CAR_Public/020724.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
             Wednesday, July 24, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 145

                          Headlines

GENERAL MOTORS: Faces Suit Over Planned Acquisition of Daewoo Motor
HEARTLAND ADVISORS: Federal Court Approves $14M Securities Settlement
IDAHO: Federal Judge Dismisses Environmental Suit Against Field Burning
INDIAN FUNDS: Report Asserts Indians Owed Less Than Lawsuit Claims
RAFFLES TOWN: Lawyers Offer Evidence in Misrepresentation Suit

UICI: Enters Into Memorandum of Understanding in Securities Suit in TX
UNITED STATES: Bush Named in Suit Over Military Assistance to Israel
VASCA INC.: Faces Suit Over Lifesite Hemodialysis System in CA Court
VERSATA INC.: Reaches Securities Suit Settlement Agreement in N.D. CA

                   New Securities Fraud Cases     

360NETWORKS INC.: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in NY
AMDOCS LTD.: Schiffrin & Barroway Commences Securities Suit in E.D. MO
AMERICAN EXPRESS: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
CAPITOL ONE: Glancy & Binkow Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA
CAPITOL ONE: Brian Felgoise Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA

CAPITOL ONE: Charles Piven Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA
CAPITOL ONE: Cohen Milstein Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA
CMS ENERGY: Keller Rohrback, Others File Breach of Fiduciary Duty Suit
EL PASO: Glancy & Binkow Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. Texas
GREAT ATLANTIC: Bernstein Liebhard Launches Securities Fraud Suit in NJ

KNIGHT TRADING: Wolf Haldenstein Launches Securities Suit in New Jersey
MONTANA POWER: Wechsler Harwood Commences Securities Suit in Montana
MONTANA POWER: Dyer & Shuman Commences Securities Fraud Suit in Montana
MUTUAL RISK: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. CA
NICOR INC.: Pomerantz Haudek Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA

REHABCARE GROUP: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Suit in E.D. MO
REHABCARE GROUP: Bernstein Liebhard Launches Securities Suit in E.D. MO
SEEBEYOND TECHNOLOGIES: Robert Susser Commences Securities Suit in CA
SONUS NETWORKS: Cauley Geller Commences Securities Suit in MA Court
VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA

VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
WORLDCOM INC.: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Suit in MS Court
                              
                           *********

GENERAL MOTORS: Faces Suit Over Planned Acquisition of Daewoo Motor
-------------------------------------------------------------------
350 Daewoo dealerships are planning to file a class action against
General Motors Corporation and Daewoo Motor Co., relating to General
Motor's plan to acquire assets of the Korean automaker, the Business
Journal of Kansas City reported.

The planned suit, proposed by law firm Myers & Fuller PA of
Tallahassee, Florida, will be filed in the next couple of weeks,
possibly on both state and federal levels.  Dan Myers, a partner with
Myers & Fuller, told the Business Journal, the suit will seek money on
behalf of dealers for damages, including lack of support for Daewoo
products and interference with dealers' business relationships.

As General Motors is currently finishing its acquisition of Daewoo, US
Daewoo dealers expressed uncertainty whether new Daewoos will be
covered by warranty, whether they will be reimbursed for warranty work
or whether parts will be available to do the work.

"To say it's a convoluted mess would be the grossest understatement you
have ever heard in your life," Mr. Myers told the Journal.

Jerry Dubrowski, a spokesman for General Motors, said Daewoo will honor
warranties until the assets are acquired by GM's group. After that, a
trust fund will pay for warranty work, he said.  "There is no basis for
a legal claim against General Motors," he told the Journal.


HEARTLAND ADVISORS: Federal Court Approves $14M Securities Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------------
US District Judge J.P. Stadtmueller recently approved a $14 million
partial settlement of the class action against Heartland Advisors Inc.
and related parties, The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports.

After lawyers fees and reimbursements of nearly $3.7 million, the
remaining $10.3 million will be divided among some 10,000 to 11,000
shareholders of two ill-fated Heartland bond funds whose value
plummeted by millions of dollars in October 2000.  At that time, the
Company marked down the net asset value of its High-Yield Municipal
Bond Fund by 69 percent and its Short Duration High-Yield Municipal
Fund by 44 percent.

The settlement will give High-Yield fund shareholders an average of 32
cents a share.  Short Duration fund shareholders would get an average
of 17 cents a share, according to court documents.  However, the amount
shareholders receive will be influenced by the extent of their actual
losses.  Also, the amount paid to those who bought their shares before
October 26, 1997, will be reduced by 50 percent.

One of the biggest factors influencing the settlement was the agreement
of all the parties that class members would be unlikely to collect much
more than $14 million after litigating the lawsuit further.

The Company contributed its entire $10 million insurance policy, plus
another $4 million to the settlement.  The Company also paid more than
$5 million in defense costs, even though its insurance policy was set
up to pay those costs first.

William J. Nasgovitz, president of Heartland Advisors, advanced $9
million to Heartland Holdings for the additional $4 million for the
shareholders and the $5 million defense costs.  His contribution was a
"very substantial portion of his net worth," said C. Oliver Burt, lead
lawyer for the plaintiffs, who had reviewed the financial statements of
Mr. Nasgovitz and Heartland.

None of the six bond fund shareholders who had objected to the
settlement appeared at the federal courthouse for the fairness hearing.  
Class members are still seeking damages from Pricewaterhouse Coopers
LLP, the accounting firm for the bond funds.


IDAHO: Federal Judge Dismisses Environmental Suit Against Field Burning
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Idaho Federal Judge Edward Lodge dismissed a lawsuit filed by advocacy
group Safe Air for Everyone, against Coeur d'Alene, North Idaho's
Kentucky bluegrass farmers, to ban field burning.

Last year, the farmers on the Rathdrum Prairie and the Coeur d'Alene
Indian Reservation burned 7,000 acres of bluegrass on the prairie and
30,000 acres on the reservation.  The practice increases seed yields
for the following year's crops, but sends plumes of smoke into the air.
Farmers said they could begin the 45-day burn season within two weeks,
but have not finished registering with the state, the Spokesman-Review
reports.

The suit alleges that burning grass stubble constitutes burning the
grass stubble constitutes the disposal of a hazardous waste and
presented a threat to public health.  Although the practice does not
violate federal air quality standards, SAFE argued those standards are
inadequate to deal with large short-term emissions.  Federal air
standards are based on 24-hour or yearlong averages, but the burns
typically last only a few hours, the Spokesman-Review states.

"There's a tremendous gap in the existing regulatory schemes at the
state and federal levels," Patti Gora, SAFE's executive director, told
the Review.  "We need provisions to regulate these `hit-and-run
polluters' who can fill up the entire airshed with pollution that is
not only debilitating but may be causing death.  That must be
addressed."

Just because the federal standards aren't violated, "doesn't mean that
there aren't environmental or health impacts," Scott Downey, a regional
air quality specialist with the Environmental Protection Agency in
Seattle, told the Review.  "The plumes can come in so quick, that one
minute it will be at a background level and within a half hour it will
be at a spike."

SAFE asked for burn ban while the federal lawsuit proceeded, but Judge
Lodge's decision rendered the request moot.  In his ruling, Judge Lodge
wrote that Idaho's Legislature has addressed both the economic need for
field burning and the impacts on public health.  "The remedy, if any,
lies with Congress or the state legislature - not the courts," he
added.

The farmers, however, still face a possible burn ban request as a
Seattle law firm is preparing a class action against them.

"This is the first quarter; this is not the end of the game," said Gary
Baise, the growers' Washington, DC, attorney.  He told the Spokesman-
Review that SAFE failed to establish that the farmers' burns resulted
in spikes in medical problems, including asthma attacks and other
respiratory illnesses.

SAFE will quickly consider whether to appeal the decision to the 9th
Circuit Court of Appeals, said attorney Joel Gross.


INDIAN FUNDS: Report Asserts Indians Owed Less Than Lawsuit Claims
------------------------------------------------------------------
Most trust fund accounts held by American Indians receive less that
$1,000 in royalties each year, according to government figures that
challenge the Indians' claim that they are owed billions of dollars in
unpaid royalties, according to a report by USA Today.

The figures, buried in the back of a report the Interior Department
submitted to Congress earlier this month, show that about 77 percent of
trust accounts held by individual Indians received a maximum $1,000
each year between 1985 and 2000 from farmers, mining company owners and
others who lease Indian lands.  Forty-one percent of the 193,766
account holders received royalties of $100 or less each year, the
report says.

Indians say the new figures are unreliable because Interior officials
did not always properly record leases.

A class action filed on behalf of 300,000 Indians contends the Interior
Department mismanaged trust accounts and lost at least $10 billion
going back 1887, when the accounts were first created.  Interior
officials say they may have misplaced millions of dollars at most.

The new report was designed to give Congress information on how much
money and time would be required to determine how much money Interior
officials might have misplaced.

The House is set to vote Wednesday on the fiscal 2003 Interior
Department spending bill, which includes a provision that would allow
the department to search as far back as 1985, when the record-keeping
became computerized, but no further, for money that might have been
lost.  The report, submitted to Congress on July 3, does not address
whether the department is collecting all the money it should be
collecting.

"Until we get into the paper records and analyze the account ledgers
and histories, we will not know what actually happened in the
accounts," said Jeff Zippin, deputy director of the department's Office
of Historical Trust Accounting.

Interior officials say they have collected $13 billion since 1909, for
the trust fund accounts, a figure that includes other trust accounts
created to pay out money awarded to settle suits filed by the Indians
and to settle claims they filed against the federal government.

Keith Harper, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs in their class
action, said the new report shows Interior officials are pulling
numbers "out of the air."  Since 1985, when the department computerized
its Indian trust fund records, only 60 to 75  percent of the leases
were recorded in the department's computer databases, Mr. Harper said.  
Before 1985, he said, only five percent of the leases were recorded.

The plaintiffs' lawyers arrived at their $10 billion estimate of
missing money by using a computer model to recreate the royalties they
say should have been recorded.  Mr. Harper said the Interior Department
report "is looking at a very small minority of the total transactions.  
You never get the idea of what the universe of dollars is."

However, House appropriators cited the report in committee meetings
last week to bolster their contention that the department misplaced
millions, not billions, of dollars.

The Interior's recent report establishes the policy rationale for the
House's new stance of using 1985 as the cutoff point for examination of
trust account records.  In 1994, however, Congress ordered Interior
officials to account for all trust fund monies.  Then, in 1999, the
judge hearing the class action and the sorry picture it presents of the
government's fulfillment of fiduciary duties to the Indians, issued a
demand identical to Congress' - an accounting for all trust fund
monies.


RAFFLES TOWN: Lawyers Offer Evidence in Misrepresentation Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs in the class action against the Raffles Town Club in
Singapore presented letters sent to them as evidence that the Club
breached its promises to them, the Business Times reports.

The suit charges the club with misrepresentation and/or breach of
contract, alleging that in late 1996, the plaintiffs were misled into
joining the club by statements made in its brochure that it would be
exclusive and premier.  The suit further claims that these statements
constitute part of the membership contract.

Lead attorney Molly Lim argued before the court that some members of
Raffles Town Club were told by the club following delays to its
completion that it would be finished just as depicted in its membership
brochure, the Business Times reports.  She showed the court several
letters sent to members between late 1998 and early 2000, of which one
was signed by the club's legal manager at the time, Brendan Don.

The letters were sent to people who had asked why the club had not been
completed by late 1998 and to some who were late in paying membership
fee installments.  A letter dated Jan 31, 2000 and signed by Mr. Don
sought members' "kind understanding that we have not failed in our
contractual obligation to our members."

It said delays in the club's opening were due to unforeseen technical
difficulties and added, "We have promised to deliver the club and we
will do so. All our members can rest assured, and have our unqualified
assurance, that we will deliver the club as depicted in our membership
brochures," the Business Report states.

Another letter, sent in September 1998 and signed by RTC's marketing
communications manager Jennifer Wee-Almodiel said, "On behalf of RTC
Ltd, we would like to state that it is our every intention to deliver
up to members a club with a standard and quality of lifestyle as
depicted in our membership brochures."

The letters were presented by Ms Lim as evidence yesterday as she
cross-examined RTC's current legal adviser Francis Lee, who testified
as the first defense witness.  

Mr Lee, who became RTC's legal adviser in August 2001, said in his
affidavit that it is RTC's case that its membership application form
and the letter of acceptance sent to members formed a contract between
the parties, and that the contractual terms were in these two documents
as well as in RTC's rules and regulations. He said letters of
invitation to join the club, as well as its brochure and question-and-
answer sheet, constituted 'nothing more than advertisements'.
Under cross-examination, Mr Lee said he was not aware of the letters
produced by Ms Lim, the Business Times reports.


UICI: Enters Into Memorandum of Understanding in Securities Suit in TX
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Health insurer UICI (NYSE: UCI) entered into a memorandum of
understanding with the plaintiffs in the securities class action
pending against it in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Texas.

The suit alleges, among other things, that the Company's periodic
filings with the SEC contained untrue statements of material facts
and/or failed to disclose all material facts relating to the condition
of the Company's credit card business.

The suit alleges violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, on behalf of persons who
purchased the Company's common stock from February 10, 1999 through
December 9, 1999.

The parties entered into the memorandum, agreeing, without admitting or
denying liability and provided that certain conditions are satisfied,
to fully and finally resolve the litigation.  The Company believes that
the terms of the settlement as contemplated by the memorandum of
understanding will not have a material adverse effect upon the
financial condition or results of operations of the Company.

Final settlement is subject to execution and delivery of definitive
settlement and release documentation (the terms of which have not yet
been negotiated), completion of confirmatory discovery, preliminary
approval by the US District Court of the settlement terms, notice of
settlement to the plaintiff class, and final, binding, and non-
appealable approval by the US District Court.


UNITED STATES: Bush Named in Suit Over Military Assistance to Israel
--------------------------------------------------------------------
President George Bush, Secretary of State Colin Powell and Israeli
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon face a lawsuit filed by a Washington-based
human rights group, asking the President to "cease providing military
assistance to Israel until they have reported to Congress the misuse of
American military assistance by Israel," as required under the Arms
Export Control Act of 1976 on behalf of 21 Palestinians, most of them
United States citizens, the Arab News reports.

"These plaintiffs are not militants even by Israel's definition. None
committed any crimes, before their houses were destroyed, killed, or
assaulted," Attorney Stanley Cohen, who filed the lawsuit this week for
Solidarity International for Human Rights, a non-profit Palestinian-
American organization based in Washington, told Arab News.

The suit also names as defendants:

     (1) the state of Israel

     (2) Natan Sharanski,

     (3) Shimon Peres,

     (4) the Boeing Company,

     (5) McDonnell Douglas Helicopter Systems,

     (6) the Halamish/Neve Settlement,

     (7) Christ Lutheran Church,

     (8) Central Fund for Israel,

     (9) Rabbi Yosef Adler,

    (10) Arnon Hiller,

    (11) Joav Merrick,

    (12) Ruth Kohn,

    (13) Jay Marcus

The suit states that "the state of Israel and its allies have engaged
in genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, extra judicial
killings, torture, arbitrary arrest and detention, wrongful death,
battery, assault, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of
emotional distress, negligence per se, trespass, and conversion during
the massacres of Sabra and Shatila refugee camps from September 16-18,
1982 until what is occurring to the present day."

Mr. Cohen, head of Solidarity's team of lawyers, said the state of
Israel has continued its assault against the Palestinian people and is
the leading "sponsor of terrorism" in the world today, according to the
Arab News.  In addition, he added, "the plaintiffs have suffered
significant losses of life (of loved ones), limb, family, or property
as a result of the continuing illegal acts of Israel and its armed
forces or settler populations in the Occupied Territories, and in
Sabra-Shatila twenty years earlier."

The suit, filed in the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia, is not a class action, but Solidarity and Mr. Cohen say they
plan to soon seek class action status on behalf of all the plaintiffs
next month, according to Arab News. The current plaintiffs are
individual United States citizens or resident aliens, all of whom are
Palestinian-Americans.


VASCA INC.: Faces Suit Over Lifesite Hemodialysis System in CA Court
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Vasca, Inc. faces a class action relating to its LifeSite hemodialysis
access delivery system, pending in the United States District Court in
San Francisco on behalf of Evelyn Cuevas and others implanted with the
LifeSite system,

According to the suit, the US Food and Drug Administration has received
at least 129 complaints, including alleged deaths and serious injuries,
experienced by patients using the LifeSite system.  The suit further
contends that Vasca failed to timely report complaints.

For more details, contact William M. Audet by Mail: 152 North Third
Street, Suite 600, San Jose CA 95112 by Phone: 408-289-1776 by Fax:
408-287-1776 by E-mail: waudet@alexanderlaw.com or Ryan M. Hagan
rhagan@alexanderlaw.com or visit the Website:
http://www.vascainjurylaw.com.  


VERSATA INC.: Reaches Securities Suit Settlement Agreement in N.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Versata, Inc. (Nasdaq: VATA) reached an agreement in principle to
settle a securities class action pending against it and its current and
former officers and directors in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of California.  An agreement has also been
reached to settle a related derivative action pending in California
state court.

The agreement to settle both lawsuits calls for a payment of $9.75
million in cash by the Company's insurance carriers and the issuance of
200,000 shares of Company's common stock. The agreement for both
lawsuits is subject to execution of definitive settlement documents and
Court approval.  The agreement for settlement does not constitute any
admission of wrongdoing on the part of the Company or the individual
defendants.

"We are very pleased to reach an agreement to put these actions behind
us. Management can now unequivocally focus on the Company's future and
the achievement of the Company's strategic goals," said Jim Doehrman,
COO and CFO of Versata, in a statement.

                      New Securities Fraud Cases     

360NETWORKS INC.: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in NY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP initiated a securities class action
on behalf of all persons who purchased or acquired 360 Networks Inc.
(NASDAQ: TSIXQ) securities between November 8, 2000 and June 28, 2001,
in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York.

The suit alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the
market between November 8, 2000 and June 28, 2001, thereby artificially
inflating the price of Company shares.

The complaint alleges that throughout the class period, the Company
reported strong year-over-year revenue growth.  Unbeknownst to
investors, however, as alleged in the complaint, the Company was
experiencing diminishing revenue growth.

The complaint alleges that in order to create the impression that the
Company was continuing to experience growth, the Company engaged in a
series of reciprocal transactions with certain competitors for the
purchase and sale of dark fiber optic cable - the so-called dark fiber
swap.

The complaint alleges that as a result of these transactions, the
Company artificially inflated its operating results and materially
misrepresented its financial results at all relevant times.

For more details, contact Ms. Linda Flood, Director of Shareholder
Relations by Phone: 10 East 40th Street, New York, New York 10016 by
Phone: 800-217-1522 or 212-779-1414 or by E-mail: TSIXQ@bernlieb.com.  


AMDOCS LTD.: Schiffrin & Barroway Commences Securities Suit in E.D. MO
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri on
behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Amdocs Limited (NYSE:
DOX) common stock during the period between July 18, 2000 and June 20,
2002, inclusive.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its
business and financial condition.  Specifically, the complaint alleges
that these statements failed to disclose, among other things, that the
Company's business and operations were being negatively affected by a
host of adverse factors, including, but not limited to:

     (1) the Company was experiencing declining sales as its business
         began to be affected by adverse market forces; and

     (2) the Company artificially inflated its financial statements by
         maintaining inadequate reserves for doubtful accounts and
         failing to disclose that the Company's revenue growth
         improperly included revenues from a recent acquisition.

Furthermore, defendants lacked a reasonable basis upon which to publish
and/or affirm the revenue guidance they provided to analysts and
investors.

For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz or Stuart L. Berman by Mail:
Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone:
888-299-7706 (toll free) or 610-667-7706 or by E-mail:
info@sbclasslaw.com

                    
AMERICAN EXPRESS: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class
action on behalf of shareholders who acquired American Express Company
(NYSE:AXP) securities between July 18, 1999 and July 17, 2001,
inclusive.  The suit is pending in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of New York, against the Company and:

     (1) Kenneth I. Chenault,

     (2) Harvey Golub,

     (3) David R. Hubers and

     (4) James M. Cracchiolo

The action 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 Charles J. Piven by Mail: The World Trade
Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore,
Maryland 21202 by Phone: 410-986-0036 by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com
or visit the firm's Website: http://www.pivenlaw.com


CAPITOL ONE: Glancy & Binkow Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Glancy & Binkow LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on behalf of
a class consisting of all persons who purchased securities of Capital
One Financial Corporation (NYSE:COF) between January 15, 2002 and July
16, 2002, inclusive.

The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors
with violations of federal securities laws.  Among other things,
plaintiff claims that defendants' material omissions and the
dissemination of materially false and misleading statements regarding
the nature of the Company's business operations and earnings caused its
stock price to become artificially inflated, inflicting damages on
investors.

The suit alleges that defendants failed to disclose that the Company
has a large percentage of "subprime" customers, borrowers with either
poor credit histories or from low-income households.  The Company
failed to maintain adequate loan loss reserves, thereby artificially
inflating the Company's earnings and stock price.

When it was revealed that federal regulators told the Company to
increase its loan loss reserves and improve the technology that the
Company uses to provide loans and credit cards to subprime consumers,
the Company's stock price plummeted 39% in one day.

For more details, contact Lionel Z. Glancy or Michael Goldberg by Mail:
1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 311, Los Angeles, California 90067 by
Phone: 310-201-9161 or 888-773-9224 or by E-mail: info@glancylaw.com.


CAPITOL ONE: Brian Felgoise Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise, PC initiated a securities class
action has been commenced on behalf of shareholders who acquired
Capital One Financial Corp. (NYSE:COF) securities between January 15,
2002 and July 16, 2002, inclusive.  The case is pending in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria
Division, against the Company and certain key officers and directors.

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

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


CAPITOL ONE: Charles Piven Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class
action on behalf of shareholders who acquired Capital One Financial
Corp. (NYSE:COF) securities between January 15, 2002 and July 16, 2002,
inclusive, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District
of Virginia, Alexandria Division, against the Company and:

     (1) Richard D. Fairbank,

     (2) Nigel W. Morris and

     (3) David M. Willey

The action 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 Charles J. Piven by Mail: The World Trade
Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore,
Maryland 21202 by Phone: 410-986-0036 by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com
or visit the firm's Website: http://www.pivenlaw.com


CAPITOL ONE: Cohen Milstein Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, PLLC initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Virginia, Alexandria Division, on behalf of its client and purchasers
of Capital One Financial Corporation (NYSE:COF) securities during the
period between January 18, 2002 and July 16, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that the Company and certain of its officers and
directors violated sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, by issuing a series of materially false and misleading
statements to the investing public.

The complaint alleges that defendants failed to disclose that they did
not maintain adequate loan loss reserves and failed to disclose the
full scope and nature of the Company's subprime lending and its
inadequate internal controls.  On July 16, 2002, defendants finally
revealed that nearly 40% of the Company's loans were made to high-risk
borrowers.

The company also disclosed that as a result of a memorandum of
understanding with federal regulators, the Company would need to
increase the amount of its loss reserves.  On July 17, 2002, the
Company stock price plunged by 39%.

For more details, contact Daniel S. Sommers or Angela Wallis Cohen by
Mail: 1100 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 500, West Tower, Washington,
D.C. 20005 by Phone: 888-240-0775 or 202-408-4600 by E-mail:
dsommers@cmht.com or awallis@cmht.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.cmht.com  


CMS ENERGY: Keller Rohrback, Others File Breach of Fiduciary Duty Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Keller Rohrback, Mazur Morgan Meyers & Kittel and Campbell, Harrison &
Dagley have filed a 401(k) breach of fiduciary duty class action
against CMS Energy Corp. (NYSE:CMS) on behalf of participants and
beneficiaries of the Company's 401(k) retirement plan from August 3,
2000 through the present.

The complaint alleges that the Company, and its plan administrators,
breached their fiduciary duties of loyalty and prudence when they
withheld or concealed material information from the 401(k) Plan
participants and beneficiaries with respect to the Company's business,
financial results and operations, thereby encouraging current and
former employees to continue to make and maintain substantial
investments in Company stock in the Plan.

For more details, contact Jennifer Tuato'o by Phone: 800-776-6044 by E-
mail: investor@kellerrohrback.com or visit the Websites:
http://www.erisafraud.comor http://www.seattleclassaction.com


EL PASO: Glancy & Binkow Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. Texas
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Glancy & Binkow LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Texas on behalf of a
class consisting of all persons who purchased securities of El Paso
Corporation (NYSE:EP) between July 25, 2001 and May 29, 2002,
inclusive.

The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors
with violations of federal securities laws.  Among other things,
plaintiff claims that defendants' material omissions and the
dissemination of materially false and misleading statements regarding
the nature of the Company's trading practices and revenues caused its
stock price to become artificially inflated, inflicting damages on
investors.

For more details, contact Michael Goldberg by Mail: 1801 Avenue of the
Stars, Suite 311, Los Angeles, California 90067 by Phone: 310-201-9161
or 888-773-9224 or by E-mail: info@glancylaw.com.  


GREAT ATLANTIC: Bernstein Liebhard Launches Securities Fraud Suit in NJ
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz LLP initiated a securities class action
on behalf of all persons who purchased or acquired Great Atlantic &
Pacific Tea Company, Inc. (NYSE:GAP) securities between November 15,
2001 and May 28, 2002, in the United States District Court, District of
New Jersey.

The suit alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the
market between November 15, 2001 and May 28, 2002, thereby artificially
inflating the price of Company securities.

Throughout the class period, as alleged in the complaint, defendants
issued statements regarding the Company's quarterly and annual
financial performance and filed reports confirming such performance
with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

The complaint alleges that these statements were materially false and
misleading because, among other things:

     (1) the Company was employing improper accounting practices
         regarding the recognition of vendor allowances and the
         accounting of inventory in certain of its regions for fiscal
         year 2001 in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting
         Principles.  As a result, the Company's operating results were
         materially misrepresented and overstated; and

     (2) based on the foregoing, defendants' statements concerning the
         prospects of the Company were lacking in a reasonable basis at
         all times.

On May 28, 2002, the last day of the class period, the Company
announced that it would delay the filing of its annual report with the
SEC while it conducted an accounting review which will most likely
result in a charge to earnings.  The accounting review will focus on
the appropriate timing for the recognition of vendor allowances and the
accounting of inventory in certain of the Company's regions for fiscal
year 2001.

The Company further noted that a substantial portion of any charge the
Company will take will reverse credits which were recognized
prematurely as reductions of cost of merchandise sold, and that portion
will therefore be recognized in periods subsequent to fiscal 2001 as
reductions of cost of merchandise sold.

Following this disclosure, Company stock fell $4.03 per share, or
approximately 16%, to close on May 28, 2002 at $21.070 per share.

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


KNIGHT TRADING: Wolf Haldenstein Launches Securities Suit in New Jersey
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of New
Jersey, on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Knight Trading
Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: NITE) between February 29, 2000 and June 3, 2002,
inclusive, against the Company and Kenneth D. Pasternak.

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.

Specifically, the suit alleges that the defendants failed to disclose
that Company traders had systematically engaged in "front-running," a
practice in violation of securities trading rules.

By engaging in these practices, Company traders delayed customer orders
while Company traders made purchases in the same stocks for which its
customers were placing orders.  Only after the Company traders had made
their own purchases would the Company's customers' orders for those
same stocks be processed.  This practice had the impact of inflating
the prices of those stocks and generating a windfall profit to the
defendants as they collected profits that should properly have
benefited the Company's customers.

This fraudulent scheme and its effect on Company customer transactions
finally came to light on June 3, 2002, when it was announced that both
the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) and the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) were investigating the
Company's trading practices.

The following day, June 4, 2002, as the market absorbed the revelations
of the Company's illegal trading practices and the SEC and NASD
investigations, the market price of Company stock plunged 28% in a
single day of trading.

For more details, contact Fred Taylor Isquith, 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 Knight Trading.


MONTANA POWER: Wechsler Harwood Commences Securities Suit in Montana
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Wechsler Harwood Halebian & Feffer LLP initiated a securities class
action on behalf of shareholders who acquired Montana Power Company,
n/k/a Touch America Holdings, Inc. (NYSE:TAA) securities between
January 30, 2001 and November 14, 2001, inclusive.  The case is pending
in the United States District Court for the District of Montana,
against the Company and Robert Gannon.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors violated the federal securities by issuing false and
misleading statements concerning its business and financial condition.
Specifically, defendants issued positive statements regarding the
Company's successful restructuring from an energy company into a
standalone telecommunications company.

These statements were materially false and misleading because they
failed to disclose material adverse facts which were known to
defendants or recklessly disregarded by them, including that the
Company was having problems with the assets that it acquired from Qwest
Communications International. These had become its principal assets in
lieu of the power generation assets that it had sold, and in its
relationship with Qwest.

As a result of these problems:

     (1) the Company was experiencing declining revenues in its
         telecommunications business;

     (2) the Company's broadband division was experiencing declining
         demand for its products and services; and

     (3) as a result of the foregoing, the Company's purported
         transformation to a standalone telecommunications company was
         not meeting with success.

On November 14, 2001, the last day of the class period, the Company
issued a press release announcing its financial results for the third
quarter of 2001, the period ending September 30, 2001, and disclosed
that the Company's quarterly losses, "reflect the continued slowing of
the nation's economy and the difficult transition of Montana Power from
a diversified energy company to Touch America."  

The press release further revealed that, as a result of its poor third
quarter results, the Company was not in compliance with certain
financial covenants under its Senior Secured Credit Facility.

Finally, the press release revealed that the Company was engaged in
litigation with Qwest concerning its purchase of certain assets from
Qwest in June 2000, litigation ongoing since August 2001, but not
meaningfully revealed to investors.

Following this announcement, the price of the Company's common stock
closed at $4.70 per share on heavy trading volume.  During the class
period, the Company's common stock traded as high as $22.78 per share.

For more details, contact Craig Lowther by Mail: 488 Madison Avenue,
8th Floor, New York, New York 10022 by Phone: 877-935-7400 by E-mail:
clowther@whhf.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.whhf.com.


MONTANA POWER: Dyer & Shuman Commences Securities Fraud Suit in Montana
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dyer & Shuman, LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the District of Montana on behalf of
purchasers of the securities of Montana Power Company, now known as
Touch America Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: TAA), during the period between
January 30, 2001 and November 14, 2001, inclusive, against Montana
Power and certain of its officers and directors.

The suit alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the
market between January 30, 2001 and November 14, 2001, thereby
artificially inflating the price of Company securities.

Throughout the class period, defendants issued positive statements
regarding the Company's successful restructuring from an energy company
into a standalone telecommunications concern.  Defendants' statements
were materially false and misleading because they failed to disclose
material adverse facts, known to defendants or recklessly disregarded
by them.

For example, the Company was having problems with the assets that it
acquired from Qwest Communications International. These had become its
principal assets in lieu of the power generation assets which it had
sold-and in its relationship with Qwest.

As a result of these problems, the Company was experiencing declining
revenues in its telecommunications business, was experiencing declining
demand for its products and services, and as a result, the Company's
restructuring as a standalone telecommunications company was not
meeting with success.

On November 14, 2001, the Company issued a press release announcing its
financial results for the third quarter of 2001, the period ending
September 30, 2001, and disclosed that the Company's quarterly losses
"reflect the continued slowing of the nation's economy and the
difficult transition of the Company from a diversified energy company
to Touch America."  

The press release also revealed that, as a result of poor third quarter
results, the Company was not in compliance with certain financial
covenants under its Senior Secured Credit Facility. Last, the press
release revealed that the Company was engaged in litigation with Qwest
concerning its purchase of certain assets from Qwest in June 2000-
litigation which had been ongoing since August 2001, but not
meaningfully revealed to Montana Power investors.

For more details, contact Trig R. Smith, by Mail: 801 E. 17th Avenue
Denver, CO 80218 or by Phone: 303-861-3003


MUTUAL RISK: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
California, on behalf of all persons who acquired the securities of
Mutual Risk Management, Ltd. (NYSE: MM; Non Nasdaq OTC: MLRMF) between
February 16, 2000 and April 2, 2002, inclusive, against the Company and
certain of its officers and directors.

The complaint 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.

The suit alleges that the Company and its highest-ranking officers and
directors circulated materially false financial statements for the
interim quarters during the class period as well as for the years ended
December 31, 2000 and 2001, materially overstating the Company's
collective revenues and its net income.  Defendants made additional
materially false and misleading statements concerning the Company and
its financial condition and performance.

The suit further alleges that the Company's quarterly and annual
filings with the SEC violated generally accepted accounting principles
as revenues for potential claims were understated.  It is also alleged
that Mutual Risk's $17.5 million receivable (reinsurance recoverable)
linked with Reliance Group Holdings was largely exaggerated as it was
not collectible.  These receivables had become materially damaged at
the start of the class period and completely impaired even before
November 15, 2000, when Reliance defaulted on its bond.

On April 2, 2002, the Company disclosed that even its problematic Q4
2001 results (released February 19, 2002) were not precise, causing the
Company's shares to dramatically decline, trading at just pennies per
share following the announcement.

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


NICOR INC.: Pomerantz Haudek Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP filed a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois against Nicor Inc. (NYSE:GAS) and two of the Company's senior
officers on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired the
securities of the Company during the period from January 24, 2002
through July 18, 2002, inclusive.

The suit charges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing false and misleading
financial statements and press releases concerning the Company's
publicly reported earnings.

After the market closed on July 18, 2002, the Company issued a press
release announcing it may restate prior results in response to
improprieties at its gas business.  The Company indicated that the
Illinois Commerce Commission and other governmental agencies are
investigating allegations that the gas distribution business acted
improperly in connection with a performance-based rate program. Also
according to the press release, reported results for the six months
ended June 30, 2002 were negatively impacted by accounting
irregularities at a retail energy marketing joint venture which is 50%
owned by the Company and 50% owned by Dynegy Inc.

For more details, contact Andrew G. Tolan by Phone: 888-476-6529,
888-4-POMLAW or by E-mail: agtolan@pomlaw.com


REHABCARE GROUP: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Suit in E.D. MO
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Missouri, on behalf of purchasers of the securities of RehabCare Group,
Inc. (NYSE: RHB) between February 7, 2001 and January 21, 2002,
inclusive, against the Company and certain of its officers and
directors.

The complaint 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.

The Company's August 17, 1998 acquisition of StarMed Staffing, Inc.
increased its staffing revenues by $66.2 million from 1998 to 1999,
representing an increase of over 100% from the 1998 staffing revenues
of $65.4 million.  The StarMed acquisition also allowed the Company to
tap into a new market, the per diem supplemental staffing market.

The suit alleges that by the start of the class period, the
supplemental staffing division was being adversely impacted by numerous
factors, which were causing it to generate declining revenues and would
necessarily require that the division be reorganized.  

The supplemental staffing division lacked sufficient internal controls
necessary to adequately monitor its business due, largely, to the
acquisition of StarMed and the Company's failed attempts to integrate
StarMed's information system into its own, leading to inefficiency, an
inability to gauge and meet the demand for its services and a profit-
eroding reorganization.

Indeed, according to press reports published after the class period,
the Company's supplemental staffing division maintained paper records.
Additionally, the Company was increasingly reliant on a limited number
of key contracts, thereby concentrating its business and subjecting its
financial results to heightened risk should any of those contracts be
canceled or modified.

The truth about the Company began to be known to the market on January
21, 2002, when the Company issued a press release announcing that it
would report a net loss for the fourth quarter of 2001 of $0.08 to
$0.12 per share, including a charge to earnings of between $8.5 to $9.5
million, which included costs relating to technology and other costs
associated with the supplemental staffing division.

Furthermore, the Company attributed the shortfall to a slowdown in the
Company's business, even though the Company had, throughout the class
period, conditioned the market to believe that its business was
stronger than ever and would continue to be led by the supplemental
staffing division.

For more details, contact Fred Isquith, 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 RehabCare.


REHABCARE GROUP: Bernstein Liebhard Launches Securities Suit in E.D. MO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz LLP initiated a securities class action
on behalf of all persons who purchased or acquired RehabCare Group,
Inc. (NYSE: RHB) securities between February 7, 2001 and January 21,
2002.  The action is pending in the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of Missouri.

The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors
with violating Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of
materially false and misleading statements to the market between
February 7, 2001 and January 21, 2002.

The complaint alleges that, among other things, defendants issued a
series of materially false and misleading statements concerning the
Company's supplemental staffing division.  The complaint alleges these
statements were materially false and misleading because they failed to
disclose that the supplemental staffing division was experiencing
serious operational problems with information systems critical for
matching supply with demand and poor employee training and retention
and that its revenues and earnings were declining as a result.

On January 21, 2002, the Company issued a press release announcing that
earnings for its fourth quarter 2001 would be less than half than they
had reiterated in late October and that the Company would take a charge
of $8.5 to $9.5 million, $3 million of which was for a reorganization
of the staffing division.

In reaction to the Company's disclosure, as alleged in the complaint,
the price of its stock plummeted by 25% over one trading day on heavy
volume, falling from $25.21 per share to $18.70 per share.

Prior to the disclosure of the adverse facts described above, as
alleged in the complaint, the Company completed a secondary offering of
common stock, raising $50 million for the Company and more than $8
million for Company insiders.  In addition, Company insiders also sold
$4,568,209 worth of the Company's common stock during the class period
at artificially inflated prices.

For more details, contact Ms. Linda Flood, Director of Shareholder
Relations by Mail: 10 East 40th Street, New York, New York 10016 by
Phone: 800-217-1522 or 212-779-1414 or by E-mail: RHB@bernlieb.com.  


SEEBEYOND TECHNOLOGIES: Robert Susser Commences Securities Suit in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert C. Susser PC initiated a securities class action in the US
District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of all
shareholders who purchased SeeBeyond Technology Corp. common stock
(NYSE:SBYN) between April 23, 2001 and April 22, 2002.

The complaint alleges that the Company and certain of its officers
violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making materially false
and misleading statements concerning the Company's financial results
during the class period.  The complaint alleges that as a result of
these false and misleading statements, the price of the Company's
shares were artificially inflated throughout the class period causing
plaintiff and the class to suffer damages.

For more details, contact Robert C. Susser by Mail: 6 East 43rd Street
- 19th Floor, New York, NY 10017 by Phone: 212-808-0298 or by E-mail:
classaction@mail.com  


SONUS NETWORKS: Cauley Geller Commences Securities Suit in MA Court
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
on behalf of purchasers of Sonus Networks, Inc. (Nasdaq:SONS) common
stock during the period between December 11, 2000 and January 16, 2002,
inclusive.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violating 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 December
11, 2000 and January 16, 2002, thereby artificially inflating the price
of Company securities.

The complaint alleges that defendants issued numerous statements
highlighting the Company's financial performance and describing the
Company's success in acquiring and/or developing new products it was
then able to offer to current and prospective customers.

As alleged in the complaint, these statements were materially false and
misleading because they failed to disclose and/or misrepresented the
following adverse facts, among others:

     (1) that certain products that Sonus claimed it had sold to Qwest
         Communications International, Inc. would not be ready for
         deployment in time to meet Qwest's needs and would result in
         Qwest having to purchase competing products from Nortel;

     (2) that the Company's highly-touted transaction with Qwest, which
         contributed more than 10% of Sonus' first quarter 2001
         revenues, was actually a quid pro quo deal wherein Sonus had
         to agree to buy a $20 million Irrevocable Right of Use (IRUs)
         from Qwest in exchange for a $20 million order from Qwest;

     (3) that contrary to defendants' representations, Sonus' products
         were not carrier class as they did not have 99.999%
         availability, did not have voice quality as good as circuit-
         switched networks and did not have sophisticated network
         management and configuration capabilities; and

     (4) as a result, Sonus was not on track to report revenues of $195
         million in 2001

On January 16, 2002, the last day of the class period, the Company
announced its disappointing fourth quarter and year-end 2001 results
and revealed that revenues for the year were just $173 million compared
to class period estimates exceeding $200 million. Following this
announcement, shares of Company stock fell below $5 per share.

For more details, contact Jackie Addison, Sue Null or Ellie Baker by
Phone: 888-551-9944 or by E-mail: info@classlawyer.com or contact
Randall K. Pulliam or Shelly Nicholson (for media) by Phone:
888-551-9944


VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Central District of
California on behalf of purchasers of Vivendi Universal, S.A. (NYSE:V)
common stock and American Depository Receipts (ADRs) during the period
between April 23, 2001 and July 2, 2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The
complaint alleges that during the class period, defendants' false
statements artificially inflated Vivendi ADRs to as high as $68.80 per
ADR. Defendants reported favorable, but misleading, financial results
to the market and represented that Vivendi was not as susceptible to
economic problems as competitors and that the Company had the "highest
resiliency and lowest sensitivity to recessionary environment."  The
defendants also represented that the Company was successfully
implementing recent mergers being reorganized quickly to generate
synergies.

These positive but false statements allowed the Company to complete
additional acquisitions in its $100 billion buying spree between 1998
and 2001. In late 6/02, news leaked from the Company that its debt was
at alarming levels, causing Company's ADRs to decline in price from $28
to $20.  The Company's ordinary shares declined in similar fashion.

Nonetheless, the Company's CEO reassured the market that liquidity was
not a problem and the ADRs did not totally collapse.  However, as
ratings agencies continued to downgrade the Company's debt, the ADRs
continued to decline. On July 2,2002, the Company's debt was downgraded
again and the Company was in danger of default.  On July 3,2002, the
Company's CEO was forced to resign.  Company ADRs collapsed upon these
revelations, falling to $15-21/32 on July 3,2002, on huge volume of 8
million shares.

For more details, contact William Lerach by Phone: 800-449-4900 by E-
mail: wsl@milberg.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.milberg.com


VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class
action on behalf of shareholders who acquired Vivendi Universal
(NYSE:V) (Paris Bourse: EX FP) securities between February 11, 2002 and
July 3, 2002, inclusive, in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, against the Company and Jean-Marie
Messier, the Company's former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer.

The action 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 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


WORLDCOM INC.: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Suit in MS Court
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of
Mississippi on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise
acquired the 7.5%, May 15, 2011 notes of WorldCom Corporation, (Nasdaq:
WCOME) pursuant or traceable to the Company's May 11, 2001 Prospectus
defined below, and who purchased the Notes between the period May 11,
2001 through and June 25, 2002.  The suit names as defendants the
Company, certain of its officers and directors, Arthur Andersen, and
the joint lead underwriters for the sale of the Notes, J.P. Morgan
Chase & Co., and Salomon Smith Barney, Inc.

The suit alleges that during the class period, defendants materially
misled the investing public, thereby inflating the price of WorldCom
Notes, by publicly issuing false and misleading statements and omitting
to disclose material facts necessary to make defendants' statements not
false and misleading.  Said statements and omissions were materially
false and misleading in that they failed to disclose material adverse
information and misrepresented the truth about the Company, its
business and operations.

The suit further alleges that each of the Company's reported earnings
announcements throughout the class period were false and misleading for
a plethora of reasons.  During the class period, the Company improperly
booked approximately $3.8 billion in expenses as capital expenditures,
a device that permitted the Company to misleadingly enhance profits and
cash flow.  These bookings include $3.06 billion in 2001 and $797
million in the first quarter of 2002.  

The accounting machination raised cash flow because it improperly
labeled costs as an asset that could be written down over time, not
directly.  Shifting certain transfers from line item expenses to
capital accounts is an egregious breach of Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles and Generally Accepted Accounting Standards.

Without utilizing this improper accounting practice, the Company would
have reported a net loss for 2001, and the first quarter of 2002.  The
Company reported a profit of $1.4 billion for 2001 and $130 million for
the first quarter of 2002, each entirely false.

After the close of the market on June 26, 2002, it was reported that
the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) had filed a formal fraud
complaint against the Company.  SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt said the
agency also was seeking a court order that would freeze payments to
Company executives and bar destruction of Company records.  The
government's motion also would prevent dissipation of WorldCom assets.

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


                           *********

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  * * *