---

               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
                Friday, August 2, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 152

                            Headlines
                     

BORDERS GROUP: CA Court Grants Overtime Wage Suit Certification
ECLIPSYS CORP.: Vigorously Opposing Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. FL
FIRST ALLIANCE: CA Judge Wants Details Of Claims V. Prudential, Company  
FLORIDA POWER: Former Chairman Denies Allowing Age Discrimination
GAMING INDUSTRY: CEO Warns Gambling Addiction Likely Legal Target     

MARTIN COUNTY: Paying $3.25M For Damages in October 2000 Coal Spill
MASSACHUSETTS: Teachers Union Ordered To Repay Agency Fee Overcharges
NEVADA: Federal Judge's Ruling Will Help Seniors Keep Their Homes
NEW YORK: NY Court Approves $13.2M Settlement of Private Carting Suit
NEW YORK: LTMUA Agrees To Settle Builders Suit Over "Illegal" Fees

PEMSTAR INC.: Mounting Vigorous Defense V. Securities Suit in MN Court
SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS: Faces Suit Over Unsolicited E-mails in Utah
UNITED STATES: INS Deports 25 Haitians, Suit Results Set New Policy
UNITED STATES: Suit Says Civilians Denied Return To US during WWII
VANTAGEMED CORP.: Court Grants Final Securities Settlement Approval

VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: French Shareholders Commence Securities Fraud Suit
WASHINGTON: State Court Approves Instructors' Suit Settlement

                      New Securities Fraud Cases

AMDOCS LTD.: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Suit in E.D. MO
AOL TIME: Kirby McInerney Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
AOL TIME: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS: Glancy & Binkow Files Securities Suit in CA
ECLIPSYS CORPORATION: Berger & Montague Launches Securities Suit in FL

ECLIPSYS CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit in FL
ECLIPSYS CORP.: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in S.D. FL
EL PASO: Schiffrin & Barroway Commences Securities Fraud Suit in TX
HPL TECHNOLOGIES: Mark McNair Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
HPL TECHNOLOGIES: Wechsler Harwood Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA

HPL TECHNOLOGIES: LeBlanc & Waddell Commences Securities Suit in CA
ICN PHARMACEUTICALS: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA
ICN PHARMACEUTICALS: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA
ICN PHARMACEUTICALS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA
ICN PHARMACEUTICALS: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Suit in NJ

INSIGHT ENTERPRISES: Bernard Gross Commences Securities Suit in AZ
KNIGHT TRADING: Weiss & Yourman Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
NICOR INC.: Mark McNair Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. IL
NTL INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. New York
OMNICOM GROUP: Wolf Popper Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY

PEMSTAR INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MN Court
PEMSTAR INC.: Leo Desmond Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MN Court
TELLABS INC.: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Suit in N.D. IL
UNIROYAL TECHNOLOGIES: Schatz & Nobel Commences Securities Suit in FL

                            *********

BORDERS GROUP: CA Court Grants Overtime Wage Suit Certification
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Superior Court of California granted class action status to a
lawsuit filed against Borders Group Inc. on behalf of all individuals
who worked as assistant managers in a Borders superstore in California
at any time between April 10, 1996 and March 18, 2001, Associated Press
reports.

The suit alleges that:

     (1) the plaintiffs worked hours for which they were entitled to
         receive, but did not receive, overtime compensation under
         California law; and

     (2) they were classified as exempt store management employees but
         were forced to work more than 50% of their time in non-exempt
         tasks.

The suit further alleges violations of the California Labor Code and
the California Business and Professions Code.

The book and music retailer said it intends to "vigorously" defend
itself against the allegations.


ECLIPSYS CORP.: Vigorously Opposing Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. FL
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Boca Raton healthcare company Eclipsys Corporation faces a securities
class action filed in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Florida, on behalf of all purchasers of the Company's
common stock between July 23,2001 and June 27, 2002.  The suit names as
defendants the Company, its chief executive officer, chief financial
officer and chief operating officer.

The suit alleges the Company and its three chief officers violated
federal securities laws by issuing false and misleading statements
during the class period.  Defendants, according to the complaint, were
in possession of materially adverse information, which they failed to
disclose.

The company said it believes the action is without merit, and that it
"intends to conduct a vigorous defense against the allegations
contained in the complaint," the South Florida Business Journal
reports.


FIRST ALLIANCE: CA Judge Wants Details Of Claims V. Prudential, Company  
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
First Alliance Corporation customers who claim that Prudential
Financial Inc. and Wachovia Corporation's First Union helped the
mortgage lender deceive them through its predatory lending practices,
must add more specifics to their lawsuit, a federal judge ruled
recently, according to a report by the Los Angeles Times.  The
plaintiffs plan to seek class action status and are asking for
unspecified damages.

At a hearing in Santa Ana, California, Judge David O. Carter told the
plaintiffs' attorney, Richard Scruggs, to submit a new complaint that
details how the First Alliance mortgage customers learned of the fraud
they claim was committed by Prudential and First Union.

"We are very confident that we can rewrite the complaint to Judge
Carter's specifications," said Mr. Scruggs, a Mississippi attorney, who
helped negotiate a settlement in 1998 between state attorneys general
and tobacco companies.

The consumer suit, filed in February by First Alliance customers, says
the financial service companies, First Union and Prudential, extended
lines of credit to First Alliance when the mortgage company engaged in
predatory lending practices.

First Alliance, formerly one of the nation's largest lenders to people
with spotty credit, agreed in March to pay as much as $60 million to
settle Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charges that it deceived
borrowers.  First Alliance targeted customers with poor credit
histories and failed to give accurate information about the costs of
their loans, the agency charged in its 2000 lawsuit.

The FTC settlement does not prevent customers from pursuing suits
against First Alliance's bankers, who funded the mortgages and bundled
them for sale as securities.

Irvine-based First Alliance filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection
in 2000.  The company blamed the bankruptcy filing in part on
"unwarranted negative publicity."  First Union is a unit of Wachovia.


FLORIDA POWER: Former Chairman Denies Allowing Age Discrimination
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Former Florida Progress Chairman and Chief Executive, Richard Korpan,
denies he condoned age-based discrimination when he slashed hundreds of
jobs at Florida Power. He claims the cuts were a step to greater
efficiency and a way to change the "entitlement culture" of the St.
Petersburg company, the St. Petersburg Times reports.

In mid-1990, the Company slashed 1,200 jobs allegedly to streamline its
operations in the face of increasing competition in the state's retail
power market.  Of the 564 employees laid off between 1993 and 1995,
three quarters of them were allegedly over the age 40.  

Twelve employees filed a discrimination class action against the
Company, now in trial at the United States District Court in Ocala,
Florida.  About a dozen trials are expected after the US Supreme Court
declined in April to rule on a age bias class action involving more
than 100 former Florida Power employees.

In his taped testimony, Mr. Korpan said Florida Power's staff cuts
reaped positive results for the company, according to the St.
Petersburg Times.  "I believe in general that we've made a lot of
progress, that the company operates more efficiently, more
professionally, more business-like and that employees are much more
focused on value added for their department and their personal efforts
than they used to be," he said.

Earlier, former Florida Power research and development director Patsy
Baynard testified that Mr. Korpan once told her that he wanted to hire
young MBA graduates straight out of school because they would feel more
obligated to him and would do "exactly what he wanted," the St.
Petersburg Times stated.

Mr. Korpan said he couldn't recall whether he had made such a
statement, but added that he did say previously that longer-term
employees were "part of the (corporate) culture, so it's harder to
change."

Testimony in the Ocala trial is expected to conclude next week.


GAMING INDUSTRY: Common Cause Warns Gambling Next Likely "Addiction"      
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The President and Chief Executive Officer of government watchdog,
Common Cause, issued a warning to the gaming industry that it might be
the next target of class actions due to gambling addiction, stating
that an increasing number of Americans face lives destroyed by
legalized gambling, mondaq.com reports.

Scott Harshbarger, also former Attorney General of Massachusetts and
one of the first Attorneys General to sue the tobacco industry,
predicts, "If the industry or the people doing this are not taking
steps that are reasonable, they may well face the same problem that the
tobacco and alcohol industries faced."  Mr. Harshbarger made this
statement during a June 5, 2002 talk to participants at the New England
Conference on Problem Gambling.

"Sooner or later, the (slot) machines are going to be labeled as the
addictive delivery system." said Rev. Tom Grey, Executive Director of
the National Coalition Against Legalized Gambling, according to
mondaq.com.  "We believe states should bring lawsuits against gambling
entities, the same way they did against the tobacco industry.Except
there's no incentive to do it because they're partners (with the
industry).  So it's going to take longer.  But it's going to happen."

A class action has already commenced against Loto-Quebec, on behalf of
over 100,000 plaintiffs seeking damages caused by their addiction to
video lottery terminals.  That lawsuit benefited from publicity
generated by the suicide of a Quebec man with a gambling addiction, who
allegedly left a suicide note blaming his suicide on his addition to
video lottery terminals and mentioning Loto-Quebec by name, mondaq.com
reports.


MARTIN COUNTY: Paying $3.25M For Damages in October 2000 Coal Spill
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin County Coal agreed to pay US$3.25 million in compensation for
starting one of the nation's worst coal sludge spills in Kentucky,
state officials said.  According to the Associated Press, the Company
will pay $1.75 million in penalties, $1 million for damage to the
environment and $500,000 to pay back the state for the cleanup.

The spill occurred in October 11, 2000, when more than 300 million
gallons of water and sludge broke through the bottom of the impoundment
pond on a mountaintop outside Inez, Kentucky and poured into the
underground coal mine portals, out into the two creeks and into the Big
Sandy River.

As a result, lawns were buried up to 7 feet deep in the molasses-like
mixture, all fish were killed in two streams, and drinking water
supplies were fouled along 60 miles of the Big Sandy River, AP reports.  
The Environmental Protection Agency called the spill one of the worst
environmental disasters ever in the Southeast.

Under the agreement, the Company is required to close and reclaim the
70-acre pond and to continue the cleanup.  

"It seems like they have taken a step finally in the right direction,"
Larry Preece, whose yard was blackened by the sludge, told AP.  "The
people who were directly affected by this slurry spill have suffered
greatly.  If these companies aren't made to pay for what they've done
to the people, what's their incentive to stop."

Company representatives couldn't immediately be reached for comment, AP
reports.  The Company still faces suits filed by affected Kentucky
residents and by the West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection.


MASSACHUSETTS: Teachers Union Ordered To Repay Agency Fee Overcharges
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Massachusetts' largest teachers union has been ordered to return about
one-fifth of the money it collected in agency fees from about 350
protesting teachers more than decade ago, the Associated Press reports.  
The decision by the Massachusetts Labor Relations Commission concludes
a class action filed by Springfield teacher Jim Belhumeur 13 years
ago.  

Mr. Belhumeur, a supporter of the rival American Federation of
Teachers, challenged the agency fees charged by the Springfield
Teachers Association and the Massachusetts Teachers Association (MTA)
from 1987 through 1992.  Unions are allowed to collect the fees from
people who don't want to join but still benefit from union
representation.  Typically, they cover collective bargaining expenses.

Ann Clark, a lawyer for the MTA, noted that in 2000 the Supreme
Judicial Court, in a precedent-setting decision, upheld the validity of
most of the charges the union included in its agency fee.  The
subsequent legal wrangling involved how that ruling on the 1990-1991
charges would be applied to the other four years in dispute.  "Overall,
it was largely a win for us," she said.

Dan Cronin, a spokesman for the National Right To Work Legal Defense
Foundation, which represented the teachers, estimated they could get
back a total of about $87,000 in overcharges, with individual teachers
getting up to $250, depending on how many years they paid the agency
fees.   However, Ms. Clark said that the unions will get to keep about
$315,000 that the dissident teachers had paid into escrow accounts
during the court fight.

The labor commission found that the overcharges ranged from $26 to $63
on annual agency fees of $157 to $207.


NEVADA: Federal Judge's Ruling Will Help Seniors Keep Their Homes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Nevada District Court Judge Ron Parraguirre ruled recently to bar the
state from placing liens on homes of Medicaid recipients and ordered
all existing liens removed, the Associated Press Newswires reports.  
The Judge said the state violated a federal statute barring states from
placing liens on homes until both husband and wife have died.

Jim O'Reilly, an attorney for the American Association of Retired
People, filed the class action that asked for the relief Judge
Parraguirre has ordered.  The attorney estimates the lawsuit may
include up to 200 Nevada seniors who had liens placed on their homes to
pay medical bills.

The class action follows on the heels of the case of Las Vegas widow
Agnes Ullmer, an 86-year-old whose home was hit with a lien for
$144,000, as part of a state effort to recover Medicaid payments made
on behalf of her husband who died in 2001.  Mr. O'Reilly said the lien
was worth more than the house.


NEW YORK: NY Court Approves $13.2M Settlement of Private Carting Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court in New York granted approval to a
US$13.2 million settlement of a class action filed against a consortium
of private carting firms, charging it with overcharging customers
through a price-rigging scheme throughout the 1990s, the Journal News
reports.

In June 1996, seven men and fourteen companies were indicted of
conspiring to control the garbage hauling industry in several New York
City suburbs by threats, extortion and bribery.  

In 1997, Thomas Milo, former president of the Mamaroneck-based Suburban
Carting Corp., pleaded guilty to several charges for his role in the
so-called "property rights" scheme, under which private haulers
conspired to dominate the carting industry through threats and violence
against competitors, bribes to corrupt officials and kickback payments
to organized crime, according to The Journal News.

Under the settlement, more than a dozen waste haulers agreed to pay
$13.2 million to victims without admitting any guilt.  Mr. Milo, named
one of the principal defendants in the suit, agreed to pay more than $9
million of the total $13.2 million settlement amount.  Anyone outside
of governmental entities who paid for private carting in Westchester
County between June 1992 and July 2001 is eligible to submit a claim
for reimbursement of overcharges can take part in the said settlement.

"I think it was a reasonable settlement in light of everything that
happened," John Carney, one of the lawyers for the bilked customers,
told the Journal News.  "One of the significant things that happened
here was that the lawsuit showed that the mob control was more
pervasive than just the Suburban companies.The indictments led to the
commission study. The study indicated that customers had been
overcharged, and that led to the lawsuit."

Bruce Berger, executive director of the county's Solid Waste
Commission, told the Journal News that the legislation has led to
reforms, more competition and lower prices.  "We believe, based on
anecdotal and other evidence, that prices have gone down in the
county.Since mid-2000, approximately 40 new companies have applied for
permits, and that is slowly but surely increasing competition."


NEW YORK: LTMUA Agrees To Settle Builders Suit Over "Illegal" Fees
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Lower Township Municipal Utilities Authority (LTMUA) agreed to
settle for US$600,000 a class action filed by several builders in 1999,
over the "reservation of capacity fees" the authority began charging in
1993 to partly fund a US$9 million upgrade of the sewer plant,
according to PressofAtlanticCity.com.

The suit alleges that the fees were illegal.  Pelican Development, the
lead plaintiff in the suit, was asked to pay US$9,004 to reserve
capacity at the sewer plant.  David Hasbrouck, the attorney for the
developers said the authority was "holding them hostage."

Superior Court Judge John Callinan ruled in favor of the builders last
year, ordering the LTMUA to return the money.  LTMUA planned to appeal
the ruling, but later decided that settling the case was "the cheapest
way out."


The $600,000 represents about $60 for every LTMUA sewer customer.  
Jeffrey Barnes, the attorney for the authority, told
PressofAtlanticCity.com the total amount owed, including restitution,
attorney fees and interest as of April 3, was $812,109. The $600,000
settlement saves ratepayers some money. Barnes also noted there would
have been added costs in filing an appeal, and with no guarantee of
winning.

The $600,000 settles all claims from June 10, 1993, to Nov. 30, 1999.
The authority no longer charges the reservation of capacity fees and
Barnes pointed out the issue dates to entirely different management
staff. The authority has a new five-member governing board since the
fees were created, a new executive director, and the professional staff
has changed.


PEMSTAR INC.: Mounting Vigorous Defense V. Securities Suit in MN Court
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PEMSTAR Inc. faces a securities class action pending in the United
States District Court of Minnesota on behalf of investors who acquired
the Company's shares (Nasdaq:PMTR) between June 8, 2001 and May 2,
2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The
complaint alleges that during the class period defendants caused
Company shares to trade at artificially inflated levels through the
issuance of false and misleading statements.

The Company believes the allegations are without merit and intends to
vigorously defend the lawsuit.  


SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS: Faces Suit Over Unsolicited E-mails in Utah
------------------------------------------------------------------
Sprint Communications Co. faces a class action filed on behalf of Utah
residents that have received unsolicited commercial e-mails from it
between May 7, 2002 and the present.  The case is pending in the Third
District Court of Salt Lake County in the State of Utah.

The action charges violations of Utah Code Section 13-44-101, which
requires any commercial e-mail sender to clearly state its legal name,
correct street address, valid Internet domain name, a subject line
containing the letters "ADV:" as the first four characters, and a
convenient, no-cost means of notifying the sender not to send any
future e-mail to the recipient.

The Utah statute, which was modeled after the Washington State statute
that was upheld in STATE OF WASHINGTON, v. JASON HECKEL, defines
unsolicited e-mails as "an electronic message, file, data, or other
information that is transmitted (a) between two or more computers,
computer networks, or electronic terminals; or (b) within a computer
network."

"This statute was intended to get companies to stop the incessant spam
e-mail bombardment we all face every day," said Denver Snuffer,
attorney for the plaintiffs.  "However, this statute is not self-
executing. It requires legal action to enforce it.We have brought this
suit to bear in hopes of getting some relief for computer users from
the ridiculous number of spam e-mails they receive each day because
corporations continue to break the law and send out electronic
advertisements without disclosing the proper information or providing a
straightforward `unsubscribe' system."

In response, the Company filed a motion intending to have the plaintiff
surrender his hard drive as part of the discovery process.  However,
the third district court judge instead ordered the Company and the
plaintiff both not to purge any electronic records that may have
evidentiary value for the class action.

"We are pleased with the court's response," Mr. Snuffer said.  "The
Sprint motion appeared to be a retaliatory attempt to bully and
intimidate our client.  There are an estimated 1.4 million Internet
users in Utah who may have received Sprint spam, and to ask that many
people to literally remove and deliver their hard drives to Sprint is
ridiculous.Naturally, the plaintiffs would be unable to use their
computers without a hard drive, and Sprint has not offered to give them
one to use in its place."

For more details, contact Denver Snuffer by Phone: 801-576-1400 or by
E-mail: dcsnuff@aol.com


UNITED STATES: INS Deports 25 Haitians, Suit Results Set New Policy
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal officials deported 25 Haitian asylum seekers recently, alarming
advocates who say the Haitians have been denied due process of law, the
South Florida Sun-Sentinel reports.

Of the 25 migrants who were deported, 21 were among the close to 200
whose overloaded boat ran aground in Miami on December 3, setting off
fears of a mass Haitian exodus, fears which inspired a new policy
toward Haitian asylum-seekers.

In fact, the policy brought the Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center, in
Miami, into the fray to plead the cause of Haitians against the
discrimination seemingly evidenced by the fact of their prolonged
detention.  One of the 25 deportees, is a female Haitian, who was also
the lead plaintiff in the racial bias class action filed, in March, by
the Center and other advocates.  In May, a federal judge dismissed the
lawsuit, thereby effectively upholding a new, more stringent policy
toward the Haitian asylum seekers.

Generally, the vast majority of asylum seekers are released to prepare
their cases after passing an initial interview upon arrival in the
United States, at which they establish they have a credible fear of
persecution, said Cheryl Little, executive director of the Florida
Immigrant Advocacy Center.

The Haitians were removed quickly, Ms. Little said the appeals board
would issue two-sentence responses upholding the judge's decision, and
most of the Center's clients had no attorneys appointed to represent
them during their hearings.  They were unable to fill out asylum
applications that required detailed responses to the questions in
English.

The advocacy center has filed appeals on behalf of about 100 of the
Haitians.


UNITED STATES: Suit Says Civilians Denied Return To US during WWII
------------------------------------------------------------------
Thousands of American civilians living in the Philippines were
deliberately left in the likely path of Japanese forces so the United
States would have an excuse to enter World War II, according to a
lawsuit being filed in federal court, the Chicago Tribune reports.

The class action is being filed on behalf of 7,000 civilians taken
prisoner when Japan's army overran the Philippine islands in 1942.  
They spent the rest of the war in prison camps, denied adequate food
and brutalized by their guards.

Half a century later, 450 survivors filed the suit, placing
responsibility for their suffering squarely on the US government.  They
say that during the final months before the United States went to war,
they and their parents wanted to get out of harm's way by leaving the
Philippines, then a US possession.

Yet, according to the lawsuit, they were not allowed leave, even though
as civilians, they had nothing to contribute to the islands' defense,
and despite the fact that the government was urging Americans living in
other parts of Asia to get out quickly.

Anthony D'Amato, the plaintiffs' attorney and a Northwestern University
professor, contends that the government has tried to cover up the
affair ever since the war.  Even now, his clients say, the State
Department refuses to release relevant diplomatic documents despite
congressional legislation intended to make those records publicly
available.

The lawsuit, which asks that the government award Ms. Achenbach and
others monetary compensation for what they endured, will be heard in
the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, the
principal venue for lawsuits against the government.

"We think the whole story of what we went through - and why - belongs
in history books, not hidden away in a government archive," said Marcia
Fee Achenbach, an Evanston, Illinois social worker who was interned in
a Japanese prison camp as a child.  Professional historians, generally
skeptical of conspiracy theories, have reservations about the lawsuit's
premise.

"All the evidence goes the other way," said Gerhard Weinberg, author of
"A World At Arms," a history of World War II.  President Franklin
Roosevelt's focus was on defeating Nazi Germany, right up to the moment
that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor brought the United States into
the war, Mr. Weinberg said.  "Far from trying get into a war with
Japan, we were doing everything in our power to keep the Japanese out
of it," he said.

When the US entered World War II in 1941, the conflict was already two
years old.  Adolf Hitler's armies had overrun Europe, and the United
States, fearing Great Britain could not long hold out against the Nazi
dictator, had provided military equipment and financial support.  
However, anti-war sentiment was strong in the United States, making it
politically difficult for President Roosevelt to commit soldiers and
sailors to what seemed to be someone else's war.

Meanwhile, Japan, Germany's Far Eastern ally, had announced its
intention to dominate that part of the world, and the Philippines lay
directly across the logical route of Japanese expansion.  Still, the
United States feared that the American public would not regard a
Japanese attack on the Philippines as sufficient cause for declaring a
war on Japan, much less on Germany, according to the lawsuit.  The
Philippines were too remote, unless, perhaps, some American citizens
were endangered by Japanese aggression, the lawsuit claims.

After the war, Francis Sayre, former US high commissioner to the
Philippines, recalled that he had recognized the likelihood of a
Japanese invasion in 1941, and had wanted to alert American citizens
there but was overruled by his superiors.  "Washington felt that with
due regard to the national interest it would be inadvisable to issue
such a notice," Mr. Sayre wrote in a document uncovered by former
prison-camp inmates doing research for the lawsuit.

Ms. Achenbach and other plaintiffs say the results of that strategy
were a disaster for them.  She and her parents spent the war in a
Japanese prison camp in the Philippines.  "The last year we were near
starvation," said Ms. Achenbach.  "Older people died, some because they
were frail, others because they gave up their food to the children."

Raymond Teichman, a senior archivist with 30 years of experience
working with documents in the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Library and
Museum in Hyde Park, New York, said he is skeptical of the theory
behind Mr. D'Amato's lawsuit.

"It is true that our government wanted maintain an American presence in
the Philippines," Mr. Teichman said.  "But a single document cannot be
used to prove a government's intent (for that presence)."  More likely,
he said, was that the Americans were viewed as a deterrent to Japanese
attack.

Mr. D'Amato said that his clients' accounts are consistent with certain
aspects of the pre-war situation that no responsible historian doubts.  
For example, Plan Orange, a US military contingency plan, conceded the
Philippines should war come.  "American Army and Naval planners had
long agreed that the Philippines were indefensible against a long-
sustained Japanese attack," wrote Samuel Eliot Morison in his "History
of the United States Naval Operations in World War II."

Yet even while assuming that the Philippines would fall to the enemy,
US officials of the 1940s were denying passports and visas to fearful
American citizens eager to leave the islands, the lawsuit claims.

It was not possible for survivors to bring a lawsuit until recently,
because the documentary evidence of US wartime policy was still
classified until supporters of their cause in Congress passed
legislation requiring the relevant archives to be opened up.  

Even so, compliance has been spotty, Mr. D'Amato said.  In 1940 and
1941, President Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill
kept in touch by regular series of conversations via shortwave radio,
transcripts of which were made by both governments.

Mr. D'Amato said he thinks those transcripts contain clues to the two
leaders' plans for bringing the United States into the war, making them
invaluable to his clients' case.  Yet, British authorities say they
cannot find their copies of the Roosevelt-Churchill conversations, and
the US version was sealed in perpetuity at the war's end by President
Harry Truman.

"I can accept the fact that we might have had to be sacrificed for
political considerations of the time," Ms. Achenbach said.  "But I
can't accept the silence about it, ever since."


VANTAGEMED CORP.: Court Approves Securities Suit Settlement
------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California
granted final approval to the settlement of the consolidated securities
class action lawsuit filed against VantageMed Corporation and several
of its officers and directors in the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of California.

Under the terms of the settlement, all claims against the Company were
dismissed without admission of liability or wrongdoing.  As previously
announced, the shareholder class will receive a cash payment of $2.5
million, out of which class counsel will be awarded attorney's fees.
The Company recorded a $1.2 million charge in the fourth quarter of
2001 to reflect its portion of the settlement. The Company paid its
portion of the settlement in December 2001 and no future payments to
the settlement class will be required.

Richard Brooks, Chairman and CEO commented in a press statement, "We
are pleased to formally conclude this matter. We continue to focus on
our recently announced restructuring plans to drive long-term
profitability and cash flow. Finalizing this settlement allows us to
look forward without the uncertainty and potential expense of
litigation."


VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: French Shareholders Commence Securities Fraud Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Directors of Vivendi Universal faces a civil class action filed by
1,000 French shareholders, alleging "fakery" and the "distribution of
fictitious dividends," Variety.com reports.

The suit is separate from a securities class action filed in New York
federal court last July 18, charging the Company and CEO Jean-Marie
Messier of playing down the Company's financial crisis, spurred by
debts amounting to around US$19 billion.  The French shareholders, who
comprise the group APPAC, declare they were duped by an "erroneous
presentation of the group's results and its financial situation."

"It is indispensable that this matter, which concerns a French company,
be treated by the French justice system," APPAC president Didier
Cornardeau said Tuesday, according to Variety.com.

Two weeks ago, French stock market watchdog the Commission des
Operations en Bourse (COB) opened an investigation into Viv U's
financial dealings over the 18 months.  As a result, the company
postponed the publication of its second-quarter and first-half 2002
results, due last Friday, until August 14.


WASHINGTON: State Court Grants Instructors' Suit Settlement Approval
--------------------------------------------------------------------
King County Superior Court Judge Steven Scott granted tentative
approval to a US$12 million settlement to a class action filed by part-
time community college instructors who were denied retirement benefits,
the Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports.

The final approval of the settlement will finally end the four-year
legal dispute.  Under the settlement, instructors would receive
contributions toward retirement accounts at the Teachers Insurance and
Annuity Association College Retirement Equities Fund, which manages
funds for educators and researchers.  About 1,600 instructors could
take part in the settlement, if none objects to it.

Judge Scott also required the state and the 34 Washington community
colleges to notify anyone who could possibly qualify to comment on or
object to the lawsuit.  Many of the instructors say the process was
incomplete and slipshod.  They asked Judge Scott to order the state to
renotify the affected instructors, but he declined.  Instead, he asked
the state to show by August 30 that the notification process was
properly done.

"I was disappointed," Keith Hoeller, co-founder of the Washington Part-
time Faculty Association told the Post-Intelligencer.  "The stipulation
from the state is that it had posted the notices. Four of us had
testified that we had not seen the notices."  He added that unless it's
clear how many instructors qualify, it's hard to know if $12 million is
adequate, he said.

"Firstly, I think it's very nice that there is a settlement, but about
today's hearing, there's a touch of frustration," Jack Longmate, an
English composition instructor at Olympic College in Bremerton told the
Post-Intelligencer.  "People who received the notice dismissed it
because they assumed that it didn't apply to them, and these people are
not dummies.When you don't really understand something, it's hard to
object to it."

The state however, claimed that it did the best it could.  "We mailed
out over 4,100 notices to part-time faculty at their last known
address," said John Boesenberg, director of human resources at the
Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges, according
to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

                       New Securities Fraud Cases

AMDOCS LTD.: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Suit in E.D. MO
------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Missouri, on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Amdocs, Ltd.
(NYSE: DOX) between July 24, 2001 and June 20, 2002, against the
Company and certain of its officers and directors.

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

The suit alleges that during the class period, defendants issued a
series of press releases touting the Company's "record" financial
results, and continued revenue growth despite deteriorating market
conditions.  Unbeknownst to the investing public who purchased Company
securities during the class period at artificially inflated prices, the
Company's business and financial condition were rapidly deteriorating.

The suit further alleges that defendants failed to reveal material,
adverse facts regarding the Company's financial condition and
prospects, such as:

     (1) that contrary to defendants' statements, Company revenues were
         declining throughout the class period, and demand for the
         Company's products had, and was continuing to, decline
         materially;

     (2) according to a research report issued by the Center for
         Financial Research and Analysis, Inc. (CFRA), dated August 7,
         2001, the Company's deferred revenue growth slowed as early as
         June, 2001, indicating a slowdown in future revenue growth;
         and

     (3) defendants artificially inflated the Company's class period
         financial statements by maintaining a lower allowance for
         doubtful accounts as a percentage of gross accounts
         receivable.  In fact, the Company's class period allowance for
         doubtful accounts remained significantly below levels
         displayed throughout fiscal year 2000.

Indeed, on June 20, 2002, defendants revealed that revenue for the
third quarter of fiscal 2002 was expected to be approximately $380
million, rather than $420 million, as defendants had previously led
investors to believe.  Profit and sales would fall well short of
estimates in the June and September quarters.  In addition, the Company
revealed a massive lay off, and the replacement of its Chief Executive
Officer. In response to the news that the Company would not meet third
quarter results, the shares plummeted and lost almost 40 percent of
their value, or more than $1 billion.

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


AOL TIME: Kirby McInerney Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Kirby McInerney & Squire, LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
on behalf of all persons:

     (1) who purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired the
         common stock of America Online, Inc. between July 19, 1999 and
         January 10, 2001; or

     (2) who purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired the
         common stock of AOL Time Warner (NYSE:AOL) between January 11,
         2001 and July 17, 2002. The action seeks to recover losses
         suffered by such investors.

The complaint asserts claims for violations of Section 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 against AOL Time Warner,
Ernst & Young, LLP (AOL Time Warner's auditor), and several AOL and AOL
Time Warner senior executives (including the Chief Financial Officers
for AOL and AOL Time Warner).

The alleged violations, according to the complaint, stem from
materially false and misleading statements made by the defendants
between July 19,1999 and July 17, 2002 that, as detailed below:

     (i) materially misrepresented and inflated the revenues reported
         by AOL from its online advertising operations during the class
         period; and

    (ii) thereby caused AOL and AOL Time Warner stock to trade at
         artificially-inflated prices during that time.

The complaint alleges that, during the class period, defendants
misrepresented to the public the true nature and amount of revenues
derived from online advertising (which defendants overstated in
contravention of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and the
synergies from, and financial effects of, the merger with Time Warner.

As disclosed by the Washington Post on July 18, 2002, and as detailed
in the complaint, defendants inflated AOL's publicly-reported on-line
advertising revenues through a variety of accounting mechanisms that
transformed other transactions (such as legal settlements, barter
transactions, one-time penalty charges, and revenues in fact destined
for other companies) into purported on-line advertising revenue earned
by AOL. Ernst & Young, as the complaint alleges, certified these
financial results as accurate, despite their alleged violations of
GAAP.

According to the complaint, the false and inflated advertising revenues
reported by the defendants, as well as the defendants' misleadingly
positive statements concerning the financial effects of the AOL Time
Warner merger, had the effect of artificially inflating the share price
of AOL and AOL Time Warner.

For more details, contact Ira M. Press or Ori Braun by Mail: 830 Third
Avenue, 10th Floor, New York, New York 10022 by Phone: 212-317-2300 or
888-529-4787 by E-Mail: obraun@kmslaw.com


AOL TIME: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York, on behalf of purchasers of the securities of AOL Time Warner,
Inc. (NYSE: AOL) between April 18, 2001 and April 24, 2002, inclusive,
against the Company and certain of its officers.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities
laws by issuing materially false and misleading statements throughout
the class period that had the effect of artificially inflating the
market price of the Company's securities.

The complaint alleges that by the start of the class period, the
Company was required to take a substantial write-down of the value of
its goodwill.  It did not do so, thereby artificially inflating its
financial results throughout the class period.

The complaint further alleges that the following factors, among others,
required that the Company write down billions of dollars of its
goodwill earlier than it did:

     (1) a material decline in the advertising market: the Company was
         experiencing a dramatic decline in demand for advertising,
         which had typically represented 20% of the Company's revenues.
         The decrease in advertising revenues had been escalating since
         the fourth quarter of 2000;

     (2) in the months prior to the consummation of the merger, America
         Online, Inc. executives were advised that it faced the risk of
         losing more than $140 million in ad revenue the following
         year; and

     (3) the merger was not creating any synergies: the merger between
         America Online and Time Warner was not being effectively
         integrated and the Company lacked an effective plan to
         integrate the two companies.

Prior to the disclosure of the true facts about the Company, Company
insiders, including several of the individual defendants sold their
personal holdings of the Company's common stock to the unsuspecting
public.  In total, these sales generated more than $250 million in
illicit proceeds.

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


CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS: Glancy & Binkow Files Securities Suit in CA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Glancy & Binkow LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf
of all persons who purchased securities of Charter Communications, Inc.
(Nasdaq:CHTR) between November 9, 1999 and July 17, 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 revenue and earnings caused Company stock
price to become artificially inflated, inflicting damages on investors.

The suit alleges that defendants overstated Company revenue, failed to
appropriately account for installation costs and artificially inflated
the number of subscribers for the Company's basic cable services.  On
July 18, 2002, when a Merrill Lynch analyst expressed concerns about
potentially misleading accounting practices, Charter's stock fell more
than 13%.  

Additionally, a subsequent article in Forbes discusses a Credit Suisse
First Boston report that further amplifies these concerns and describes
how Charter handles the impact of "churn" -- labor and advertising
costs -- on the Company's balance sheet, by improperly capitalizing
approximately 30% of its installation labor costs over an extended time
period.

For more details, contact Michael Goldberg or Lionel Z. Glancy 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.  


ECLIPSYS CORPORATION: Berger & Montague Launches Securities Suit in FL
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Berger & Montague, PC initiated a securities class action against
Eclipsys Corporation (Nasdaq: ECLP) in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida on behalf of all persons or
entities who purchased the Company's common stock between July 23, 2001
and June 27, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that the Company and its three chief officers
violated the federal securities laws by issuing false and misleading
statements during the class period.  Contrary to their positive
statements, defendants, according to the complaint, were in possession
of materially adverse information which they failed to disclose.

Specifically, during the class period, defendants trumpeted the large
amount of new sales the Company was booking and the expansion of its
sales force.  In making these announcements, defendants knew or
recklessly ignored that the Company was experiencing a decline in
demand for its information technology and that it had failed to
sufficiently increase its expenditures for research and development,
costs necessary to correct operational problems at the platform-level
of its technology.

This fraudulent course of conduct allowed Company insiders, including
the named defendants, to sell over 388,500 shares and pocket in excess
of $9.69 million while privy to material adverse knowledge regarding
the Company's true financial status.

On June 28, 2002, the Company shocked the market by announcing that
instead of the profit that the Company had previously told the market
to expect, the Company would report a loss of $0.07-0.10 per share due
to fewer contracts closing.  The price of Company stock tumbled nearly
50% on the announcement.

For more details, contact Sherrie R. Savett, Robin Switzenbaum or
Kimberly A. Walker by Mail: 1622 Locust Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103
by Phone: 888-891-2289 or 215-875-3000 by Fax: 215-875-5715 by E-mail:
InvestorProtect@bm.net or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.bergermontague.com


ECLIPSYS CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit in FL
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities class
action on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Eclipsys
Corporation (Nasdaq: ECLP) between July 23, 2001 and June 27, 2002,
inclusive, in the United States District Court, Southern District of
Florida against the Company and:

     (1) Robert Joseph Colletti,

     (2) Harvey J. Wilson and

     (3) John T. Patton

The suit alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the
market between July 23, 2001 and June 27, 2002, thereby artificially
inflating the price of Company securities.

As alleged in the complaint, defendants issued highly positive press
releases regarding the Company's addition of new contracts for its
information technology, in an effort to create the impression that
Eclipsys' revenues were growing and the Company was well positioned to
generate strong profitability.

However, during a six-week period in July to August 2001, insiders sold
more than $9.5 million worth of Eclipsys stock at or near the stock's
two year highs and unbeknownst to the investing public, although the
defendants were aware that new-sales bookings had slowed considerably
and expenditures in research and development and marketing and
distribution had accelerated, the Company failed to timely disclose
these facts to the public in any of Eclipsys' public filings with the
Securities and Exchange Commission or press releases.

On June 27, 2002, defendants issued a press release announcing that
results for the second quarter of 2002 would fall short of the
Company's previous statements.  The Company announced it would report a
net loss in the range of $0.07 to $0.10 per share. Trading price of
Company stock dropped nearly 50% in response to this.

For more details, contact Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman by
Mail: One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl., New York, NY 10119-0165 by
Phone: 800-320-5081 or contact Kenneth Vianale or Tara Isaacson by
Mail: The Plaza, 5355 Town Center Road, Suite 900, Boca Raton, FL 33486
by Phone: 561-361-5000 or by E-mail: EclipsysCase@milbergNY.com


ECLIPSYS CORP.: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in S.D. FL
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class
action has been commenced on behalf of shareholders who acquired
Eclipsys Corporation (Nasdaq: ECLP) securities between July 23, 2001
and June 27, 2002, inclusive, in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of Florida, against the Company and its Chief
Executive Officer, who is also a director, its Chief Financial Officer
and its Chief Operating Officer.

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

For more details, contact Charles J. Piven by Mail: The World Trade
Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore,
Maryland 21202 by Phone: 410-986-0036 or by E-mail:
hoffman@pivenlaw.com


EL PASO: Schiffrin & Barroway Commences Securities Fraud Suit in TX
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas on
behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of El Paso Corporation
(NYSE: EP) between July 25, 2001 and May 29, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its
business and financial condition.  Specifically, the complaint alleges
that defendants' material omissions and the dissemination of materially
false and misleading statements regarding the nature of the Company's
trading practices and revenues caused the Company's stock price to
become artificially inflated, inflicting damages on investors.

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


HPL TECHNOLOGIES: Mark McNair Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Office of Mark McNair initiated a securities class action on
behalf of purchasers of HPL Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq:HPLAE) common
stock between July 31, 2001 through July 18, 2002, in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California, against the
Company and:

     (1) Y. David Lepejian, its former Chief Executive Officer, and

     (2) Ita Geva, former Chief Financial Officer

The defendants allegedly engaged in a massive accounting fraud
involving fictitious transactions and falsified documents in order to
inflate the Company's revenues and earnings.

For more details, contact Mark McNair by Phone: 877-511-4717 or
202-872-4717 by E-mail: mcnair@justice4investors.com or visit the
firm's Website: http://www.justice4investors.com


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 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: LeBlanc & Waddell Commences Securities Suit in CA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LeBlanc & Waddell initiated a securities class action against HPL
Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq:HPLA), claiming the software company and
certain of its top officers pumped up the Company's stock price by
artificially inflating revenue.  The complaint was filed in the US
District Court for the Northern District of California 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 Chad A. Dudley by Mail: 5353 Essen Lane,
Suite 420, Baton Rouge LA 70809 by Phone: 800-988-3514 or by E-mail:
cdudley@lw-law.net


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
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, 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. ICN stock
dropped upon these revelations, falling 53% to $9.30 on 7/11/02, 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 or by
E-mail: wsl@milberg.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.milberg.com


ICN PHARMACEUTICALS: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class
action on behalf of shareholders who acquired ICN Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(NYSE: ICN) securities between May 3, 2001 and July 10, 2002,
inclusive, in the United States District Court for the Central District
of California, Southern Division against the Company and:

     (1) Milan Panic,

     (2) Richard A. Meier and

     (3) David C. Watt

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 Charles J. Piven, PA by Phone: 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


ICN PHARMACEUTICALS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel 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
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 ICN stock for
proceeds of $7.35 million.  On July 11,2002, (before the market
opened), ICN 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, huge volume of 19.9 million shares, its steepest
decline ever. In fact, ICN had pulled sales from future periods into
class period quarters to inflate sales

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Avenue, 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


ICN PHARMACEUTICALS: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Suit in NJ
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of New
Jersey, on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired
the securities of ICN Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NYSE: ICN) between
November 1, 2001 and July 10, 2002, inclusive, against the Company and
Milan Panic, the Company's founder and former Chief Executive Officer
and Chairman of the Board.

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 during the class period,
defendants failed to disclose critical information about the Company,
including that:

     (1) during the third and fourth quarters of 2001, and the first
         quarter of 2002, the Company engaged in "channel stuffing" to
         distributors as evidenced by the fact of a very large supply
         of product had been sent to distributors in an effort to
         artificially boast its reported earnings;

     (2) during the third and fourth quarters of 2001, and the first
         quarter of 2002, the Company violated GAAP by improperly
         recognizing revenue from sales to distributors, when, in fact,
         those revenues were not properly recognizable; and

     (3) revenues were overstated in the third and fourth quarters of
         2001, and the first quarter of 2002.

It is further alleged that on or about June 14, 2002, just days after
defendants gave high but false earnings and revenue guidance, Mr. Panic
exercised options for and then sold at inflated prices, more than
900,000 shares of ICN stock, earning millions of dollars in profits.

In response to these disclosures revealing, at least in part, the
Company's true financial condition, Company shares fell sharply.  
Company stock, which had opened on July 10, 2002 at $19.95, dropped
$10.65 to close at $9.30, a decline of 53%.

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


INSIGHT ENTERPRISES: Bernard Gross Commences Securities Suit in AZ
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Bernard M. Gross PC commenced 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 names as
defendants the Company and:

     (1) Eric J. Crown, co-founder, Chairman of the Board of Directors
         and member of the Executive Committee of the Board of
         Directors,

     (2) Timothy A. Crown, co-founder, Chief Executive Officer,
         Director, and member of the Executive Committee of the Board
         of Directors, and

     (3) Stanley Laybourne, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary,
         Treasurer and Director

The defendants were charged 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 Insight 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 the Company was not fully disclosed until July 17,
2002, when defendants finally revealed that the Company 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 the Company's 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 Deborah R. Gross, or Susan Gross by Mail:
1515 Locust Street, Second Floor Philadelphia, PA 19102 by Phone:
866-561-3600 (toll-free) or 215-561-3600 by E-mail:
susang@bernardmgross.com or debbie@bernardmgross.com or visit the
firm's Website: http://www.bernardmgross.com  


KNIGHT TRADING: Weiss & Yourman Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Weiss & Yourman LLP initiated a securities class action against Knight
Trading Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: NITE) and Kenneth D. Pasternak was
commenced 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 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, shares of the Company 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 or by E-mail:
info@wynyc.com


NICOR INC.: Mark McNair Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. IL
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Office Of Mark McNair initiated a securities class action on
behalf of shareholders who acquired Nicor, Inc. (NYSE:GAS) securities
between January 24, 2002 and July 18, 2002, inclusive, in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, against
the Company and two of the Company's senior officers.

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 Phone: 202-872-4717,
877-511-4717 by E-mail: mcnair@justice4investors.com or visit the
firm's Website: http://www.justice4investors.com


NTL INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York on
behalf of purchasers of the securities of NTL, Inc. (NYSE: NLI) between
August 9, 2000 and November 29, 2001, inclusive.  The suit is pending
against the Company and:

     (1) George S. Blumenthal,

     (2) J. Barclay Knapp,

     (3) Steven Carter and

     (4) John F. Gregg

The suit alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the
market between August 9, 2000 and November 29, 2002, thereby
artificially inflating the price of Company securities.

The complaint alleges that, throughout the class period, defendants
issued a series of materially false and misleading statements, which
failed to disclose, among other things:

     (i) that the Company was unable to effectively integrate its
         acquisitions and, as a result was experiencing substantial
         difficulties in operating its business;

    (ii) that the Company was not fully funded until 2003, and as a
         result of its massive debt burden would necessarily have to
         restructure its debt;

   (iii) that the Company was underreporting churn rates by failing to
         report terminations and by continuing to bill customers for
         accounts which they had terminated, thereby creating the false
         impression that the Company was retaining customers longer and
         that migrations were decreasing; and

    (iv) that the Company was improperly delaying the write-down of
         billions of dollars of impaired assets, thereby artificially
         inflating the Company's operating results.

Indeed, after the end of the class period, the Company announced that
it would write off over $11 billion of goodwill and other asset
impairments prior to reporting fourth quarter financial results, which
would result in an astounding loss per share for the fourth quarter
2001 of $46.46 per share.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Avenue, 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


OMNICOM GROUP: Wolf Popper Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Popper LLP initiated a securities class action against Omnicom
Group Inc. (NYSE:OMC) and certain of its senior officers on behalf of
all persons who purchased the Company's common stock on the open market
during the period April 25, 2000 through June 11, 2002, inclusive.  The
suit is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York.  Events subsequent to the filing of that
complaint have significantly substantiated the complaint's initial
allegations.

On June 17, 2002, the Company acknowledged that it had received an
informal request from the SEC concerning two directors who had
reportedly resigned from its board for reasons relating to transactions
that the plaintiff alleges in the action were intended by defendants to
avoid reporting its losses on internet investments.

The Company also disclosed, in a filing with the SEC on July 8, 2002,
that it had incurred $395 million in future payment obligations in
connection with recent acquisitions, which were previously undisclosed
to investors.

The suit also alleges that the Company fraudulently reported growth in
"organic" revenue that included revenue generated by newly acquired
companies, and failed to disclose its contingent obligations to make
additional investments in certain partially acquired companies.

The Company's common stock has fallen approximately $30.00 per share,
or over 33%, as a result of the revelations of the true facts, as
alleged in the suit.

For more details, contact Robert C. Finkel or Michele F. Raphael by
Mail: 845 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10022-6662 by Phone: 212-451-9620
or 877-370-7703 by Fax: 212-486-2093 or 877-370-7704 by E-mail:
irrep@wolfpopper.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.wolfpopper.com


PEMSTAR INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MN Court
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota on
behalf of purchasers of PEMSTAR Inc. (Nasdaq: PMTR) publicly traded
securities during the period between June 8, 2001 and May 3, 2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The
complaint alleges that during the class period defendants caused
Company shares to trade at artificially inflated levels through the
issuance of false and misleading statements.

The Registration Statement and Prospectus for the June 8, 2001
Secondary Offering were materially false and misleading when issued as
they misrepresented and/or omitted one or more of the following adverse
facts which then existed and disclosure of which was necessary to make
the statements made not false and/or misleading, including that the
Company, in order to attract and maintain the appearance of a diverse
customer base,

     (1) executed orders from customers without industry track records
         or acceptable financial conditions, in fact, several were on
         the brink of bankruptcy; and

     (2) had an extremely liberal policy of accepting and holding
         inventory for and from existing and prospective customers
         (often without ever obtaining a written contract), the result
         of which was that PEMSTAR significantly increased its costs of
         doing business and was forced to write down obsolete
         inventory.

In fact, a substantial amount of the Company's inventory was already
obsolete.  Due to a lack of internal controls, reflected, but not
acknowledged in PEMSTAR's contracts with Datasweep:

     (i) PEMSTAR's "cash conversion cycle," or the amount of time
         between the purchase of inventory and the collection of
         payment, was dramatically lower than its competitors', which
         resulted in PEMSTAR having to write down material amounts of
         accounts receivables; and

    (ii) PEMSTAR's "days sales outstanding," the number of days PEMSTAR
         had to wait payment for sales, was dramatically lower than its
         competitors', which resulted in PEMSTAR having to write down
         material amounts of accounts receivables.

The complaint further claims that the facts, known to the defendants
but concealed from the public following the Secondary Offering, were:

     (a) The Company was in violation of its financial loan covenants;
     
     (b) The Company's inventory and accounts receivables valuations
         were grossly overstated;

     (c) Defendants needed to keep the Company's shares artificially
         inflated to complete the Company's convertible offering;

     (d) The Company was then experiencing lower than projected
         utilization rates at the Company's higher cost locations which
         performed many of the Company's higher margin services,
         including engineering, New Product Introduction (NPI) and
         prototyping;

     (e) The Company's customers were being devastated financially in
         the severe "end-market" downturn;

     (f) The Company was actually selling back its inventory to
         original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) because, unbeknownst
         to shareholders, the Company was actually "holding" inventory
         from its OEMs without any written/binding agreement to
         perform; and

    (g) As a result of (a)-(f) above, the defendants' projections for
        the Company's third and fourth quarters of F02 were materially
        false and misleading.

On May 3, 2002, the Company issued a press release entitled, "PEMSTAR
Revises Estimates for Fourth Fiscal Quarter 2002 Results and Announces
Private Placement of Up to $50 Million." On this news, the Company's
share price plunged more than 60% to $2.84 on May 6, 2002 on trading of
more than 4.5 million shares.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Avenue, 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


PEMSTAR INC.: Leo Desmond Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MN Court
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Leo W. Desmond initiated a securities class action
on behalf of shareholders who acquired PEMSTAR, Inc. (Nasdaq:PMTR)
securities between June 8, 2001 and May 3, 2002, inclusive in the
United States District Court for the District of Minnesota.  The suit
names as defendants the Company and:

     (1) Allen J. Berning,

     (2) William B. Leary,

     (3) William J. Kullback,

     (4) Robert R. Murphy,

     (5) Steve V. Petracca,

     (6) Karl D. Shurson,

     (7) Robert D. Ahmann,

     (8) Hargopal Singh,

     (9) Gregory S. Lea,

    (10) Thomas A. Burton and

    (11) Bruce M. Jaffe

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 or by E-Mail: Info@SecuritiesAttorney.com or visit the
firm's Website: http://www.SecuritiesAttorney.com


TELLABS INC.: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Suit in N.D. IL
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois, Eastern District, on behalf of purchasers of the securities
of Tellabs, Inc. (Nasdaq: TLAB) between December 11, 2000 and June 19,
2001, inclusive, against the Company and certain of its officers and
directors.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its
business and financial condition.  By at least the start of the class
period, unbeknownst to investors, the Company was experiencing
declining demand for the Titan 5500, a digital cross-connect product,
and its optical networking products were not being well-received by
customers as they were inferior to competitors' offerings.

The complaint further alleges that the Company acquisition of SALIX was
a complete failure as sales of the product line that the Company
acquired in connection with that acquisition were declining.  Indeed,
the Company eliminated the SALIX line of switching products just 14
months after the Company's acquisition of that company.  Prior to the
disclosure of these facts, defendant Michael J. Birck and other Company
insiders sold their personally-held common stock to the unsuspecting
public.

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


UNIROYAL TECHNOLOGIES: Schatz & Nobel Commences Securities Suit in FL
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Schatz & Nobel PC initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on behalf of
all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly traded
securities of Uniroyal Technology Corp. (Nasdaq: UTCI) from February 8,
2000 through May 13, 2002, inclusive (the "Class Period"), including
those who acquired Company shares through its acquisition of Sterling
Semiconductor.

The suit alleges that the Company and certain of its officers and
directors issued materially false and misleading statements concerning
the Company's financial condition.  It is alleged that defendants
issued a press release reporting inflated financial results by
concealing the fact that Rubatex, a company which had an obligation to
the Company for $5 million in the form of a note receivable, had been
financially crippled by a strike, was facing imminent bankruptcy and
that the note receivable had become uncollectible.

The suit also alleges that the acquisition of Sterling, which the
Company represented as strategically positioning the Company to
increase participation in the semiconductor industry, was a failure.  
Unbeknownst to investors, Sterling was a development stage company
which had sustained losses throughout its existence and was nearing
bankruptcy.

On December 31, 2001, the Company announced that it recorded a write-
down of Sterling goodwill of over $9.8 million. On this news, Company
shares closed at $1.69 on January 2, 2002 from $3.20 on the previous
trading day, well below the Class Period high of over $71 per share.
Subsequent disclosures, which culminated in the revelation that
Sterling could not even be sold for $3 million caused the stock to drop
even further.

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


                              *********

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  * * *