CAR_Public/020711.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Thursday, July 11, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 136

                           Headlines


ABC CHECK: Customer Files Suit Alleging Illegally High Interest Rates
CENTERPULSE LTD.: No Appeals Filed V. $725M Faulty Implants Settlement
DOLLAR TREE: Recalls 294,000 Kitchen Range Drip Pans For Fire Hazard
ENTERASYS NETWORKS INC.: Expects Securities Suits To Be Consolidated
GREAT ATLANTIC: Consents To $3 Million Settlement of Wage Suits in NY

GREAT ATLANTIC: Faces Several Suits For Securities Violations in NJ
GREAT ATLANTIC: Faces Shareholder Derivative Suit in NJ State Court
JAPAN: A-Bomb Victims Seek Recognition As Radiation Sickness Sufferers
NEBRASKA: Federal Judge Refuses to Stop Cuts In Child-Care Subsidies
NORTHWEST AIRLINES: GA Court Approves Settlement of Race Bias Lawsuit

PENNSYLVANIA: ACLU Fights Pittsburgh Police Dept On Profanity Arrests
SOUTH KOREA: Delay In Introduction Of Securities Suits Into Economy
STRAWSER INC.: Motorists Sue For Unfinished Repair on Interstate 95
UNITED STATES: USDA Seeks Stay of Order Halting Beef Checkoff Program
VERIZON WIRELESS: Says CA Suit Settlement Will Have Nationwide Effect

WAR VETERANS: Fight For Compensation For British Veterans Gains Ground

                   New Securities Fraud Cases

AMDOCS LTD.: Stull Stull Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS: Chimicles & Tikellis Files PA Securities Suit
CRYOLIFE INC.: Holzer & Holzer Commences Securities Suit in Georgia
CRYOLIFE INC.: Mark McNair Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. GA
INTERLIANT INC.: Brualdi Law Firm Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY

MERCK & CO.: Wechsler Harwood Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
MERRILL LYNCH: Stull Stull Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
PERKINELMER INC.: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in MA Court
RELIANT RESOURCES: Wolf Haldenstein Launches Securities Suit in S.D. TX

                            *********

ABC CHECK: Customer Files Suit Alleging Illegally High Interest Rates
---------------------------------------------------------------------
ABC Check Cashiers faces a class action in Crawford County Circuit Court,
alleging the Company charged illegally high interest rates disguised as
service charges, the Southwest Times Record reports.

Fort Smith resident LaDonna Payte filed the suit.  Ms. Payte received a cash
loan from the Company in May 2001 after she presented the Company with a
personal check for $122.22, which the Company agreed to hold until her next
payday.  In exchange, she received $100 cash from the company.

When she returned on her payday, she was given the option of paying off the
loan and the service charge or "renew" the loan by simply paying a portion
of the debt against the personal check.  Ms. Payte opted to renew the loan
and subsequently agreed to following renewals, the lawsuit states.

The suit alleges that "the terms of these loans resulted in an effective
annual percentage rate in the minimum amount of 405.57 percent...After
several months of conducting this type of business with the defendant, the
plaintiff finally reached a point where she could not continue to pay the
defendants' fees ... The interest rates charged by the defendant for loans
to its customers constitute a gross and flagrant violation of the usury laws
of Arkansas."

Todd Turner, the Arkadelphia attorney who filed the lawsuit, told the Times
Record the Company has closed their doors. "It appears they have gone out of
business," he said.  That will not stop Ms. Payte and other class-action
litigants from collecting from the firm, however.

The Times Record could not reach the Company for comment. A recording at the
business's telephone number stated the number had been disconnected.


CENTERPULSE LTD.: No Appeals Filed V. $725M Faulty Implants Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Swiss medical technology company Centerpulse Ltd. recently said that no
appeal has been filed by patients against a $725 million class action
settlement over faulty knee and hip implants, Dow Jones International
News reports, as the appeal period expired on July 5.

While no appeal was filed, 12 patients who underwent revision surgery still
decline to accept the agreement, a number down from around 16 a month ago.
Company spokeswoman Beatrice Tschanz said the Company continues to negotiate
out of court settlements with these patients.  The number of opt-outs is
expected to drop to around eight soon.

"No individual lawsuits have been filed so far, but these patients clearly
prefer settlements to lawsuits," the spokeswoman said.  The Company has said
that it will fight any individual lawsuits the opt-outs may bring.

Under the terms of the settlement, the Company will pay patients who went
through revision surgery after receiving faulty knee or hip implants, an
average of $200,00 each over the next six to 18 months.  Costs for the
revision surgeries as well as legal fees are included in
the compensation.


DOLLAR TREE: Recalls 294,000 Kitchen Range Drip Pans For Fire Hazard
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Dollar Tree Stores, Inc. is cooperating with the United States Consumer
Product Safety Commission (CPSC) by voluntarily recalling about 294,000 drip
pans.  These drip pans are used under the burners of kitchen ranges to catch
food that drips while cooking.  The hot burners can ignite the drip pans and
pose a fire hazard.  The Company has received seven reports of the drip pans
catching fire.  No injuries have been reported.

The recalled drip pans were sold in various sizes, ranging from 6-
to 9- inches in diameter.  The SKU Number 845289 is either on the pan or on
a cardboard insert in the package.  All of the drip pans are black.

Dollar Tree Stores sold these drip pans nationwide from April 2002 to May
2002 for about $1.

For more details, contact the Company by Phone: 800-876-8077 between 9:00 am
and 5:00 pm ET Monday through Friday.


ENTERASYS NETWORKS INC.: Expects Securities Suits To Be Consolidated
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Six investor lawsuits accusing Enterasys Networks Inc. and two top
executives of fraud will be consolidated into a single class action, The
Union Leader (N.H.) reported recently.  The Los Angeles County Employees
Retirement Association, which claims it lost more than $2 million on
Enterasys stock between August 1, 2001 and February 1 of this year, will
lead the suit.

Three of the lawsuits had been filed in US District Court in February,
after the US Securities and Exchange Commission announced it was
investigating the company.  Another was filed in March and two in April.
The plaintiffs have been negotiating the consolidation for two
months.

The suits accuse the Company, former chief executive officer Enrique Fiallo
and current chief financial officer Robert Gagalis of deceiving
investors about the Company's revenues and earnings in order to keep its
stock artificially high.  They also accuse Mr. Fiallo of benefiting
personally by selling his shares at inflated prices.

Court documents allege Company officials used accounting principles that
were contrary to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and the Company's
own policies.  Company stock has lost 85 percent of its value since it
disclosed on February 4 that it found discrepancies in how it recorded a $4
million sales contract in Asia.  Company officials have said the Company is
conducting an internal investigation.

Mr. Fiallo and two other top executives resigned in April, and hundreds of
employees were laid off.  Also, the company has delayed its release of
fourth-quarter and full-year financial results.  The Company, based in
Rochester, is a spinoff of the former Cabletron Systems Inc.

Cabletron co-founder and former chief executive Craig Benson said the
Company's management has acted honestly.  Mr. Benson, who continues as an
Enterasys director and member of the directors' audit committee, said the
Company simply lost money as a result of a downturn in the high-tech
industry.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs said they plan to take testimony under oath from
Mr. Benson, to find out what he knew about Company finances, and when.  Mr.
Benson is not named in the lawsuit, however.


GREAT ATLANTIC: Consents To $3 Million Settlement of Wage Suits in NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., Inc. reached an memorandum of
understanding (MOU) to settle for US$3 million two lawsuits, one a class
action and the other filed by the Attorney General of the State of New York.
The Attorney General's suit was filed in the New York Supreme Court, County
of New York, while the class action is pending in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York.

The suits alleged alleging that the Company and its subsidiary Shopwell,
Inc., together with the Company's outside delivery service Chelsea Trucking,
Inc., violated New York law by failing to pay minimum and overtime wages to
individuals who deliver groceries at one of the
Food Emporium's stores in New York City.  The federal suit makes similar
minimum wage and overtime pay allegations under both federal and state law
and extends the allegations to various stores operated by the Company.

In May 2001, the federal court granted plaintiffs' motion for certification
of a class action.  On June 18, 2002, the plaintiffs, the Attorney General
and the Company entered into the MOU providing for a settlement of the
actions brought by the plaintiff class and by the Attorney General.

Under the proposed settlement, the Company would pay approximately $3
million in full settlement of the actions and would receive releases from
the class and the Attorney General, and the actions would be dismissed with
prejudice.  The proposed settlement remains subject to, among other things,
execution of a definitive settlement agreement and the approval of the
federal court.


GREAT ATLANTIC: Faces Several Suits For Securities Violations in NJ
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., Inc. faces several securities class
actions pending in the United States District Court for the District of New
Jersey.  The suits name as defendants the Company and certain of its
officers and directors.

The suits purport to assert claims under Sections 10(b) (and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
arising out of the Company's accounting practices, and allege that the
Company made material misrepresentations and omissions concerning its
financial results.

The Company intends to vigorously oppose the suits, and is confident that
they will not have a materially adverse effect on its financial position or
business operations.


GREAT ATLANTIC: Faces Shareholder Derivative Suit in NJ State Court
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., Inc. faces a shareholder derivative
suit filed in the Superior Court of New Jersey in Bergen County against the
Company's Board of Directors and certain of its executive officers in an
action.

The suit alleges that the defendants violated their fiduciary obligations to
the Company and its stockholders by failing to establish and maintain
adequate accounting controls and mismanaging the assets and business of the
Company, and seeks unspecified money damages, costs and expenses.

While the outcome of this suit cannot be predicted with certainty, the
Company does not believe that the outcome will have a material adverse
effect on its consolidated results of operations, financial position
or cash flows.


JAPAN: A-Bomb Victims Seek Recognition As Radiation Sickness Sufferers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A total of 19 victims of the 1945 atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagsaki
asked three prefectural governments recently to recognize them as sufferers
of radiation sickness, in the first such group application and bid to seek a
more lenient recognition system, the Kyodo News reports.

The applications in Aichi, Ishikawa and Kumamoto prefectures came in line
with policies of the Japan Confederation of A-bomb and H-bomb Sufferers'
Organizations, which terms the current recognition system "too severe and
inhumane."

"Many A-bomb victims gave up hopes to be officially recognized as sufferers
under the current severe system, but they have decided to apply as they have
suffered more as they are getting older," said an
official of the confederation.  Other A-bomb victims plan to file the
same application with five other prefectural governments, bringing the
total number of applicants to more than 70.

The applicants would be eligible for special medical benefits worth 139,600
yen per month if the governments recognize that their diseases were caused
by exposure to radiation from the atomic bombings on August 6 and August 9,
1945.

They said they will file a class action if their applications are rejected.
80 A-bomb victims whose applications were previously rejected, are also
ready to join if they are rejected again, the confederation said.

Some 30 percent of the applications have been approved since fiscal 1993.
Of 285,620 A-bomb victims as of the end of March, only 2,169, or
0.76 percent are recognized as sufferers of radiation sickness, according to
the health ministry.

Regarding the group application, Health, Labor and Welfare Minister Chikara
Sakaguchi told a news conference that although he recognizes some say the
current recognition system is too severe, he does not believe it is
necessary to revise it at present.


NEBRASKA: Federal Judge Refuses to Stop Cuts In Child-Care Subsidies
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lancaster County District Judge John Colburn, in Nebraska, recently denied a
request that would have halted temporarily a move by the state
that cut funding for child-care subsidies for poor people, the Associated
Press Newswires reports.

The request for the temporary injunction was filed by the Nebraska Appleseed
Center for Law in the Public Interest on behalf of three mothers.  Judge
Colburn said the women failed to show that they would suffer immediate,
irreparable harm if he denied the request for an injunction.

Judge Colburn's order, however, does not preclude the class action, filed
earlier, from proceeding.  Three mothers had filed the lawsuit last month,
alleging that the cuts, spearheaded by Gov. Mike Johanns, were illegal.

Gov. Johanns changed the rules for child-care subsidies in an April veto of
legislation.  It reduced the income cut-off for working families who are not
coming off welfare from 185 percent of the federal poverty level to 120
percent.  Under the old rules, a family of four could earn up to $32,652 a
year and qualify for the subsidy.  That dropped to 21,180 on July 1.  This
will save the state about $4.6 million a year.

Becky Gould, a lawyer with the Appleseed Center, said that the Governor's
line-item veto of a budget appropriation for the child-care
subsidies was a major policy change not directed by the Legislature.  She
also said it is unconstitutional to take away subsidies for some families
while keeping them for families in an identical low-income situation.

Governor Johanns has defended the cut, saying the money was not there to
keep the program running at its current level and that funding had been
generous in the past.  The subsidy program has grown over the last five
years, from serving about 9,000 children in 1997 to more than 16,000 this
year.

The cut in child-care subsidies affects at least 1,000 low-income working
families and 1,500 children throughout the state.   Ms. Gould said the
center will continue to pursue the lawsuit.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Kendra Johnsen and Jamie Longwell of
Lincoln and Jamie Koch of Scottsbluff. Ms. Longwell, for example, will face
an increase of between $606 and $861 per month in her child-care costs, Ms.
Gould said.


NORTHWEST AIRLINES: GA Court Approves Settlement of Race Bias Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
An Atlanta federal court granted approval to a settlement of a racial
discrimination suit filed against Northwest Airlines, on behalf of the
African-American employees at its Atlanta maintenance hangar, the Atlanta
Journal-Constitution reports.

The suit alleged that the Company subjected the plaintiffs to "the
presentation of nooses, Confederate flags, misogynist or racist graffiti,
jokes and comments which debase, degrade and demean them."
The suit initially sought class-action status, but the court said there was
"a strong likelihood" that class certification would be denied.  The Company
has denied the accusations in the lawsuit and said it does not tolerate
harassment.

US District Judge Charles Pannell approved the settlement, under which 50 of
the airline's 292 African-American employees in Atlanta have agreed to go
through arbitration hearings in which each worker could receive up to
$300,000.

"We worked extremely hard to resolve the case," Company attorney Al Pearson
told the Journal-Constitution.  "We got a good settlement."  A Northwest
spokesman said the airline is pleased with the agreement, adding arbitration
will provide a "fair and expeditious framework for the consideration, and if
necessary, resolution of individual claims from eligible parties."

Mr. Pearson added the settlement is limited to monetary damages, which could
total up to $15 million. He and two other plaintiffs' attorneys will split
an additional $150,000.


PENNSYLVANIA: ACLU Fights Pittsburgh Police Dept On Profanity Arrests
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) recently filed two lawsuits,
one on behalf of Erica Upshaw, against two Pittsburgh-area police
departments, accusing officers of violating Ms. Upshaw's right to free
speech, the Associated Press Newswires reports.

Ms. Upshaw, 28, a mother of three children, was pulled over by a police
officer who told her she had made an incomplete stop.  After checking her
record by computer, the officer told Ms. Upshaw that her driver's license
was suspended.  She was under stress and cursed, ending up in jail for her
choice of words.  As it happens, her license had not been suspended, there
had been a temporary computer glitch.

The ACLU wants the lawsuits to warn police across the nation that they
should not arrest people simply because they do not like someone's language,
said Witod Walczak, executive director of the ACLU's Pittsburgh chapter.  He
said that officers need to understand that when person is stopped by the
police, tremendous tension and stress is created and emotions spill over.

Police dismiss the accusation that they are misusing disorderly conduct
laws, saying officers are just trying to do their job.  Officers may feel it
is necessary to arrest someone on a minor charge to prevent the person from
committing a more serious crime, said Jim Pasco, executive director of the
National Fraternal Order of Police.

"The police don't write the laws, they don't prosecute the laws, they
just enforce the laws," said Mr. Pasco.  "Perhaps, they (the ACLU) would
address changing the law rather than harassing the police."

The ACLU's initiative stems from a 1996 class action against the Pittsburgh
police department over alleged widespread abuse and misconduct.  Mr. Walczak
said that at least a dozen of those complaints involved profanity arrests.
The police department agreed to federal oversight and the city agreed to
settle the lawsuits for a total of $275,000 last month, in an endeavor to
persuade the court and the Department of Justice that the Pittsburgh Police
were ready to function without federal oversight.

The ACLU said it was receiving five or six complaints a year from western
Pennsylvanians who were arrested for swearing, said Mr. Walczak.  Ms.
Upshaw's arrest was one of them.  Most municipalities have some provision
that allows police to arrest rowdy individuals, said Mr. Pasco.

The ACLU's second lawsuit last week stems from the arrest of Amy Johnson,
27, a Chatham University student, and Gregory Lagrosa, 29, a University of
Pittsburgh student.  According to the lawsuit, Ms. Johnson swore at a
passing Homestead police patrol car, which Ms. Johnson said came dangerously
close to the couple as they walked through a crosswalk.  The charges were
subsequently dismissed.

Homestead Mayor Betty Esper is standing firmly by the town's officers, who
handle approximately 900 calls a month.  She says preventing officers from
making arrests could have an adverse effect on society, particularly in
teaching children about manners.


SOUTH KOREA: Delay In Introduction Of Securities Suits Into Economy
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Securities-related class actions, which were to be introduced in April,
likely will not be introduced any time this year, reports the Korea Herald,
citing the Ministry of Finance and Economy.

According to a report by the Dow-Jones International News, the National
Assembly has not looked over the necessary bills, and, in fact, many
lawmakers are opposed to class actions, because of their sympathy to big
corporations, said a ministry official.

Another influential factor barring introduction of class actions this year,
is the upcoming presidential election in December.  Political parties are
unlikely to take actions that could arouse the ire of the business
community, said the same official, according to the Herald.

The People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPD), a civic group in
support of the class action lawsuit system, has been collecting signatures
from citizens to prod lawmakers to act on the necessary legislation leading
to introduction.  "The system should be introduced to protect investors and
realize economic justice," an official of the civic group said.

"Stock market institutions, including the Korea Stock Exchange, the Kosdaq
market and the Korea Futures Exchange, are also looking forward to an early
implementation of the class-action lawsuit system, because it could
invigorate the stock market by offering better protection to investors,"
said Korea Stock Exchange Chairman and CEO Kang Yung-joo.

He added, "To protect investors, enhance corporate transparency and improve
corporate governance structures, it is necessary to introduce class-action
lawsuits."


STRAWSER INC.: Motorists Sue For Unfinished Repair on Interstate 95
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Strawser, Inc. faces a class action after motorists damaged their vehicles
after driving through a newly-paved stretch of the Interstate 96, where the
tar had not yet set properly, the Detroit News reports.

An estimated 2,000 to 3,000 people drove through the I-96 on May 30 and 31
and found their vehicles stained with a tar-like substance that couldn't be
removed by scrubbing.  Bits of aggregate stuck in the tar also reportedly
damaged their vehicles.

Detroit law firm Macuga and Liddle filed the suit, accusing the Company of
being responsible for tarring that section of the road.  The suit claims the
Strawser company allowed the road to be re-opened to traffic even though the
tar it laid had not set properly.

Brian Einhorn, a Company attorney told the Detroit News that the damage
occurred to the vehicles after the last 1,000 to 1,500 feet of a
road-overlay project failed to set properly.  The Company has been working
with the Michigan Department of Transportation to get claims settled and to
figure out what went wrong.

"We're trying to come up with a procedure where people can come in and have
their cars inspected," Einhorn said.  "If there's no question the damage was
caused by the road, we'll work something out."

The project involved a technique called microsurfacing, where aggregate is
mixed with chemicals and used to seal the road, repelling water.  Unexpected
downpours on May 31 may have contributed to the breakdown, Ari Adler, a
state transportation department spokesman, told the Detroit News.  "It could
have been a combination of the weather, the stuff didn't set all the way and
there's some question if we opened the lanes too soon," he said.


UNITED STATES: USDA Seeks Stay of Order Halting Beef Checkoff Program
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) filed a motion seeking a
stay of a federal judge's decision to halt collections made in conjunction
with a beef checkoff program, pending an appeal by the department of the
judge's decision, the Associated Press Newswires reports.

US District Judge Charles B. Kornmann, in South Dakota, ruled recently that
the national beef checkoff program violated the First Amendment rights of
cattle producers and called for USDA to halt collection for that program
starting July 15.  USDA has filed an appeal of the decision and USDA is
seeking a stay of the halt on collections, pending that appeal, from the US
Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Since 1985, livestock producers have had to pay a mandatory $1-per-head fee
on cattle sold in the United States.  Half of that money goes to the
Cattlemen's Beef Promotion and Research Board and half to qualified state
beef councils.  The groups came up with the popular slogan, "Beef: It's
What's for Dinner."  Collection of the fee is done by collectors during a
checkoff of each head of cattle.

Those opposed to the checkoff are upset by, among other things, that the
advertisements promote beef in general, not American beef.  In his opinion,
Judge Kornmann said cattlemen should not be required to pay for commercials,
which are a form of speech they are opposed to.

USDA said the nationwide order to halt collections was too broad, and gave
as a reason, for example, that collection of the entire one dollar checkoff
was halted, even though only about half of each dollar goes to generic
advertising.  USDA's motion for the stay halting cessation of the program
said cattle producers would suffer minimal harm if required to take part in
the beef checkoff program while the appeal is pending.


VERIZON WIRELESS: Says CA Suit Settlement Will Have Nationwide Effect
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Verizon Wireless attorneys have filed new motions to dismiss a Louisiana
lawsuit accusing the company of misleading customers, arguing that a
proposed class action settlement in California would cover alleged victims
nationwide, according to a report by Associated Press Newswires.

Like the Louisiana lawsuit, the California case involves allegations that
the Company took steps to prevent people from using their cell phones with
other carriers, but did not disclose that to customers before they bought
the phones.  The class defined in the California case covers about 40
million people who had contracts in an 11-year span with the Company and
cell-phone companies it bought, said Nancy Stark, Company spokeswoman.

If approved by a state judge in San Diego, the settlement could mean new
customer service agreements and $15 coupons for allegedly deceived
customers.  The Company has not admitted any wrongdoing.  Ms. Stark said she
did not know how many people in Louisiana could be affected by the proposed
settlement.

Attorney Randy Estes, who represents Shane O'Quin in one of two Baton Rouge
lawsuits against the Company, said he also was unsure how many Louisiana
cellular phone customers would be affected.  "For whatever
reason, Verizon has not told us how many customers they have here," Mr.
Estes said.

US District Judge James Brady is considering whether the California
settlement would cover the alleged victims in the O'Quin lawsuit.  The
judge has ordered all written arguments on the issue to be submitted by
August 2.

Mr. O'Quin sued the Company in state District Court in Baton Rouge in
September 2001, but the suit was later moved to federal court.  Ms.
Georgianne Mire has a lawsuit similar to Mr. O'Quin's pending in federal
court in Baton Rouge.  It was not immediately clear how that case may be
affected.

The Company sold Mr. O'Quin a cellular phone and a monthly service contract,
Mr. O'Quin's lawsuit says.  The phone has a "subsidy lock" on it, something
the Company failed to disclose would render the phone useless with any other
cellular system, Mr. Estes said.  When customers asked about removing the
lock, the Company said they had to pay to get the code to unlock it, or, in
some cases, they refused to hand over the code at all, Mr. Estes said.
"That phone you thought you owned cannot be used with anybody else," he
added.

Attorney Thomas Roberts, who represents the Company, filed the motion to
throw out Mr. O'Quin's lawsuit in light of the proposed California
settlement.  Nearly everyone who could collect from any settlement of
the Baton Rouge cases can collect in the California settlement, Mr.
Roberts wrote in his motion to stop Mr. O'Quin's case while the
California settlement is decided.

The California settlement affects anyone who had cellular or wireless
service nationally with the Company or one of 12 other companies, from
January 1, 1991, through April 12, 2002.  The proposed settlement would
affect customers of:

     (1) Verizon Wireless,

     (2) Airtouch Cellular,

     (3) Ameritech Cellular Services,

     (4) Bell Atlantic Mobile,

     (5) Bell Atlantic Nynex Mobile,

     (6) GTE Wireless,

     (7) Metro Mobile,

     (8) Nynex Mobile,

     (9) Primeco,

    (10) Southwestco Wireless d/b/a Cellular One,

    (11) Comm Net,

    (12) Frontier Cellular and

    (13) US West Cellular

Mr. O'Quin's lawsuit affects essentially the same group, Mr. Roberts wrote.
Mr. Estes disagreed, saying, "I hope he's dead wrong...It will certainly
have an effect on our case, but what that is, I do not know."


WAR VETERANS: Fight For Compensation For British Veterans Gains Ground
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Two law firms have received public funding to look into the filing of a
class action on behalf of veterans and civilians exposed to British nuclear
tests in the South Pacific half a century ago, the Associated Press reports.

Alexander Harris and Clarke Willmott & Clarke law firms received funding
from the Legal Services Commission to investigate the strength of five test
cases before considering the launching of a compensation class action on
behalf of veterans and civilians from Britain, New Zealand and Fiji.

According to AP, Thousands of British and Commonwealth troops, and local
civilians, were exposed to atomic radiation from nuclear test explosions in
the Pacific between 1952 and 1963, the year that the International Nuclear
Testing Ban was signed.

Britain's Ministry of Defense has always denied the level of exposure was
sufficient to cause the illnesses cancer, muscular diseases,
gastrointestinal problems, heart conditions, asthma and loss of teeth and
hair, that those exposed later complained of.

The firms said they received new medical evidence linking the tests to
several illnesses, including cancer.  Mervyn Fudge, a partner at law firm
Clarke Willmott & Clarke, told AP recently published research shows "that
the stance taken by the Ministry of Defense is incorrect and that the
veterans have sustained injuries which should allow them to claim
compensation from the British government."

"From the information which is available to both ourselves and Alexander
Harris, we are at this time satisfied that such an action is sustainable and
would be successful," he said.

A Ministry of Defense spokesman told AP, however, independent studies had
shown no evidence of excess illness or mortality among the veterans.  "We
refute very strongly any suggestion that these veterans were used as guinea
pigs," he said on customary condition of anonymity.


                  New Securities Fraud Cases
AMDOCS LTD.: Stull Stull Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Stull, Stull & Brody initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of
all persons who purchased securities of Amdocs Limited (NYSE:DOX) common
stock between July 18, 2000 and June 20, 2002, inclusive, against the
Company and certain of its senior officers and directors.

The complaint charges Amdocs, Ltd., Amdocs, Inc. and certain of its
officers, during the specified time period, with violations of Sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Among other things, plaintiff claims that defendants' material omissions and
materially false and misleading statements regarding the nature of the
Company's revenue and business prospects caused the Company's stock price to
become artificially inflated, inflicting damages on investors.

The complaint alleges that, during the class period, defendants overstated
the Company's orders backlog and misrepresented or failed to fully disclose
the full extent of the Company's problems, including a declining backlog,
declining customer demand, inadequate Company technology, accounting
irregularities and problem acquisitions.

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


ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS: Chimicles & Tikellis Files PA Securities Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chimicles & Tikellis LLP initiated a securities class action Friday on
behalf of purchasers of the 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2006
issued by Adelphia Communications Corporation.  The suit was filed in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

The complaint alleges that Defendants violated Sections 11 and 15 of the
Securities Act of 1933 and 10(b) and 20 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 by misrepresenting or omitting material facts in the Registration
Statement and Prospectus used to sell the 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes
as well as in other public filings and statements made during the class
period.

The suit names as defendants:

     (1) John J. Rigas,

     (2) Timothy J. Rigas,

     (3) James P. Rigas,

     (4) Michael J. Rigas,

     (5) Perry S. Patterson,

     (6) Pete J. Metros,

     (7) Dennis P. Coyle,

     (8) Leslie J. Gelber,

     (9) Peter L. Venetis,

    (10) Daniel R. Millard,

    (11) Erland E. Kailbourne,

    (12) Deloitte & Touche LLP,

    (13) Salomon Smith Barney, Inc. and

    (14) Banc of America Securities LLC

The Company petitioned for protection from its creditor under Chapter 11 of
the Bankruptcy Act on June 25, 2002.  The Company is not a defendant to this
action.

The complaint alleges that the defendants misrepresented or failed to
disclose that, between March 27 and June 10, 2002, the Company overstated
its revenues, income and the number of basic cable television subscribers it
served.

On March 27, 2002, the Company announced that it would restate its financial
results for years 1999, 2001 and 2002 because of previously undisclosed
off-balance sheet loans to the Rigas family, the Company's then controlling
shareholders.  The defendants did not disclose until June 10, 2002 that the
Company's revenues, income and number of cable subscribers were also
inflated.

For more information, contact Nicholas E. Chimicles or Denise Davis
Schwartzman by Phone: 888-805-7848 or by E-mail:
deniseschwartzman@chimicles.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.chimicles.com


CRYOLIFE INC.: Holzer & Holzer Commences Securities Suit in Georgia
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Holzer & Holzer initiated a securities class action in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Georgia on behalf of purchasers
of CryoLife, Inc. (NYSE:CRY) publicly traded securities during the period
between August 11, 2000 and June 26, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint charges that the Company, although purporting to be a "leader
in the development and commercialization of implantable human tissue" and
that "patient safety is of paramount concern to us" was, in reality not in
compliance with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines. Inherent in
those representations is that the Company abides by and follows all FDA
rules, regulations, and guidelines.

The complaint alleges that on June 17, 2002, the FDA sent a letter to the
Company detailing a laundry list of deficiencies and safety hazards at the
Company's Kennesaw, Georgia facility.  The suit alleges that on June 24,
2002, the Company issued a press release, which stated that "since its
inception, it has never before received a warning letter."

The complaint alleges that this statement was blatantly false as the Company
received a similar FDA warning letter in 1997 which detailed "serious
regulatory problems."  The complaint further alleges that the effect on the
Company's stock price was significant and dramatic as the stock fell 18% on
June 25, 2002 and an additional 16% on June 26, 2002. After trading as high
as $31.31 on May 3, 2002, the stock dipped below $16.00 per share on June
27, 2002.

For more details, contact Michael I. Fistel, Jr. by Phone: 404-847-0085 if
in Atlanta or 888-508-6832 if outside Atlanta or by E-mail:
michaelfisteljr@msn.com


CRYOLIFE INC.: Mark McNair Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. GA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Office Of Mark McNair initiated a securities class action on behalf
of shareholders who acquired CryoLife, Inc. (NYSE:CRY) securities between
August 11, 2000 and June 26, 2002, inclusive, in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, against the
Company and:

     (1) Steven G. Anderson and

     (2) Albert E. Heacox

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

For more details, contact Mark McNair by Mail: 1101 30th St N.W. Suite 500,
Washington, D.C 20007 by Phone: 877-511-4717 or 202-872-4717 by E-mail:
mcnair@justice4investors.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.justice4investors.com


INTERLIANT INC.: Brualdi Law Firm Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Brualdi Law Firm 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 Interliant, Inc. (Nasdaq: INIT) between
the period of August 4, 1999 and April 8, 2002, inclusive against Merrill
Lynch & Co., Inc. and its former Internet analyst, Henry M. Blodget.

The suit alleges that to obtain and enhance Merrill Lynch's lucrative
investment banking relationship with Interliant, Inc., defendants issued
analyst reports and positive ratings on Interliant, Inc. which were
materially false and misleading in that they were inconsistent with the
defendants' own private assessments of the Company, omitted to disclose
material, non-public, adverse information that defendants possessed about
Interliant, Inc. and failed to disclose significant, material conflicts of
interest.

For more details, contact Richard B. Brualdi by Mail: 29 Broadway, Suite
1515, New York, New York 10006 by Phone: 212-952-0602 by Fax: 212-952-0608
or by E-mail: rbrualdi@earthlink.net.


MERCK & CO.: Wechsler Harwood Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Wechsler Harwood Halebian & Feffer LLP initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, on
behalf of all investors who bought Merck & Co., Inc. (NYSE:MRK) common stock
between July 1, 1999 and June 21, 2002, inclusive against the Company and
certain of its senior officers and directors.

According to the complaint, the Company overstated revenues by billions of
dollars from its subsidiary Merck-Medco Managed Care, L.L.C. by including
customer co-payments for prescription drugs in its revenues. During the
class period, co-payments comprised approximately 10% of the Company's total
revenues.

The lawsuit claims that the Company violated Generally Accepted Accounting
Practices because neither company bills for the co-payments, gets billed for
them, or otherwise comes into contact with co-payment money. Patients make
co-payments directly to pharmacies when they purchase medicine.

On June 21, 2002, The Wall Street Journal reported on the Company's
accounting practices and estimated that the Company and Merck-Medco may have
overstated their 2001 revenues by as much as $4.6 billion.  On July 8, 2002,
The Wall Street Journal reported that the Company's revenues for 1999 and
2000 were overstated by approximately $12.6 billion.

According to the complaint, the Company admitted that the Company had been
recording prescription drug co-payments as revenue since it acquired
Merck-Medco in 1993.

On June 21, 2002, Company stock fell precipitously from its closing price of
$52.20 on June 20, 2002 to a closing price of $49.98 on June 21, 2002, its
lowest closing price since late 1997.  On the heels of the July 8, 2002
revelations, the price of the Company's common stock dipped further and
closed at $47.81 per share on the same day.

For more details, contact David Leifer by Mail: 488 Madison Avenue, 8th
Floor, New York, New York 10022 by Phone: 877-935-7400 or by E-mail:
dleifer@whhf.com


MERRILL LYNCH: Stull Stull Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Stull, Stull & Brody LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of
purchasers of Merrill Lynch Internet Infrastructure Holdrs depository
receipts issued by the Merrill Lynch Internet Infrastructure Holdrs/SM Trust
(AMEX:IIH) between February 24, 2000 and April 8, 2002, inclusive.  The suit
names as defendants, Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., Merrill Lynch Pierce, Fenner
& Smith, the Trust and signatories of the Registration Statement and
Prospectus issued on behalf of the Trust.

The suit alleges that defendant violated Sections 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of
the Securities Act of 1933 by issuing a series of false and misleading
statements, and omissions of material fact contained in the Prospectus filed
with the SEC on February 24, 2000, for the issuance and initial public
offering of one billion Internet Infrastructure HOLDRS.

In particular, it is alleged that the prospectus was materially false and
misleading because it failed to disclose that defendants recommended the
purchase of and set price targets for stocks of certain of the companies
that were included as assets of the Trust without any reasonable factual
basis therefore failed to disclose significant material conflicts of
interest to obtain investment banking business for Merrill Lynch and failed
to disclose material, non-public, adverse information which they possessed
about such companies, as well as their true opinion about such companies.

It is further alleged that the prospectus failed to disclose that,
consequently, stocks of the underlying securities covered by Merrill Lynch
traded at artificially inflated prices, which in turn artificially inflated
the price of the Internet Infrastructure Holdrs throughout the class period,
causing plaintiff and the other members of the class to suffer damages.

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


PERKINELMER INC.: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in MA Court
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class action
on behalf of shareholders who acquired PerkinElmer, Inc. (NYSE:PKI)
securities between July 15, 2001 and April 11, 2002, inclusive, in the
United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, against the
Company and:

     (1) Gregory L. Summe and

     (2) Robert F. Friel

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

For more information, contact 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


RELIANT RESOURCES: Wolf Haldenstein Launches Securities Suit in S.D. TX
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Texas, Houston Division, on behalf of purchasers of the securities of
Reliant Resources, Inc. between May 1, 2001 and May 10, 2002, inclusive,
against the Company, and certain of its officers and directors.

The suit alleges that defendants violated 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.

During the class period, defendants released statements concerning the
Company's quarterly and annual financial performance and filed reports
substantiating such performance with the United States Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC).

The suit alleges that these statements were materially false and misleading
because 10% of the Company's confirmed and represented revenues in 1999 and
2000 were composed of purchases and sales referred to as "round trip trades,
" transactions involving the simultaneous buying and trading of power in the
same price and same amount and provide no economic benefit to the Company.
The suit further alleges that some transactions in the Company's
conventional accrual accounts were improperly described as cash flow hedges.

On May 10, 2002, the Company announced to the investing public that a $500
million private placement debt offering, priced on May 9, 2002, would be
withdrawn, affected by their "round trip" trades.  Pursuant to this
statement, the Company's common stock underwent a single-day reduction of
more than 25% on high trading volume and a decline of more than 55% from the
class period high.

For more details, contact Fred Taylor Isquith, Gregory Nespole, Gustavo
Bruckner, Michael Miske, George Peters or Derek Behnke by Mail: 270 Madison
Avenue, New York, New York 10016 by Phone: 800-575-0735 by E-mail:
classmember@whafh.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.whafh.com.
All e-mail correspondence should make reference to Reliant Resources.


                              *********

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  * * *