CAR_Public/020726.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

               Friday, July 26, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 147

                          Headlines

BLUE CROSS: New Lawsuit Halts Disbursement of 1998 Settlement Money
CANE CREEK: Recalls 7,700 Defective Bicycle Suspension Seat Posts
CENDANT CORPORATION: Shareholder Derivative Suit Settled for $54 MM
CIGARETTE LITIGATION: Indonesian Media, Manufacturers Sued For Ads
DENVER CITY: Mayor Refuses Panel's Suggestion To Destroy Police Files

DIAL CORPORATION: Federal Court Stems Third Try To Avoid Harassment Suit
HAWAII: ACLU Suit Claims Inmates Denied Right To Vote in 2000 Poll
MISSOURI: Medicaid Recipients Sue State For Lost Dental Benefits
NICOR INC.: Faces Two Lawsuits For Accounting Irregularities
OKLAHOMA: Suit Prompts Justice Dept. to Check Garfield County Jail

PENNSYLVANIA: Bucks County Officials To Appeal Oversight Board Creation
SONY MUSIC: NY Supreme Court Certifies Groundbreaking Royalties Suit
UST INC.: Milwaukee Lawsuit Accuses Firm of Antitrust Activities
WALGREEN CO.: Unsolicited Drugs by Mail Result In Class Action
WORLDCOM INC.: Judge Orders Firm to Inform Fired Employees of Suit

YAMAHA MOTOR: 14,000 ATVs with Rear Brake Defects Recalled

* Looking For Evidence For Asbestos Cases?  Go To eBay!

                    New Securities Fraud Cases

AMDOCS LIMITED: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Suit in E.D. Missouri
AOL TIME: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
AOL TIME: Cauley Geller Brings Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. New York
AOL TIME: Olsen Law Firm Alleges Securities Fraud in S.D. NY Lawsuit
AOL TIME: Schiffrin & Barroway Joins Fray, Files Suit in S.D. New York

AOL TIME: Wechsler Harwood Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
BRITISH BIOTECH: Class Law Takes First Step in Likely Shareholders Suit
CAPITAL ONE: Levy and Levy Commences Securities Suit in E.D. Virginia
CRYOLIFE INC.: Charles Piven Commences Lawsuit in N.D. Georgia
KNIGHT TRADING: Hoffman & Edelson Begins Securities Suit in New Jersey

NICOR INC.: Brodsky & Smith Initiates Shareholders Suit in N.D. IL
PEROT SYSTEMS: Berger & Montague Files Securities Suit in N.D. Texas
SEEBEYOND TECHNOLOGY: Cauley Geller Lodges Securities Suit in C.D. CA
SEEBEYOND TECHNOLOGY: Charles Piven Initiates Suit in C.D. California
SEEBEYOND TECHNOLOGY: Leo Desmond Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA

SEEBEYOND TECHNOLOGY: Schiffrin & Barroway Initiates Lawsuit in C.D. CA
SUPERVALU INC.: Leo Desmond Files Securities Fraud Suit in Minnesota
TELLABS INC.: Charles Piven Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. IL
VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: Brodsky & Smith Claims Securities Fraud in SDNY Suit
VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: Levy and Levy Starts Securities Fraud Suit in SDNY

                            *********

BLUE CROSS: New Lawsuit Halts Disbursement of 1998 Settlement Money
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota said recently that a new
lawsuit that seeks class-action status has put a stop to the spending
of $412 million from the 1998 tobacco settlement, the Associated Press
Newswires has reported.

The state's Commerce Department had approved the allocation of the
money for community health clinics, disease-prevention programs, anti-
smoking efforts and rebates to Blue Cross members, among other
purposes.

But the spending plan has been frozen in Dakota County District Court
after lawyers representing businesses and individuals who bought Blue
Cross health insurance have sued the Eagan-based insurer, arguing that
most of the settlement money should go to current and former plan
members.

Minneapolis lawyer Karl Cambronne, who is representing the plaintiffs,
said the lawsuit seeks an injunction against spending most of the
settlement money.  Mr. Cambronne explained that during the tobacco
lawsuit, Blue Cross had argued that smoking-related illness drove up
health care costs to Blue Cross and its members.  It follows,
logically, said Mr. Cambronne, that $252 million of the settlement
money, the amount not directly covered by the Commerce Department
decision, should be used solely to repay policyholders.

Blue Cross had planned to begin 30 to 40 programs next year to reduce
tobacco use and to prevent heart disease and cancer among residents of
Minnesota.  Dr. Marc Manley, who heads Blue Cross's tobacco-reduction
and health-improvement effort, said state-of-the art cessation
programs, anti-smoking TV ads and an expanded blood pressure screening
program were among the initiatives placed on hold.  Some planning will
continue using non-settlement money, Mr. Manley said.

Banks said $60 million in rebates, an average of $138 per subscriber,
that had been approved for policyholders will be frozen while the
lawsuit is pending.


CANE CREEK: Recalls 7,700 Defective Bicycle Suspension Seat Posts
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC),
Cane Creek Cycling Components (Cane Creek), of Fletcher, N.C., is
voluntarily recalling about 7,700 bicycle suspension seat posts.  The
seat post's cradle, which attaches to the bicycle seat, can break,
posing the risk of falls and serious injury to riders.

Cane Creek has received 18 reports of cradles breaking; though, no
injuries have been reported.

The recalled THUDBUSTER Suspension Seat Posts are black and silver and
have a range of serial numbers between 10894 and 18710.  The serial
number can be found inside the seat post's tube toward the bottom of
the post.  The words, "Cane Creek" and "Thudbuster" are also printed on
the seat post.  The seat posts are made in the U.S.

Independent bicycle dealers nationwide sold these seat posts between
November 2000 and June 2002 for about $140.

Consumers should stop using these seat posts immediately and return
them to the company for a free repair.  Consumers should contact
Cane Creek Cycling Components at 800-234-2725 between 8:30 a.m. and
5:30 p.m. PT Monday through Friday or visit the company's website at
http://www.canecreek.com


CENDANT CORPORATION: Shareholder Derivative Suit Settled for $54 MM
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Cendant Corp. (NYSE: CD) announced Tuesday the settlement of
shareholder derivative actions against some of its current and former
officers and directors.  The settlement closes another chapter in the
five-year saga that resulted from the discovery of accounting
irregularities at CUC International, one of the two companies the other
being HFS Incorporated-that merged in 1997 to form Cendant.

The settlement calls for payment to Cendant of $54 million, less
attorneys' fees that may be awarded by the court. The full amount will
be paid from the proceeds of insurance policies covering the
defendants, according to a company statement. The settlement is subject
to approval of the U.S. District Court in New Jersey. A hearing is
scheduled for October.

The settlement pertains to shareholder actions that arose when $500
million in accounting irregularities were discovered in the aftermath
of the 1997 merger of CUC and HFS. The irregularities resulted in a
$100 million restatement of the company's earnings. The company at the
time said the irregularities were uncovered when responsibility for the
company's accounting functions was transferred from former CUC
personnel to former HFS personnel.

Cendant earlier this year announced it would pay its remaining
obligations under shareholder lawsuits against the company that also
arose from CUC's accounting irregularities by this month and that the
final payments would be made with cash on hand or by tapping existing
and available credit facilities, if necessary.

That settlement, which was announced in December 1999 and approved by
the U.S. District Court in Newark, N.J., in August 2000, ordered
Cendant to pay $2.8 billion in cash reimbursements to shareholders who
had purchased stock in Cendant or CUC International between May 31,
1995, and Aug. 28, 1998, and required the company to establish an audit
committee comprised of entirely independent directors.

Cendant Chairman and CEO Henry R. Silverman said at the time that the
company was "grateful to have closed an unfortunate chapter" in its
history.

Cendant shareholders also brought a class-action lawsuit against CUC
International's accounting firm, New York-based Ernst & Young. That
lawsuit was settled for $335 million, which at that time was believed
to be the largest amount ever paid by an accounting firm in a
securities class-action case. The accounting firm admitted no
wrongdoing in the matter and said it was "the victim of intentional,
collusive fraud on the part of CUC's management."

A number of executives parted ways with Cendant in the weeks after the
CUC accounting irregularities were discovered. Among them was Cosmo
Corigliano, who had been EVP and CFO of CUC before the merger with HFS.

Cendant today is primarily a provider of travel and residential real
estate services. The company's real estate division includes the
Century 21, Coldwell Banker and ERA real estate franchise organizations
and the NRT Inc. brokerage ownership arm. Cendant is headquartered in
Parsippany, N.J., and has approximately 70,000 employees.


CIGARETTE LITIGATION: Indonesian Media, Manufacturers Sued For Ads
------------------------------------------------------------------
Five foundations filed a lawsuit against two giant cigarette producers,
two private television stations, two print media and three advertising
companies in connection with what they allege were illegal cigarette
commercials, the Jakarta Post recently reported.

The plaintiff foundations are asking the court to order the defendants
to pay Rp500 billion (US$55.5 million) in compensation to finance
health promotion and to establish a foundation to manage it.  The five
foundations bringing the lawsuit are:

(1) Indonesian Consumers Foundation;
(2) Indonesian Heart Foundation;
(3) Indonesian Women Against Tobacco Foundation;
(4) Indonesian Cancer Foundation; and
(5) Foundation for Coping with Smoking Problems.

One of the plaintiffs' lawyers, Sudaryatmo, told the South Jakarta
District Court recently that the lawsuit was a result of a series of
cigarette commercials from June to December 2001.  The advertisements
displayed the cigarette boxes and the cigarettes in violation of
Government Regulation No. 81/1999 on cigarette precautions for health,
which states that the content of a commercial must not display the
cigarettes or models/actors in the act of smoking.

The print versions of the advertisements also displayed the cigarette
packages.   The lawsuit also contended that publication of the
cigarette advertisements violated Paragraph 13, article C of the Press
Law No. 40/1999 on the restriction for publishing companies to publish
commercials displaying cigarette products or the act of smoking.

"The accused are responsible for the increased cigarette consumption
nowadays that leads to health risks for the consumers as well as
passive smokers," lawyer Sudaryatmo said.

Presiding Judge Tjaraka Imam Widadadi has adjourned the hearing for two
weeks.


DENVER CITY: Mayor Refuses Panel's Suggestion To Destroy Police Files
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Mayor Wellington Webb has rejected an independent panel's
recommendation that secret police files of political activists be
destroyed, meeting, instead, a request from civil rights' groups that
they be preserved, the Associated Press Newswires has reported.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which filed a class-action
lawsuit against the city over the files, has said that the records must
be preserved until questions about why they were kept are answered.

"They definitely document police misconduct," said Mark Silverstein,
ACLU executive director.  "We need to know why police regarded peaceful
political protests as crime scenes."

Andrew Hudson, spokesman for the mayor, said, "The mayor had never said
we were going to destroy any files.  We had made a permanent copy of
the files in March.  The question was kind of irrelevant," he said.

"We have taken a process that we think is fair and independent of the
city and will get the police intelligence bureau back on track.  I
think a majority of Americans, particularly in time of war, think that
intelligence gathering is necessary and appropriate."

Mr. Hudson said, further, that steps are being taken to make sure files
are kept only when there is a reasonable suspicion of possible criminal
activity.

The mayor, himself the subject of police surveillance when he was a
young activist, had condemned the keeping of the files when they were
disclosed by the ACLU in March.   Mayor Webb's statement said the city
would hire a consulting company to review any files gathered by police
while monitoring demonstrations or other political activity.  The
consultant, Rocky Mountain Information Network, specializes in
analyzing whether police conduct conforms to federal law.

Mayor Webb conferred with a panel of three judges after the information
about the police files was brought to light.  He accepted all their
suggestions except that the files be destroyed.  The panel advised that
the files should be removed from the police computer system, and that
individuals and organizations mentioned in the records should be
allowed to see what was written about them.

"To read the judges, it would seem the Denver Art Museum might need to
phone up and see if they are in the files," said Mr. Silverstein,
noting that the judges found that none of the 3,200 files on
individuals or 208 files on organizations met legal standards of [what
constitutes] reasonable standards of criminal activities."

Mr. Silverstein added, "It makes the Denver police look like bumbling
fools."

Officers did not get enough training on a new computer-filing program
when the department's intelligence bureau began putting its paper files
on computers in 2000.  The result was a mixture of records on everyone
from parade permit-holders to people who threatened visiting
dignitaries.

A member of the American Friends Service Committee, a Philadelphia-
based Quaker group that has won the Nobel Peace Prize, was among those
in the files.


DIAL CORPORATION: Federal Court Stems Third Try To Avoid Harassment Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A U.S. District Court has rejected a third attempt by Dial Corp. to
avoid trial of a class-action sexual-harassment suit, setting the stage
for a trial to begin during the next few months, the Dow Jones Business
News reported recently.

In a decision mailed last Friday, U.S. District Judge Warren K. Urbom
rejected the soap company's June motion that the case be thrown out
based on two recent court decisions, the U.S. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC) said in a recent statement.

Recent decisions cited by Dial include the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in
National R.R. Passenger Corp. v. Morgan and the ruling by the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in EEOC v. United Airlines.

Last August, Judge Urbom rejected another motion by Dial that the
lawsuit be thrown out, and he granted it class-action status.  In doing
so, the judge permitted Dial to attempt an appeal to the Seventh
Circuit Court, also located in Chicago.   On February 12, the Seventh
Circuit Appeal Court refused to hear the appeal.

The lawsuit claims that women at a company plant in Aurora, Ill.,
endured groping, suggestive remarks and other sexual harassment by male
co-workers.

Dial spokesman Thomas Herrmann said the company could not comment
immediately on Judge Urbom's decision.


HAWAII: ACLU Suit Claims Inmates Denied Right To Vote in 2000 Poll
------------------------------------------------------------------
A federal class-action lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties
Union of Hawaii (ACLU) accuses state officials of denying some prison
inmates their constitutional right to vote, says a recent report by the
Associated Press Newswires.

ACLU filed the lawsuit in behalf of William Remmers Jr. and other
pretrial detainees at Oahu Community Correctional Center.  At least 10
inmates, including Mr. Remmers, signed up for ballots prior to the
November 2000 elections, but the ballots were never provided.  When
individual detainees expressed concern regarding when they would be
allowed to vote, according to the lawsuit, they were either ignored or
rebuffed by prison guards.

Mr. Remmers filed three complaints with prison officials regarding his
right to vote and was given conflicting explanations, the lawsuit said.

The lawsuit seeks a court order directing prison officials to ensure
that pretrial detainees are allowed to vote and also asks for
unspecified damages.

Defendants in the lawsuit are:

(1) Chief Elections Officer Dwayne Yoshina;
(2) Public Safety Director Ted Sakai; and
(3) various Public Safety employees.

Mr. Yoshina said his office has been working with the Department of
Public Safety to get affidavits and voter registration forms into all
of Hawaii's prisons.  The Department has assured him, he said, that
they are putting out the forms and making them available to eligible
inmates.

Elections spokesman Rex Quidilla said pretrial detainees and paroled
felons are allowed to vote.  But convicted felons, still incarcerated,
cannot vote, he said.


MISSOURI: Medicaid Recipients Sue State For Lost Dental Benefits
----------------------------------------------------------------
A lawyer for Medicaid recipients has threatened a class-action lawsuit
unless the state restores dental care benefits for adult Medicaid
recipients, the Associated Press Newswires has reported recently.

About 88,000 Missourians took advantage of the Medicaid dental benefits
in 2001, before Governor Robert Holden and the Legislature pulled the
funding, in order to help balance the budget this year.  Attorney
Thomas E. Kennedy has responded by filing a lawsuit in St. Louis
Circuit Court on behalf of three Medicaid recipients in need of dental
care.

The lawsuit names Dana Katherine Martin, director of the Missouri
Department of Social Services, as the defendant.  The lawsuit seeks an
order requiring Ms. Martin to restore dental benefits for adults in the
Medicaid program.

Mr. Kennedy cited a state law regarding Medicaid that says benefits for
dental care "shall be made on behalf of eligible needy persons."  Mr.
Kennedy said the benefits should be restored for all who need it.

"This is not a class action," said Mr. Kennedy; "it is an individual
action."  He added, however, that: "if the state in its infinite wisdom
decides not to treat everybody equally, then we will sue them, and we
will pursue class relief."

Facing shrinking revenues, Governor Holden and lawmakers approved a
state budget without $4.6 million for the Medicaid program.  That left
out the money representing the expected cost of providing dental care
to adult Medicaid recipients.  The benefits expired at the beginning of
July.

Mr. Kennedy, as an example of the dire need the cuts in Medicaid dental
benefits has caused, cited the case of one of the plaintiffs who is on
a waiting list for a kidney transplant, and in order to stay on the
list needs a clearance form saying she has good dental health.


NICOR INC.: Faces Two Lawsuits For Accounting Irregularities
------------------------------------------------------------
Two lawsuits were filed recently against Naperville-based Nicor Inc.
following a plunge in the company's stock value in response to news of
accounting irregularities and other concerns, the Chicago Tribune
reported.

In the U.S. District Court in Chicago, a lawsuit seeking class-action
status alleges that Nicor violated federal securities law by issuing
false and misleading financial statements and press releases from
January to July of this year.  The lawsuit, filed on behalf of
shareholder Rick Singer, names as defendants Nicor Chairman and CEO
Thomas L. Fisher and executive vice president of finance and
administration Kathleen L. Halloran.

Separately, a Nicor Gas customer recently filed a lawsuit in Cook
County Circuit Court, accusing the company of using deceptive
accounting practices to artificially inflate gas prices.  The lawsuit
claims Nicor manipulated benchmark gas prices through its Gas Cost
Performance Program.  The state-regulated program provides Nicor with
an incentive to buy natural gas below market rates, using a benchmark
established by several price indices, the lawsuit alleged.

The company also recently disclosed accounting irregularities in an
unregulated unit, Nicor Energy.  The unit is a partnership with
Houston-based Dynegy Inc.  That news followed an anonymous
whistleblower's memorandum that surfaced in June, alleging that Nicor's
state-regulated gas service had manipulated its accounting to cheat
customers out of millions of dollars.  The 14-page memo led regulators
to reopen an investigation into Nicor along with a state police and
attorney general's office investigation of possible crime.


OKLAHOMA: Suit Prompts Justice Dept. to Check Garfield County Jail
------------------------------------------------------------------
A federal class-action lawsuit filed by inmates at the Garfield County
Jail in Enid, Oklahoma may have sparked the investigation of the jail
by the U.S. Department of Justice, according to a report by the
Associated Press Newswires.

The lawsuit is seeking to close the jail on the grounds that it
violates the inmates' constitutional rights.

The inmates' attorney Stephen Jones said that he plans to meet with the
Justice Department's investigation team while they are in Enid.  He
believes their findings may help the inmates' case. Mr. Jones said the
Justice Department team is investigating possible violations of the
Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution involving cruel and unusual
punishment.

The four-person group from the Special Litigation Section of the Civil
Rights Division has begun looking into possible constitutional
violations at the jail, which has been plagued by overcrowding and
deteriorating conditions.  The investigation team spent Tuesday
monitoring the 76-bed facility and talking to inmates.   Sheriff Bill
Winchester said the investigators are expected to stay three or four
days reviewing the procedures of the 67-year-old jail.  The special
litigation section derives its authority to monitor jails and prisons
from the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act of 1980.

Sheriff Winchester believes the visit is an opportunity to correct
problems.  He expects the group to issue a report when they are
finished.

"They will have some constructive criticism, for sure," he said.  "I'm
open to their suggestions."

The law authorizes the Justice Department to file a complaint when
people are subjected to "egregious or flagrant conditions, which
deprives such persons of any rights, privileges or immunities secured
or protected by the Constitution.  Since 1980, the section has
investigated more than 100 jails and prisons in the United States for
suspected violations.

The county has asked voters to approve sales tax increases that would
fund a new jail, but voters have rejected the proposals.  Wendell
Venci, chairman of the Garfield County Board of Commissioners, said
county officials hope to get a 187- to 190-bed jail with a total
project cost of $10.5 million on the November general election ballot.
City officials want to keep the price tag at or about $8 million.


PENNSYLVANIA: Bucks County Officials To Appeal Oversight Board Creation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bucks County commissioners will appeal a federal magistrate's ruling
ordering them to create an oversight board for the county prison, the
Allentown Morning Call reported recently.

Last week, as part of the resolution of a class-action lawsuit against
the commissioners by women inmates contending the prison's mental
health facilities for them were inadequate, U.S. Magistrate Diane
Devlin Welsh issued a ruling ordering the commissioners to create the
Bucks County Prison Oversight Board.  The Board was to include several
elected and appointed officials and county residents.

The state law contains no provisions for establishing an oversight
board, said James A. Downey, attorney for the commissioners. It is on
this ground that the commissioners are appealing the Magistrate's
order, he said.  Mr. Downey has asked U.S. Judge Clifford Scott Green
to overturn Magistrate Welsh's order.  No hearing date has yet been
set.

Under state law, said Mr. Downey, the commissioners are responsible for
operating the jail.  Ms. Welsh's order specified that the commissioners
would serve on the board, but would share authority with the president
judge, district attorney, sheriff, controller, public defender, head of
adult probation and three residents.  There is no provision in the
county code for a county to do something like that, said Mr. Downey.
"The commissioners can't delegate what the law does not allow them to
delegate."

Doylestown attorney Anita F. Alberts, who represents the inmates,
called the appeal a delaying tactic.  A month ago, Magistrate Welsh
asked Mr. Downey if he would request a hearing at which witnesses would
testify about the legality of a prison oversight board under state law.
At the time, said Ms. Alberts, Mr. Downey insisted that no such hearing
was necessary.  In addition, Magistrate Welsh asked the county court to
create the oversight board in March, but then Mr. Downey argued that
the issue should be heard in federal court.

Now that the Magistrate has ruled against the commissioners, Ms.
Alberts said, they refuse to accept her verdict and want it overturned.


SONY MUSIC: NY Supreme Court Certifies Groundbreaking Royalties Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP and Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes
& Lerach LLP announced Tuesday a precedent setting decision involving
the music industry in which a class action was certified against Sony
Music Entertainment (OTC: SNEJF) (NYSE: SNE).

In the case of Gary Puckett et al. v. Sony Music Entertainment, Justice
DeGrasse of the New York State Supreme Court determined that Gary
Puckett and Robert Watson were appropriate class representatives to
represent a class of some 1500 recording artists and producers to whom
Sony accounts for foreign record royalties.

In their complaint, Messrs. Puckett and Watson claim that Sony
consistently underreports foreign royalties to its recording artists
and producers in breach of Sony's contracts with Pucket, Watson and
other members of the class. Since it is extremely difficult for anyone
other than powerful, high profile artists and producers to obtain legal
redress against major record companies, due to the costs of hiring
attorneys and accountants, this decision is significant. A class action
provides an appropriate vehicle for all recording artists and
producers, regardless of their means or present popularity, to
challenge the propriety of the royalty accountings that they are
provided.

Brian D. Caplan is a partner with GLRS and is chair of the firm's
Entertainment Law Practice Group. For over 17 years he has represented
performing artists, composers, record producers, personal and business
managers, record companies, music publishers and merchandising
companies. GLRS' Entertainment Law Practice Group has litigated
numerous cases involving copyright infringement; trademark
infringement; defamation; breach of contract claims; tortious
interference with contractual relations; and royalty accounting
disputes. For information on GLRS' Entertainment Practice Group please
log onto http://www.glrslaw.com

Sanford P. Dumain is a partner at Milberg Weiss and has represented
plaintiffs in class actions for over eighteen years. In addition to
prosecuting actions involving violations of the securities laws and
consumer protection laws, Mr. Dumain has represented authors alleging
that their publishers have improperly accounted for royalties owed.
Milberg Weiss has taken a leading role in many important actions on
behalf of defrauded investors, consumers, and companies, as well as
victims of World War II and other human rights violations, and has been
responsible for more than $30 billion in aggregate recoveries. The
Milberg Weiss website, http://www.milberg.comhas more information
about the firm.

For additional information and/or a copy of this decision contact:

    Brian D. Caplan, Esq.
    Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP
    100 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10017
    Tel: 212-907-0842
    E-mail: bcaplan@glrslaw.com

    Sanford P. Dumain, Esq.
    Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP
    One Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, NY 10119
    Tel: 212-594-5300
    E-mail: spd@mwbhlny.com

    Co-counsel in this action is
    Christine Lepera, Esq.
    Rubin Baum LLP
    30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, NY 10112
    Tel: 212-698-7843
    E-mail: clepera@sonnenschein.com


UST INC.: Milwaukee Lawsuit Accuses Firm of Antitrust Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------
A lawsuit has been filed against UST Inc., accusing the company of
antitrust activities against its major competitor, the Associated Press
Newswires reported recently.

The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Milwaukee resident Jason Feuerabend, is
asking Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Dominic Amato to certify the suit
as a class-action lawsuit for anyone in Wisconsin who bought such
tobacco since 1990.

Milwaukee attorney Brian Smigelski, whose firm filed the lawsuit,
contends that UST's activities have led to higher prices and fewer
choices for smokeless tobacco users. UST, which makes Copwnhagen, Skoal
and other leading brands of smokeless tobacco, estimated in March that
it controlled 77.5 percent of the moist smokeless tobacco market, the
lawsuit alleged.

Similar lawsuits on behalf of consumers are being filed in other
states, Mr. Smigelski said.

Following trial in a Kentucky lawsuit with similar antitrust
allegations, Greenwich, Conn.-based UST was ordered in March 2000 to
pay $l.05 billion to Conwood Co.  A federal appeals court upheld that
order in May.  UST said in a recent statement that it would ask the
U.S. Supreme Court to hear the Conwood case.


WALGREEN CO.: Unsolicited Drugs by Mail Result In Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Hey, Mom," Michael Grinsted, 16, said, as he opened his mail recently,
"they sent me Prozac."   His mother, Sue Grinsted, of West Palm Beach,
Florida, said she had worried about people offering illegal drugs to
her son, but had not thought about unsolicited mailings of powerful
prescription drugs, like Prozac, an antidepressant.

"It's really scary to think they could send drugs to teenagers, in the
mail," Ms. Grinsted told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in an interview
recently.

The Grinsteds say they might join a class-action lawsuit filed this
month in state court in Fort Lauderdale against Lilly, the Walgreen Co.
and several doctors over receipt of similar unsolicited mailings of
drugs.  The lawsuit says the defendants misused patients' medical
records and invaded their privacy.  It also contends that the drugstore
chain and Lilly engaged in the unauthorized practice of medicine.

Last week, the Florida attorney general's office issued subpoenas to
Lilly, Walgreen's and several doctors.  "There is legitimate concern
that the unsolicited delivery of prescription drugs could lead to
dangerous misuse," Attorney General Robert Butterworth said.

The hand-addressed envelope to Michael Grinsted bore the return address
of a Walgreen's drugstore in West Palm Beach.  It contained a one-month
supply of Prozac Weekly and a "Dear Patient" form letter ostensibly
from a doctor who practiced in a medical group that treated Michael,
but was not known to the Grinsteds.  The name on the letter was Dr.
Jeff Bishop.  The letter said: " I'm sending you a new one-month supply
of Prozac Weekly, which is the new and only antidepressant indicated
for the maintenance phase of depression."

The Grinsteds say Michel has never suffered from depression or taken
any drug remotely like Prozac.  Dr. Bishop did not return a call for
comment.


WORLDCOM INC.: Judge Orders Firm to Inform Fired Employees of Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, in Washington, D.C., has directed
WorldCom Inc. to notify laid-off employees who were required to waive
their legal rights in exchange for severance packages of pending legal
actions against the company, according to a report by the Kansas City
Star.

Judge Sullivan said he would sign an order directing "that any future
offers of severance packages... to current or former WorldCom
employees, which expressly require terminated employees to execute a
general release of all claims against WorldCom in order to receive
severance benefits, will include language notifying the recipients of
the offers of the status of this lawsuit and other similar lawsuits
against WorldCom."

The "lawsuit" referred to in the order is an employee class action
brought last month by several law firms, among them Kansas City-based
Stueve Helder Siegel, seeking damages on behalf of WorldCom employees
who participated in the company's 401(k) plan as of January 1, 1999.

That lawsuit alleges that WorldCom and four senior executives,
including former Chief Executive Bernard Ebbers and fired Chief
Financial Officer Scott Sullivan, concealed material information from
plan participants and beneficiaries, inducing them to continue
investing in the company stock.

WorldCom recently filed for bankruptcy, and is at the center of an
accounting scandal that has triggered a wave of shareholder and
employee lawsuits against the telecommunications company.  On June 25,
WorldCom disclosed that it had wrongly booked $3.9 billion in expenses
as capital expenditures going back five quarters.  By executing that
accounting maneuver, WorldCom was able to spread those costs over many
years, thereby inflating its profits as recorded in the books.


YAMAHA MOTOR: 14,000 ATVs with Rear Brake Defects Recalled
----------------------------------------------------------
In cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC),
Yamaha Motor Corporation, U.S.A. of Cypress, Calif., is recalling to
inspect and repair about 14,000 All-Terrain Vehicles (ATVs). A
mounting-bracket weld on the rear hub can come loose, resulting in rear
brake failure and possible injury to operators.

Yamaha has received reports of weld problems with the mounting
brackets. Two of these reports resulted in the ATVs losing their rear
brakes. One user suffered a hairline wrist fracture.

These 1997 and 1998 model year ATVs have "350 Electric" written on both
sides of the bodywork. The ATVs are either red and white, or gray and
blue. The recalled ATVs have the following names and vehicle
identification numbers (VINs). The VINs are stamped into the vehicle
frames between the front and rear wheels.

Model Year and Name:    1997 Warrior
VIN Range:      All


Model Year and Name:    1998 Warrior
VIN Range: JY43GDW09WA199820 to JY43GDW00WA 207657


Model Year and Name:    1998 Warrior
VIN Range: JY4AH01Y9WA000002 to JY4AH01Y5WA000241

Yamaha dealers sold these ATVs nationwide from August 1996 through
December 1997 for about $5,000.

Consumers should stop using these ATVs immediately and call their local
Yamaha ATV dealer to schedule a free appointment to have their units
inspected, and repaired if needed. To locate a dealer or for more
information, consumers should call (800) 88-YAMAHA anytime or visit the
firm's Web site at http://www.yamaha-motor.com.

Notification is being sent to registered owners of these vehicles
directly by Yamaha Motor Corporation, U.S.A.


YOUNG'S J.K.: Recalls Lighters for Lack of Child-resistant Mechanism
--------------------------------------------------------------------
In cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC),
Young's J.K. Inc. of Portland, Ore. is recalling about 1,800 novelty
cigarette lighters. These lighters do not have child-resistant
mechanisms, as required by federal law. Young children could ignite the
lighters, posing fire and burn hazards.

CPSC and Young's J.K. Inc. have not received any reports of injuries or
incidents. This recall is being conducted to prevent the possibility of
injuries.

These are refillable, gas-fueled, piezo-electric lighters in the shape
of beverage cans.  One lighter is labeled "Coca Cola" and the other
lighter is labeled "Budweiser KING OF BEER." They are attached to
keyrings.

Grocery, gift, and liquor stores, as well as smoke shops and gas
station food marts in Oregon and southwest Washington sold these
lighters from October 2001 through February 2002 for about $3.

Consumers should stop using these lighters immediately and return them
to the store where purchased for a refund.  For more information, call
Young's J.K. Inc. collect at 503-252-3022 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. PT
Monday through Friday.


* Looking For Evidence For Asbestos Cases?  Go To eBay!
-------------------------------------------------------
After a heated bidding war on eBay, Mark Lanier recently paid $2,125 to
win a 1941 Naval Machinery manual.  It sounds like a peculiar
collecting hobby, but to Mr. Lanier it was serious business.  Mr.
Lanier, a Houston lawyer, who sues companies on behalf of asbestos
exposure victims, was bidding against a defense lawyer to get his hands
on an evidentiary trophy filled with details on where and how asbestos
was used aboard ships, according to a report by the San Jose Mercury
News.

The world's most famous Internet auction where one might buy ancient
Roman coins and millions of other idiosyncratic symbols also has become
an unlikely source for legal evidence.  While "evidence" is not one of
eBay's 18,000 product categories, lawyers who know what they are
looking for can filter 11 million items by punching in key words.
There are dozens of active "asbestos" auctions every day.  But asbestos
lawyers are not the only ones shopping for evidence on eBay.

A Los Angeles lawyer preparing a lawsuit for cancer victims, for
example, recently bought a cache of old cigarette advertisements that
he figures he can use to re-create for jurors the atmosphere of "hype"
in which his clients got hooked.

eBay is a particularly rich source of evidentiary material for asbestos
litigators, primarily because their sickest clients, those with an
incurable and rare form of cancer, do not develop symptoms until
decades after they were exposed to the hazardous mineral fiber.  And
eBay is a virtual time capsule with a seemingly endless supply of
commercial and household artifacts, historic corporate documents,
maintenance manuals and product catalogs that can help asbestos lawyers
pin down where clients encountered the hazardous material and who can
be held liable.

Said asbestos lawyer Mark Lanier, "There is no better place to shop and
buy real evidence than on eBay."

"You can quote me as saying, 'Wow'," said Deborah Hensler, a Stanford
University law professor, who tracks legal trends.

Web-trolling for evidence is a logical extension of lawyers' increasing
use of the Internet for everything from identifying causes of action to
publicizing class-action lawsuits, Professor Hensler said.  "Technology
is changing the dynamics of litigation."

Most asbestos injury cases are settled before reaching a jury verdict,
but lawyers say the evidence they gather online often can help tip the
balance toward a favorable settlement for their clients, the newspaper
reports.

Company lawyers in the asbestos cases also search for help in defending
their clients against allegations of decades-old asbestos use.  Said
Eliot Jubelirer, a San Francisco lawyer who represents corporations,
"You are talking about activities that occurred 20, 30, 40 years ago;
there is nobody alive today who was in those companies [that many]
years ago."

The creation of such niche markets is one of eBay's most valuable
functions, said Florian Zettelmeyer, an assistant professor of
marketing at the University of California-Berkeley.  "What these
lawyers have done is tap into the core strength of the Internet, which
is to pull together the suppliers."

                    New Securities Fraud Cases

AMDOCS LIMITED: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Suit in E.D. Missouri
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. announced Tuesday that a
securities class action has been commenced on behalf of shareholders
who acquired Amdocs Limited (NYSE: DOX) securities between July 24,
2001 and June 20, 2002, inclusive.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Missouri, against defendants Amdocs Limited, Bruce K.
Anderson, Robert A. Minucci, Avinoam Naor and Dov Baharav.

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 additional information, contact Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven,
P.A. by Mail: The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street,
Suite 2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202 by e-mail: piven@pivenlaw.com or
by Phone: 410/986-0036


AOL TIME: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A securities class action lawsuit was commenced on behalf of all
persons who purchased or acquired American Online, Inc. between July
19, 1999 and January 10, 2001 and all persons who purchased or acquired
the common stock of AOL Time Warner, Inc. (NYSE: AOL) between January
11, 2001 and July 17, 2002, inclusive. Please visit our website at
www.bernlieb.com or contact us at (800) 217-1522 or by email at
AOL@bernlieb.com.

The action is pending in the United States District Court, Southern
District of New York. The complaint alleges that during the class
period, AOL (and later AOL Time Warner) made misrepresentations and/or
omissions of material fact, including affirmatively misstating AOL and
AOL Time Warner's revenue from online advertising sales by including in
such revenues sums received as one-time payments in connection with the
termination of contracts for online advertising. The complaint further
alleges that AOL artificially inflated its online advertising revenues
for fiscal 1Q 2001 by counting in such revenues $16.4 million in online
advertising that AOL required an enterprise called 24dogs.com to
purchase in order to settle a legal dispute, and that AOL Time Warner
artificially inflated its revenues from online advertising sales by
including in such revenues sums that AOL Time Warner received in
connection with selling online advertising for online auction site
eBay.

The complaint further alleges that defendant Ernst & Young, LLP
violated the federal securities laws by certifying AOL Time Warner's
financial statements as incorporated in AOL Time Warner's Annual Report
for its fiscal year 2001 filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission (the "SEC") on March 25, 2002 even though it knew (or
recklessly failed to discover) that AOL Time Warner had counted in
revenue sums received in connection with selling online advertising for
online auction site eBay.

When The Washington Post revealed the foregoing on July 18, 2002, AOL
Time Warner stock dropped to as low as $11.75, down from its Class
Period high of $58.51.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all those who purchased
or otherwise acquired AOL and/or AOL Time Warner securities during the
Class Periods. If you purchased or otherwise acquired AOL and/or AOL
Time Warner securities during the Class Periods, and either lost money
on the transaction or still hold the securities, you may wish to join
in the action to serve as lead plaintiff. In order to do so, you must
meet certain requirements set forth in the applicable law and file
appropriate papers no later than September 16, 2002.

For more details, contact Ms. Linda Flood, Director of Shareholder
Relations, at Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP by Mail: 10 East 40th
Street, New York, New York 10016 by Phone: (800) 217-1522 or 212-779-
1414 or by e-mail: AOL@bernlieb.com


AOL TIME: Cauley Geller Brings Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Firm of Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP announced Tuesday
that a class action has been filed in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of AOL
Time Warner, Inc. (NYSE: AOL) publicly traded securities during the
period between July 19, 1999 and July 17, 2002, inclusive. A copy of
the complaint filed in this action is available from the Court, or can
be viewed on the firm's website at http://www.classlawyer.com/pr/aol--
time--warner.pdf

The complaint charges AOL Time Warner, Inc. and certain of its officers
and directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning
its business and financial condition. Specifically, the complaint
alleges that the defendants issued numerous materially false and
misleading statements concerning the Company, the synergies derived
from the merger of America Online Inc. and Time Warner, Inc. (the
"Merger") and the Company's prospects and earnings projections. The
complaint alleges that these statements were materially false and
misleading because they failed to disclose:

     (i) that the Merger was not generating the synergies as
         represented by defendants;

    (ii) that the Company was experiencing declining advertising
         revenues; and

   (iii) that the Company had failed to properly write down the value
         of more than $50 billion of goodwill, thereby artificially
         inflating its reported financial results and rendering its
         published financial statements materially false and misleading
         and in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

On April 24, 2002, AOL Time Warner issued a press release announcing
its financial results for the first quarter of 2002, and revealed that
it would be taking a "one-time, non-cash charge that reduced the
carrying value of the Company's goodwill by approximately $54 billion."
Following this announcement, AOL Time Warner stock closed at $19.30 per
share, a decline of more than 66% from a Class Period high of $56.60
per share. During the Class Period, prior to the disclosure of the true
facts about the Company, AOL Time Warner insiders sold their personal
holdings of AOL Time Warner common stock to the unsuspecting public for
proceeds in excess of $250 million.

The complaint further alleges that defendant Ernst & Young, LLP
violated the federal securities laws by certifying AOL Time Warner's
financial statements as incorporated in AOL Time Warner's Annual Report
for its fiscal year 2001 filed with the SEC on March 25, 2002 even
though it knew (or recklessly failed to discover) that AOL Time Warner
had counted in revenue sums received in connection with selling online
advertising for online auction site eBay. When The Washington Post
revealed the foregoing on July 18, 2002, AOL Time Warner stock dropped
to as low as $11.75, down from its Class Period high of $56.60.

For more information, contact CAULEY GELLER BOWMAN & COATES, LLP,
Investor Relations Department: Jackie Addison, Sue Null or Ellie Baker
by Mail: P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock, AR 72221-5438 by Phone:
888-551-9944 (Toll Free) or by E-mail: info@classlawyer.com


AOL TIME: Olsen Law Firm Alleges Securities Fraud in S.D. NY Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Olsen Law Firm filed on July 19, 2002 a class action suit against
AOL Time Warner Inc. (NYSE: AOL) and certain of its principal officers
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased AOL securities
between October 18, 2000 and July 17, 2002, inclusive.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated Section 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of l934. More specifically, the
Complaint alleges that defendants issued materially false and
misleading statements about its advertising revenues since the third
quarter 2000 through the end of the Class Period. The Complaint further
alleges that certain company insiders sold tens of thousands of shares
of AOL stock at huge profits while in possession of material adverse
non-public information concerning AOL's revenues. On January 17, 2002,
the market learned that AOL improperly boosted its advertising revenues
by $270 million during the period stated above by engaging in a series
of unconventional transactions.

For more information, contact The Olsen Law Firm through Kurt Olsen,
Esquire by Mail: 2121 K Street NW, Suite 800, Washington, D.C. 20037 by
Phone: (202) 261-3553 or by e-mail: Kurtolsen@sprintmail.com


AOL TIME: Schiffrin & Barroway Joins Fray, Files Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP announced early this week that it has filed a
class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York on behalf of all purchasers of the common
stock of AOL Time Warner, Inc. (NYSE: AOL) between July 19, 1999 and
July 17, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint charges AOL Time Warner, Inc. and certain of its officers
and directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning
its business and financial condition. Specifically, the complaint
alleges that the defendants issued numerous materially false and
misleading statements concerning the Company, the synergies derived
from the merger of America Online Inc. and Time Warner, Inc. (the
"Merger") and the Company's prospects and earnings projections. The
complaint alleges that these statements were materially false and
misleading because they failed to disclose:

     (i) that the Merger was not generating the synergies as
         represented by defendants;

    (ii) that the Company was experiencing declining advertising
         revenues; and

   (iii) that the Company had failed to properly write down the value
         of more than $50 billion of goodwill, thereby artificially
         inflating its reported financial results and rendering its
         published financial statements materially false and misleading
         and in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

On April 24, 2002, AOL Time Warner issued a press release announcing
its financial results for the first quarter of 2002, and revealed that
it would be taking a "one-time, non-cash charge that reduced the
carrying value of the Company's goodwill by approximately $54 billion
(Emphasis added.)." Following this announcement, AOL Time Warner stock
closed at $19.30 per share, a decline of more than 66% from a Class
Period high of $56.60 per share. During the Class Period, prior to the
disclosure of the true facts about the Company, AOL Time Warner
insiders sold their personal holdings of AOL Time Warner common stock
to the unsuspecting public for proceeds in excess of $250 million.

The complaint further alleges that defendant Ernst & Young, LLP
violated the federal securities laws by certifying AOL Time Warner's
financial statements as incorporated in AOL Time Warner's Annual Report
for its fiscal year 2001 filed with the SEC on March 25, 2002 even
though it knew (or recklessly failed to discover) that AOL Time Warner
had counted in revenue sums received in connection with selling online
advertising for online auction site eBay. When The Washington Post
revealed the foregoing on July 18, 2002, AOL Time Warner stock dropped
to as low as $11.75, down from its Class Period high of $56.60.

For more information, contact Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP through Marc A.
Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L. Berman, Esq. by Mail: Three Bala Plaza East,
Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA  19004 by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 (toll free)
or 1-610-667-7706 or by e-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com


AOL TIME: Wechsler Harwood Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
------------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Wechsler Harwood Halebian & Feffer LLP announces that a
class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of AOL Time
Warner, Inc. (NYSE:AOL) between April 18, 2001 and April 24, 2002,
inclusive against defendants AOL Time Warner and certain of its
officers.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the
market between April 18, 2001 and April 24, 2002, thereby artificially
inflating the price of AOL Time Warner securities. As alleged in the
complaint, defendants issued numerous materially false and misleading
statements concerning the Company, the synergies derived from the
merger of America Online Inc. and Time Warner, Inc. (the "Merger") and
the Company's prospects and earnings projections. The complaint alleges
that these statements were materially false and misleading because they
failed to disclose:

     (i) that the Merger was not generating the synergies as
         represented by defendants;

    (ii) that the Company was experiencing declining advertising
         revenues; and

   (iii) that the Company had failed to properly write down the value
         of more than $50 billion of goodwill, thereby artificially
         inflating its reported financial results and rendering its
         published financial statements materially false and misleading
         and in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

On April 24, 2002, the last day of the Class Period, AOL Time Warner
issued a press release announcing its financial results for the first
quarter of 2002, and revealed that it would be taking a one-time, non-
cash charge that reduced the carrying value of the Company's goodwill
by approximately $54 billion. Following this announcement, AOL Time
Warner stock closed at $19.30 per share, a decline of more than 66%
from a Class Period high of $56.60 per share. During the Class Period,
prior to the disclosure of the true facts about the Company, AOL Time
Warner insiders sold their personal holdings of AOL Time Warner common
stock to the unsuspecting public for proceeds in excess of $250
million.

For more information, contact Wechsler Harwood Halebian & Feffer LLP by
Mail: 488 Madison Avenue, 8th Floor, New York, New York 10022 by Toll
Free Telephone: 877-935-7400 or e-mail Craig Lowther, Wechsler Harwood
Shareholder Relations Department: clowther@whhf.com


BRITISH BIOTECH: Class Law Takes First Step in Likely Shareholders Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
British Biotech PLC's lawyers received Tuesday the long-threatened
paperwork preparing the way for a suit against the company by
disgruntled shareholders, according to the Financial Times.

Class Law, which is representing a clutch of shareholders unhappy at
the way British Biotech's drug development news was disseminated in the
mid-1990s, will fax a request for pre-action disclosure to Allen &
Overy, acting for the company, the newspaper said.

The request will ask to see paperwork relating to clinical trials and
correspondence with the US Food and Drug Administration between 1994
and 1998.

Class Law has been preparing the case for some time. The pre-action
disclosure is the first formal step before the filing of a writ.

"If this is a step forward to finding out who Class Law's clients are
and what their claim is, then we welcome it," British Biotech is
reported as saying.

It would not comment on whether British Biotech or Allen & Overy would
contest the request and force Class Law to go to court to obtain the
documentation.


CAPITAL ONE: Levy and Levy Commences Securities Suit in E.D. Virginia
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Levy and Levy, P.C. filed recently a class action lawsuit 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) during the period between January
15, 2002 and July 16, 2002, inclusive.

The Complaint charges Capital One 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 Capital One's business operations and earnings caused
Capital One's stock price to become artificially inflated, inflicting
damages on investors. The Complaint alleges that defendants failed to
disclose that Capital One has a large percentage of "subprime"
customers, borrowers with either poor credit histories or from low-
income households. Capital One 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 Capital One uses to provide loans and credit cards to subprime
consumers, the company's stock price plummeted 39% in one day.

For more details, contact Levy and Levy, P.C. through Stephen G. Levy,
Esq. by Mail: One Stamford Plaza, 263 Tresser Blvd., 9th Floor,
Stamford, CT 06901 by Phone: 866-338-3674 (toll-free), 203-564-1920 or
by e-mail: LLNYCT@aol.com


CRYOLIFE INC.: Charles Piven Commences Lawsuit in N.D. Georgia
--------------------------------------------------------------
Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. announced Tuesday that a
securities class action has been commenced on behalf of shareholders
who acquired CryoLife, Inc. (NYSE: CRY) securities between August 11,
2000 and June 26, 2002, inclusive.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, against defendants
CryoLife, Inc., Steven G. Anderson and Albert E. Heacox.

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 additional details, contact Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A.
by Mail: The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite
2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202 by e-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com or by
Phone: 410-986-0036


KNIGHT TRADING: Hoffman & Edelson Begins Securities Suit in New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hoffman & Edelson, LLC announced early this week that it has filed a
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) during the period from February 29,
2000 through June 3, 2002, inclusive, against defendants Knight Trading
and Kenneth D. Pasternak.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities
laws by issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements
throughout the Class Period thereby artificially inflating the
marketplace of the Company's securities. Specifically, the Complaint
alleges that defendants failed to disclose that Knight Trading traders
had systematically engaged in "front-running," a practice in violation
of securities trading rules.

By engaging in these practices, Knight Trading traders delayed customer
orders while Company traders made purchases in the same stocks ordered
by customers. Only after the Company traders had made their own
purchases would Knight Trading's customers' orders for those same
stocks be processed. This practice had the effect of inflating the
prices of those stocks and generating a windfall profit to the
defendants as they collected profits that should have accrued to Knight
Trading's customers.

On June 3, 2002, the last day of the Class Period, the Company
disclosed that both the National Association of Securities Dealers
(NASD) and the Securities and Exchange Commission were investigating
the Company's trading practices. The following day, June 4, 2002, the
market price of Knight Trading's stock plummeted 28% from the prior
day's close.

For more details, contact Jerold B. Hoffman at Hoffman & Edelson, LLC
by Mail: 45 W. Court Street, Doylestown, PA 18901 by Phone:
877-537-6532 (toll free), fax number 215-230-8735 or by e-mail:
jhoffman@hofedlaw.com


NICOR INC.: Brodsky & Smith Initiates Shareholders Suit in N.D. IL
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law offices of Brodsky & Smith, L.L.C. announced Tuesday that a
securities class action lawsuit has been commenced on behalf of
shareholders who acquired Nicor, Inc. (NYSE:GAS) securities between
January 24, 2002 through July 18, 2002, inclusive.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois, 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 Brodsky & Smith, LLC through Jason L.
Brodsky, Esquire or Evan J. Smith, Esquire by Phone: 877-LEGAL-90 (toll
free)


PEROT SYSTEMS: Berger & Montague Files Securities Suit in N.D. Texas
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Berger & Montague, P.C. filed on July 18, 2002 a class
action suit in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Texas against Perot Systems Corp. (NYSE: PER) and some of
its officers and directors on behalf of all persons that purchased the
common stock between February 2, 1999 through June 7, 2002.

The complaint alleges that the Texas-based Perot Systems Corp. omitted
to disclose crucial facts regarding risky business practices in which
Perot Systems was engaged in order to try to obtain new consulting
business and generate additional revenues. Specifically, the complaint
alleges that Perot Systems had disclosed crucial proprietary
information regarding the architecture of California's power grid that
could be used to cause artificial congestion on the system to power
trader Reliant, that Perot Systems faces substantial potential legal
liability due to the possibility that its improper disclosures of
proprietary information enabled power traders to exploit such
weaknesses in California's power grid for their own profit, and that
Perot Systems did not have in place sufficient management controls to
prevent its personnel from using confidential information obtained in
the course of its consulting work as a selling point in trying to
obtain lucrative consulting business.

The complaint further alleges that when Wall Street learned of these
practices after California State Sen. Joseph Dunn unearthed a Perot
Systems sales presentation mapping out strategies to exploit weaknesses
and loopholes in the California power grid, Perot Systems' stock
tumbled 19% on June 5, 2002 and an additional 11.3% to close at $12.90
on June 6, 2002, down from its class period high of $85.75.

For more details, contact Sherrie R. Savett, Esquire, Douglas Risen,
Esquire, Kimberly A. Walker, Investor Relations Manager, Berger &
Montague, P.C. by Mail: 1622 Locust Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103 by
Phone: 888-891-2289 or 215-875-3000, Fax: 215-875-5715 by e-mail:
InvestorProtect@bm.net or visit the firm's Web site:
http://www.bergermontague.com


SEEBEYOND TECHNOLOGY: Cauley Geller Lodges Securities Suit in C.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Firm of Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP filed a class action
this week in the United States District Court for the Central District
of California on behalf of purchasers of SeeBeyond Technology Corp.
(Nasdaq: SBYN) common stock during the period between December 10, 2001
and April 22, 2002, inclusive. A copy of the complaint filed in this
action is available from the Court, or can be viewed on the firm's Web
site at http://www.classlawyer.com/pr/seebeyond.pdf

The complaint charges SeeBeyond 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 made
positive but false statements about SeeBeyond's results and business,
while concealing material adverse information about customers pushing
out orders. As a result, SeeBeyond's stock traded at artificially
inflated levels, permitting defendants to complete a secondary public
offering of 8.5 million shares (plus 1.2 million of an overallotment)
for proceeds of $82 million, including 2 million shares sold by
SeeBeyond's CEO.

Immediately before the offering, SeeBeyond announced its 4thQ 01
results, which met analyst expectations. Defendants represented that
the Company had met the numbers without pulling in sales from the 1stQ
02 such that 1stQ 02 results would be favorable as well. The Company
indicated it had good visibility into 1stQ 02 results and forecast
revenues of more than $44 million for that quarter.

On 4/1/02, SeeBeyond preannounced its 1stQ 02 results in a press
release and conference call indicating it had revenues of $42.0 to
$42.5 million in the 1stQ 02. The stock declined somewhat on what was
termed a "slight miss" from earnings estimates. Within hours of this
release, SeeBeyond's auditors called the Company objecting to its
revenue recognition on at least $2.2 million in transactions. SeeBeyond
concealed this problem over the following weeks. Then, on 4/22/02,
after the market closed, SeeBeyond admitted the 1stQ 02 revenues were
actually only $40.3 million. On this news, the Company's stock dropped
by 50% to $3.15 per share.

For additional information, contact CAULEY GELLER BOWMAN & COATES, LLP
Investor Relations Department: Jackie Addison, Sue Null or Ellie Baker
by Mail: P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock, AR 72221-5438 by Phone:
888-551-9944 (toll free) or by e-mail: info@classlawyer.com


SEEBEYOND TECHNOLOGY: Charles Piven Initiates Suit in C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. announced Tuesday that a
securities class action has been commenced on behalf of shareholders
who acquired SeeBeyond Technology Corp. (Nasdaq: SBYN) securities
between December 10, 2001 and April 22, 2002, inclusive.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Central
District of California, against defendants SeeBeyond and certain of its
officers and directors.

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 Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. by
Mail: The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite
2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202 by e-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com or by
Phone: 410-986-0036


SEEBEYOND TECHNOLOGY: Leo Desmond Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Leo W. Desmond issue this statement early this week:

A securities class action has been commenced on behalf of shareholders
who acquired SeeBeyond Technology Corporation (Nasdaq:SBYN) securities
between Dec. 10, 2001 and April 22, 2002, inclusive.

If you purchased SeeBeyond Technology Corporation securities between
Dec. 10, 2001 and April 22, 2002, you may, not later than Sept. 2,
2002, move the court to serve as a lead plaintiff of the class action
seeking to recover damages on behalf of all similarly-situated
purchasers of SeeBeyond Technology Corporation securities, excluding
the defendants and their affiliates.

No class has yet been certified in the above actions. Until a class is
certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. If
you purchased stock during the class period, you have a right to become
involved as a plaintiff but are not required to do so to recover
damages.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Central
District of California against SeeBeyond Technology Corporation, James
T. Demetriades, Barry J. Plaga, Paul J. Hoffman, Raymond J. Lane and
Kathleen M. Mitchell.

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

For more information, contact the Law Offices of Leo W. Desmond, West
Palm Beach through Leo W. Desmond, Esq. by Phone: 888/337-6663,
561/712-8000 by e-mail: Info@SecuritiesAttorney.com


SEEBEYOND TECHNOLOGY: Schiffrin & Barroway Initiates Lawsuit in C.D. CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schiffrin & Barroway issued this statement early this
week:

Notice is hereby given that a class action lawsuit was filed in the
United States District Court for the Central District of California on
behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of SeeBeyond Technology
Corp. (Nasdaq:SBYN) common stock during the period between Dec. 10,
2001 and April 22, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint charges SeeBeyond Technology Corp. and certain of its
officers and directors with issuing false and misleading statements
concerning its business and financial condition. Specifically, the
complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants made
positive but false statements about SeeBeyond's results and business,
while concealing material adverse information about customers pushing
out orders. As a result, SeeBeyond's stock traded at artificially
inflated levels, permitting defendants to complete a secondary public
offering of 8.5 million shares (plus 1.2 million of an over allotment)
for proceeds of $82 million, including 2 million shares sold by
SeeBeyond's CEO.

Immediately before the offering, SeeBeyond announced its 4thQ 01
results, which met analyst expectations. Defendants represented that
the Company had met the numbers without pulling in sales from the 1stQ
02 such that 1stQ 02 results would be favorable as well. The Company
indicated it had good visibility into 1stQ 02 results and forecast
revenues of more than $44 million for that quarter.

On 4/1/02, SeeBeyond preannounced its 1stQ 02 results in a press
release and conference call indicating it had revenues of $42.0 to
$42.5 million in the 1stQ 02. The stock declined somewhat on what was
termed a "slight miss" from earnings estimates. Within hours of this
release, SeeBeyond's auditors called the Company objecting to its
revenue recognition on at least $2.2 million in transactions. SeeBeyond
concealed this problem over the following weeks. Then, on 4/22/02,
after the market closed, SeeBeyond admitted the 1stQ 02 revenues were
actually only $40.3 million. On this news, the Company's stock dropped
by 50% to $3.15 per share.

For more information, contact Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP through Bala
Cynwyd, Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L. Berman, Esq. by Phone:
888-299-7706 (toll free) or 610-667-7706 or by e-mail:
info@sbclasslaw.com


SUPERVALU INC.: Leo Desmond Files Securities Fraud Suit in Minnesota
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Leo W. Desmond issued this statement early this
week:

A securities class action has been commenced on behalf of shareholders
who acquired Supervalu, Inc. (NYSE: SVU) securities between April 4,
2001 and June 26, 2002, inclusive.

If you purchased Supervalu, Inc. securities between April 4, 2001 and
June 26, 2002, you may, not later than September 10, 2002, move the
court to serve as a lead plaintiff of the class action seeking to
recover damages on behalf of all similarly-situated purchasers of
Supervalu, Inc. securities, excluding the defendants and their
affiliates.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
District of Minnesota against Supervalu, Inc., Michael W. Wright,
Jeffrey Noddle and Pamela K. Knous.

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

For additional information, contact the Law Offices of Leo W. Desmond
by Mail: 2161 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 204, West Palm Beach,
Florida 33409 by Phone: 888-337-6663 (toll free) by e-mail:
Info@SecuritiesAttorney.com or by visiting its Web site:
http://www.SecuritiesAttorney.com.


TELLABS INC.: Charles Piven Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. IL
------------------------------------------------------------------
Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. announced Tuesday that a
securities class action has been commenced on behalf of shareholders
who acquired Tellabs, Inc. (Nasdaq: TLAB) securities between December
11, 2000 and June 19, 2001, inclusive.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, against defendants
Tellabs, Richard C. Notebaert and Michael J. Birck.

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 information, contact Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. by
Mail: The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite
2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202 by e-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com or by
Phone: 410/986-0036


VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: Brodsky & Smith Claims Securities Fraud in SDNY Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Law offices of Brodsky & Smith, L.L.C. announced Tuesday that a
securities class action lawsuit has been commenced on behalf of
shareholders who acquired Vivendi Universal, S.A. (NYSE:V) securities
between February 11, 2002 and July 3, 2002, inclusive.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, against the company and its former
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer.

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 Brodsky & Smith, LLC through Jason L.
Brodsky, Esquire or Evan J. Smith, Esquire by Phone: 877-LEGAL-90 (toll
free)


VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: Levy and Levy Starts Securities Fraud Suit in SDNY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Levy and Levy, P.C. initiated a class action lawsuit in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf
of purchasers of the securities of Vivendi Universal (NYSE: V) during
the period between February 11, 2002 and July 3, 2002, inclusive,
against defendants Vivendi Universal and Jean-Marie Messier, the
Company's former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer.

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. Specifically, prior to and
during the Class Period, Mr. Messier took Vivendi on an acquisition
binge that, according to published reports, resulted in the Company
amassing approximately $18 billion in debt as he turned the Company
from a water concern into an entertainment powerhouse.

Under Mr. Messier's leadership, Vivendi completed a $30 billion buyout
of Canada's Seagram and a $10.3 billion purchase of USA Networks Inc.,
the cable and entertainment company owned by Hollywood mogul Barry
Diller. Concomitantly, Mr. Messier orchestrated a scheme to conceal the
severity of Vivendi's liquidity problems stemming from the massive debt
load incurred as a result of these, and other, transactions. In fact,
only days before his ouster by Vivendi's Board, Mr. Messier caused the
Company to issue several press releases that falsely stated that
Vivendi did not face an immediate and severe cash shortage that
threatened the Company's viability going forward absent an asset fire
sale. It was only after Vivendi's Board dislodged Mr. Messier that the
Company's new management disclosed the severity of the crisis and that
the Company would have to secure immediately both bridge and long-term
financing or default on its largest credit obligations.

As detailed in the Complaint, Mr. Messier failed to disclose the true
contours of Vivendi's cash crisis and his affirmative
misrepresentations to the contrary have given rise to an investigation
by French authorities concerning whether Mr. Messier disclosed in a
timely fashion that the Company was in dire financial straits.
Published reports also indicate that Vivendi is engaged in urgent
discussions with lenders to secure financing and is both considering
and negotiating the sale of assets.

For more information, contact Levy and Levy, P.C. through Stephen G.
Levy, Esq. by Mail: One Stamford Plaza, 263 Tresser Blvd., 9th Floor,
Stamford, CT 06901, by Phone: 866-338-3674 (toll-free), 203-564-1920 or
by e-mail: LLNYCT@aol.com



                              *********

S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Trenton, New Jersey, and
Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C.  Enid Sterling, Aurora Fatima
Antonio and Lyndsey Resnick, Editors.

Copyright 2002.  All rights reserved.  ISSN 1525-2272.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic re-
mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior written
permission of the publishers.

Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be
reliable, but is not guaranteed.

The CAR subscription rate is $575 for six months delivered via e-mail.
Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same firm for the
term of the initial subscription or balance thereof are $25 each.  For
subscription information, contact Christopher Beard at 240/629-3300.

                  * * *  End of Transmission  * * *