CAR_Public/020523.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
               Thursday, May 23, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 101

                           Headlines

AQUA-LEISURE INDUSTRIES: Starts Recall of 90T Defective Baby Floats
COCA-COLA COMPANY: Employees Say "Near-Dated" Drinks Sold To Minorities
EQUITABLE LIFE: Policyholders Compensation Possible If Suit Proceeds
KOLCRAFT ENTERPRISES: Recalls 17T Wheel Attachments for Choking Hazard
MANDALAY RESORT: Merit Discovery Commences in RICO Suit in NV Court

PALM INC.: Consumers File Suit Over Defective Handhelds in CA Court
PALM INC.: Trial In CA Handheld Products Suit Set For October 2002
ROSE ART: Recalls 188,000 Cotton Candy Machines For Fire, Burn Hazard
VATICAN BANK: Faces $600 Million Insurance Commissioners RICO Suit
WASHINGTON DC: Former Inmates File Suit V. Jail Over Delayed Release

WHEREHOUSE ENTERTAINMENT: Store Employees File Wage Suit in CA Court

                          Securities Fraud

ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in PA
ALLOY INC.: Plaintiffs File Amended Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
AQUILA INC.: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in W.D. MO
CALICO COMMERCE: Plaintiffs Amend NY Suit, Drop Charges V. Company
COMVERSE TECHNOLOGY: Faces Consolidated Securities Suit in E.D. NY

DOV PHARMACEUTICAL: Kirby McInerney Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY
DOV PHARMACEUTICAL: Abbey Gardy Launches Securities Fraud Suit in NJ
DYNEGY INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. TX
EAGLE BUILDING: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. FL
EDISON SCHOOLS: Kirby McInerney Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY

EDISON SCHOOLS: Spector Roseman Expands Securities Suit in S.D. NY
EXELON CORPORATION: Schatz & Nobel Commences Securities Suit in N.D. IL
HCA INC.: Court Allows Shareholders To File Amended Securities Suit
HEARTLAND GROUP: WI Court Grants Approval To US$14M Suit Settlement
MARIMBA INC.: Plaintiffs File Consolidated Securities Suit in S.D. NY

MARVELL TECHNOLOGY: Labels "Without Merit" Securities Suit in S.D. NY
MERRILL LYNCH: Settling Attorney General's Investigation For $100M
MERRILL LYNCH: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
MERRILL LYNCH: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
MERRILL LYNCH: Cohen Milstein Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY

MERRILL LYNCH: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
NEOPHARM INC.: Bull & Lifshitz Launches Securities Fraud Suit in IL
OPTIO SOFTWARE: Mounting Vigorous Defense V. Securities Suit in S.D. NY
PEREGRINE SYSTEMS: Berman DeValerio Launches Securities Suit in S.D. NY
SPECTRALINK CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in CO

RELIANT ENERGY: Gold Bennett Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. TX
RELIANT ENERGY: Abbey Gardy Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. TX
SEITEL INC.: Weiss & Yourman Initiates Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. TX
WORLDCOM INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY

                              
                            *********


AQUA-LEISURE INDUSTRIES: Starts Recall of 90T Defective Baby Floats
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Aqua-Leisure Industries, Inc. is cooperating with the US Consumer
Product Safety Commission (CPSC) by voluntarily recalling about 90,000
"SunSmart" baby floats.  The leg holes in the seat of the float can
tear, causing children to unexpectedly fall into the water and possibly
drown.  

The Company has received 12 reports of the floats' seats tearing and
causing children to fall into the water.  There were four incidents of
children becoming completely submerged before a caregiver was able to
reach them.  No injuries have been reported.
        
The recalled floats are packaged as "SunSmart" Baby Adjustable Sunshade
Boats.  The baby floats are blue and white circular tubes with a seat
in the middle, and a detachable protective sunshade.  The vinyl floats,
intended for ages 6 months to 18 months, have pictures of purple crabs
and various colored fish along the top.  The word, "SunSmart" is
printed across the front of the float.  The recalled boats can be
identified by the lettering "C/S" molded on the valve.  Only floats
with the "C/S" lettering are involved in the recall, subsequent floats
have been corrected.
        
Juvenile products, specialty and discount department stores nationwide,
including Target, K-Mart, Bed Bath and Beyond and Baby Central, sold
the baby floats from August 2000 through September 2001 for between $10
and $13.
        
For more information, contact the Company by Phone: 866-807-3998
between 9:00 am and 5:00 pm ET Monday through Friday or visit the
firm's Web site: http://www.aqualeisure.com.


COCA-COLA COMPANY: Employees Say "Near-Dated" Drinks Sold To Minorities
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Several employees of softdrink giant Coca-Cola Co. have accused the
Company of repackaging nearly out-of-date soda cans and bottles and
then reselling them at stores in minority neighborhoods, according to
an Associated Press report.

Worker Llewellyn Hamilton, 49, told AP that the Company shipped the
"near-dated" items from white neighborhood stores and sold them at a
discount in predominantly black and Hispanic stores.  "They'd lower the
price and ship them to the black and Hispanic area stores," he said.  
"It was common knowledge that we'd recycle it to that neighborhood."  

Mr. Hamilton added that the practice was widespread and well known when
he started working as a Coca-Cola merchandiser in 1993.  He also said
that the Company's officers knew about the repackaging but did nothing
to stop it.  "You'd get...`don't ask no questions,'" he said.

Company officials vehemently denied the allegations, which they said
were not brought to their attention internally. Rick Gillis, division
vice president and general manager for Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of North
Texas, located in Dallas, told AP "We believe without a doubt that
these allegations are totally without merit."

Bob Lydia, president of the Dallas branch of the National Association
for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), said the organization is
still investigating the allegations, according to an AP report.  "To
this date we have not come up with a final (determination) on this,"
Mr. Lydia said.  "We need some hard fast evidence before we make that
claim."


EQUITABLE LIFE: Policyholders Compensation Possible If Suit Proceeds
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Irish policyholders with Equitable Life Insurance Corporation, who have
suffered as the Company cut bonus rates and imposed exit penalties, may
be able to get some redress if a London-based law firm's plans to take
a class action against the life assurer are successful, the Irish Times
recently reported.

Class Law Solutions solicitor Stephen Alexander will invite Equitable
policyholders to a meeting in Dublin this month to determine the
appetite for legal action.

The controversial guaranteed annuity rate (GAR) policies, which saw
The Company before the courts and eventually losing in the House of
Lords as investors tried to force the company to honor its guarantees,
were not sold in the Irish market, but as many as 15,000 Irish people
bought pension and investment policies.

The Company is currently suing 15 former directors on behalf of
shareholders for losses of about 3 billion pounds sterling. It also is
suing former auditors Ernst&Young.


KOLCRAFT ENTERPRISES: Recalls 17T Wheel Attachments for Choking Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kolcraft Enterprises, Inc. is cooperating with the US Consumer Product
Safety Commission (CPSC) by voluntarily recalling about 17,000 toy
steering wheel attachments sold on strollers.  The steering wheel can
break away from its base, allowing the small plastic turn signal and
horn pieces to come off, posing a choking hazard to young children.  
        
The Company has not received any reports of injury involving these
strollers.  This product is being recalled to prevent the possibility
of injury.
        
The toy steering wheel was sold on the Company's Jeepr Cherokee
stroller model number 55120.  The model number and "MADE IN CHINA" can
be found on a sticker located on one of the rear legs of the stroller.  
"Jeep" is written with yellow, raised lettering on the front of the
steering wheel base.  These toys and strollers were manufactured from
January 2001 through February 2001.  The manufacture date is listed
below the model number on the rear leg sticker.  Strollers manufactured
after February 2001, with toy steering wheels, are not included in this
recall.
          
Mass merchandise and juvenile products stores nationwide sold these
strollers from January 2001 through May 2002 for between $80 and
$90.
        
For more details, contact the Company by Phone: 800-453-7673 between
8:00 am and 6:45 pm ET Monday through Thursday and between 8 am and
3:30 pm ET on Friday, or visit the firm's Web site:
http://www.kolcraft.com.     
   

MANDALAY RESORT: Merit Discovery Commences in RICO Suit in NV Court
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Merit discovery has commenced in the consolidated class action filed
against the Mandalay Resort Group and other casino and gaming companies
in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada.  

The suit arose from three class actions commenced in August 1994
against manufacturers, distributors and casino operators of video poker
and electronic slot machines, including the Company.  The consolidated
suit alleges that the defendants are involved in a scheme to induce
people to play electronic video poker and slot machines based on false
beliefs regarding how such machines operate and the extent to which a
player is likely to win on any given play.  The actions allege claims
under:

     (1) the Federal Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
         Act (RICO),

     (2) common law fraud,

     (3) unjust enrichment and

     (4) negligent misrepresentation

The plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification in March 1998.  
The motion has been fully briefed and a Court ruling is pending.

The Court previously stayed all discovery as to the merits of this case
pending determination of the motion for class certification.  However,
on March 27, 2002, the Court announced that it would permit merit
discovery limited only to those particular casinos, which the named
plaintiffs identify as places where they played video poker or
electronic slot machines.  Otherwise, merit discovery has been stayed.

In a disclosure to the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Company
states, "We are aware that the named plaintiffs contend that they
played video poker or electronic slot machines at Circus Circus-Las
Vegas. Thus, merit discovery can begin as to that property."  The
Company intends to vigorously oppose the suit.


PALM INC.: Consumers File Suit Over Defective Handhelds in CA Court
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Palm, Inc. faces a consumer class action pending in the Superior Court
of California in San Francisco County, filed on behalf of purchasers of
Palm m500 and m505 handhelds.  The suit alleges that:

     (1) that the HotSync function in certain Palm handhelds does not
         perform as advertised and the products are therefore
         defective; and

     (2) upon learning of the problem we did not perform proper
         corrective measures for individual customers as set forth in
         the product warranty.

The complaint further alleges that the Company's actions are a
violation of California's Unfair Competition Law and a breach of
express warranty.  The complaint seeks alternative relief including an
injunction:

     (i) to have the Company desist from selling and advertising the
         handhelds;

    (ii) to recall the defective handhelds;

   (iii) to restore the units to their advertised functionality;

    (iv) to pay restitution or disgorgement of the purchase price of
         the units and/or damages and attorneys' fees

The Company has denied the allegations in the suit and the parties are
in the early stages of discovery.  No trial date has been set.


PALM INC.: Trial In CA Handheld Products Suit Set For October 2002
------------------------------------------------------------------
The California Superior Court for San Francisco County has set the
trial in a consumer class action against Palm, Inc. relating to its
handheld products for October 15,2002.

The suit was commenced in August 2001 against the Company and its
former subsidiary 3Com Corporation on behalf of purchasers of Palm III,
IIIc, V and Vx handhelds.  The suit alleges that certain Palm handhelds
may cause damage to personal computer (PC) motherboards by permitting
an electrical charge, or "floating voltage" from either the handheld or
the cradle to be introduced into the PC via the serial and/or USB port
on the PC.  The plaintiffs allege that this damage is the result of a
design defect in one or more of the:

     (1) HotSync software,

     (2) handheld,

     (3) cradle and/or

     (4) the connection cable.

The parties are currently engaging in discovery.  


ROSE ART: Recalls 188,000 Cotton Candy Machines For Fire, Burn Hazard
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Rose Art Industries, Inc. is cooperating with the United States
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) by voluntarily recalling
about 188,000 cotton candy machines.  The motors on the cotton candy
machines can jam and overheat, posing a fire hazard.  Additionally, the
heating unit can be activated without the spinner in place, presenting
a risk of burn to consumers.

The Company has received 225 reports of the machines overheating.  
There have been three reports of fire, one resulting in an estimated
$2,000 in property damage.  The CPSC has received a report of two
unconfirmed minor injuries.

The recalled cotton candy machines have either a blue or a purple
base and a clear plastic cover.  The words "The Real Cotton Candy
Machine" are printed in a rainbow of colors on the base of the machine
and on the packaging. The product is marketed for children ages 10 and
up. The cotton candy machines were made in China.

Toy and discount stores sold these cotton candy machines nationwide
from September 2001 through April 2002 for about $27.

For more details, contact the Company by Phone: 888-262-4474 anytime
for a free replacement motor unit, and free samples of flavored sugar
to make cotton candy, or visit the firm's Web site:
http://www.roseart.com.


VATICAN BANK: Faces $600 Million Insurance Commissioners RICO Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Vatican, which has long claimed immunity to lawsuits, is now facing
claimants seeking more than $1 billion, as insurance commissioners from
Mississippi, Missouri, Tennessee, Okalahoma, and Arkansas have joined
Holocaust victims and victims of pedophile priests in filing lawsuits
against the Vatican and Vatican Bank, Insurance News Net reports.

The commissioners are seeking over $600 million in a federal Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) lawsuit that has named
several top Cardinals including two former Papal Nuncios to the United
States and the Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Sodano, as co-
conspirators with convicted financier Martin Frankel in an unsuccessful
attempt to launder an incredible $150 billion in insurance assets.

Mr. Frankel who has plead guilty to 20 counts of wire fraud and one
count each of securities fraud, racketeering, racketeering conspiracy
and a forfeiture charge has been cooperating with the government in
retrieving $200 million in missing insurance assets.  He faces 150
years in prison and will be sentenced next year.

Vatican officials allegedly received pay offs from Mr. Frankel and his
associates in exchange for use of a Vatican operated charity as money
laundering conduit.  A Vatican monsignor, Colagiavanni, who also is
facing racketeering charges, assisted Frankel in taking over
unsuspecting insurance companies. Cardinal Laghi, former Vatican Nuncio
to the USA, received $100,000 from Frankel. The Vatican Bank, which is
controlled by Cardinal Sodano, issued a key letter of credit that
Frankel used in his insurance schemes.

The Vatican's legal problems in the US first arose in November 1999
when California attorneys Tom Easton and Jonathan Levy filed a class
action lawsuit seeking return of gold and funds looted from Yugoslavia
during WWII and laundered by the Vatican bank post war. The wartime
treasure is valued at several hundreds of millions. Earlier this year
sexual abuse victims in the US sued the Vatican and now the insurance
commissioners are seeking restitution and penalties of over $600
million. All the lawsuits are pending, Insurance News Net reports.

According to co-counsel in the WWII case, Jonathan Levy, all the cases
have an excellent chance of beating Vatican immunity defenses, "The
Vatican used up its goodwill long ago, it has violated too many
international laws and laundered too much money for anyone to believe
its wholesale denials anymore. They stand to lose more than a billion
dollars due to a lifestyle of crime and corruption by their top
officials."

For more information, contact Jon Levy of Easton & Levy Law offices by
Phone: 513-528-0586 by E-mail: jlevyl@cinci.rr.com or visit the
Website: http://www.vaticanbankclaims.com


WASHINGTON DC: Former Inmates File Suit V. Jail Over Delayed Release
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Three former inmates at the Washington, DC jail recently filed a class
action, alleging that for years the Corrections Department has shown a
deliberate indifference toward the rights of detainees, that has
resulted in a pattern of keeping individuals past their court-ordered
release dates, The Washington Post has reported.  

The suit, filed in the US District Court, is believed to be the first
time that a class of plaintiffs has sued the city on the grounds that
inmates are being wrongfully held because of chronic problems in
handling records at the Corrections Department.  The plaintiffs ask for
unspecified monetary damages and an independent monitor to reform the
jail's records office.  The lawsuit also alleges that as many as one in
10 inmates in the district's corrections system, at any given time, is
held beyond release dates.

William Claiborne, one of the lawyers who filed the suit, said that
records problems at the jail have been so extensive that the pool of
plaintiffs could easily reach into the hundreds if a federal court
judge certifies the case as a class action.

"The District government has known about this problem for many years
and has not done anything effective to make sure that prisoners get
released in a timely fashion," said Lynn Cunningham, a co-counsel in
the suit.  Furthermore, the lawsuit says, "many attorneys have met with
records office employees who do nothing about securing the release of
an overdetained inmate even after being told the inmate is
overdetained."


WHEREHOUSE ENTERTAINMENT: Store Employees File Wage Suit in CA Court
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Wherehouse Entertainment, Inc. faces two class actions pending in the
Los Angeles Superior Court on behalf of the Company's store managers
and assistant manager going back to 1997.

The first suit was commenced in January 2001 by a former store manager,
claiming alleged failure to pay overtime wages to herself and all
similarly situated salaried store employees.  The suit was later
amended to add three additional named plaintiffs.

In October, 2001, a second class action was filed with respect to store
managers and assistant managers by different named plaintiffs and
different lawyers.  It also seeks overtime pay and, in addition,
asserts claims for meal break and rest break penalties.

The Company moved to dismiss the first suit but the court denied the
motion. A limited amount of discovery has been conducted to date.  The
plaintiffs in the two suits are currently in the process of filing a
consolidated complaint.

The Company believes the allegations in both suits are without merit
and intends to vigorously defend itself in these matters.  However, no
assurance can be provided as to its outcome.

                            Securities Fraud

ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in PA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania on behalf of purchasers of Adelphia Communications Corp.
(NASDAQ: ADLAC) securities between March 30, 2000 and April 1, 2002,
inclusive, against the Company and certain of its officers and
directors, including members of the Rigas family, its founders.

The complaint alleges that during the class period, the Company's
founding family, the Rigases, borrowed $2.7 billion through various
entities, including a limited partnership named Highland Holdings, from
credit facilities that were co-guaranteed by the Company. This practice
allowed for these debt obligations to remain off the Company's balance
sheet and, instead, appear as if they were only the obligation of
Highland and the other entities.  The Rigas family used the borrowed
money to purchase Company stock and convertible bonds during the past
four (4) years.

According to published reports, the securities purchased by the Rigases
cost approximately $1.8 billion, but their market value has since
shrunk by approximately $1 billion.

Further, the Company's results and reported earnings were false
because, at all relevant times, defendants, including members of the
Rigas family:

     (1) failed to disclose approximately $2.7 billion in off-balance
         sheet debt that the Company had incurred during co-borrowing
         ventures with various entities managed by the Company that
         were under the control of the Rigas family;

     (2) failed to disclose that this $2.7 billion in off-balance sheet
         debt was not fully guaranteed by sufficient, underlying
         assets;

     (3) failed to disclose that Highland and other entities controlled
         by the Rigas family had borrowed $2.7 billion and that the
         loans were guaranteed by Adelphia. The Rigas family then used
         these funds to purchase Adelphia securities; and

     (4) failed to disclose that the Rigases' purchase of Adelphia
         securities was effectuated through borrowed funds, guaranteed
         by the Company.

The truth concerning the Company's true financial affairs began to
emerge on March 27, 2002, when the Company announced its Fourth Quarter
and Full-Year results.  The press release and conference call that
followed revealed that the Company had at least $2.3 billion in off-
balance sheet debt stemming from the Company's guaranty of credit
facilities for Highland.

On April 1, 2002, the full-scope of the fraud was revealed when the
Company announced that it had requested an extension of time from the
SEC in which to file its Form 10-K.

The entirety and scope of the Company's malfeasance remains under
investigation.  On April 3, 2002, the Wall Street Journal reported that
the Company's off-balance-sheet debt was at least $2.7 billion,
approximately $400 million more than the Company previously disclosed.
The Journal stated: "the additional $400 million debt obligation stems
from investments the Rigas family, which controls Adelphia, agreed to
make in the cable company earlier this year. People close to the
company say the Rigases paid for the shares with loans guaranteed by
Adelphia and made to Highland Holdings, the main off-balance-sheet
entity. Adelphia, which is based in Coudersport, Pa., and is the
nation's sixth-largest cable television company, didn't return calls
seeking comment. The SEC declined to comment."

Also, on April 3, 2002, the Company disclosed that the SEC had
commenced an informal inquiry into the Company's "co-borrowing
agreements" and had petitioned the Company for certain "clarification"
related documents. The Company's stock has continued to slide, falling
an additional 14% by mid-day trading on April 3, 2002.

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


ALLOY INC.: Plaintiffs File Amended Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs in the securities class action against Alloy, Inc. amended
the suit to include new claims against the defendants in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York.  The suit
was initially commenced in November 2001 against the Company and:

     (1) James K. Johnson,

     (2) Matthew C. Diamond,

     (3) BancBoston Robertson Stephens,

     (4) Volpe Brown Whelan & Company,

     (5) Dain Rauscher Wessels, and

     (6) Ladenburg Thalmann & Co., Inc.,

The suit, filed on behalf of persons who purchased the Company's common
stock between May 14, 1999 and December 6, 2000, alleges violations of
Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act, and Section 10(b)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that, in connection with the
Company's initial public offering, the defendants failed to disclose:

     (i) "excessive commissions" purportedly solicited by and paid to
         the underwriter defendants in exchange for allocating shares
         of the Company's common stock to preferred customers; and

    (ii) alleged agreements among the underwriter defendants and
         preferred customers tying the allocation of the Company's IPO
         shares to agreements to make additional aftermarket purchases
         at pre-determined prices.

Plaintiffs claim that the failure to disclose these alleged
arrangements made the Company's prospectus incorporated in its
registration statement for our IPO materially false and misleading.

In April 2002, the plaintiffs amended the suits to assert violations of
Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and mirror allegations asserted
against other issuers sued by plaintiffs.

The Company labeled the allegations in the suit "without merit" and
stated its intent to vigorously defend against the suit.  The Company
believes that the suit will not have a material adverse effect on its
financial condition or operating results.


AQUILA INC.: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in W.D. MO
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz LLP initiated a securities class action
on behalf of all persons who purchased or acquired Aquila, Inc. (NYSE:
ILA) securities between April 25, 2001 and December 3, 2001, in the
United States District Court, Western District of Missouri.

The complaint charges the Company, certain of its officers and
directors, and UtiliCorp United Inc., its controlling shareholder, with
making material misstatements and omissions concerning the Company's
planned formation of an Audit Committee consisting of independent
directors to monitor transactions between UtiliCorp and Aquila.

Defendants' failure to timely appoint an independent Audit Committee
ultimately permitted UtiliCorp to commence a tender offer pursuant to
which it bought back all of the outstanding Company Class A common
stock at a non-negotiated and less than optimum price per share.

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: ILA@bernlieb.com or
visit the firm's Web site: http://www.bernlieb.com.


CALICO COMMERCE: Plaintiffs Amend NY Suit, Drop Charges V. Company
------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs in the securities class actions against Calico Commerce,
Inc. filed an amended consolidated suit in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York, dropping the Company as a
defendant.

The first of the securities suits against the Company was commenced in
March 2001 against the Company and:

     (1) Alan P. Naumann, former chief executive officer,

     (2) William D. Unger, director,

     (3) Bernard J. Lacroute, director, and

     (4) William G. Paseman, director

The suit alleged, among other things, that the investment banks which
underwrote the Company's initial public offering of securities, and
others, received commissions and made agreements which were not
disclosed, but should have been disclosed in the initial public
offering prospectus, and which affected the price of the Company's
securities.

The suit attempts to state claims under Sections 11, 12 and 15 of the
Securities Act of 1933, and under Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated by the
Securities Exchange Commission.

Other similar suits were filed in the same jurisdiction on behalf of
the same class and making substantially the same allegations as the
first suit.

All of the suits were later consolidated for pre-trial purposes before
Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, United States District Judge for the
Southern District of New York, together with more than one thousand
actions making virtually identical allegations against the same and
additional investment banks, approximately 310 other issuers of
securities which conducted initial public offerings in 1998-2000, and
numerous individuals associated with such issuers.

On April 4, 2002, the lead plaintiffs in the suits against the Company
filed a proof of claim in the Company's bankruptcy proceeding, stating
a claim in excess of $62 million.  On April 17, 2002, plaintiffs filed
a further amended, consolidated class action regarding the Company in
the IPO Litigation.  While the complaint names the Company's individual
defendants, it does not name the Company as a defendant.

The Company believes that the allegations against the individual
defendants are without merit, and intends to vigorously defend
the litigation in both the civil and bankruptcy actions.


COMVERSE TECHNOLOGY: Faces Consolidated Securities Suit in E.D. NY
------------------------------------------------------------------
Comverse Technology, Inc. faces a consolidated securities class action
pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
New York against the Company and certain of its executive officers.  
The suit was filed on behalf of purchasers of the Company's common
stock between April 30,2001 and July 10,2001.

The consolidated suit generally alleges violations of federal
securities laws by issuing false misleading statements regarding its
financial condition as well as its present and future business
prospects.  Plaintiffs in the suit allege that such actions
artificially inflated the price of the Company's stock.

The Company believes all claims in the complaints to be without merit
and will vigorously defend against these claims.  The Company is
confident that the suit will not have a material adverse effect on its
financial position or operations.


DOV PHARMACEUTICAL: Kirby McInerney Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Kirby McInerney & Squire, LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
on behalf of all purchasers of DOV Pharmaceutical (Nasdaq:DOVP) common
stock in or traceable to its initial public offering.

The action charges the Company, certain of its officers and directors,
and the lead underwriters of its IPO, with violations of Sections 11
and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933.  The violations, as the complaint
alleges, stem from the issuance of allegedly misleading financial
statements contained in the Company's IPO-related Registration
Statement and Prospectus that understated expenses arising from joint
venture in Bermuda (DOV Bermuda Ltd.).

The complaint alleges that the Company issued five million shares in
its IPO on April 25, 2002 at $13 per share, but failed to timely inform
the class of the revision in its financial results.  Consequently, as
the complaint alleges, Company investors experienced a two-fold
surprise on April 25, 2002 when Company shares began public trading.  
Investors discovered that the Company's previously-issued financial
statements had been misleading and investors witnessed Company shares
lose approximately 33% of their value in one day, falling from their
offering price of $13.00 to close trading at $8.70 per share.

For more details, contact Ira M. Press or Orie Braun by Mail: 830 Third
Avenue, 10th Floor, New York, New York 10022 by Phone: 212-317-2300 or
888-529-4787 by E-Mail: obraun@kmslaw.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.kmslaw.com


DOV PHARMACEUTICAL: Abbey Gardy Launches Securities Fraud Suit in NJ
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbey Gardy, LLP initiated a securities class action against DOV
Pharmaceutical, Inc. (Nasdaq:DOVP) in the United States District Court
for the District of New Jersey, on behalf of all persons or entities
who purchased the Company's common stock in or traceable to its initial
public offering.

The suit charges the Company, certain of its officers and directors,
and the lead underwriters of its IPO, with violations of Sections 11
and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933.  The violations, as the complaint
alleges, stem from the issuance of allegedly misleading financial
statements contained in the Company's IPO-related Registration
Statement and Prospectus that understated expenses arising from a joint
venture in Bermuda (DOV Bermuda Ltd.).

The suit alleges that the Company issued approximately five million
shares in its IPO on April 25, 2002 at $13 per share, but failed to
timely inform the class of revisions in its financial results.  On
April 25, 2002 when Company shares began public trading investors
learned that the Company's previously issued financial statements had
been materially false and misleading.  As a result Company shares lost
approximately 33% of their value in one day, falling from their
offering price of $13.00 to close trading at $8.70 per share.

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


DYNEGY INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. TX
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Texas on behalf of purchasers of Dynegy, Inc. (NYSE: DYN)
publicly traded securities during the period between April 17, 2001 and
April 24, 2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
alleges that the Company and its top officers inflated the price of the
Company's stock in order to pursue an accelerated securities sale
program.

Defendants knew that concealing the Company's true vehicle, Project
Alpha, for creating cash flow from operations and the true impact it
would have on the Company provided the only way that they could foster
the perception in the business community that the Company was not
"Enron Corp.," i.e., the only way it could post the revenue and
earnings per share growth claimed by defendants.

Prior to the class period, the individual defendants realized that many
of their complicated deals to generate reported net income did not
generate cash flows. The defendants knew that investors would
eventually discover this discrepancy and the Company's stock price
would collapse.

To prevent this, the Company classified what was essentially a loan
from CitiGroup Inc. as an operating activity rather than as a financing
activity as required by Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. The
defendants' wrongful course of business:

     (1) artificially inflated the price of Company stock during the
         class period;

     (2) deceived the investing public, including plaintiff and other
         class members, into acquiring the Company's securities at
         artificially inflated prices;

     (3) allowed the Individual Defendants to extract millions of
         dollars in bonuses for creating the appearance of the
         Company's phenomenal cash flow from operations growth; and

     (4) allowed Dynegy to sell nearly half a billion dollars of its
         own securities to the unsuspecting public.

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


EAGLE BUILDING: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. FL
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Kaplan Fox and Kilsheimer initiated a securities class action against
Eagle Building Technologies, Inc. (OTC: EGBT) and Anthony M. D'Amato in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida,
on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise
acquired the Company's securities between April 18, 2001 and February
14, 2002, inclusive.

The suit charges the Company and Anthony M. D'Amato with violations of
the federal securities laws and alleges, among other things, that
during the class period, the Company:

     (1) improperly recorded revenue from its construction business in
         India and made false and misleading statements regarding its
         India operations; and

     (2) made false and misleading statements regarding its post-
         September 11 business endeavors, including an airport baggage
         security system, mail sterilization technology, and money
         laundering detection software.

As a result of defendants' misrepresentations, Company stock price was
artificially inflated during the class period, trading as high as
$12.30.  On the Company's February 14 announcement, the Company's stock
fell 68% to $1.44 on heavy trading.

For more details, contact Robert N. Kaplan, Shelley Thompson by Mail:
805 Third Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10022 by Phone: 800-290-1952
or 212-687-1980 by Fax: 212-687-7714 or by E-mail: mail@kaplanfox.com


EDISON SCHOOLS: Kirby McInerney Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Kirby McInerney & Squire, LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
on behalf of all purchasers of Edison Schools Inc. (Nasdaq:EDSN) common
stock during the period from November 10, 1999 through May 14, 2002.

The action charges the Company, its auditor PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
(PWC) and 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
materially false and misleading statements made by the defendants
during the class period that misrepresented the Company's business,
operations and financial performance and caused its stock to trade at
artificially-inflated prices.

The complaint alleges that, during the class period, the Company
misrepresented and inflated its publicly reported revenues, and
misrepresented and deflated its publicly reported liabilities.  

As the complaint alleges, investigative reporting on February 13, 2002
first apprized the investing public of the former, and an SEC cease and
desist order on May 14, 2002 prompted the Company to admit to the
latter.  As the complaint alleges, the Company over-reported revenues
by recording as revenue monies paid for teachers' salaries, student
transportation and utility bills that were remitted directly by the
Company's clients (i.e., school districts).

Although the Company never actually received these monies, it recorded
them as revenue in its financial statements.  Thus, the Company was
able to boast revenue growth in its financial statements disseminated
to the investing public.  When this information was belatedly disclosed
to the market on February 13, 2002, the following day, the price of its
shares dropped as low as $12.75.

On May 14, 2002, the Company, in a settlement with the SEC, agreed to
restate its financial statements so as to correctly account for certain
liabilities that had not previously been reported. The following day,
its shares traded as low as $2.50 per share.

For more details, contact Ira M. Press or Orie Braun by Mail: 830 Third
Avenue, 10th Floor, New York, New York 10022 by Phone: 212-317-2300
or 888-529-4787 by E-Mail: obraun@kmslaw.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://www.kmslaw.com


EDISON SCHOOLS: Spector Roseman Expands Securities Suit in S.D. NY
------------------------------------------------------------------
Spector, Roseman & Kodroff, P.C. expanded the securities class action
filed in the United States District Court For the Southern District of
New York on behalf of Edison Schools, Inc. investors (Nasdaq:EDSN) to
include investors who purchased Company securities in the period from
November 11, 1999 to May 14, 2002, inclusive.  The new complaint names
as defendants the Company and:

     (1) Chris Whittle,

     (2) Christopher Cerf,

     (3) Adam Field, and

     (4) PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, the Company's outside auditor


The suit alleges that the defendants made material misrepresentations
and omissions of material facts concerning the Company's financial
condition and business performance during the relevant time.  

According to the complaint, the defendants knew or recklessly
disregarded that the Company was overstating revenues, among other
things.  In February 2002, it was revealed that the Company was
improperly recognizing revenue.  On May 14, 2002, the Company announced
that it had been the subject of an SEC investigation concerning its
improper accounting and revenue recognition.

In addition, the Company announced that it had entered into a
settlement with the SEC, pursuant to which the Company would reclassify
its revenues for numerous prior reporting periods, thereby
acknowledging that prior financial statements were false and
misleading.

For more details, contact Robert M. Roseman by Phone: 888-844-5862 or
by E-mail: classaction@srk-law.com


EXELON CORPORATION: Schatz & Nobel Commences Securities Suit in N.D. IL
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Schatz & Nobel PC initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on behalf
of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly traded
securities, including common stock and options, of Exelon Corporation
(NYSE: EXC) between April 24, 2001 and September 27, 2001.

The suit alleges that the Company, the parent corporation of electric
utility companies Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd) and PECO Energy
Company (PECO), together with three top officers, violated the federal
securities laws by issuing false or misleading statements during the
class period.

Specifically, the Company issued several statements concerning the
strength of its operations and assured the market that it would meet or
beat its $4.50 per share projected earnings figure for 2001.  The suit
alleges that these statements were materially false and misleading
because defendants failed to disclose, among other things:

     (1) that the Company's robust results for the first half of 2001,
         driven by its generation and delivery businesses, were not
         sustainable in a less favorable energy market that was
         imminent for the second half of 2001;

     (2) that the Company's investments in telecommunications companies
         were dropping in value at a rapid pace; and

     (3) that the Company's infrastructure subsidiary was experiencing
         declining demand for its products as telecommunications
         companies were facing severe industry-wide problems.

On September 27, 2001, the Company issued a press release announcing
that it would not meet its earnings commitment of $4.50 for 2001,
blaming the economy, poor weather and write-downs for failed
investments.  In reaction to the announcement, its common stock price
plunged by 22%, falling to a low of $38.85 per share on September 27,
2001, after closing at $50.45 the previous day, on extremely heavy
trading volume.

For more details, contact Andrew M. Schatz, Patrick A. Klingman, Wayne
T. Boulton or Nancy A. Kulesa by Phone: 800-797-5499 by E-mail:
sn06106@aolcom or visit the firm's Website: http://www.snlaw.net


HCA INC.: Court Allows Shareholders To File Amended Securities Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals breathed new life into a shareholder
class action filed against the nation's largest for-profit hospital
company HCA, Inc., allowing plaintiffs to file an amended suit after a
lower court dismissed the suit and prohibited them from filing an
amended suit, the Associated Press reports.  The suit was commenced
after the Company's stock prices plunged amid a 1997 federal fraud
investigation.  

Two years ago, Nashville Federal Judge Thomas Higgins dismissed the
suit, saying at the time that the shareholders' attorneys should have
filed an amended complaint after a magistrate recommended the suit's
dismissal.

"It appears to have had about it a bit of the cat and mouse, i.e., let
the court first sort out the deficiencies in the pleadings and after
judgment then seek to amend to patch up the matter and then attempt to
close the rat holes," Judge Higgins wrote.

Boyce Martin Jr., chief judge for the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals, wrote that he and the other judges on the panel "share the
district court's frustration with plaintiffs' apparent `cat and mouse'
class action gamesmanship," but "we cannot conclude they acted in bad
faith," the Associated Press reports.

Attorney for the plaintiffs Robert Harwood told AP "this is a good day
for shareholder advocates. Management must be held accountable."  He
added that the amended suit would be filed soon.  Company spokesman
Jeff Prescott said the company is "perfectly happy to have Judge
Higgins look at another complaint. It will have the same failures as
the first complaint."


HEARTLAND GROUP: WI Court Grants Approval To US$14M Suit Settlement
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
granted preliminary approval to a US$14 million settlement proposed by
the Heartland Group, Inc. to settle the consolidated class actions
brought by shareholders of the Company's High Yield Municipal Bond and
Short Duration High-Yield Municipal Funds (the High-Yield Funds).  The
suit names as defendants the Company, the High-Yield Funds, and:

     (1) certain of its present and former employees,

     (2) the Company's directors, and

     (3) its independent accountants

The consolidated suit alleged, among other things, that the information
concerning the High-Yield Funds contained in the Company's prospectus
and other disclosures was false and misleading in that it overstated
the High-Yield Funds' net asset values and performance and understated
the risks associated with investing in the High-Yield Funds.   The suit
further alleges that the Company as a whole, including all of the
Funds, was responsible for the alleged damages.  The Company's assets
consist exclusively of the assets of its various Funds.

On March 15, 2002, a proposed stipulation of partial settlement was
filed by the plaintiffs and the defendants.  In that stipulation, the
federal class plaintiffs agreed to dismiss and release all claims,
including the federal class actions, against the settling defendants.  
Correspondingly, a settlement fund of $14,000,000 has been established
on behalf of the settling defendants to settle the lawsuit.

On April 5, 2002, the court entered an order preliminarily approving
the settlement and setting a settlement fairness hearing on June 21,
2002 to, among other things, determine whether the stipulation is fair
and reasonable and to allow class members to file requests to be
excluded from the class.


MARIMBA INC.: Plaintiffs File Consolidated Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs in the securities class actions pending against Marimba,
Inc. filed a consolidated suit in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of New York.  The suit names as defendants the
Company, certain of its officers and directors, and certain
underwriters of its initial public offering:

     (1) Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.,

     (2) Credit Suisse First Boston Corp. and

     (3) Bear Stearns & Co., Inc.

The consolidated suit alleges, among other things, that the
underwriters of the Company's initial public offering violated the
securities laws by:

     (i) failing to disclose certain alleged compensation arrangements
         (such as undisclosed commissions or stock stabilization
         practices) in the offering's registration statement; and

    (ii) engaging in manipulative practices to artificially inflate the
         price of the Company's stock in the aftermarket subsequent to
         the initial public offering.

The Company and certain of its officers and directors are named in the
complaints pursuant to Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, and
Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The Company stated that the suit is similar to other complaints that
have been filed against over 300 other issuers that have had initial
public offerings since 1998.  All such actions, the suit against the
Company included, have been included in a single coordinated
proceeding.

The Company intends to defend these actions vigorously.  However, due
to the inherent uncertainties of litigation, it cannot accurately
predict the ultimate outcome of the litigation.


MARVELL TECHNOLOGY: Labels "Without Merit" Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Marvell Technology Group Ltd. faces two securities class actions
pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District
of New York alleging federal securities violations in connection with
the Company's June 29,2000 initial public offering (IPO).

The first suit was filed against two investment banks that participated
in the underwriting of the Company's IPO.  The suit, however, did not
name the Company or any of its officers or directors as defendants.  

The suit alleged that the underwriters received excessive and
undisclosed commissions and entered into unlawful tie-in agreements
with certain of their clients in violation of Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

In September, 2001, a second suit was filed in the same court, naming
three underwriters of the Company's IPO as well as the Company and two
of its officers as defendants.  Relying on many of the same allegations
contained in the initial complaint in which the Company was not named
as a defendant, plaintiffs allege that the defendants violated various
provisions of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934.

The two suits have been consolidated with hundreds of other lawsuits
filed by plaintiffs against approximately 40 underwriters and
approximately 300 issuers across the United States.  To date, there
have been no significant developments in the consolidated litigation.

It is expected that a small number of cases will be designated as "test
cases" for purposes of initial challenges to the pleadings, which are
not expected to be briefed, argued or decided before mid-2002.

The Company believes that the claims asserted against it and its
officers are without merit and intends to defend these claims
vigorously.  Based on currently available information, the Company does
not believe that the ultimate disposition of the suits will have a
material adverse impact on its business or financial condition.


MERRILL LYNCH: Settling Attorney General's Investigation For $100M
------------------------------------------------------------------
Prominent brokerage firm Merrill Lynch and Co., Inc. agreed to pay
US$100 million fine to settle New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's
investigation into the Company's method of picking stocks during the
Internet Stock boom, USA Today reports.  The firm, which makes more
money offering merger advice and helping companies sell stocks and
bonds than it does recommending stocks also agreed to apologize to
investors.

Mr. Spitzer filed a complaint against the firm, after a 10-month
investigation, which ended last April.  The investigation uncovered
several e-mails in which the firm's star analyst Henry Blodget revealed
his true thoughts on the stocks they were recommending to the public.  
The e-mails reportedly said the stocks were really no good, as opposed
to the strong "buy" ratings they were telling investors.

Under the settlement, the firm agreed to:

     (1) completely separate analysts' pay from investment banking
         business;

     (2) disclose whether it has received or is entitled to receive
         investment banking fees from the recommended company over the
         past 12 months;

     (3) create a research recommendations committee to review all new
         stock picks and changes to ratings for objectivity and
         integrity;

     (4) appoint a compliance monitor who will ensure the firm's
         obedience to the agreement for one year; and


     (5) implement a new system to monitor e-mail between analysts and
         investment bankers;

Mr. Spitzer said the Merrill Lynch settlement will be a template for
his negotiations with other investment banks on Wall Street. Spitzer
has subpoenaed internal e-mails and documents from at least five other
leading investment banks, including Salomon Smith Barney and Morgan
Stanley, according to USA Today.

However, some skeptics don't think the settlement will really eliminate
the conflicts of interest on Wall Street that have undermined
investors' faith.  "When we surveyed about 100 institutional investors,
they were reluctant to have confidence that these kind of rules could
be enforced," Leslie Boni, a professor of finance at the University of
New Mexico told USA Today.

Merrill Lynch continued to defend the integrity of its stock research
department. "Certainly our reputation has been impacted, and we're
going to work hard to re-establish it," said CEO David Komansky.  "We
intend to rigorously enforce not only the words of the agreement, but
also the spirit."

The firm, despite not admitting to any wrongdoings, still faces
numerous class actions filed in the United States District Court in New
York, due to the revelations in the investigation.


MERRILL LYNCH: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York against Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., and Internet stock analyst and
First Vice President of Merrill Lynch, Henry Blodget, on behalf of all
persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the common
stock of Aether Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq: AETH) between November 15, 1999
and February 20, 2002 inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities
laws by issuing analyst reports regarding Aether that recommended the
purchase of Aether common stock and which set price targets for Aether
common stock, which were materially false and misleading and lacked any
reasonable factual basis.

The complaint further alleges that, when issuing their Aether analyst
reports, the defendants failed to disclose significant, material
conflicts of interest, which resulted from their use of Mr. Blodget's
reputation and his ability to issue favorable analyst reports, to
obtain investment banking business for Merrill Lynch.

Furthermore, in issuing their Aether analyst reports, in which they
recommended the purchase of Aether stock, the Defendants failed to
disclose material, non-public, adverse information, which they
possessed about Aether.

Throughout the class period, the defendants maintained "ACCUMULATE/BUY"
or "BUY/BUY" recommendations on Aether in order to obtain and support
lucrative financial deal for Merrill Lynch.  As a result of defendants'
false and misleading analyst reports, Aether's common stock traded at
artificially inflated levels during the class period.

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


MERRILL LYNCH: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York against Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., and Internet stock analyst and
First Vice President of Merrill Lynch, Henry Bloget, on behalf of all
persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the common
stock of Internet Capital Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: ICGE) between August 30,
1999 and November 8, 2000, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities
laws by issuing analyst reports regarding ICGE that recommended the
purchase of ICGE common stock and which set price targets for ICGE
common stock, which were materially false and misleading and lacked any
reasonable factual basis.

The complaint further alleges that, when issuing their ICGE analyst
reports, the defendants failed to disclose significant, material
conflicts of interest, which resulted from their use of Mr. Blodget's
reputation and his ability to issue favorable analyst reports, to
obtain investment banking business for Merrill Lynch.

Furthermore, in issuing their ICGE analyst reports, in which they
recommended the purchase of ICGE stock, the Defendants failed to
disclose material, non-public, adverse information, which they
possessed about ICGE.

Throughout the class period, the Defendants maintained an
"ACCUMULATE/BUY" recommendation on ICGE in order to obtain and support
lucrative financial deals for Merrill Lynch.

As a result of defendants' false and misleading analyst reports, ICGE's
common stock traded at artificially inflated levels during the class
period.

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


MERRILL LYNCH: Cohen Milstein Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
------------------------------------------------------------------
Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, PLLC, initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of GoTo.com, Inc.
(now known as Overture Services, Inc.) (Nasdaq:OVER) between the period
of January 11, 2001, through June 6, 2001 against Merrill Lynch & Co.,
Inc., and its internet analyst Henry Blodget.

The firm is also involved in other cases against Merrill Lynch and Mr.
Blodget on behalf of purchasers of Infospace, Internet Capital Group
(ICGE), Aether Systems (AETH), Excite@Home (ATHQE.OB) and 24/7 Real
Media, Inc. (TFSM).

The suit alleges that to maintain and enhance Merrill Lynch's
investment banking relationships with GoTo, defendants issued analyst
reports with positive ratings on GoTo which were materially misleading
as they were inconsistent with their own contemporaneous, private
adverse assessments of GoTo.

For example, the very day of the initiation of coverage, Mr. Blodget
admitted in an e-mail that there was nothing interesting about GoTo
except banking fees. The suit also describes how defendants made their
proposed rating to GoTo more palatable to GoTo management by
downgrading a GoTo competitor. However, when defendants learned that
GoTo had awarded its underwriting business to another bank, defendants
downgraded GoTo in retribution.

For more details, contact Steven J. Toll or Diana Steele by Mail: 1100
New York Avenue, NW West Tower, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20005 by
Phone: 888-240-0775 or 202/408-4600 or by E-mail: stoll@cmht.com or
dsteele@cmht.com


MERRILL LYNCH: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York against Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., and Internet stock analyst and
First Vice President of Merrill Lynch, Henry Blodget, on behalf of all
persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the common
stock of Excite@Home Corporation (Nasdaq: ATHMQ) between June 7, 1999
and April 26, 2001, inclusive.

The suit alleges that defendants violated the federal securities laws
by issuing analyst reports regarding Excite@Home that recommended the
purchase of Excite@Home common stock and which set price targets for
Excite@Home common stock, which were materially false and misleading
and lacked any reasonable factual basis.

The complaint further alleges that, when issuing their Excite@Home
analyst reports, the defendants failed to disclose significant,
material conflicts of interest, which resulted from their use of Mr.
Blodget's reputation and his ability to issue favorable analyst
reports, to obtain investment banking business for Merrill Lynch.

Furthermore, in issuing their Excite@Home analyst reports, in which
they recommended the purchase of Excite@Home stock, the Defendants
failed to disclose material, non-public, adverse information, which
they possessed about Excite@Home.

Throughout the class period, the defendants maintained an
"ACCUMULATE/BUY" or "ACCUMULATE/ACCUMULATE" recommendation on
Excite@Home in order to obtain and support lucrative financial deals
for Merrill Lynch. As a result of defendants' false and misleading
analyst reports, Excite@Home's common stock traded at artificially
inflated levels during the class period.

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


NEOPHARM INC.: Bull & Lifshitz Launches Securities Fraud Suit in IL
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Bull & Lifshitz, LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on behalf
of purchasers of NeoPharm Inc. (NASDAQ: NEOL) securities during the
period between September 25, 2000 and April 19, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the federal securities laws by issuing
materially false and misleading statements throughout the class period
that had the effect of artificially inflating the market price of the
Company's securities.

Specifically, the suit alleges that the Company issued a series of
statements concerning its Liposome Encapsulated Praclitaxel (LEP)
product, and that the defendants:

     (1) made materially false positive statements to Pharmacia in
         order to induce their participation in clinical trials of LEP;

     (2) failed to disclose that Pharmacia was studying a different
         formulation of LEP that would not necessarily support the
         approval of the Company's LEP product; and

     (3) failed to disclose that all of Pharmacia's clinical trials
         failed to produce any positive benefits to patients.

In addition, certain individual defendants wrongfully sold shares of
the Company on the open market at artificially inflated prices, reaping
proceeds of over $7 million.

For more details, contact Peter D. Bull or Joshua M. Lifshitz by Phone:
212-213-6222 by E-mail: counsel@nyclasslaw.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://www.nyclasslaw.com.  


OPTIO SOFTWARE: Mounting Vigorous Defense V. Securities Suit in S.D. NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Optio Software, Inc. labeled "without merit" the securities class
action pending against it, certain of its officers and directors, and
the underwriters of its intial public offering in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The suit, filed on behalf of persons purchasing the Company's common
stock between December 14, 1999 and December 6, 2000, includes
allegations of violations of:

     (1) Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 by all named
         defendants,

     (2) Section 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 by the
         underwriter defendants,

     (3) Section 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 by the individual
         defendants, and

     (4) Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule
         10b-5 promulgated thereunder by the underwriter defendants.

The Company intends to defend vigorously against the plaintiff's
claims, and is confident the litigation will not have a material
adverse effect on its financial position or business operations.


PEREGRINE SYSTEMS: Berman DeValerio Launches Securities Suit in S.D. NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo initiated a securities
class action against Peregrine Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq:PRGN) that claims
the Company inflated its stock price by misleading the public.  The
suit is pending in the US District Court for the Southern District of
California, on behalf of all investors who bought the Company's common
stock from July 19, 2000 through May 3, 2002.

The suit states that news of the problems came to light May 6, 2002,
when the Company disclosed an internal investigation into potential
accounting inaccuracies in fiscal 2001 and 2002 - revenue recognition
irregularities that could total up to $100 million.  In the same
statement, the Company announced the resignations of Stephen Gardner,
the company's chief executive officer, and Matthew Gless, its executive
vice president of finance.

Following the May 6 announcement, the Company's stock plummeted 65% to
a 52-week low of $0.89.

For more information, contact Julie Richmond, Michael G. Lange,
Jennifer Abrams or Nicole Lavallee by Mail: One Liberty Square, 425
California Street, Suite 2025, Boston, MA 02109 by Phone: 800-516-9926
or 415-433-3200 by E-mail: law@bermanesq.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://www.bermanesq.com.  


SPECTRALINK CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in CO
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado on
behalf of purchasers of SpectraLink Corporation (Nasdaq: SLNK) publicly
traded securities during the period between July 19, 2001 and January
11, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the
market between July 19, 2001 and January 11, 2002, thereby artificially
inflating the price of Company securities.  

Throughout the class period, as alleged in the complaint, defendants
issued statements which represented that the Company was experiencing
continued growth and increasing its market share and would continue to
do so in the future.  

Unbeknownst to investors, however, the Company was suffering from a
host of undisclosed adverse factors which were negatively impacting its
business and which would cause it to report declining financial
results, materially less than the market expectations defendants had
caused and cultivated.  

Specifically, defendants misrepresented or failed to disclose that:

     (1) the Company was experiencing declining sales as its business
         began to be affected by general market forces.  Throughout the
         class period, defendants repeatedly emphasized that the
         Company was not being affected by the slowdown in the US
         economy, when, in fact, that was not true;

     (2) the Company was becoming increasingly reliant on end-of-the-
         quarter sales to meet its sales forecasts.  This sales pattern
         necessarily subjected the Company to the increased risk that
         it would not meet its sales expectations should it not
         successfully complete certain anticipated sales; and

     (3) certain of the Company's customers were experiencing financial
         difficulty such that it was highly unlikely that they would be
         able to complete anticipated sales, thereby causing it to
         suffer a decline in its revenues.  

On January 14, 2002, before the open of the Nasdaq stock market, the
Company issued a press release announcing preliminary financial results
for its fourth quarter of 2001, and disclosed, for the first time, that
its revenue and earnings would in fact be affected by the slowdown in
the overall economy.

In response to this announcement, the price of Company common stock
dropped precipitously, falling from $16.02 per share to $10.16 per
share, a decline of more than 36%.  

While the Company was being adversely affected by the aforementioned
factors, but prior to any disclosure to the market, the Individual
Defendants and other senior executives sold more than $13.7 million
worth of their personally-held common stock to the unsuspecting public.  

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


RELIANT ENERGY: Gold Bennett Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. TX
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gold Bennett Cera & Sidener LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, on
behalf of purchasers of Reliant Energy, Inc. (NYSE: REI) common stock
during the period of April 29, 1999 through May 10, 2002.

The defendants are the Company and certain of its officers and
directors.  The complaint charges the defendants with violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The complaint alleges that the Company and its 82%-owned subsidiary,
Reliant Resources, Inc., engaged in numerous "round-trip" power trading
transactions with other companies which were designed to artificially
boost reported trading volumes and revenues. Round-trip power trading
transactions involve a company buying power, without risk, by
simultaneously selling the same amount of power at the same price.

This simultaneous purchase and sale of power at the same price had the
effect of materially and artificially increasing the Company's reported
revenues in 1999, 2000 and 2001. Since the round-trip transactions were
first disclosed, the price of the Company's common stock plummeted from
$24.60 on May 9, 2002 to as low as $13.63 on May 17, 2002.

For more details, contact Joseph M. Barton by Mail: 595 Market Street,
Suite 2300, San Francisco, California 94105 by Phone: 800-778-1822 or
415-777-2230 by Fax: 415-777-5189 or by E-mail: Reliant@gbcsf.com.  


RELIANT ENERGY: Abbey Gardy Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. TX
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbey Gardy, LLP initiated a securities class action against Reliant
Energy Inc. (NYSE:REI) in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, on behalf of all persons
or entities who purchased the Company's common stock during the period
from August 2, 1999 through May 10, 2002, inclusive.

The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors
with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its business
and financial condition.  The complaint alleges that, throughout the
class period, defendants violated Section 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,
thereby inflating the price of Company securities.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that, throughout the class period,
defendants issued statements regarding the Company's quarterly and
annual financial performance.  The suit alleges that these statements
were false and misleading because, among other things, the company's
revenue were materially overstated because:

     (1) its subsidiary Reliant Resources, Inc. engaged in transactions
         with other power traders to buy and sell power to each other
         simultaneously and at the same price; and

     (2) the Company improperly recorded revenue from these
         transactions.

On May 10, 2002, it was announced that Reliant Resources was canceling
a $500 million private placement debt offering and disclosed that it
had engaged in roundtrip transactions.  The price of Company stock
dropped from $24.60 on May 9, 2002 to a low of $15.87 on May 14, 2002.

For more details, contact Nancy Kaboolian or Jennifer Haas by Phone:
800-889-3701 or by E-mail: jhaas@abbeygardy.com or
nkaboolian@abbeygardy.com.


SEITEL INC.: Weiss & Yourman Initiates Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. TX
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Weiss & Yourman commenced a securities class action against Seitel,
Inc. (NYSE:SEI), and certain of its officers and directors was
commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern District
of Texas, on behalf of purchasers of Company securities, between July
13, 2000 and April 1, 2002.

The complaint charges the defendants with violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleges that defendants issued
false and misleading statements, which artificially inflated the stock.

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


WORLDCOM INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York, on behalf of persons who purchased, converted, exchanged or
otherwise acquired the common stock of WorldCom, Inc. (Nasdaq: WCOM)
between January 3, 2000 and April 29, 2002, inclusive against the
Company and:

     (1) Bernard J. Ebbers, President and Chief Executive Officer,

     (2) James C. Allen, director,

     (3) Max E. Bobbitt, director,

     (4) Francisco Galesi, director, and

     (5) Arthur Andersen, LLP

The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated by the SEC
thereunder, as well as pendant state law claims for fraud, negligent
misrepresentation, and intentional deceit and seeks to recover damages.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities
laws by making misrepresentations and/or omissions in connection with
false and/or misleading financial statements.

The complaint specifically alleges that defendants misrepresented the
Company's earnings in its public filings with the SEC and elsewhere as
a result of failing to record write-downs of goodwill and other
intangible assets associated with the Company's acquisition of numerous
telecommunications companies at premium prices.

The complaint further alleges that the defendants affirmatively
misstated the value of goodwill and other intangible assets associated
with the Company's acquisition of numerous telecommunications companies
at premium prices and carrying such assets on the Company's balance
sheet at the cost of acquiring them long after it had become apparent
that the Company had overpaid to acquire such assets.

Additionally, defendants failed to disclose that the Company's goodwill
and other intangible assets associated with the Company's acquisitions
of numerous telecommunications companies at premium prices were being
carried at unrealistically and misleadingly high values on its balance
sheet.

For more 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 Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182.  


                              *********

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  * * *