERSEN: Lawyer Invokes 5th Amendment During Suit Deposition
--------------------------------------------------------------------
An attorney at the Chicago headquarters of Arthur Andersen LLP recently
invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination during the
taking of a deposition in a class action on behalf of large investors,
against Andersen and Enron officials, the Associated Press reported
recently.

Nancy Temple had testified before Congress in January that her October
12 e-mail to a manager in the Andersen firm's Houston office was not
intended to trigger the wave of document destruction.  "I never
counseled any shredding or destruction of documents," she told
Congress, adding that her e-mail only reminded staff about the firm's
policy on retaining documents.

However, when she was deposed, during the course of the class action,
Ms. Temple refused to answer all questions.  Her lawyer, Mark C. Hansen
of Washington, DC, advised her not to answer questions in light of an
indictment for obstruction of justice against the firm that was
unsealed in Houston last week.

"Ms. Temple has done nothing wrong," Mr. Hansen said.  "While she would
strongly prefer to continue to answer all questions regarding this
matter, under the circumstances she has reluctantly accepted the advice
of her counsel to invoke her constitutional protections."  Justin
Campbell, a Houston lawyer representing Enron employees and
shareholders in the lawsuit, said Ms. Temple declined to answer all
questions during the 2 1/2-hour deposition.

David Duncan, the former Andersen partner in charge of Enron's audits,
also declined to answer questions during his deposition taken in
February.  Mr. Duncan was fired shortly after Andersen acknowledged in
January that a "significant but undetermined" number of documents and
electronic records had been destroyed.  He is cooperating with
investigators.

Enron Corporation imploded late last year in a whirlwind of alleged
accounting abuses, after revelations of financial partnerships that
were used to hide debt and inflate profits.  On December 2, the Company
filed for bankruptcy.  Andersen then became a targeted defendant in
multibillion-dollar lawsuits against Enron for whatever role the firm
may have played in the collapse.


CALPINE CORPORATION: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California on behalf of shareholders who acquired the common stock of
Calpine Corporation (NYSE:CPN) between January 5, 2001 and December 13,
2001, inclusive against the Company and certain of its officers and
directors.

The suit alleges that the defendants violated federal securities laws
by issuing false and misleading information. The action alleges that
the Company engaged in manipulative transactions that inflated
revenues.

For more details, contact Charles J. Piven, PA by Mail: The World Trade
Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore,
Maryland 21202 by Phone: 410-986-0036 by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com


CORNELL COMPANIES: Leo Desmond Commences Securities Suit in S.D. TX
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Leo W. Desmond initiated a securities class action
on behalf of shareholders who acquired Cornell Companies, Inc.
(NYSE:CRN) securities between March 6, 2001 and March 5, 2002,
inclusive, in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Texas against the Company, Stephen W. Logan and John L.
Hendrix.

It is alleged that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10(b)(5) promulgated
thereunder, by issuing a series of materially false and misleading
statements to the market throughout the class period which statements
had the effect of artificially inflating the market price of the
Company's securities.

For more information, contact Leo W. Desmond by Phone: 888-337-6663 or
561-712-8000 by E-Mail:  Info@SecuritiesAttorney.com or visit the
firm's Web site: http://www.SecuritiesAttorney.com


DYNACQ INTERNATIONAL: Bernstein Liebhard Lodges Securities Suit in TX
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard and Lifshitz LLP initiated a securities class action
on behalf of all persons who acquired Dynacq International, Inc.
(NASDAQ: DYII) securities between November 29, 1999 and January 16,
2002, inclusive, in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Texas against the Company, Chiu Moon Chan, and Philip S.
Chan.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The
suit alleges that during the class period, defendants represented that
the Company's favorable financial results were due to its commitment to
quality and cost-effective care. Throughout the class period,
defendants repeatedly stated that the Company's financials were strong
and that it was consistently achieving "record results."  Defendants
actually knew that the quality of the Company's balance sheet was
eroding, that it was violating federal law in the maintenance of its
facilities, and that it improperly cared for patients.

Then, on February 4, 20002, it was revealed that one of the named
defendants, Chiu Moon Chan, was identified by a news agency as one of
the 15 largest insider sellers for the reported week of January 25,
2002 to February 1, 2002. The news agency report stated that Mr. Chan
sold approximately $525,000 worth of his personal shares in January
2002. These sales took place during the class period.

For more details, contact Ms. Linda Flood, Director of Shareholder
Relations by Mail: 10 East 40th Street, New York, New York 10016 by
Phone: 800-217-1522 or 212-779-1414 by E-mail: DYII@bernlieb.com or
visit the firm's Web site: http://www.bernlieb.com.


E-REX INC.: Judge Orders Special Master To Review Finance Records
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A Nevada federal court judge ordered the appointment of a special
master to review the financial records of E-Rex, Inc. (OTCBB:EREX).
Judge James C. Mahan also ordered a temporary halt to any further stock
issuance by the Company's management until the next court hearing on
April 4, and asked the special master to investigate the company's
progress in developing an advanced technology product called the
Dragonfly.

A group of shareholders, led by Chris Ford, successor trustee of the
Carol Gamble Trust 86, has filed a class action against the Miami-based
technology development company, its officers, directors, attorney and
law firm, and two affiliated companies. The shareholders allege that
the Company's officers and directors engaged in insider stock deals,
fraudulent dilution of shares, misuse of investors' funds, corporate
mismanagement, breach of fiduciary duty and other wrongdoings.

"We welcome this opportunity to inform present and future E-Rex
shareholders of the current status of the shareholder lawsuit," Mr.
Ford said.

Judge Mahan recently appointed George Swarts, of the Las Vegas
accounting firm Swarts and Swarts, as the special master in the case.
"I have faith that the firms of Rambo and Associates and Gately and
Associates, past auditors of E-Rex, and others will comply promptly
with the judge's directive," said Mr. Ford. "I also want to personally
thank President George W. Bush and his administration on a proactive
domestic economic policy in allocating extra monies to the Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC) yesterday."

Mr. Ford added that shareholders have contributed large dollar amounts
to the Company in the past few years in an effort to fund the prototype
development of Dragonfly. The suit alleges those shareholder funds were
regularly diverted into the hands of the Company's corporate officers
and directors and various shell companies. As a result, the Dragonfly
is still in the development stage.

For more information, contact Andrew M. Rose of Marketing Ink, Inc. by
Phone: 954-428-2678 or by E-mail: andy@marketingink.net.  


GILAT SATELLITE: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in E.D. NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court, Eastern District of New York, on
behalf of purchasers of the securities of Gilat Satellite Networks,
Ltd. (Nasdaq: GILTF) between November 13, 2000 and October 2, 2001,
inclusive.  The suit names as defendants the Company, Yoel Gat and Yoav
Libovitch.

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 a series of material misrepresentations to the
market between November 13, 2000 and October 2, 2001, thereby
artificially inflating the price of Company securities.

Prior to and throughout the class period, as alleged in the complaint,
the Company issued a series of materially false and misleading
statements which materially misrepresented its financial condition and
results because, among other things, the Company was improperly
delaying the write-down of tens of millions of dollars of inventory and
investments which were impaired and of diminishing value.

In addition, the Company failed to disclose that its StarBand division
was experiencing significant difficulties attracting customers and was
not generating the revenues for the Company that defendants had caused
the market to expect.

On October 2, 2001, the last day of the class period, the Company
issued a press release announcing that its financial results for the
third quarter of 2001 would be below previously announced guidance and
that it was taking additional charges. The Company reported that
revenues for the third quarter were expected to be $80 million, as
compared to the $150 million announced on May 14, 2001, and that the
Company expected to report a loss of $267 million or approximately
$11.40 per share.

Following this announcement, the price of Company shares dropped from
$5.38 per share to $3.32 per share, a decline of more than 38% on heavy
trading volume.

For further details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave, Suite 202 Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004-2808 by Phone: 888-643-6735 or
610-660-8000 by Fax: 610-660-8080 by E-mail: Mhenzel182@aol.com or
visit the firm's Web site: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182.   


L90 INC.: Brian Felgoise Commences Securities Fraud Suit in C.D. CA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise, PC initiated a securities class
action on behalf of shareholders who acquired L90, Inc. (Nasdaq:LNTY)
securities between July 26, 2001 and March 12, 2002, inclusive, in the
United States District Court for the Central District of California,
against the Company and certain key officers and directors.

The suit charges that defendants violated the federal securities laws
by issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements to
the market throughout the class period which statements had the effect
of artificially inflating the market price of the Company's securities.

For more information, contact Brian M. Felgoise by Mail: 230 South
Broad Street, Suite 404, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19102 by E-mail:
BrianFLaw@yahoo.com or by Phone: 215-735-6810.


L90 INC.: Charles Piven Commences Securities Fraud Suit in C.D. CA
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Central District of
California on behalf of shareholders who acquired the common stock of
L90, Inc. (Nasdaq:LNTY) between July 26, 2001, and March 12, 2002,
inclusive against the Company and certain of its officers.

The action alleges that the defendants violated federal securities laws
by issuing false and misleading information regarding the Company's
financial condition. The action alleges that the Company misrepresented
its true prospects and overstated revenues and assets in violation of
generally accepted accounting principles.

For more details, contact Charles J. Piven, PA by Mail: 401 East Pratt
Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202 by Phone: 410-986-0036 or
by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com


LIGAND PHARMACEUTICALS: DE Court Dismisses Claims v. Company, Seragen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Delaware Chancery Court dismissed Ligand Pharmaceuticals and
subsidiary Seragen, Inc. as defendants in a class action charging the
Company of aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duty by Seragen.  
The suit names the Company, Seragen, former officers and directors of
Seragen, Boston University and other entities as defendants.

The complaint, as amended, alleged that the Company aided the breaches
of fiduciary duty by the Seragen related defendants in connection with
the acquisition of Seragen by the Company and made certain
misrepresentations in related proxy materials.

On July 25, 2000, the court dismissed the Company, Seragen, and
subsidiaries Seragen Technology, Inc. and Knight Acquisition
Corporation as defendants.  However, claims of breach of fiduciary duty
remain against the remaining defendants, including the former officers
and directors of Seragen.

The court later certified a class consisting of shareholders as of the
date of the acquisition and on the date of an earlier business unit
sale by Seragen.  The litigation is currently in the discovery phase.
While the Company and Seragen have been dismissed from the action, such
dismissal is subject to a possible subsequent appeal upon judgment in
the action against the remaining parties.

The Company and Seragen faces another class action filed in the United
States District Court for the District of Massachusetts by the Trustees
of Boston University and other former stakeholders of Seragen. The suit
alleges:

     (1) breach of contract,

     (2) breach of the implied covenants of good faith and fair
         dealing, and

     (3) unfair and deceptive trade practices abased on, among other
         things, allegations that the Company wrongfully withheld
         approximately $2.1 million in consideration due the plaintiffs
         under the Seragen acquisition agreement.

The suit has not been served and the Company has not responded to the
complaint.  The Company believes that the suit is without merit and
intends to vigorously defend against each of such lawsuits.  Due to the
uncertainty of the ultimate outcome of these matters, the impact on
future financial results is not subject to reasonable estimates.


LUMENIS LTD.: Leo Desmond Initiates Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Leo W. Desmond commenced a securities class action
on behalf of shareholders who acquired Lumenis Ltd. (Nasdaq:LUME)
securities between January 7, 2002 and February 28, 2002, inclusive, in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
against the Company and:

     (1) Jacob Frenkel,

     (2) Yacha Sutton,

     (3) Sagi Genger and

     (4) Asif Adil

It is alleged that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10(b)(5) promulgated
thereunder, by issuing a series of materially false and misleading
statements to the market throughout the class period which statements
had the effect of artificially inflating the market price of the
Company's securities.

For more details, contact Leo W. Desmond by Phone: 888-337-6663 or
561-712-8000 by E-Mail: Info@SecuritiesAttorney.com or visit the firm's
Web site: http://www.SecuritiesAttorney.com


MEDI-HUT COMPANY: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in NJ
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard and Lifshitz LLP initiated a securities class action
on behalf all persons who acquired Medi-Hut Company, Inc. (NASDAQ:
MHUT) securities between April 4, 2000 through February 4, 2002, in the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey.  The suit
named as defendants the Company and:

     (1) Joseph A. Sanpietro,

     (2) Laurence M. Simon,

     (3) Robert Russo,

     (4) Vincent Sanpierto,

     (5) James G. Aaron, and

     (6) James S. Vacarro

The suit seeks damages for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder.  The suit alleges that defendants knowingly and recklessly
disseminated materially false and misleading statements and omissions
that misrepresented the Company's business, operations and financial
performance. The suit further alleges, among other things, that the
Company misled the investing public by failing to disclose that a
Company vice president, Lawrence Marasco had a controlling interest in
Larval Corporation, the Company's largest customer. During fiscal year
2001, sales to Larval accounted for 62% of the Company's revenues.

Because Lawrence Marasco had a controlling interest in one of the
Company's customers, generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP)
dictated that the Company identify sales to that customer as related
party transactions.  The Company, however, failed to disclose the true
nature of its sales to Larval. The suit further alleges that as a
result of the misrepresentations and omissions by the Company's stock
traded at artificially inflated prices throughout the class period.

On February 4, 2002, the nature of the relationship between the
Company, Lawrence Marasco and Larval was revealed to the market. The
investing public, recognizing that a majority of the Company's revenues
in fiscal year 2001 were generated via sales to a related party,
reacted swiftly and severely. By the close of business on February 4,
2002 Company shares -Hut had lost 51% of their value, falling $3.41 per
share to $3.29 in unusually heavy trading. Four days later, Grant
Thornton LLP resigned its position as the Company's independent
auditor.

For more details, contact Linda Flood, Director of Shareholder
Relations by Mail: 10 East 40th Street, New York, New York 10016 by
Phone: 800-217-1522 or 212-779-1414 by E-mail: MHUT@bernlieb.com or
visit the firm's Web site: http://www.bernlieb.com   


METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Bernstein Liebhard Files Securities Suit in WA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP initiated a securities class action
on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Metawave Corporation
(NASDAQ: MTWV) between April 25, 2001 and March 14, 2002, inclusive, in
the United States District Court, Western District of Washington
against the Company, Robert H. Hunsberger, and Stuart W. Fuhlendorf.

The complaint charges the defendants with violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.  The suit alleges that during the class period,
defendants caused the Company's shares to trade at artificially
inflated levels through the issuance of false and misleading financial
statements.

As a result of this inflation, the Company was able to complete private
placement offerings, raising net proceeds of $30 million during the
class period.  On March 14, 2002, just months after the last offering
was completed, the Company revealed that its FY 2001 results were false
when issued. The stock dropped below $1 per share on this news.

For more information, contact Ms. Linda Flood, Director of Shareholder
Relations by Mail: 10 East 40th Street, New York, New York 10016 by
Phone: 800-217-1522 or 212-779-1414 by E-mail: MTWV@bernlieb.com or
visit the firm's Web site: http://www.bernlieb.com.


METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Hagens Berman Commences Securities Suit in WA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hagens Berman LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Western District of Washington on behalf
of all purchases of Metawave Communications Corporation (Nasdaq:MTWV)
common stock during the period from April 24, 2001, through March 14,
2002.

The suit charges the Company as well as its chief executive officer and
chief financial officer, with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The violations, as the complaint
alleges, stem from the issuance of allegedly false and misleading
financial statements and financial projections during the class period,
which had the effect of artificially inflating the price of the
Company's shares.

On March 14, 2002, after the close of the markets, the Company issued a
press release disclosing a number of surprises concerning the company,
including:

     (1) that it would restate its 2001 earnings, reducing revenue by
         $5 million to $7 million out of the $43.6 million of total
         revenue previously reported, a change of 11% to 15%, because
         of "unauthorized commitments" made to customers in Asia;

     (2) that it would terminate its SpotLight GSM product line due to
         "insufficient customer demand;"

     (3) that it would close its Taiwan facilities, cut its Chinese
         operation and reduce its United States workforce by 42% in an
         effort to lower operating expenses;
    
     (4) that the restructuring would result in a first-quarter (2002
         charge of $23 million to cover inventory and accounts
         receivable write-offs, employee severance, facilities
         closures, and other shutdown costs);

     (5) that it had fired its Chief Financial Officer, Stuart
         Fuhlendorf; and

     (6) that it had revised its first-quarter 2002 revenue guidance to
         about $6 million, well below the $8.5 million to $9 million
         range Wall Street had been led to expect for the Company's  
         first-quarter (2002) revenue.

After disclosure that the Company's current financial results would not
be as expected, and that previously reported financial results would be
even lower than reported, Company shares swiftly lost more than 70% of
their value.

For more details, contact Steve W. Berman or Dawn Van Diest by Phone:
206-623-7292 or 888-381-2889 or by E-mail: Dawn@Hagens-Berman.com.  


METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Levy Levy Lodges Securities Suit in W.D. WA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Levy and Levy PC initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Western District of Washington on behalf
of purchasers of Metawave Communications Corporation (Nasdaq: MTWV)
publicly traded securities during the period between April 25, 2001 and
March 14, 2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The
complaint alleges that during the class period, defendants caused the
Company's shares to trade at artificially inflated levels through the
issuance of false and misleading financial statements.

As a result of this inflation, the Company was able to complete private
placement offerings, raising net proceeds of $30 million during the
class period. On March 14, 2002, just months after the last offering
was completed, the Company revealed that its FY 2001 results were false
when issued. The stock dropped below $1 per share on this news.

For more information, contact Stephen G. Levy by Mail: One Stamford
Plaza, 263 Tresser Blvd., 9th Floor, Stamford, CT 06901 by Phone:
866-338-3674 (toll free) or 203-564-1920 by E-mail: LLNYCT@aol.com or
visit the firm's Web site: http://www.levylawfirm.com


METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Abbey Gardy Launches Securities Suit in WA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbey Gardy, LLP lodged a securities class action against Metawave
Communications Corporation (Nasdaq:MTWV) in the United States District
Court for the Western District of Washington, on behalf of all persons
or entities who purchased the Company's common stock during the period
from April 24, 2001 through March 14, 2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleges that during the class
period, defendants caused the Company's shares to trade at artificially
inflated levels through the issuance of false and misleading financial
statements.

As a result of this inflation, the Company was able to complete private
placement offerings, raising net proceeds of $30 million during the
class period.

On March 14, 2002, after the close of the markets, the Company issued a
press release disclosing several issues concerning the company,
including:

     (1) that the company would be restating its 2001 earnings,
         reducing revenue by $5 million to $7 million out of the $43.6
         million of total revenue previously reported, a change of 11%
         to 15%, because of "unauthorized commitments" made to
         customers in Asia;

     (2) that the company would terminate its SpotLight GSM product
         line due to "insufficient customer demand;"

     (3) that it would close it Taiwan facilities, cut its Chinese
         operation and reduce its United States workforce by 42% in an
         effort to lower operating expenses;

     (4) that the restructuring would result in a first quarter (2002)
         charge of $23 million to cover inventory and accounts
         receivable write-offs, employee severance, facilities closures
         and other shutdown costs;

     (5) that the company had fired their Chief Financial Officer,
         Stuart Fuhlendorf; and

     (6) that the company had revised its first quarter 2002 revenue
         guidance to about $6 million, well below the $8.5 million to
         $9 million range Wall Street had been led to expect for the
         Company's first quarter (2002) revenue.

After disclosure of this news, Company shares lost more than 70% of
their value.

For further information, contact Nancy Kaboolian or Jennifer Haas by
Phone: 800-889-3701 or by E-mail: JHaas@abbeygardy.com.  


METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Cohen Milstein Lodges Securities Suit in WA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, PLLC initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Western District of
Washington on behalf of persons who purchased Metawave Communications
Corp. (Nasdaq:MTWV) common stock during the period April 25, 2001
through March 14, 2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleges that during the class
period, defendants issued a series of materially false and misleading
statements, which had the effect of artificially inflating the price of
the Company's common stock.

In particular, the complaint alleges that, during the class period,
defendants caused the Company's shares to trade at artificially
inflated levels through the issuance of false and misleading financial
statements.  As a result of this inflation, the Company was able to
complete private placement offerings, raising net proceeds of $30
million.

On March 14, 2002, however, the Company revealed that its FY 2001
results were false and that it would restate those results.  Company
common stock, which had traded at over $6 per share during the class
period, sunk below $1 per share on this news.

For more information, contact Murray T.S. Lewis or Clarence D. Williams
by Mail: 999 Third Avenue, Suite 3600, Seattle, WA 98104 by Phone:
206-521-0080 or 888-240-1238 by Fax: 206-521-0166 by E-mail:
mlewis@cmht.com or cwilliams@cmht.com


NASHUA CORPORATION: Sued For Federal Securities Violations in IL Court
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nashua Corporation faces a consolidated class action pending in the
Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois against the Company, certain of
its officers and directors and its underwriters on behalf of all
purchasers of the Company's common stock between May 24, 1996 and and
July 9, 1996.

The suit alleges that, in connection with the Company's initial
public offering, the defendants issued materially false and
misleading statements and omitted the disclosure of material
facts regarding, in particular, certain significant customer
relationships.

In October 1997, the court, on motion by the defendants, dismissed the
consolidated suit.  The plaintiffs filed a second amended suit alleging
similar claims as the first complaint.  In May 6, 1998, the court, on
motion by the defendants, dismissed with prejudice the second amended
suit.

The plaintiffs appealed the dismissal, and in November 1999, the
appeals court reversed the circuit court's ruling, saying that the
second amended suit represented a valid claim.  The suit was sent back
to the circuit court for further proceedings.

The Company then filed a petition with the Supreme Court of Illinois,
asking the high court to determine whether the circuit court or the
appellate court is correct.  The Supreme Court denied the petition and
sent the case to the Circuit Court for trial. Discovery is in process.

The Company believes that the lawsuit is without merit and will
continue to defend itself in this matter.


NEWPOWER HOLDINGS: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York on behalf of shareholders who acquired the common stock of
NewPower Holdings, Inc. (NYSE:NPW) between October 5, 2000 and December
5, 2001, inclusive against the Company and certain of its officers and
directors.

The action alleges that Defendants violated federal securities laws by
issuing false and misleading information regarding the Company's risk
relating to its affiliation with Enron Energy Services, Inc.

For more information, contact Charles J. Piven, PA by Mail: The World
Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore,
Maryland 21202 by Phone: 410-986-0036 by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com


PNC FINANCIAL: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in W.D. PA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard and Lifshitz LLP initiated a securities class action
on behalf all persons who acquired PNC Financial Services Group, Inc.
securities between July 19, 2001 through January 29, 2002, in the
United States District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania against
the Company and:

     (1) Ernst & Young, LLP,

     (2) James E. Rohr, and

     (3) Robert L. Haunschild

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 a series of material misrepresentations to the
market between July 19, 2001 and January 29, 2002, thereby artificially
inflating the price of Company securities.

The suit alleges that, throughout the class period, defendants issued
multiple press releases reporting the Company's quarterly financial
performance, and filed reports confirming such performance with the
United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

These reports positively portrayed the Company's performance during the
class period. As alleged in the complaint, however, these statements
were materially false and misleading because the Company was engaged in
improper and/or suspect accounting practices which affected the
accuracy of its financial results and that, contrary to the statements
in documents filed with the SEC during the class period, the Company's
financial statements issued during the class period were not prepared
in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

On January 29, 2002, the Company issued a press release announcing that
the Federal Reserve Board had raised concerns about accounting
inaccuracies in its financial statements for the second, third, and
fourth quarters of fiscal year 2001.  Specifically, the Company had
failed to consolidate preferred interests in three subsidiaries.

As a result, the Company announced that it would restate its earnings
for the second and third quarters of fiscal year 2001 and revise its
fourth quarter earnings for the same year, resulting in year-end
earnings being reduced $155 million to approximately $412 million, or
$1.38 a share.

The Company also revealed that these accounting adjustments would cause
the Company's non-performing assets to rise by $125 million to $393
million.  Additionally, the Company stated that the Federal Reserve
Board and SEC were making inquiries about its transactions and that the
Company would cooperate with the investigations.

In response to these disclosures, Company shares fell $5.79, or nearly
10%, to close at $56.08 on extremely heavy trading volume of 6,305,100
shares.

For more information, contact Ms. Linda Flood, Director of Shareholder
Relations by Mail: 10 East 40th Street, New York, New York 10016 by
Phone: 800-217-1522 or 212-779-1414 by E-mail: PNC@bernlieb.com or
visit the Web site: http://www.bernlieb.com.


WILLIAMS COMPANIES: Stull Stull Commences Securities Suit in N.D. OK
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Stull Stull and Brody initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, against
Williams Companies, Inc. (NYSE:WMB), Williams Communications Group,
Inc. (NYSE:WCG), and certain individuals associated with those
companies, on behalf of purchasers of WMB or WCG securities between
July 24, 2000 and January 29, 2002, inclusive.

The suit charges defendants with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleges that
defendants issued materially false and misleading statements and failed
to disclose material information to their shareholders regarding the
spin-off of WCG from WMB, the accounting and financial impact of the
contingent liabilities retained by WMB, and the nature of the assets
and liabilities of WCG, causing the common stock of both companies to
trade at artificially inflated prices.

For more details, contact Tzivia Brody by Mail: 6 east 45th Street, New
York NY 10017 by Phone: 800-337-4983 by Fax: 212-490-2022 or by E-mail:
SSBNY@aol.com.


                               *********


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  * * *