CAR_Public/020801.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
              Thursday, August 1, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 151

                           Headlines

ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS: Rigas Maintains He is Innocent of Fraud
BIOTECH FIRMS: Appeal Over Organic Farmers Lawsuit Decision Proceeds
CRYOLIFE INC.: Mounting Vigorous Defense V. Securities Suits in N.D. GA
CSX TRANSPORTATION: Ruling Ends Nine-Year-Old Suit Over Rail Corridors
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Suit Says Children Unscreened For Lead Poisoning

ENRON CORPORATION: Merrill Lynch Says "Limited Dealings" Appropriate
FORD MOTOR: FL Sheriff Files Lawsuit Over Crown Victoria Police Cars
INSIGHT ENTERPRISES: Sued For Securities Act Violations in AZ Court
LAIDLAW: Bondholders Reach Settlement in Canadian Securities Fraud Suit
RACIAL PROFILING: Report Shows Minorities Searched More in Nebraska

REMINGTON PRODUCTS: Recalls 3T Hairdryers Due To Electrocution Hazard
STK INTERNATIONAL: Recalls 190T Extension Cords Due To Shock Hazard
TWA: 1,000 Former Pilots File Suit Over Pension Benefits in D.C. Court
VERIZON WIRELESS: Provides Discount to Settle Suit over Wireless Bills

*Lawsuit Against Four Major Fast-Food Chains Launches Diet Debate


                     New Securities Fraud Cases

AMERADA HESS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in New Jersey
AOL TIME: Stull Stull Files Suit For Securities Violations in S.D. NY
CAPITAL ONE: Mark McNair Initiates Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA
CAPITAL ONE: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA
CAPITAL ONE: Holzer Holzer Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA

EL PASO: Stull Stull Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. Texas
HPL TECHNOLOGIES: Leo Desmond Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
HPL TECHNOLOGIES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
HPL TECHNOLOGIES: Berman DeValerio Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
HPL TECHNOLOGIES: Wechsler Harwood Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA

HPL TECHNOLOGIES: Abbey Gardy Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
ICN PHARMACEUTICALS: Glancy & Binkow Commences Securities Suit in NY
ICN PHARMACEUTICALS: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA
INSIGHT ENTERPRISES: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in AZ
INSIGHT ENTERPRISES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in AZ Court

JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in NJ
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
KNIGHT TRADING: Weiss & Yourman Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
MH MEYERSON: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
RIVERSTONE NETWORKS: Weiss & Yourman Launches Securities Suit in CA

RIVERSTONE NETWORKS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
RIVERSTONE NETWORKS: Stull Stull Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
SEEBEYOND TECHNOLOGY: Bernstein Liebhard Lodges Securities Suit in CA
SEEBEYOND TECHNOLOGY: Cohen Milstein Launches Securities Suit in CA
TELLABS INC.: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in N.D. IL

TELLABS INC.: Schatz & Nobel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. IL
VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: Holzer & Holzer Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA

                           *********

ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS: Rigas Maintains He is Innocent of Fraud
----------------------------------------------------------------
Adelphia Communications executive John J. Rigas continues to insist on
his innocence relating to an accounting scandal that eventually led to
the beleaguered telecommunications firm's filing of Chapter 11
bankruptcy in June, the Associated Press reports.  

Mr. Rigas was arrested last week, with his two sons, also Adelphia
executives, over accusations that they borrowed billions of dollars
from the Company, which was not recorded in Company books.  The Company
later stated that the Rigas family spent company money for personal
interests, such as funding a hockey team, a golf course and an African
safari.  The three are out on $10 million bail.

"I really believe that what we did was completely acceptable," Mr.
Rigas told the Buffalo News.  "We'll go from here, but it is going to
be hard. The road will be very difficult, no question."  He added that
he and his two sons tried to turn themselves in, but the government
refused to let them.  He accused authorities of staging a media event.

"Ten minutes to 6 in the morning was that rap on the door with all
those government agents. I went downstairs handcuffed and the reporters
were already there," Mr. Rigas continued.  "My lawyer is 75 years old
and said that this is the first time in his life in practicing criminal
law that he couldn't turn his client in and surrender him.  They
refused.  They wanted to make a show of it."

Mr. Rigas told the newspaper he still believes he will be exonerated,
according to AP.  "I still have confidence in the American system," he
said.  "I really do."


BIOTECH FIRMS: Appeal Over Organic Farmers Lawsuit Decision Proceeds
--------------------------------------------------------------------
A Canadian Court of Appeals allowed the appeal of biotech giants,
Monsanto and Aventis, to proceed relating to a class action filed by a
group of organic farmers over genetically modified canola, the Leader-
Post reports.  

The farmers claim that since genetically modified canola was introduced
in Canada in the mid-1990s, it has been found growing on land for which
it was never intended.  The farmers' claims say few, if any, seed
suppliers will certify their seeds as organic, according to an earlier
Class Action Reporter story.  The farmers are claiming damages for
contamination of their land through cross-pollination with genetically
modified canola.


Earlier this year, a Saskatoon Queen's Bench Justice ordered the
biotech firms, Monsanto and Aventis, to file statements of defense to
the farmers' lawsuit before a certification hearing determines whether
the farmers can proceed as a "class" under the province's newly-passed
Class Actions Act, the Leader-Post reports.

The companies say they need more information from the plaintiffs before
they file a statement of defense, and appealed the decision.  Terry
Zakreski, the lawyer representing the farmers, successfully argued in
April that his clients' case against the two companies would be
prejudiced if they were unable to know what the defense is planning
before the certification hearing, the Leader-Post states.

Justice Calvin Tallis of the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal to
proceed, saying "The point raised on this proposed appeal is one of
significance to the practice in his field."  He further wrote, "Since
the issue has not been before this court (in the past), I find that it
is desirable to have this issue . settled in Saskatchewan, particularly
in light of the divergent views in other Canadian jurisdictions."


CRYOLIFE INC.: Mounting Vigorous Defense V. Securities Suits in N.D. GA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CryoLife, Inc. intends to vigorously defend against a securities class
action on behalf of shareholders who acquired its 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 the Company, 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.

Steven G. Anderson, President and Chief Executive Officer of CryoLife
said in a statement,  "We believe the claims are meritless, and we have
retained King & Spalding, which has one of the leading securities
litigation defense practices in the Southeast, to represent us in the
actions."

Additionally, Mr. Anderson said, "More importantly, although the
lawsuits are an unfortunate distraction, we will continue to focus our
energies on our business and the many growth opportunities that we are
seeing in our human tissue processing, SynerGraft(R) and BioGlue(R)
product lines."


CSX TRANSPORTATION: Ruling Ends Nine-Year-Old Suit Over Rail Corridors
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A judge's final approval of a settlement has ended a nine-year-old
lawsuit on behalf of Indiana landowners who now can gain undisputed
title to abandoned railroad corridors adjoining their land, Associated
Press Newswires reports.

The settlement, approved recently by Hamilton Superior Court Judge
William Hughes, in Noblesville, Indiana, concludes negotiations between
CSX Transportation and thousands of landowners over portions of 600
miles of abandoned railroad rights of way in 36 Indiana counties.

Under Indiana law, a railroad's easement rights are lost once rail
service is abandoned.  However, the lawsuit claimed that the Company
made deals with telecommunications companies to install cables on
abandoned railroad corridors it did not own.  In several cases, the
Company sold properties to adjoining landowners, who, by law, already
had acquired ownership.

"This is the first case in the nation with a class of this size against
a railroad," said Washington, D.C. attorney, Nels Ackerson.

Under the agreement, the Company will pay a $7 million cash settlement,
including attorney fees and administrative costs, and up to $2,500 per
landowner, or up to $22.4 million for the group of property owners.

George N. Clark, 58, who owns a 170-acre farm in Hortonville in
Hamilton County, next to a railroad corridor, said he probably will
receive $1,500 from the settlement, but he said the money was not
important.  The lawsuit, he said, was brought "to settle a point of law
and justice, because they claimed they owned it - which was slander of
title - and they didn't," he said.

After the Company abandoned the railroad and pulled up the tracks in
1978, AT&T apparently paid it to install fiber-optic cable along that
right of way.  "They just hoped nobody would discover it, but we did,"
said Indianapolis attorney Henry Price.  "They were taking advantage of
the ignorance of the adjoining landowners."

In 1999, a class action settlement was reached with AT&T over the
installation of the fiber-optic cable along the abandoned railroad
lines, giving landowners an average of $45,000 per mile.

Attorneys from both sides will go through property deeds to determine
which rights of way are owned by the Company and which are owned by the
adjoining property owners.  Claim forms will be sent to up to 9,000
landowners, who can decide whether to file a claim.  Mr. Ackerson said
checks and titles should be issued to all qualified landowners by the
end of this year.


DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Suit Says Children Unscreened For Lead Poisoning
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nearly 80 percent of the District of Columbia's poorest infants and
toddlers were not screened last year for blood-lead-poisoning, in
violation of Medicaid guidelines and despite a six-year-old federal
court order that has sought to improve medical care for the city's most
vulnerable children, an advocacy group has charged, according to a
recent report by The Washington Post.

In motions filed this month in US District Court in Washington, D.C.,
plaintiffs in a landmark class action, Salazar v. Washington, D.C., say
the city's Medicaid providers are failing to screen most children even
when they come in for check-ups.  Medicaid guidelines state that all
children covered should be tested for heightened levels of lead twice
in their first two years.

The plaintiffs' motions, using the city's statistics, state that fewer
than 22 percent of the 29,000 D.C. children younger than five who are
enrolled in Medicaid had been screened for lead in their bloodstreams.  
Doctors failed to test 54 percent of all Medicaid children ages one to
two who were in their offices receiving checkups, although the
screenings are required by federal law, one of the motions states.

The motions ask immediate action to change the situation.  They want
another court order to force the city to screen all children and
payment by the city of a $500 fine for each child who came into a
doctor's office last year but was not screened.  The money would go
into a fund to provide for more blood-lead screening.

"I don't know what the problem could be, unless providers have not been
informed they need to do it," said Kathleen Millian, one of the lawyers
representing the plaintiffs in the class action case known as Salazar
v. Washington, D.C.

The Salazar suit was originally filed in 1993, and exposed vast
failings in the city's medical care system for low-income children,
leading U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler to place the system under
her oversight in 1996.  The D.C. Department of Health now contracts
with several private health care organizations to treat the city's
Medicaid patients.  According to federal standards, children covered by
Medicaid are to be screened twice before age 2, or failing that, at
least once by age five.

The pages of charts and tables in the recent court motions show that
the city's success in monitoring lead levels in children has risen only
slightly, the blood-lead screening having moved from seven percent of
children in 1999 to 21 percent last year.

Each year, a few hundred D.C. children are found to have high levels of
lead in their bloodstreams, and several are hospitalized according to
city health records.  Health officials acknowledge that the issue is
likely to be more widespread than reported, but cannot be documented
because of the city's poor record keeping.

Doctors have said for years that the lead, which primarily comes from
paint in older or run-down houses, is the nation's worst environmental
health threat to children.  High levels of lead in children can cause
behavior and learning disorders, severe neurological problems, coma and
death.

Although 95 percent of the city's houses were built before 1978, when
the use of lead-based paint was banned, screening data for lead levels
in children was not computerized until 2000.  Earlier data are
considered unreliable, city officials have acknowledged.

Advocates say screening is imperative for low-income children because a
disproportionate number of the nation's impoverished and minority
children are exposed to lead-based paint.  A 2000 study by the General
Accounting office found that 83 percent of the nation's reported cases
of blood-lead poisoning were in children on Medicaid.

The motions also say that Medicaid children are receiving grossly
inadequate dental care, again in violation of federal standards.  The
plaintiffs are asking Judge Kessler to order that system fixed as well.


ENRON CORPORATION: Merrill Lynch Says "Limited Dealings" Appropriate
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. said their "limited dealings" with fallen
energy trader Enron Corporation were appropriate, according to a
Reuters report.  The auditing firm is due to be questioned by Congress
over its role in the Enron collapse, the nation's largest bankruptcy so
far.

"Our firm dealt with Enron at arm's length, and made business decisions
based on the information that was then available," the firm said in a
statement.  "In terms of fees, Enron was not a large client
relationship with Merrill Lynch."

Merrill said it made $1 million advising Enron on one acquisition
between 1997 and 2001 and averaged about $8.2 million a year during
that time in fees from helping Enron sell stocks and bonds, according
to a Reuters report.  That compared with average annual investment
banking fees of $3.5 billion, Merrill said.

One of the transactions being probed by regulators and lawmakers was a
$7 million investment by a Merrill unit in three Nigerian barges owned
by Enron. Lawmakers are investigating whether the transaction was a
loan disguised as a sale, with Merrill guaranteed a specific rate of
return.  Merrill denies that it was a hidden loan, Reuters reports.

Three witnesses were called by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations to testify on Tuesday, with two of the witnesses
expected to refuse to testify.


FORD MOTOR: FL Sheriff Files Lawsuit Over Crown Victoria Police Cars
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Okaloosa County, Florida Sheriff Charles Morris filed a class action
against Ford Motor Company, over its Ford Crown Victoria Police
Interceptors, stating that the design of the vehicle's fuel tanks
creates a serious risk of fires and explosions in rear-end collisions,
the Northwest Florida Daily News reports.

The suit, which was filed "on behalf of all counties, municipalities
and other political subdivisions within the state of Florida which have
purchased or leased Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptors," also
names two Panhandle car dealerships, Key Ford Inc. of Pensacola and
Milton Ford-Mercury Inc. as defendants.

Class actions already have been filed against the Company in Arkansas,
Texas, and New Jersey, seeking recall of all Crown Victoria police
cruisers, according to an earlier Class Action Reporter story.  The
defects caused the deaths of at least 11 police officers nationwide in
the last two decades, all of whom survived rear-end impacts to the
vehicle but were killed when the vehicle's gas tank exploded.

The suit states that the fuel tanks in the patrol cars, which are
versions of the Crown Victoria, are dangerously close to bolts and
brackets that could puncture the tanks or damage their metal covering,
the Northwest Florida Daily News reports.

There hasn't been a problem yet with the fuel tanks during rear-end
collisions for the county's fleet of about 200 patrol cars, the sheriff
told the Daily News.

"We're hoping that Ford Motor Company will make the decision to fix the
automobiles before there is any loss of life or serious injuries,"
chief deputy Fred Cobb told the Daily News.  "We ought not to wait
around for someone to be killed or seriously hurt."


INSIGHT ENTERPRISES: Sued For Securities Act Violations in AZ Court
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Insight Enterprises Inc. faces a securities class action pending in the
United States District Court for the District of Arizona, on behalf of
all persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the
Company's common stock between April 26, 2002 and July 17, 2002,
inclusive.  The suit names as defendants the Company and:

     (1) Eric J. Crown,

     (2) Timothy A. Crown, and

     (3) Stanley Laybourne

The complaint charges the defendants with violations of Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5, by
issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements to the
market during the class period.  

The Company has not yet been served with the complaint, and the
complaint is not yet available from the district court.

Timothy A. Crown, chief executive officer, said in a statement, "We
reject any implication that we intentionally or recklessly issued
materially false or misleading forecasts about our second quarter
earnings."

The Company stated that it will respond appropriately after it receives
and reviews the complaint.


LAIDLAW: Bondholders Reach Settlement in Canadian Securities Fraud Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Canada's Laidlaw said it had reached a definitive agreement to settle
the federal securities class action against it by its bondholders,
according to a recent report by The Wall Street Journal.  The Toronto
holding company for school bus and other transportation operations,
which is under bankruptcy-court protection, reached an agreement in
principle for the settlement in January.

The definitive agreement is subject to court approvals in the United
States and Canada, and also is subject to confirmation of a
satisfactory plan of reorganization for Laidlaw.

If the settlement is implemented, the plaintiff bondholder classes
would be paid about $42.9 million, and the bankruptcy estate of Laidlaw
would receive $12.5 million.


RACIAL PROFILING: Report Shows Minorities Searched More in Nebraska
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Data released by the Nebraska State Patrol states that Black and
Hispanic motorists stopped by state troopers were more likely to be
searched than white drivers.  According to an Associated Press report,
7 percent of black motorists and 6 percent of Hispanic drivers stopped
by state troopers were searched compared with 1 percent of white
motorists.

"I am surprised by some of the numbers," Patrol Superintendent Col. Tom
Nesbitt told AP.  A majority of the stops were on Interstate 80, the
state's main east-west highway.

Because the I-80 driving population does not reflect the population of
Nebraska, the University of Nebraska at Omaha plans to conduct a
demographics survey of the driving population along the highway for
comparison purposes.  "The official data they have, the numbers don't
speak for themselves," Samuel Walker with UNO's criminal justice
program told AP.  "You need an estimate of the at-risk population."

A law enacted last year requires all officers to documents the race and
ethnicity of those they stop, AP reports.


REMINGTON PRODUCTS: Recalls 3T Hairdryers Due To Electrocution Hazard
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Remington Products Co., LLC is cooperating with the US Consumer Product
Safety Commission (CPSC) by voluntarily recalling about 3,000
hairdryers.  These hairdryers are not equipped with an appliance
leakage current interrupter (ALCI) plug to cut off electrical current
in case of contact with water.  If dropped in water, the hairdryers
pose an electrocution hazard to consumers.  The Company has not
received any reports of electrocutions relating to these hairdryers.  
This recall is being announced to prevent the possibility of injury.

The 1600-watt hairdryers have a chrome body, with black speed and heat
controls.  The model name, "Remington Vortex Ultra," is printed in
black on one side of the air intake grill with the model number, V-
1030, and the words, "Do Not Immerse In Water" and "Made in China"
printed in silver on the other side.  The hairdryers have a UPC number
of 0-74590-87541-6, which is located on the packaging box.    

The recalled hairdryers were sold nationwide in K-Mart, Sears, Target,
Bed, Bath & Beyond, K's Merchandise, Service Merchandise, Eckerd, Army
and Air Force Exchanges and other retailers from July 2000 through
January 2001 for between $18 to $25.  
        
For more details, contact the Company by Phone: (800) 992-9686 between
9 am and 5:30 pm ET Monday through Friday.


STK INTERNATIONAL: Recalls 190T Extension Cords Due To Shock Hazard
-------------------------------------------------------------------
STK International, Inc. is cooperating with the US Consumer Product
Safety Commission (CPSC) by voluntarily recalling about 190,000
extension cords.  The cords have undersized wires, presenting a shock
hazard to consumers.  The Company has not received any reports of
incidents or injuries involving these extension cords.  The recall is
being conducted to prevent the possibility of injury.
        
The recalled extension cords were sold in brown (model EC-222) or
white (model EC-221) and are approximately 5-feet 3-inches long.  The
model numbers are printed in the upper right corner of the packaging.  
The cords were packaged in a mustard and orange color sleeve with the
words, "5 Household Extension Cords" and "Made in China" printed on the
front.  The "Volt Master" logo is printed in the left corner of the
packaging.  "YWC-981 8 CHINA E157848" is printed on the cord.
        
Discount stores sold the extension cords nationwide from October
1998 to March 2002 for about $1.
        
For more details, contact the Company by Mail: EC-221/ EC-222 Recall,
STK International, Inc., 5500 East Olympic Boulevard Los Angeles,
California 90222, or by Phone: 800-536-7855 between 8 am and 5 pm PT
Monday through Friday.


TWA: 1,000 Former Pilots File Suit Over Pension Benefits in D.C. Court
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TWA faces a class action filed in the US District Court in the District
of Columbia, by a group of more than 1,000 former pilots over pension
benefits they are allegedly being denied, the St. Louis Business
Journal reports.  The suit names as defendants:

     (1) financier Carl Icahn,

     (2) the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, and

     (3) the Airline Pilots Association.

The suit alleges conspiracy, violations of federal law and denial of
constitutional rights.  The pilots say they are receiving pensions as
much as $1,500 per month lower than what hey had been promised.  In
addition, they lost their Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) when TWA
filed for bankruptcy under Icahn's ownership, the Business Journal
reports.

"Carl Icahn and the other defendants robbed us coming and going," said
Devon "Al" Francis, president of the plaintiff's group, in a statement.  
"He promised to help us transform the company into the world's "premier
airline' and we agreed to drastically reduce our wages and benefits in
consideration of receiving stock equity in the company and job security
items including enhanced retirement benefits."


VERIZON WIRELESS: Provides Discount to Settle Suit over Wireless Bills
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An estimated 40 million current and former Verizon Wireless customers
will receive service credits or merchandise discounts under a proposed
class action settlement, the Boston Herald reports.  A final hearing is
set for September 25 in a California Superior Court.

The lawsuit alleges that the nation's largest cell phone service
provider and some of its predecessor companies did not disclose fees,
charges and service limits.  Allegations range from charging tolls in
customers' home calling areas to using technology that allows
eavesdropping.

The settlement would require the Company to develop an easy-to-read
consumer guide detailing services, limitations and billing information.  
The settlement could have a ripple effect in an industry where rates
and terms are often mimicked and matched by competing carriers.  
"Certainly, it could be significant for consumers if they really clean
up their language and a lot of the wireless carriers adopt it," said
Steve Rosen, a telecommunications lawyer in Washington.

If approved, the settlement lets eligible customers collect a voucher
for a $15 credit on a new one-year contract, a $30 credit on a new
two-year contract, a 25 percent Verizon Wireless store discount for up
to $15 or a free earpiece for hands-free calls.

Verizon Wireless users who have been customers since before April 12,
2002, are eligible.  Former customers of companies now part of Verizon
Wireless can determine their eligibility by visiting the Website:
http://www.verizonwireless.com/settlement.


*Lawsuit Against Four Major Fast-Food Chains Launches Diet Debate
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The news that a class action has been launched against America's
biggest fast-food chains McDonald's, KFC, Burger King and Wendy's, on
the grounds that they are partly responsible for the nation's obesity
epidemic, is the latest twist in what may turn out to be one of the
most monumental medical blunders of the past century, according to a
report in the Sydney Morning Herald.

The foods we have been eating in abundance with the approval of health
authorities and the medical establishment, such as pasta, rice, bread
and anything with the words "low fat" on the label, may be one of the
major factors that helped spark the obesity epidemic.

This epidemic began a quarter of a century ago, around 1977, when 13
percent of Americans were classified as obese, a statistic that had
been stable for decades.  It then doubled in about 15 years.  Today,
the proportion of clinically defined obese individuals in the
populations of the United States and Australia is close to one in
three.  All the diseases that stem from obesity, like diabetes and
heart disease, have continued to increase despite decreases in smoking
and the proportion of fat in the average diet.

According to the Sydney Morning Herald, one change coinciding with the
start of this health disaster was the success of the low-fat mantra,
which has led to the inclusion of more carbohydrates in people's daily
lives.  Everyone knows that fast food is not synonymous with healthy
living, especially among children, but research conducted by American
and Australian scientists is finding that the old-fashioned, routinely
ridiculed hamburger may be the least of the dietary enemies.  It is the
bun people have to worry about, and the pasta that people now consume
in vast quantities, which may be causing far more problems than the
beef patty at the core of the fast-food industry.

According to the suits filed in New York by Washington lawyer, Samuel
Hirsch, the biggest villains in this saga may turn out to be the
medical and scientific communities who for decades ridiculed any
deviance from the low-fat dogma.  

Some evidence of the scholarly closed-mindedness was presented by Gary
Taubes in The New York Times, "The National Institutes of Health spent
several hundred millions of dollars trying to demonstrate a connection
between eating fat and getting heart disease and, despite what we might
think, it failed.  Five major studies revealed no such link."

"After insisting that Dr. Robert Atkins (of the famous high-protein,
low-carb diets) was a quack for three decades, obesity experts are now
finding it difficult to ignore the copious anecdotal evidence that his
diet does just what it has claimed. In fact, when the AMA released
its scathing critique of Atkins' diet in March 1973, it acknowledged
that the diet probably worked, but expressed little interest in why,"
the report states.

"The bottom line is that for the better part of 30 years, Dr. Atkins
insisted his diet worked and was safe, and Americans apparently tried
it by the tens of millions, while nutritionists, doctors, public-health
authorities and anyone concerned with heart disease insisted it could
kill them, and expressed little or no desire to find out who was
right," the report further states.

The jury is still out on this debate, but not long ago, it would not
even have been taken seriously.  Now, people may find that tens of
millions of ordinary people got it right while the medical-scientific
community got it wrong.  For the conclusion, says the Sydney Morning
Herald, the people should have to wait and see.


                     New Securities Fraud Cases


AMERADA HESS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in New Jersey
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, on
behalf of purchasers of Amerada Hess Corp. (NYSE: AHC) common stock
during the period between Feb. 9, 2001 and July 11, 2001.

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 beginning in early 2001, the Company began
secret discussions to acquire Triton Energy Limited, in order to obtain
needed additional oil reserves and to significantly boost the Company's
crude oil production.

However, it immediately became clear to the Company's top insiders that
due to the demands of Triton's CEO and Triton's controlling shareholder
that if the Company was to acquire Triton, it would have to pay an
extremely high price of over $3 billion for Triton, a price in excess
of what standard valuation approaches would justify for Triton, a price
that would represent a very substantial premium over Triton's stock
trading price and a price that would require the Company to borrow
billions of dollars to finance the purchase of Triton.

Without disclosing these discussions and negotiations or the Company's
decision to offer to pay over $3 billion to acquire Triton, the top
insiders at the Company who were involved in, or aware of, the details
concerning the proposed acquisition of Triton, sold off huge amounts of
their Company stock to avoid the losses they knew they would suffer
from the sharp decline in Company stock which they knew would occur
when the Triton acquisition was disclosed, and thus profit from the
artificial inflation in the price of the Company's stock that persisted
while they failed to disclose material information about the proposed
Triton acquisition.

By not disclosing that defendants were actively negotiating for the
acquisition of Triton, the individual defendants violated their duty to
"abstain" or "disclose" under the 1934 Act and pursued a scheme to
defraud and course of business that operated as a fraud or deceit on
purchasers of Company stock by selling off over 1.3 million of their
Company shares at as high as $90 per share for proceeds of $119
million.

On July 10,2001, after the individual defendants had completed their
stock sales, the Company disclosed it was acquiring Triton for $3.2
billion, $45 per share, a very large, over 50%, premium over Triton's
July 9,2001 closing price of $29-29/32.  Company stock fell from $81-
11/16 on 7/9/01 to $77 on 7/10/01; to $74 per share on 7/12/01; and to
$70-19/32 per share on 7/18/01, a cumulative decline of well over 13%
in just seven trading sessions. By September 26,2001, just weeks after
the Company completed the Triton deal and disclosed it had had to
borrow $2.5 billion to finance the transaction, Company stock fell to
$59-3/32 compared to its class period high of $90-13/32 in 5/01, a 34%
decline.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave.,
Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735
by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


AOL TIME: Stull Stull Files Suit For Securities Violations in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Stull, Stull & Brody LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on
behalf of all persons who purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise
acquired the securities of America Online between July 19, 1999 and
January 10, 2001 and all persons who purchased, converted, exchanged or
otherwise acquired the securities of AOL Time Warner, Inc. (NYSE:AOL)
between January 11, 2001 and July 17, 2002, inclusive, against AOL Time
Warner and certain of its officers and directors.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities
laws.  The complaint alleges that throughout the class period, among
other things, defendants made material misrepresentations and/or
omitted to state material facts relating to the Company's online
advertising revenues.

The complaint further alleges that AOL and AOL Time Warner booked
revenue from one-time payments received from online advertising clients
as advertising revenue in order to artificially inflate their revenues
derived from online advertising.

When the truth was revealed regarding AOL in an article in The
Washington Post on July 18, 2002, AOL Time Warner stock dropped to as
low as $11.75, down from its class period high of $58.51. As a result
of the defendants' false and misleading statements, investors were
damaged, by purchasing AOL and AOL Time Warner securities at
artificially inflated levels during the class period.

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


CAPITAL ONE: Mark McNair Initiates Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Office Of Mark McNair commenced 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.  The case is pending 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 Mark McNair by Mail: 1101 30th St. N.W. Suite
500, Washington, DC 20007 by Phone: 877-511-4717 or 202-872-4717 or by
E-mail: mcnair@justice4investors.com.  


CAPITAL ONE: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Virginia on behalf 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 the
Company's 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 Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave.,
Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735
by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


CAPITAL ONE: Holzer Holzer Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Holzer & Holzer initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria
Division, on behalf of purchasers of Capital One Financial Corp.
(NYSE:COF) securities between January 15, 2002 and July 16, 2002,
inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants' violated the federal securities
laws by issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements
to the market during the class period.  As alleged in the complaint,
the Company issued numerous press releases regarding its performance
during the class period which represented that the Company was
experiencing quarter after quarter of record earnings and revenue
growth while maintaining "stringent risk management practices" and
adequate loan loss reserves.

The complaint further alleges that these, and other, representations
were materially false and misleading because they failed to disclose
that the Company was in violation of federal guidelines regarding
adequate levels of capitalization and loan loss reserves and that it
was not effectively managing its rapid growth.

On July 16, 2002, the Company revealed that it had entered into an
agreement with regulators, which required the Company to boost reserves
by $247 million in the second quarter of 2002, tie-up additional
capital and institute infrastructure reforms in order to deal
adequately with its high rate of growth, especially in the subprime
market.

In reaction to the announcement, Company stock plummeted by 39%,
falling from a $50.60 per share close on July 16 to $30.48 per share by
the close of July 17, on extremely heavy trading volume.  During the
class period, as alleged in the complaint, Company insiders profited by
selling a total of over $8.2 million in common stock at artificially
inflated prices and the Company undertook a convertible debt offering
for $650 million on April 19, 2002.

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


EL PASO: Stull Stull Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. Texas
------------------------------------------------------------------
Stull Stull & Brody initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, on behalf of
all persons who acquired the common stock of El Paso Corporation
(NYSE:EP) between January 29, 2001 and May 29, 2002, inclusive against
the Company and certain of its officers and directors.  The class also
includes holders of Coastal Corp. securities who acquired the Company's
stock as a result of the Company's acquisition of Coastal.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities
laws by making misstatements and/or omissions of material facts in the
Company's public filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) and otherwise.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that throughout the class period,
among other things, defendants' material omissions and the
dissemination of materially false and misleading statements regarding
the nature of the Company's energy trading practices and revenues
caused the Company's stock price to become artificially inflated,
inflicting damages on investors.

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


HPL TECHNOLOGIES: Leo Desmond Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Leo W. Desmond initiated a securities class action
on behalf of shareholders who acquired HPL Technologies, Inc.
(Nasdaq:HPLAE) securities between October 2, 2001 and July 19, 2002,
inclusive in the United States District Court for the Northern District
of California against the Company and:

     (1) Y. David Lepejian,

     (2) Ita Geva,

     (3) Elias Antoun,

     (4) Osamu Kano,

     (5) Lawrence Kraus, and

     (6) Yervant Zorian

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 details, contact Leo W. Desmond by Phone: 888-337-6663 or 561-
712-8000 by E-Mail:  Info@SecuritiesAttorney.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://www.SecuritiesAttorney.com


HPL TECHNOLOGIES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California on behalf of purchasers of HPL Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ:
HPLA) common stock during the period between July 31, 2001 and July 18,
2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The
Company is a provider of yield optimization software solutions to
enable semiconductor companies to enhance efficiency in the production
process.  

On July 31,2001, the Company completed its initial public offering
(IPO) of 6.9 million shares (including the overallotment) at $11.00 per
share, raising net proceeds of $69.1 million. The IPO was accomplished
pursuant to a Prospectus and Registration Statement filed with the SEC.
These documents represented that the Company recognized revenue on
sales to distributors only when the distributors sold the software
license or services to their customers. Later, HPL reported favorable
financial results for the 1stQ, 2ndQ, 3rdQ and 4thQ of F02.

The complaint alleges that as a result of the Company's favorable but
false financials and false and misleading statements, its stock traded
as high as $17.85 per share.  Defendants took advantage of this
inflation, selling 85,500 shares of their individual holdings.

Then, on July 19,2002, before the markets opened, HPL shocked the
market with news that it was investigating accounting irregularities
with respect to revenue recognition on shipments to distributors in
prior quarters that its CEO had been fired and its CFO had been
reassigned.  On this news, HPL's stock collapsed 72% to as low as $4
per share, before trading was halted.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave.,
Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735
by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


HPL TECHNOLOGIES: Berman DeValerio Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo initiated a securities
class action against HPL Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq:HPLA), claiming the
software company and certain of its top officers pumped up Company
stock price by artificially inflating revenue.

The complaint was filed in US District Court for the Northern District
of California alleging violations of federal securities laws on behalf
of all investors who bought the Company's common stock from July 31,
2001 through July 18, 2002.

According to the lawsuit, the Company issued a series of false and
misleading financial statements to the public during the class period,
which led investors to believe that the San Jose-based company had
generated millions of dollars more revenue than it actually had.

The Company's accounting woes began to surface on July 19, 2002 when it
announced that its audit committee was investigating financial and
accounting irregularities involving purported sales to an international
distributor.  In its news release, the Company also said it had fired
its chairman and chief executive officer.

The complaint says Company stock fell 72% on the news, dropping from
the previous day's closing price of $14.10 to a low of $4 before Nasdaq
halted trading in its stock.  Trading has not yet resumed.

According to the lawsuit, the Company later revealed during a July 22,
2002 conference call with investors that $11 million of the $13.7
million in revenue it had reported in the quarter ended March 31, 2002
was based on "fictitious transactions that were supported by a trail of
falsified documentation."

According to the complaint, all the fictitious transactions were
reported as sales to the Company's distributor.  In fact, the
distributor never agreed to enter into those transactions, the
complaint says.  In the conference call, the Company admitted that
similar transactions may have been booked in prior quarters and that
the company would have to restate its financial results for fiscal 2002
and possibly for 2001.

The lawsuit also accuses some company executives of taking personal
advantage of the inflated stock price they allegedly helped to create
by selling 85,500 shares of their individual holdings during the class
period.

For more details, contact Joseph J. Tabacco, Jr. by Mail: 425
California Street, Suite 2025, San Francisco, CA 94104 by Phone:
415-433-3200 by E-mail: law@bermanesq.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.bermanesq.com.  


HPL TECHNOLOGIES: Wechsler Harwood Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wechsler Harwood Halebian & Feffer LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California on behalf of purchasers of HPL Technologies, Inc.
(Nasdaq:HPLA) securities between July 31, 2001 and July 18, 2002,
inclusive against the Company and certain of its officers.

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, and Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of
1933 by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market
during the class period, thereby artificially inflating the price of
Company securities.

The suit further alleges that the Company and certain of its officers
and directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning
its business and financial condition.  Specifically, on July 31, 2001,
HPL completed its initial public offering (IPO) of 6.9 million shares
(including the over allotment) at $11.00 per share, raising net
proceeds of $69.1 million.

The IPO was accomplished pursuant to a Prospectus and Registration
Statement filed with the SEC.  These documents represented that the
Company recognized revenue on sales to distributors only when the
distributors sold the software license or services to their customers.  
Later, the Company reported favorable financial results for the 1stQ,
2ndQ, 3rdQ and 4thQ of F02.

The suit further alleges that as a result of the Company's favorable
but false financials and false and misleading statements, its stock
traded as high as $17.85 per share.  Defendants took advantage of this
inflation, selling 85,500 shares of their individual holdings.  Then,
on July 19, 2002, before the markets opened, the Company shocked the
market with news that it was investigating accounting irregularities
with respect to revenue recognition on shipments to distributors in
prior quarters that its CEO had been fired and its CFO had been
reassigned. On this news, Company's stock collapsed 72% to as low as $4
per share, before trading was halted.

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


HPL TECHNOLOGIES: Abbey Gardy Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbey Gardy LLP initiated a securities class action against HPL
Technologies Inc. (Nasdaq:HPLA) in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, on behalf of
all persons or entities who purchased the Company's securities during
the period from July 31, 2001, the day HPL commenced trading on the
Nasdaq to July 19, 2002, inclusive, the day HPL announced that it had
initiated an investigation into financial and accounting
irregularities.   The suit also names as defendants David Lepejian, CEO
and Chairman and Ita Geva, Chief Financial Officer.

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 during the class period, thereby artificially inflating the
price of the Company's common stock

For more details, contact Nancy Kaboolian or Mark Gardy by Phone:
800-889-3701 or 212-889-3700 or by E-mail: nkaboolian@abbeygardy.com


ICN PHARMACEUTICALS: Glancy & Binkow Commences Securities Suit in NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Glancy & Binkow LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on behalf of
all persons who purchased securities of ICN Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(NYSE:ICN) between May 3, 2001 and July 10, 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, revenue and earnings
caused the Company's stock price to become artificially inflated,
inflicting damages on investors.

The suit alleges that during the class period, defendants manipulated
the Company's sales by increasing the inventory of its distributors,
thereby artificially inflating the Company's earnings and stock price.  
When it was revealed that the Company could not sustain its
artificially inflated revenue numbers, the Company's stock price
plummeted 53% in one day.

For more details, contact Michael Goldberg by Mail: 1801 Avenue of the
Stars, Suite 311, Los Angeles, California 90067 by Phone: 310-201-9150
or 888-773-9224 or by E-mail: info@glancylaw.com.  


ICN PHARMACEUTICALS: 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 ICN Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(NYSE:ICN) common stock during the period between May 3, 2001 and July
10, 2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The
Company is a research-focused global pharmaceutical company that
manufactures and distributes prescription and non-prescription
pharmaceuticals.  The complaint alleges that during the class period,
defendants' false statements artificially inflated Company stock to as
high as $34.72 per share.

Defendants reported favorable, but false and misleading, financial
results to the market and represented that the Company's 2002 results
would be extremely favorable as well, with revenues for specialty
pharmaceuticals exceeding $700 million. These positive but false
statements allowed the Company to complete a debt offering in 7/01 for
$400 million.

Also, as a result of the Company's inflated stock price, certain of the
defendants were able to sell 236,833 shares of their Company stock for
proceeds of $7.35 million.  On July 11,2002, (before the market
opened), the Company pre-announced its 2ndQ 02 results, including that
revenues were only $236 million compared to estimates of $257 million+
and that earnings were only $0.15 to $0.20 per share compared to
estimates of $0.43.  Company stock dropped upon these revelations,
falling 53% to $9.30 on July 11,2002, on huge volume of 19.9 million
shares, its steepest decline ever. In fact, the Company had pulled
sales from future periods into class period quarters to inflate sales.

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


INSIGHT ENTERPRISES: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in AZ
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class
action on behalf of shareholders who acquired Insight Enterprises, Inc.
(Nasdaq: NSIT) securities between April 26, 2002 and July 17, 2002,
inclusive.  The suit is pending in the United States District Court for
the District of Arizona, against the Company and:

     (1) Eric J. Crown,

     (2) Timothy A. Crown and

     (3) Stanley Laybourne

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


INSIGHT ENTERPRISES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in AZ Court
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, on
behalf of all persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired
the common stock of Insight Enterprises, Inc. (Nasdaq: NSIT) between
April 26, 2002 and July 17, 2002, inclusive.  The suit is pending
against the Company and:

     (1) Eric J. Crown,

     (2) Timothy A. Crown, and

     (3) Stanley Laybourne

The complaint charges the defendants with violations of Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5, by
issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements to the
market during the class period.

On April 25, 2002, after the close of the market, defendants issued the
Company's First Quarter 2002 earnings press release for the three
months ended March 31, 2002 and held a conference call with analysts.
The press release touted the Company's accomplishments.  During the
conference call on April 25, 2002, defendants stated that the Company
expected to see substantial growth in sales in the Second Quarter of
2002, the three months which began April 1, 2002, to between $720
million and $760 million with Second Quarter earnings growing to
between $0.31 and $0.35 per share.

The response from the market to defendants' statements was dramatic.
The per share price of the Company's common stock jumped 26% from a
close of $21.30 on April 25, 2002 to a close of $26.46 on April 26,
2002.

Unbeknownst to investors, however, the Company, already one month into
the Second Quarter of 2002, was suffering from undisclosed adverse
facts which were negatively impacting its revenues and profits and
which would cause it to reverse it sequential growth pattern and report
earnings per share for the Second Quarter that, at best, would be flat
compared to the First Quarter reported in 2002 earnings per share and
significantly below the $0.31 to $0.35 cents defendants told the market
they were expecting for the Second Quarter of 2002.

The truth regarding Insight was not fully disclosed until July 17,
2002, when defendants finally revealed that Insight anticipated Second
Quarter earnings per share in the range of only $0.26 and $0.29, flat
with the prior year's quarter and the First Quarter of 2002. The press
release blamed the lower results on operating losses in its UK
operations caused by reduced sales and a lower gross profit percentage.
The press release also stated that the president and chief operating
officer of the UK operations had resigned.

In response to the surprise negative announcement on July 17, 2002,
after the close of the market, the price of Insight common stock
dropped precipitously, falling from $23.74 per share on July 17, 2001
to close at $13.36 per share on July 18, 2002, a decline of almost 44%,
on volume of 12 million Insight shares.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave.,
Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735
by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in NJ
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz LLP initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for District of New Jersey on
behalf of all persons who purchased or acquired Johnson & Johnson
(NYSE: JNJ) securities from April 16, 2002 through July 19, 2002.

The suit, filed in the United States District Court for the District of
New Jersey, alleges that prior to the beginning of the class period
there were reports of 40 cases of pure red cell aplasia (PRCA) in
chronic renal failure in patients taking EPREX, which is manufactured
at Johnson & Johnson's Puerto Rico facility and sold in Europe.  PRCA
is a condition in which the body loses its ability to produce red blood
cells, leaving the patient dependent on blood transfusions for
survival.

The class period begins on April 16, 2002 when defendants released the
Company's first quarter results.  In the Company's press release and
during the earnings conference call held that day, defendants
repeatedly attributed the Company's financial performance to the
success of EPREX, stating, for example, that "This amazing product has
delivered consistent double-digit growth over the past five years. And
in the first quarter of this year, we hit a record sales level of a
billion dollars."

Moreover, defendants discussed the reported incidences of PRCA and
assured investors that EPREX "continues to be a trusted brand that
people are using," and that the Company was working very closely with .
the experts, as well as health authorities in understanding (PRCA), why
it occurs. And we're doing whatever we can to understand the risk and
mitigate it."

The defendants' statements during the class period, however, were
materially false and misleading because defendants knew, but failed to
disclose that by April 2002, the US Food and Drug Administration's
Office of Criminal Investigation, spurred on by the increasing number
of cases of PRCA in EPREX patients, sought a stay of a qui tam
(whistleblower) action in order to investigate the allegations
regarding the Company's EPREX manufacturing facility located in Puerto
Rico.  

The whistleblower action was filed in March 2000 by Hector Arce, a
former employee at the Company's EPREX factory.  Mr. Arce contends in
the lawsuit that he was pressured to falsify data to cover up
manufacturing lapses at the EPREX manufacturing facility, and then was
suspended a few days before an expected interview with FDA inspectors.

This information, which defendants failed to disclose, was information
a reasonable investor would have wanted to know - especially as the
reported incidences of PRCA continued to climb during the class period
- considering EPREX, and its U.S. version, PROCRIT, accounted for over
10% of the Company's revenues in 2001 and was projected to account for
11% of revenues in 2002.

The true facts concerning the existence of the criminal investigation
of Johnson & Johnson and the allegations of the qui tam action were
first revealed in The New York Times on July 19, 2002. That same day,
Johnson & Johnson admitted that it was aware of the criminal
investigation since April 2002. Once the foregoing information was
revealed, Johnson & Johnson shares fell $7.88 per share to close on
July 19, 2002, at $41.85, a fall of 16%.

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: JNJ@bernlieb.com.  


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey, on behalf of
investors who bought shares of the Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ) from
April 16 through July 18, 2002.

Prior to that period, it said there were 40 reports of a rare blood
disorder called pure red cell aplasia among patients taking Eprex.  The
Company sells the drug in Europe.  The suit alleges the Company, on
April 16 repeatedly attributed the company's strong financial
performance to the success of Eprex and praised the drug.

However, it said the firm failed to disclose that by that month the US
Food and Drug Administration's Office of Criminal Investigation was
attempting to investigate allegations by a former plant employee that
"he was pressured to falsify data to cover up manufacturing lapses at
the Eprex manufacturing facility."  Company shares fell almost 16
percent on July 19 when the firm acknowledged an FDA probe was underway
and that it apparently involves allegations by the former worker.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave.,
Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735
by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


KNIGHT TRADING: Weiss & Yourman Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Weiss & Yourman initiated a securities class action against Knight
Trading Group, Inc. (NYSE:V) and Kenneth D. Pasternak in the United
States District Court for District of New Jersey on behalf of
purchasers of Company securities between February 29, 2000 to June 3,
2002.

The suit alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5, by issuing a
series of material misrepresentations to investors during the class
period, thereby artificially inflating the price of Company securities.

The suit alleges that defendants failed to disclose and or
misrepresented that Company traders were engaging in trading-rule
violations known as "front-running," in which customer orders were
delayed while defendant's traders made purchases in the same stocks
ordered by customers, thereby benefiting themselves at the expense of
their customers.  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 the Company's
customers.

On June 3, 2002, the last day of the class period, the Company
disclosed that its trading practices were being investigated by both
the SEC and the NASD.  Following this announcement, on June 4, 2002,
when the market opened for trading, Company shares collapsed 28% from
the prior day's close.

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


MH MEYERSON: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz LLP initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for District of New Jersey on
behalf of all persons who purchased or acquired M.H. Meyerson & Co.,
Inc. (Nasdaq: MHMY) securities from February 28, 2000 to April 9, 2002.

The suit alleges that the Company and certain of its officers and
directors violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of
materially false and misleading statements to the market.  
Specifically, the suit alleges that the Company failed to disclose that
it was a defendant in numerous lawsuits, including a pending
arbitration claim against it that ultimately resulted in a $5.0 million
award against the Company.

The complaint further alleges that the Company misrepresented that it
was the 50% owner of a financial software company, TradinGear.com, Inc.
when, in fact, the Company never held more than 5% of TradinGear's
stock.  Moreover, the suit alleges that the Company returned the 5% to
TradinGear pursuant to the settlement of a lawsuit brought by
TradeinGear against the Company as a result of its attempted
misappropriation of TradeinGear software. The lawsuit and the
settlement with TradinGear were never disclosed.

Finally, the complaint alleges that the Company concealed the fact that
it was well behind in its plans to launch the Emeyerson online
business, which was ultimately folded into another failing ecommerce
venture.  Plaintiff claims that defendants' material omissions and the
dissemination of materially false and misleading statements regarding
the nature of the Company's financial statements caused the Company's
stock price to become artificially inflated, inflicting damages on
investors.

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: MHMY@bernlieb.com.  


RIVERSTONE NETWORKS: Weiss & Yourman Launches Securities Suit in CA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Weiss & Yourman initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California, on
behalf of purchasers of Riverstone Networks, Inc. (Nasdaq: RSTN)
securities between August 20, 2001 and June 5, 2002, inclusive.

The suit alleges that throughout the class period, the Company and
certain of its senior officers deceived the investing public through a
series of press releases and statements to the media which falsely
represented the Company's financial condition and prospects and,
specifically, the true effect that the downturn in telecom spending had
upon the Company.

However, gradually the truth emerged.  On February 28, 2002, the
Company announced that revenues for the fourth quarter would be $50-$54
million, instead of the originally projected $65 million, that the
Company would at best break even on a pro forma basis, that it expected
to take charges in the fourth quarter totaling approximately $26-$30
million, that Days Sales Outstanding (DSO) had increased and that the
Company would be forced to cut expenses by 10%. Following this
announcement, the price of Company stock dropped almost 50% on
unusually heavy trading.

On June 5, 2002, the Company further announced that actual revenue was
$30 million, instead of the $50-54 million it had announced in
February.  This information further eroded Company stock down to $2.61
from a Class Period high of $21.10.

For more details, contact Weiss & Yourman by Phone: 800-437-7918 by E-
mail: info@wyca.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.wyca.com.  


RIVERSTONE NETWORKS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California, on behalf of purchasers of Riverstone Networks, Inc.
(NASDAQ: RSTN) securities between August 20, 2001 and June 5, 2002,
inclusive.

The Company designs, manufactures and markets Internet infrastructure
equipment to telecommunications service providers in the metropolitan
area network.  The suit charges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10-b(5).

The action alleges that defendants issued a series of false and
misleading statements concerning the Company's financial condition and
sales. Specifically, defendants misled the investing community
concerning the true effect that the downturn in telecom spending had
upon the Company.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave.,
Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735
by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


RIVERSTONE NETWORKS: Stull Stull Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Stull, Stull & Brody initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California, on
behalf of purchasers of Riverstone Networks, Inc. (Nasdaq:RSTN)
securities between August 20, 2001 and June 5, 2002, inclusive.

The suit alleges that throughout the class period, the Company and
certain of its senior officers deceived the investing public through a
series of press releases and statements to the media which falsely
represented the Company's financial condition and prospects and,
specifically, the true effect that the downturn in telecom spending had
upon the Company.

For more details, contact Michael D. Braun or Timothy J. Burke by
Phone: 888-388-4605 or by E-mail: info@secfraud.com


SEEBEYOND TECHNOLOGY: Bernstein Liebhard Lodges Securities Suit in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz LLP initiated a securities class action
on behalf of all persons who purchased or acquired SeeBeyond Technology
Corp. (Nasdaq: SBYN) securities between December 10, 2001 and April 22,
2002.  The suit is pending in the United States District Court for the
Central District of California.

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 made
positive but false statements about the Company's results and business,
while concealing material adverse information about customers pushing
out orders.

As a result, the Company'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 the
Company's CEO.

Immediately before the offering, the Company 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 April 1,2002, the Company pre-announced 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, Company auditors called the Company objecting to its
revenue recognition on at least $2.2 million in transactions. The
Company concealed this problem over the following weeks.

Then, on April 22,2002, after the market closed, the Company 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 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: SBYN@bernlieb.com.  


SEEBEYOND TECHNOLOGY: Cohen Milstein Launches Securities Suit in CA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, PLLC initiated a securities class
action in the US District Court for the Central District of California
on behalf of persons who purchased the common stock of SeeBeyond
Technology Corp. (Nasdaq:SBYN) during the period of December 10, 2001
through April 22, 2002.  Other similar securities suits have been filed
asserting a class period of April 23, 2001 through April 22, 2002.  In
addition to the Company, the suit also names as defendants certain
officers and directors of the company.

The complaint asserts claims under sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The complaint alleges that during the
class period defendants issued false and misleading statements, and
omissions of material fact, concerning the Company's business and
operational results.

The complaint asserts that the alleged misconduct, among other things,
caused Company stock to trade at artificially inflated levels, and
permitted defendants to complete a secondary public offering (including
2 million shares sold by the Company's CEO) that generated proceeds of
$82 million.

For more details, contact Steven J. Toll or Robert Smits by Mail: 1100
New York Avenue, NW West Tower, Suite 500, Washington, DC by Phone:
888-240-0775 or 202-408-4600 by E-mail: rsmits@cmht.com or
stoll@cmht.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.cmht.com


TELLABS INC.: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in N.D. IL
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz LLP initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois on behalf of all persons who purchased or acquired Tellabs,
Inc. (NASDAQ: TLAB) securities between December 11, 2000 and June 19,
2001.  The suit names as defendants the Company and:

     (1) Richard C. Notebaert, CEO, President, Director, and

     (2) Michael J. Birck, Chairman

The defendants allegedly 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 materially false and misleading statements to
the market between December 11, 2000 and June 19, 2001.

According to the complaint, the Company had represented to the public,
in press releases issued throughout the class period, that:

     (i) its new products were enjoying strong demand;

    (ii) the seeming slowdown in its business was due to "component-
         parts shortages which have been corrected;" and

   (iii) the Company's business was strong fundamentally and the
         Company would meet earnings and revenues expectations.

The complaint alleges that these, and other, statements were materially
false and misleading because, as alleged in the complaint, the
Company's new optical networking line of products were inferior to the
competition and its products were not well-received or in high demand.

The complaint further alleges that, contrary to defendants' statements
to the investing public, the Company's highly-touted acquisition of
SALIX was a failure as sales of the product line the Company gained in
the acquisition were falling.

On June 19, 2002, the Company issued a press release revealing that
second quarter of 2001 revenues would be 35% less than guidance
reiterated only weeks before, and that the Company's earnings would be
breakeven instead of the consensus $0.29 per share.  In reaction to the
announcement, the price of the Company's common stock fell by 31%, from
$23 per share on June 19 to $15.87 on June 20, representing a 75%
decline from the class period high.

During the class period, Mr. Birck sold a total of 80,000 shares of
Company stock at prices between $64.25 to $65.38 per share, grossing
proceeds of more than $5.18 million.

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: TLAB@bernlieb.com.  


TELLABS INC.: Schatz & Nobel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. IL
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Schatz & Nobel PC initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on behalf
of all persons who purchased the securities of Tellabs, Inc. (Nasdaq:
TLAB) from December 11, 2000 through June 19, 2001, inclusive.

The suit alleges that the Company, a designer and manufacturer of
optical networking products, and certain of its senior executive
officers and directors, misled investors by issuing false and
misleading statements regarding its financial condition throughout the
class period.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that the Company represented that
the seeming slowdown in business was due solely to a component parts
shortage and that its business was otherwise strong.  However, the
Company was aware that:

     (1) customers were oversupplied with the Titan 5500, a product the    
         Company relied on to fuel its growth;

     (2) the Company's optical line of products was incompatible with
         competitors' products; and

     (3) its sales of the product line acquired from SALIX were
         declining.

On June 19, the Company issued a press release revealing that the
second quarter revenues for 2001 would be 35% less than represented
only two weeks before, and that the Company's earnings would only
breakeven rather than the consensus $0.29 per share. On this news, the
price per share fell over 31% from a high of $23.01 per share on June
19, to a low of $15.87 per share, well below the class period high of
over $67 per share.

For more details, contact Andrew M. Schatz or Nancy A. Kulesa by Phone:
800-797-5499 by E-mail: sn06106@aol.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.snlaw.net.  


VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: Holzer & Holzer Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Holzer & Holzer 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) securities between
April 23, 2001 and July 2, 2002, inclusive, against the Company and top
executive Jean Messier.

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, the complaint alleges that prior to and during the class
period, Mr. Messier took the Company on an acquisition binge that
resulted in the Company amassing approximately $18 billion in debt as
he turned the Company from a water concern into an entertainment
powerhouse.

The complaint alleges that under Mr. Messier's leadership, the Company
completed a $30 billion buyout of Canada's Seagram and a $10.3 billion
purchase of USA Networks Inc.  The complaint further alleges that Mr.
Messier orchestrated a scheme to conceal the severity of the Company's
liquidity problems stemming from the massive debt load incurred as a
result of these, and other, transactions.

The complaint alleges that before his ouster by the Company Board, Mr.
Messier caused the Company to issue several press releases that falsely
stated that it did not face an immediate and severe cash shortage that
threatened the Company's viability going forward absent an asset fire
sale.

The complaint alleges that after the Company's Board dislodged Mr.
Messier, 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 alleged in the suit, Mr. Messier failed to disclose the true
contours of the Company's cash crisis and his affirmative
misrepresentations to the contrary have given rise to an investigation
by French authorities.

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