/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/020327.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Wednesday, March 27, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 61 Headlines CANADA: Insurance Suits Could Cause Motorists To Pay Higher Legal Fees CANADA: Appellate Court Upholds Paybacks to Mentally Disabled Veterans DYCO OIL: Lessor Alleges Fraudulent Handling of Gas Purchase Contracts MICROSOFT CORPORATION: States To Present Witnesses In Antitrust Suit MOHAWK INDUSTRIES: Works Out Settlement For CA Carpet Antitrust Suits ORKIN EXTERMINATING: Customers Sue For Breach of Contract In Alabama PADGETT-THOMPSON INC.: Trainer Sues Over Employee/Consultant Status PACKAGING CORPORATION: Trial in Linerboard Antitrust Suit Scheduled PHILIP MORRIS: Jury Awards $150M To Plaintiffs In Light Cigarettes Suit SAFEWAY INC: CA High Court Dismisses Antitrust Suit Against Subsidiary SAFEWAY INC.: Subsidiary Faces Antitrust Suit Over Milk Prices in IL SLAVE LABOR: Three Financial Firms Face Slave Labor Suit in New York Securities Fraud ANDRX CORPORATION: Schoengold Sporn Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY ARTHUR ANDERSEN: Judge Orders Mediation Route For Enron Civil Cases ADVANCED FIBER: Asks California Court To Dismiss Securities Fraud Suits ADVANCED SWITCHING: Charles Piven Initiates Securities Suit in E.D. VA BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB: Milberg Weiss Launches Securities Suit in S.D. NY BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB: Charles Piven Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB: Bernard Gross Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY COMPUTER ASSOCIATES: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in E.D. NY CORNELL COMPANIES: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in S.D. TX CORNING INC.: Charles Piven Commences Securities Fraud Suit in W.D. NY GILAT SATELLITE: Leo Desmond Commences Securities Suit in E.D. NY GILAT SATELLITE: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in E.D. NY HEARTLAND ADVISORS: Heartland, Investors Reach $14 M Partial Settlement HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL: Four Execs Dismissed From Securities Suit HUB GROUP: Charles Piven Initiates Securities Suit in N.D. Illinois LUMENIS LTD.: Charles Piven Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY MEASUREMENT SPECIALTIES: Shalov Stone Lodges Securities Suit in NJ MEASUREMENT SPECIALTIES: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in NJ MEDI-HUT CO.: Bernstein Liebhard Lodges Securities Suit in New Jersey MEDI-HUT CO.: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey METAWAVE CORPORATION: Charles Piven Launches Securities Suit in W.D. WA NEWPOWER HOLDINGS: Sued For Securities Act Violations in S.D. New York PEDIATRIX MEDICAL: Fairness Hearing For Securities Suit Set May 2002 RARE MEDIUM: Moves To Dismiss Consolidated Securities Suit in Delaware SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in E.D. NY ********* CANADA: Insurance Suits Could Cause Motorists To Pay Higher Legal Fees ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Insurance Bureau warned Canadian motorists that the costs of excessive legal bills may be passed on to them, if their class actions asking automobile insurers to pay back drivers who wrecked their cars as far back as 1975 succeed, the National Post Online reports. Many class actions were commenced after the Ontario Court of Appeals ruled that the insurer is liable for "actual cash value of the automobile" not the value minus the deductible, which varies anywhere from several hundred dollars to thousands per vehicle. Most insurance policies contain language that limits the insurer's liability to a period of one year, but the appellate court rejected this. The National Post reports that if the suits are successful, a million Canadians from Ontario, Alberta, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, Prince Edward island are eligible for refunds. This could end up costing the industry, and, by extension, car owners across Canada, "hundreds of millions of dollars," said Randall Bundus, the bureau's general counsel. "It could be very, very expensive," he added. The suits must still be certified as class actions, but it's unlikely that a judge would refuse certification, given that the appeals court in Ontario has already endorsed it. CANADA: Appellate Court Upholds Paybacks to Mentally Disabled Veterans ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Canadian government has been ordered to pay back about $4 billion denied over the years to thousands of mentally-disabled war veterans, the St. Petersburg Times recently reported. The Ontario Court of Appeals ruling upheld an earlier court's decision, rendered in a class action, finding the government liable to about 10,000 former soldiers whose finances were managed by the Department of Veterans Affairs between 1919 and 1990. It was alleged in the lawsuit, filed in 1999, that the money held by the government for the mentally disabled veterans was never properly invested, billions in interest never paid and $50 million in pensions and hospital allowances unjustly taken back. Attorney Peter Sengbusch called it a "victory in a battle that we have fought for several years and that veterans and their families have fought for decades." Roy Bailey of the Canadian Alliance Party said it is an "historic wrong" and urged the Liberal government to pay up immediately. The government has 60 days to decide whether to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada. DYCO OIL: Lessor Alleges Fraudulent Handling of Gas Purchase Contracts ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dyco Oil and Gas Program 1978-1 faces a class action pending in the District Couft of Roger Mills County, Oklahoma filed by Walter K. Spurlin, LLC, on behalf of all individuals who leased Oklahoma mineral leases to the Company, which were subject to certain gas purchase contracts. The Company allegedly amended or terminated certain gas purchase contracts and fraudulently concealed the settlement of these contracts. The plaintiff, a lessor of the Spurlin No. 1-23 well, alleged that the Company's actions resulted in a breach of the express and implied obligations of the leases and reckless indifference and/or actual fraud on behalf of the Company. The Company answered the suit on April 1998, denying all allegations, and asserting a number of affirmative defenses, including failure to state a claim and running of the statute of limitations. The Company also said that the plaintiff's claims were contrary to the Oklahoma Supreme Court's decision in Roye Realty and Developing, Inc. v. Watson, 949 P.2d 1208 (Okla. 1996) and that the Company acted as a prudent operator and in accordance with the lease terms. The court certified the suit as a class action in February 2000. The Company has filed an interlocutory appeal of this order which is currently pending before the Oklahoma Supreme Court. MICROSOFT CORPORATION: States To Present Witnesses In Antitrust Suit -------------------------------------------------------------------- The nine states dissenting to Microsoft Corporation's settlement of an antitrust class action with the US Department of Justice will present three witnesses this week, attempting to convince Federal Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly that the Company was using "anti-competitive" practices to crush competition in technology markets, the Associated Press reports. The witnesses include: (1) Carl Ledbetter - Novell, Inc. vice president, who plans to say the Company abused industry standards for competitive gain and that the states' penalties would force the Company to disclose technical information that would help computers communicate with each other. (2) Steve McGeady - a former Intel Corporation executive, who will testify that the technical disclosure will not compromise security, as the Company claims; and (3) Michael Mace - a top Palm, Inc. executive who will allege that the Company has tried to block Palm's development by blocking access to its development tools. Last year, the Company inked a settlement agreement with the Justice Department and nine states to settle a federal class action charging the Company with monopolistic behavior and charging customers more for Windows software. Nine other states dissented to the settlement, saying it was not harsh enough and it would even allow the Company to use the settlement to further entrench their hold on the technology market. The nine states seek harsher penalties in order to restore competition and break the Company's Windows monopoly. According to Associated Press, the nine states want the Company to create a stripped-down version of its flagship Windows software that could incorporate competitors' features, and to divulge the blueprints for its Internet Explorer browser. As the nine remaining states pursue the next phase of the case, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly refused in the first week of testimony to rule on a central issue, whether the penalties should cover issues outside the desktop computer operating system market on which the first antitrust case was based. Company spokesman Jim Desler told AP that Microsoft was pleased with the first week of testimony and will work to convince the judge that the proposed penalties go too far. MOHAWK INDUSTRIES: Works Out Settlement For CA Carpet Antitrust Suits --------------------------------------------------------------------- Mohawk Industries, Inc. is in the process of settling three class actions suits pending in the Superior Court of the State of California, City and County of San Francisco. Two suits were brought on behalf of a purported class of indirect purchasers of polypropylene carpet in the State of California and seek damages for alleged violations of California antitrust and unfair competition laws. The third suit was filed on behalf of a purported class based on indirect purchasers of nylon carpet in the State of California and alleges violations of California antitrust and unfair competition laws. The Company has reached an agreement to settle the lawsuits and is in the process of finalizing documentation to be presented to the court for approval. ORKIN EXTERMINATING: Customers Sue For Breach of Contract In Alabama -------------------------------------------------------------------- Orkin Exterminating Company, Inc. faces a class action pending in the United States District Court of Houston County, Alabama, seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief for alleged breach of contract arising out of alleged missed or inadequate re-inspections. The attorneys for the plaintiffs contend that the case is suitable for a class action and the court has ruled that the plaintiffs would be permitted to pursue a class action against the Company. The Company believes this case to be without merit and intends to defend itself vigorously at trial. At this time, the final outcome of the litigation cannot be determined. The Company is confident that the ultimate resolution of this action will not have a material adverse effect on its financial position, results of operations, or liquidity. PADGETT-THOMPSON INC.: Trainer Sues Over Employee/Consultant Status ------------------------------------------------------------------- Padgett-Thompson, Inc. faces a class action suit, which could have far- reaching effects on companies that classify trainers as contractors rather than employees, the Associated Press reported recently. The trainers provide seminars for Leawood, Kansas-based Company. Besides the Company, the suit names American Management Association International of New York as a defendant. The Company is a division of American Management. The suit, if granted class-action status on behalf of current and former trainers at the Company, could encompass a class of hundreds. The lawsuit, which was filed in federal court in Kansas City, by former trainer Keith Stubblefield of Liberty, claims trainers are entitled to the same benefits as the Company's employees, including savings and investment plans, insurance, sick leave and vacation pay. Supporting this claim is the allegation in Mr. Stubblefield's complaint that the Company "so tightly controlled" the trainers that they "are, in reality, employees." Indicia of the tight control, according to the lawsuit, is the fact that the Company: (1) provided the trainers all their materials and equipment; (2) restricted them from engaging their own assistants; (3) reimbursed them for airfare, rental car, seminar room and hotel expenses; and (4) required them to attend dress rehearsals at the Company before they were allowed to present seminars. Mr. Stubblefield also contends that the IRS considered him an employee for federal income tax purposes after the Company refused to withhold his income taxes. If Mr. Stubblefield prevails, not only could the case cost the Company millions of dollars, but also it could have far- reaching effects on other seminar companies, several of which are based in the Kansas City area. All of them classify their trainers as independent contractors. Whether a worker is classified as an independent contractor or an employee is an increasingly critical - and often costly - workplace issue. "We shall have to see what benefits were provided to the employees and determine their value, then determine what benefits were denied to the trainers," said one of Mr. Stubblefield's lawyers, John F. Edgar. "But we are probably talking about an extensive amount." Microsoft Corporation, for example, settled a class action on behalf of thousands of contingent workers for around $100 million. "Potentially for employers, the misclassification of employees as independent contractors is a huge monster hiding in the closet," said Kansas City employment lawyer, Michael Blumenthal, who is not involved in the case. Many employers classify workers as independent contractors to avoid the minimum-wage or overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the IRS' requirements for employee benefits and payroll taxes and the laws governing discrimination in the workplace. The IRS looks at 20 factors in order to determine whether a worker is an independent contractor, while the Department of Labor has adopted a seven-point test. US Senator Kit Bond, a Missouri Republican, has introduced legislation to allow consideration of fewer criteria. Raelene Dietz, Padgett president, said she had not seen the lawsuit. However, she said, the issue of employee versus independent contractor always has been contentious in the industry, and "we work very hard at keeping the trainers as independent contractors, because that is part of the lifeblood of the seminar business." PACKAGING CORPORATION: Trial in Linerboard Antitrust Suit Scheduled ------------------------------------------------------------------- Trial in the consolidated antitrust class action against Packaging Corporation of America, Inc. is set to commence in January 2003. The suit alleges civil violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. The suit names the Company as a defendant based solely on the allegation that it is successor to the interests of Tenneco Packaging, Inc. and Tenneco, Inc., both of which were also named as defendants in the suit, along with nine other linerboard manufacturers. The suit alleges that the defendants, during the period starting October 1, 1993 through November 30, 1995, conspired to limit the supply of linerboard, and that the purpose and effect of the alleged conspiracy was artificially to increase prices of corrugated containers. The suit was filed on behalf of all persons in the United States who purchased corrugated containers directly from any defendant during the above period. The court granted class certification on September 2001, but modified the proposed class to exclude those purchasers whose prices were "not tied to the price of linerboard." Defendants have appealed the class certification ruling, and that appeal is currently pending before the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. The Company believes that the plaintiffs' allegations have no merit and intends to defend against the suit vigorously. The Company also expressed confidence that the pending litigation will not have a material effect on its financial position or operations. PHILIP MORRIS: Jury Awards $150M To Plaintiffs In Light Cigarettes Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Philip Morris Companies recently suffered its fifth consecutive courtroom loss on the West Coast, when a jury in Portland, Oregon, ordered the nation's largest tobacco company to pay nearly $150.2 million in damages in the case of a woman who died of lung cancer after smoking low-tar cigarettes, The Wall Street Journal recently reported. The successful strategy of plaintiff's lawyers has its ramifications for class actions, three class actions have been brought in three states on behalf of light cigarette smokers. After five days of deliberations, the 12-member state-court jury said that the Company made false claims that "light" cigarettes were safer than regular ones. The jury also found that the Company's Merit cigarettes, which the woman, Michelle Schwarz, smoked for decades before her 1999 death, were "defective and unreasonably dangerous." The jurors assessed damages of $168,514.22 as compensation for the harm Mrs. Schwarz suffered from smoking. They also levied a punitive award of $150 million. Under Oregon law, 60 percent of punitive damages are paid to a state fund for crime victims. The rest goes to plaintiffs and their lawyers. The verdict was the second straight loss for the Company in Oregon. In 1999, a jury in the same Portland courthouse where the Schwarz case was tried hit the Company with an $80.3 million verdict. A judge later reduced the award to $30.3 million. The case is on appeal. The Schwarz verdict also follows three defeats in California. The losses are a significant, and potentially costly, exception to cigarette makers' generally winning litigation record elsewhere. The Company said it will appeal "very promptly" if the judge does not overturn the verdict. Judges need to tell juries to "try the case before them and not make social policy," said William S. Ohlemeyer, the Company's associate general counsel. Mr. Ohlemeyer said Philip Morris did not get a fair trial, pointing to the fact that documents that had been ruled inadmissible as evidence were inadvertently given to the jurors during their deliberations. Other documents, he said, had been marked in a way designed to draw jurors' attention to certain passages. Mr. Ohlemeyer also said the Company would ask the judge to reduce the size of the punitive award, which he said was "clearly excessive" and "obviously unreasonable." Under the law, punitive damages must bear a reasonable relationship to compensatory damages. Punitive-damage awards in all of the Company's previous West Coast cases have been reduced substantially by judges, and this one is likely to be as well, according to analysts. The jury sent a message that "low-tar cigarettes are a fraud and that the cigarette companies have not conducted themselves the way a reliable business should," said Lawrence Wobbrock, the lead plaintiff's attorney. Mr. Wobbrock focused on the way Philip Morris marketed the low-tar cigarettes, the first time this issue has played such a prominent role in an individual case. Mr. Wobbrock, 53, trying his first tobacco case, argued that Philip Morris tried to persuade smokers that light cigarettes were less dangerous and, therefore, an alternative to quitting. Company lawyers countered that Mrs. Schwarz, who started smoking while a nursing student and then married a doctor, was well aware of the health risks of cigarettes. Besides, said Mr. Ohlemeyer, the Company never said Merits were any less dangerous than regular cigarettes. "The warning on Merit was the same as on Benson & Hedges and every other pack of cigarettes," he said. For a long time, the US Surgeon General and others encouraged smokers to switch to lower tar cigarettes, but public-health experts now say light cigarettes are just as dangerous as full-flavor ones. The National Cancer Institute last November published a report criticizing the marketing of "light" and "ultralight" cigarettes as deceptive. As a result, more cases are being brought on behalf of light-cigarette smokers who allege they were misled. The Company is a defendant in three such cases that have been certified as class actions in Massachusetts, Illinois and Florida. The most troublesome legal problem for the industry, however, analysts say, is its losing record on the West Coast, especially in California. The largest of the industry's three straight losses in the Golden State came last summer, when a Los Angeles jury awarded more than $3 billion to a former smoker with lung cancer. A judge later reduced the award to $105.5 million. All of the California verdicts are being appealed. "Clearly, the strategic changes that Philip Morris has made to the defense of these cases has to date amounted to naught," said Martin Feldman, a tobacco analyst at Salomon Smith Barney in New York. SAFEWAY INC: CA High Court Dismisses Antitrust Suit Against Subsidiary ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The California Supreme Court affirmed a trial court's decision dismissing the class action charging Safeway, Inc. subsidiary Vons Stores with violating the state's antitrust laws. The suit was commenced in September 1996 in the Superior Court of San Diego County, California against Vons and two other grocery store chains operating in Southern California. The suit alleged that the defendants conspired to fix the retail price of eggs in southern California, in violation of the California Cartwright Act, and that they engaged in unfair competition. The court subsequently certified a class of retail purchasers of white chicken eggs by the dozen in southern California from September 1992 to October 1997. A jury trial commenced in July 1999, and plaintiffs asked the jury to award damages against the Company (before trebling) of $36.8 million. However, in September 1999, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants. The plaintiffs then filed a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial, which the court denied. The court also denied their motion for judgment on the unfair competition claim. The plaintiffs appealed this decision to the California Court of Appeals, but in November 2001, the appellate court affirmed the decision of the trial court. On January 23, 2002, the California Supreme Court denied plaintiffs' petition for review, and the case is now terminated. SAFEWAY INC.: Subsidiary Faces Antitrust Suit Over Milk Prices in IL -------------------------------------------------------------------- Discovery is proceeding in a class action against Safeway, Inc. subsidiary Dominick's filed in Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, alleging, among other things, that Dominick's conspired with other retailers to fix the retail price of milk in nine Illinois counties in the Chicago area, in violation of the Illinois Antitrust Act. The suit was commenced on behalf of all persons residing in the nine-county area who purchased milk from the defendants' retail stores in these counties. In December 2001, the court denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment, which sought a dismissal of the entire action. In January 2002, the defendants moved the court to certify that decision for immediate interlocutory appeal. That motion is currently pending. Discovery in the matter is continuing, and no trial date has been set. The Company believes that the allegations in the complaint are without merit, and plans to defend this action vigorously. SLAVE LABOR: Three Financial Firms Face Slave Labor Suit in New York -------------------------------------------------------------------- Three financial institutions face a possible class action to be filed in the US District Court in New York on behalf of all African-Americans who can claim slaves as forebears, Reuters reports. The suit will name as defendants: (1) Aetna Inc., (2) CSX Corporation, and (3) FleetBoston Financial Corporation. The suit alleges that the defendants unjustly profited from slavery. Aetna, the nation's largest health insurer, has acknowledged issuing life insurance policies on slaves, naming their owners as beneficiaries, while Fleet's earliest predecessor bank was founded by John Brown, a notorious Rhode Island slave trader, and CSX owns early rail lines built by slaves, according to a USA Today report. The suit seeks reparations for unpaid slave labor and a share of corporate profits derived from slavery. CSX spokeswoman Kathy Burns told USA Today there was "no legal basis" for the lawsuit. "It is an unfortunate misuse of the legal system to attempt to address issues well over a century old at the expense of today's workers and stockholders," she said. Aetna said in a company statement that it had already expressed "deep regret" for issuing slave policies, while Fleet declined comment. Securities Fraud ANDRX CORPORATION: Schoengold Sporn Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY -------------------------------------------------------------------- Shoengold & Sporn, PC initiated a securities 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 New York, 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, the Company's 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 details, contact Jay P. Saltzman by Phone: 866-348-7700 by Fax: 212-267-8137 or by E-mail: Shareholderrelations@spornlaw.com ARTHUR ANDERSEN: Judge Orders Mediation Route For Enron Civil Cases ------------------------------------------------------------------- US District Judge Melinda Harmon, in Houston, ordered the parties suing Arthur Andersen LLP over the Enron Corporation debacle, to join with their attorneys in an attempt to resolve the civil lawsuits against the auditing firm through non-binding mediation. Judge Harmon, who also is presiding over the criminal case against Andersen, appointed Eric D. Green, a Boston University law professor, who helped craft a settlement of antitrust charges against Microsoft Corporation, to oversee the talks. The order covers two pending class actions and potential claims against the firm, being considered by Enron and the Company's creditors. The judge's order does not require the SEC to be a part of the mediation. ADVANCED FIBER: Asks California Court To Dismiss Securities Fraud Suits ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Advanced Fiber Communications, Inc. asked the US District Court for the Northern District of California to dismiss a consolidated class action charging the Company and certain of its current and former officers and directors of violations of state and federal securities laws. The amended consolidated suit arose from several class actions commenced in July 1998 alleging various federal and state securities law violations on behalf of purchasers of the Company's stock for the period March 25, 1997 through and including June 30, 1998. These suits were ordered consolidated in November 1998. The consolidated suit was amended three times, but the court dismissed the three amended suits, giving plaintiffs leave to file a fourth amended suit, which they did in July 2001. On February 15, 2002, the defendants again moved to dismiss the fourth suit. Limited discovery has occurred. Based on current information, the Company believes the lawsuits are without merit and that it has meritorious defenses to the actions. Accordingly, the Company is vigorously defending the litigation. ADVANCED SWITCHING: Charles Piven Initiates Securities Suit in E.D. VA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA commenced a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, on behalf of shareholders who acquired the common stock of Advanced Switching Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: ASCX) between October 4, 2000 and February 12, 2002, inclusive, against the Company, five of its principal officers and/or directors and Morgan Stanley Dean Witter. The suit alleges that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing false and misleading information regarding the availability of its A-4500 product. 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 or by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB: Milberg Weiss Launches Securities Suit in S.D. NY ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities class action on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. (NYSE: BMY) between September 25, 2001 and March 19, 2002, inclusive, in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York against the Company and Peter R. Dolan. 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 September 25, 2001 and March 19, 2002, thereby artificially inflating the price of Company securities. Specifically, as alleged in the complaint, defendants knew or recklessly disregarded that the Company's clinical trial of VANLEV, a new drug for the treatment of hypertension, that was completed in September, demonstrated that VANLEV users experienced a higher risk of a side effect known as angiodema and that it was not shown to be superior to a cheaper generic drug already on the market. When this information was belatedly disclosed to the market on March 20, 2002, the price of Company shares dropped 15.6%, or $7.57, to close at $41.08. For more information, contact Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman by Phone: 800-320-5081 by E-mail: BMYcase@milbergNY.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.milberg.com BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB: Charles Piven Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY -------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA lodged a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of shareholders who acquired Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (NYSE:BMY) securities between September 19, 2001 and January 4, 2002, inclusive against the Company and certain of its officers. The suit alleges that a press release issued on December 28, 2001 disclosed that the FDA had refused to accept the application for Erbitux. The action further alleges that the FDA repeatedly advised of problems with the Erbitux clinical trials during the Class Period. After this disclosure on January 4, 2002, the price of Bristol-Myers shares dropped. 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 or by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB: Bernard Gross Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY -------------------------------------------------------------------- Bernard M. Gross PC initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of all persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. (NYSE: BMY) between September 25, 2001 and March 19, 2002, inclusive. The suit charges the Company and Peter R. Dolan, its Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the Company issued materially false and misleading statements regarding its OCTAVE* study of VANLEV (omapatrilat), a novel cardiovascular compound for the treatment of hypertension. In April 2000, the Company voluntarily withdrew its New Drug Application for VANLEV (omapatrilat) from the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA). As a result of the withdraw of the VANLEV NDA, the Company announced that it would commence a 25,000 patient clinical trial of VANLEV for the treatment of hypertension, known as OCTAVE*, to determine the incidence and frequency of the deadly side effect known as angioedema. The market eagerly awaited the results of the OCTAVE* study to learn whether VANLEV for the treatment of hypertension would be a blockbuster drug for BMY. Finally, on September 25, 2001 defendants announced that the review and analysis of the data from the OCTAVE* study of VANLEV had been completed. On December 14, 2001, the Company submitted a New Drug Application with the FDA for VANLEV. On March 20, 2002, defendants revealed that they had known since September 25, 2001 but refused to disclose, the negative data from the OCTAVE* study of VANLEV for the treatment of hypertension. The data from the OCTAVE* study showed that, "there was a higher risk of a side effect known as angioedema observed in VANLEV-treated patients." After describing the details of the incidence of angioedema found in the data, defendants disclosed that, "the overall incidence of angioedema over 24 weeks was 2.17 with VANLEV and 0.68% with enalapril." Defendants also disclosed at the same time that the results of the study of VANLEV for treatment of heart failure had failed to show that it was superior to a cheap generic drug already on the market. As a result of these materially false and misleading statements, among others, plaintiff alleges that the price of the Company's common stock was artificially inflated during the class period. For more details, contact Deborah R. Gross, Susan Gross or Tina Moukoulis by Mail: 1515 Locust Street, 2nd Floor, Philadelphia, PA 19102 by Phone: 215-561-3600 or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.bernardmgross.com COMPUTER ASSOCIATES: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in E.D. NY ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on behalf of shareholders who acquired the common stock of Computer Associates International, Inc. (NYSE:CA) between May 28, 1999 through February 25, 2002, inclusive against the Company and certain of its officers and directors. The action alleges that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing false and misleading information regarding the Company's financial condition and revenue recognition. For more details, contact Charles J. Piven by Mail: The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202 by Phone: 410-986-0036 or by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com CORNELL COMPANIES: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in S.D. TX --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, on behalf of shareholders who acquired the common stock of Cornell Companies, Inc. (NYSE:CRN) between March 6, 2001 and March 5, 2002, inclusive against the Company and certain of its officers and directors. The action alleges that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing false and misleading information regarding the Company's financial condition. 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 or by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com CORNING INC.: Charles Piven Commences Securities Fraud Suit in W.D. NY ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York, on behalf of shareholders who acquired the common stock of Corning, Inc. (NYSE:GLW) between September 27, 2000 and July 10, 2001, inclusive against the Company and certain of its officers and directors. The action alleges that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing false and misleading information. The suit alleges that the Company misrepresented how robust the market was for its photonics products. In addition, the action alleges that on July 10, 2001, the Company announced a $5.1 billion charge attributable to its acquisitions of Pirelli and NetOptix, that it would write-off $300 million in excess and obsolete inventory and that it would close three plants and cut 1,000 jobs. For more details, contact Charles J. Piven by Mail: The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202 by Phone: 410-986-0036 or by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com GILAT SATELLITE: Leo Desmond Commences Securities Suit in E.D. NY ----------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Leo W. Desmond initiated a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who acquired Gilat Satellite Networks, Ltd. (Nasdaq:GILTF) securities between November 13, 2000 and October 2, 2001, inclusive, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York against the Company, Yoel Gat and Yoav Libovitch. 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: 800-892-4134, 561-712-8000 by E-Mail: Info@SecuritiesAttorney.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.SecuritiesAttorney.com GILAT SATELLITE: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in E.D. NY ------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA launched a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, on behalf of shareholders who acquired the common stock of Gilat Satellite Networks, Ltd. (NASDAQ: GILTF) between November 13, 2000 and October 2, 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 regarding the Company's financial condition. 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 or by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com HEARTLAND ADVISORS: Heartland, Investors Reach $14 M Partial Settlement ----------------------------------------------------------------------- A proposed $14 million partial settlement has been reached in a lawsuit filed by investors in two Heartland Advisors bond funds that were put into receivership this past year following steep portfolio write-downs, The Wall Street Journal reported recently. If approved by a federal judge in Milwaukee, the proposed settlement would resolve the investors' claims against the money-management firm and various fund officers, directors and portfolio managers. Money for the proposed settlement would come from closely-held Heartland and $10 million in insurance coverage held by the Company. The October 2000 write-downs of defaulted bonds owned by Heartland High-Yield Municipal Bond Fund and Heartland Short Duration High-Yield Municipal Fund caused one-day share-price drops of 70 percent and 44 percent respectively. The two funds and a third Heartland bond fund were put into receivership this past year at the request of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The class action alleged that the defendants failed to price accurately the funds' shares each day and failed to disclose fully the funds' high risk to shareholders. The Heartland defendants, also the subject of a continuing investigation by the SEC, "deny each and every allegation of the Complaint and do not admit any fault, wrongdoing or liability," according to a legal filing detailing the proposed settlement. At Heartland Advisors, which continues to run three stock funds and a bond fund, Chief Operating Officer Paul Beste said that the firm is "fully cooperating," with the SEC investigation. It is not clear how far the proposed $14 million settlement, which would be reduced by legal fees and expenses, would go to make up losses suffered by the Heartland fund investors. The lead plaintiffs in the suit estimated the damages caused to fund holders by the alleged misconduct at $87 million. However, the Heartland defendants rejected that figure, and instead estimated that even if all the allegations against them were found to be true, they could be held liable for no more than $29 million in damages. One defendant in the investor lawsuit that is not a party to the proposed settlement is PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, which served as auditor of the Heartland funds. PricewaterhouseCoopers was not involved in the settlement talks and filed a motion to dismiss the legal action, said PricewaterhouseCoopers spokesman David Nestor. "We feel that the complaint is totally without merit.and we intend to defend it vigorously," he said. HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL: Four Execs Dismissed From Securities Suit ------------------------------------------------------------------ The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey dismissed four of Honeywell International, Inc.'s current and former officers from the consolidated securities suit against the Company, filed on behalf of purchasers of its common stock from December 20,1999 to June 19,2000. The suit initially charged the Company and seven of its current and former officers with violating federal securities laws by purportedly making false and misleading statements and by failing to disclose material information concerning the Company's financial performance. These practices allegedly caused the value of the Company's stock to be artificially inflated. However, the Company, along with seven of its current and former officers and its board, has been named as defendants in a purported shareowner derivative action filed in the same court. The derivative suit alleges a single claim for breach of fiduciary duty based on nearly identical allegations to those set forth in the federal suit. The Company believes that there is no factual or legal basis for the allegations in the two suits. Although it is not possible at this time to predict the result of these cases, the Company expects to prevail. However, an adverse outcome could be material to the Company's consolidated financial position or results of operations. HUB GROUP: Charles Piven Initiates Securities Suit in N.D. Illinois ------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA commenced a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, on behalf of shareholders who acquired the common stock of Hub Group, Inc. (Nasdaq:HUBG; HUBGE) between April 21, 1999 and February 12, 2002, inclusive against the Company, certain of its officers and directors and Arthur Andersen, LLP. The suit alleges that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing false and misleading information regarding the Company's financial condition. The action alleges that on February 12, 2002, the Company announced accounting irregularities that it estimated caused it to overstate its earnings. For more details, contact Charles J. Piven by Mail: The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202 by Phone: 410-986-0036 or by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com LUMENIS LTD.: Charles Piven Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities 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 Lumenis, Ltd. (Nasdaq:LUME) between January 7, 2002 and February 28, 2002, inclusive against the Company and certain of its officers. The suit alleges that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing false and misleading information regarding the status of an SEC investigation. For more information, contact Charles J. Piven by Mail: The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202 by Phone: 410-986-0036 or by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com MEASUREMENT SPECIALTIES: Shalov Stone Lodges Securities Suit in NJ ------------------------------------------------------------------ Shalov Stone & Bonner LLP initiated a securities class action on behalf of all persons who purchased the securities of Measurement Specialties, Inc. (AMEX:MSS) in the period from July 31, 2001 to February 14, 2002, against the Company and: (1) Joseph Mallon, (2) Damon Germanton and (3) Kirk Dischino The suit, filed in the US District Court in New Jersey, alleges that the defendants made material misrepresentations and omissions of material facts concerning the Company's accounting, inventories, assets and business performance during the relevant time. According to the complaint, throughout the relevant time period, defendants overstated the Company's financial condition and stated that the company was enjoying strong growth and performing well. At the same time, however, the suit alleges that the defendants knew or recklessly disregarded that the company was overstating inventories and assets, among other things. On February 15, 2002, the Company disclosed that it expected to restate previously reported financial statements because of problems associated with its accounting. In addition, the Company disclosed that it had fired its then-Chief Financial Officer, Kirk Dischinoo. The Company's stock was halted from trading that day, and has remained halted for over a month, leaving investors with an illiquid and possibly worthless investment. Investors have been left with substantial damages as a result of the financial misstatements and apparent accounting scandal at the Company. The company has delayed the filing of its Report on Form 10-Q for the most recent fiscal quarter with the SEC. For more information, contact Ralph M. Stone by Mail: 485 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1000, New York, New York 10018 by Phone: 212-239-4340 by E-mail: rstone@lawssb.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.lawssb.com MEASUREMENT SPECIALTIES: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in NJ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of shareholders who acquired the common stock of Measurement Specialties, Inc. (AMEX:MSS) between August 1, 2001 and February 14, 2002, inclusive including all persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company's common stock pursuant, or traceable to, a public offering, which became effective on or about August 1, 2001. The suit alleges that the Company violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of false and misleading statements regarding the Company's financial condition and that the registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with the offering misrepresented and omitted material facts concerning its financial results. The case filed also alleges that the Company violated generally accepted accounting principles by improperly recognizing revenues and improperly overstating inventories and that its stock traded at artificially inflated levels during the proposed class period. For more details, contact Charles J. Piven by Mail: The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202 by Phone: 410-986-0036 or by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com MEDI-HUT CO.: Bernstein Liebhard Lodges Securities Suit in New Jersey --------------------------------------------------------------------- Bernstein Liebhard and Lifshitz LLP initiated a securities class action on behalf all persons who acquired Medi-Hut Co., Inc. securities between April 4, 2000 through February 4, 2002, in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Named as defendants in the complaint are the Company and: (1) Joseph A. Sanpietro, (2) Laurence M. Simon, (3) Robert Russo, (4) Vincent Sanpietro, (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. Plaintiff has alleged 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 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 Company revenues. Because Mr. 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 Corp. 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 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 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 or by E-mail: MHUT@bernlieb.com. MEDI-HUT CO.: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey ------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, on behalf of shareholders who acquired the common stock of Medi-Hut Co., Inc. (NASDAQ: MHUT) between April 4, 2000 and February 4, 2002, inclusive against the Company and certain of its officers and directors. The suit alleges that the defendants violated federal securities laws by withholding information regarding its sales to a customer in which a company officer owned a controlling interest. 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 or by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com METAWAVE CORPORATION: Charles Piven Launches Securities Suit in W.D. WA ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington on behalf of shareholders who acquired the common stock of Metawave Corporation (Nasdaq:MTWV) between April 25, 2001 and March 14, 2002, 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 regarding the Company's financial condition. The action alleges that the Company caused its shares to trade at artificially inflated levels and that its fiscal year 2001 results were false when originally reported. For more information, contact Charles J. Piven by Mail: The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202 by Phone: 410-986-0036 or by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com NEWPOWER HOLDINGS: Sued For Securities Act Violations in S.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Newpower Holdings, Inc. faces five securities class actions pending in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York against the Company and certain of its officers and directors on behalf of purchasers of the Company's common stock between October 5, 2000 and December 5, 2001. The suits allege violations of the federal securities laws as a result of alleged misrepresentations and omissions made in connection with the Company's October 5, 2001 initial public offering and allegedly false and misleading statements and omissions occurring during the class period. Only one suit has been served, and the Company has not yet prepared any pleadings or other documents in response to these lawsuits. The Company believes that the allegations made in the above-described lawsuits are without merit and intends to vigorously contest these claims. PEDIATRIX MEDICAL: Fairness Hearing For Securities Suit Set May 2002 -------------------------------------------------------------------- The fairness hearing for the settlement of a securities class action against Pediatrix Medical Group, Inc. is set for May 3,2002 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The suit was filed on behalf of purchasers of the Company's common stock or call options, or sellers of the Company's put options between March 31, 1997 and April 2, 1999, inclusive. Judge Jose A. Gonzalez will conduct the hearing to determine: (1) whether the proposed settlement for the principal amount of twelve million dollars ($12,000,000) cash, plus accrued interest, should be approved by the court as fair, reasonable and adequate; (2) whether an order and final judgment approving the settlement and dismissing this action on the merits and with prejudice should be entered; and (3) whether the application of plaintiffs' counsel for the payment of attorneys' fees and expenses are reasonable and should be approved. For more information, contact Michael J. Pucillo or Wendy H. Zoberman, of Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo by Mail: 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 1701, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.bermanesq.com RARE MEDIUM: Moves To Dismiss Consolidated Securities Suit in Delaware ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rare Medium Group, Inc. asked the Delaware Chancery Court to dismiss a consolidated securities class action filed by holders of the Company's common stock, challenging the planned merger with Motient Corporation that was terminated on October 1, 2001. The suit names the Company, members of its Board of Directors, holders of the Company's preferred stock, certain of their affiliates, and Motient as defendants. The lawsuit alleges that the defendants breached duties allegedly owed to the holders of the Company's common stock in connection with the merger agreement and sought to stop the merger and/or obtain monetary damages. The court has not yet certified the suit as a class action. On October 19, 2001, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the suit on a variety of grounds, including that the suit is "moot." Settlement negotiations are underway. Another suit was filed in the New York State Supreme Court, making similar allegations to the Delaware suit. The complaint was dismissed on February 21, 2002. SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in E.D. NY ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on behalf of shareholders who acquired the common stock of Symbol Technologies, Inc. (NYSE:SBL) between October 20, 2000 and February 12, 2002, inclusive against the Company and three of its top 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 improperly booked a $10 million payment and improperly recorded over $40 million in revenue. 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 or by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.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 * * *