CAR_Public/021017.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
             Thursday, October 17, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 206

                           Headlines

CALIFORNIA: Saugus Residents Sue Over Defective Galvanized Steel Pipes
CRYOLIFE INC.: Donor-Tissue Recall Triggers Lawsuit, Delays Surgery
FEDEX CORPORATION: Appeals Adverse CA Court Judgment in Consumer Suit
FEDEX CORPORATION: Court Grants Preliminary Approval To Suit Settlement
HMO LITIGATION: Court Agrees To Hear Arbitration Appeal for RICO Suit

INDIAN FUNDS: Native American Gains Right To Draft Trust Reform Plan
NABORS INDUSTRIES: Asks TX Court To Dismiss Suits Over Re-Incorporation
PALM INC.: Plaintiffs File Amended Shareholder Suit in CA State Court
PENNSYLVANIA: School District Protests Testimony in School Fraud Suit
POLO RALPH: Lawyers Seeking More Plaintiffs For "Wardrobing" Lawsuit

REDDI BRAKE: Working To Settle Securities Fraud Suit in CA State Court
RITE AID: FTC Starts Probe into Consumer Privacy, Advertising Practices
VASCA INC.: CA Court Dismisses Suit Over Lifesite Hemodialysis System
VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: French Shareholder Group Commences Securities Suit
WORLDCOM INC.: NY Comptroller Says New Allegations Will Strengthen Suit

                   New Securities Fraud Cases

BELLSOUTH CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. GA
CONCORD EFS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in W.D. TN
CONSECO INC.: Wechsler Harwood Commences Securities Suit in S.D. IN
CORRPRO COMPANIES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in E.D. OH
EL PASO: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. Texas

ELECTRONIC DATA: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Suit in E.D. TX
FLEMING COMPANIES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in E.D. TX
HEALTHSOUTH CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in AL
HPL TECHNOLOGIES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
ICN PHARMACEUTICALS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA

INSIGHT ENTERPRISES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in AZ Court
MERRILL LYNCH: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
MERRILL LYNCH: Schatz & Nobel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in NY
MERRILL LYNCH: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
MERRILL LYNCH: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY

NICOR INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. IL
QUADRAMED CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
SALOMON SMITH: Stull Stull Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
TELLABS INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. IL
TXU CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit in N.D. TX

WORLDCOM INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY

                           *********

CALIFORNIA: Saugus Residents Sue Over Defective Galvanized Steel Pipes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Over 400 residents of Saugus, California filed a class action against
the builders, contractors, suppliers and manufactures of the galvanized
steel pipes installed in three new-home communities in the 1980s, after
learning of the settlement of a similar class action filed by Santa
Clarita, California residents, The-Signal.com reports.

Members of the El Dorado Home Owners Group filed the suit in Los
Angeles County Superior Court against:

     (1) Shappell Industries, Inc.,

     (2) Monteverde Development Co.,

     (3) Newhall Valencia Plumbing,

     (4) C.I.R. Plumbing, Dongbu Steel Co. Limited,

     (5) Dongbu USA,

     (6) Hyundai Pipe of America,

     (7) Union Steel,

     (8) Fuji Pipe Manufacturing Co.,

     (9) Pusan Pipe America,

    (10) Culligan Water Conditioning,

    (11) M.J. Mang & Sons,

    (12) Rayne Corp.,

    (13) Castaic Lake Water Agency,

    (14) Newhall County Water (District),

    (15) Valencia Water Co. and

    (16) the Santa Clarita Water Co.

The suit seeks reimbursement or replacement of their galvanized steel
pipes and damage caused by those pipes.  The El Dorado group claims
that the galvanized pipes used in the construction of their homes have
burst, leaked, brought mold, and even cost some homeowners their
insurance coverage.  The lawsuit further alleges that Shapell misled
the homeowners by informing them that they had one type of plumbing
system when they bought their homes, only to learn that another type
had been installed.

The earlier suit, filed by Santa Clarita residents, was settled in an
agreement which included thousands of area homeowners who shared a $41-
million settlement paid by builders, contractors, suppliers and
manufacturers for their respective roles in placing defective
galvanized steel plumbing systems in 15 new-home communities from 1986
to 1994.

"They kept us in the dark about what was going on," Kathleen Thomson,
president of the association that represents El Dorado I, El Dorado II
and El Dorado Estates in Saugus, told The-Signal.com.  Attorney Ron
Hartmann of the Los Angeles law firm Quisenberry & Kabateck LLP, who
was credited for recognizing the similarity of the plumbing problems
that cropped up in the SCV and for spearheading the 2000 class action
lawsuit settlement, said in March he had no comment on why the El
Dorado homeowners were not part of the original lawsuit.

Christine L. Herdman, vice president and general counsel for Shapell,
could not be reached in the past week for comment, but told The-
Signal.com in a March interview she also does not know why the El
Dorado homeowners were omitted from the 2000 class-action lawsuit.  "We
were never advised that we needed to inform them," Herdman said. "My
suspicion is they were outside of the 10-year statute (of
limitations)."

Attorney David Castenholz, who represents the El Dorado Home Owners
Group, said his clients want the same restitution that the homeowners
in the 2000 class action settlement received.  "As my clients were
among the first to have this (galvanized steel) pipe installed in their
homes and as this entire tract has been affected in some way by the
cheap pipes used in the construction of their homes, it is outrageous
that they were not able to benefit from the (2000) lawsuit," Mr.
Castenholz said.

Mr. Castenholz told The-Signal.com he believes Shapell misled people
into believing they were purchasing homes with copper pipes, when in
reality they were purchasing galvanized pipes, which he said were
defective.  "Not only do we believe that misrepresentations were made
with the sale of the homes, but there were also ongoing
misrepresentations and concealments of the galvanized pipes," he said.
"We believe that certain practices on the part of the builder, which
included patchwork on the pipe, further perpetrated the
misrepresentation."


CRYOLIFE INC.: Donor-Tissue Recall Triggers Lawsuit, Delays Surgery
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Area surgeons in Texas say some knee and heart operations are on hold
after the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ordered a recall of
donated human tissue that it says could be infected with fungus or
bacteria, The Fort Worth Star Telegram reports.

The FDA recently issued a recall order covering all tissue processed on
or after October 3, 2001, by CryoLife, Inc., the nation's largest
provider of human tissue for implantation.  The tissue has been linked
to the death of a Minnesota man and has spawned an increasing number of
lawsuits from patients who claim to have been infected.  The FDA has
agreed to allow the Georgia company to resume distribution, but only in
cases of medical emergency.

So far, CryoLife faces about a dozen product liability lawsuits arising
from the implantation of tissue that it processed.  In addition to the
product liability cases, CryoLife faces a class action by shareholders
who claim the Company misled them about reports of contaminations.  The
Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating the Company's
accounting practices and trading in the last year to determine whether
federal securities laws were violated.

While the FDA closely monitors the transplantation of organs such as
kidneys and livers, it has largely allowed the organ and tissue
procurement industry to regulate itself.   In 1998, the FDA proposed a
three-part tissue action plan that would require the registration of
tissue banks, establishment of procedures for handling tissues and
require as well the screening of potential donors.  So far, only the
registration of tissue banks has been achieved.

However, last November, when a 23-year-old Minnesota man died from a
bacterial infection after receiving CryoLife tissue during routine knee
surgery, the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention began
an industry-wide investigation.

The CDC has uncovered 54 infections associated with the surgical
implantation of cadaver tissue, 26 of which involved tissue from
CryoLife.  The Company contends that the infections could have come
from sources other than the tissue.

In January, the CDC recommended changes in the Company's processing and
testing procedures to prevent conatmination.  When FDA inspected
CryoLife, in late summer, it issued an order of recall, saying CryoLife
could not ensure that its tissue was free of fungus and bacteria
because it had not enacted the CDC's recommendations.  The FDA has
recently agreed to allow CryoLife to resume distribution of veins,
arteries and cardiac patches, but only in cases of medical emergency
when there are no other options.

The FDA recently told CryoLife to develop an acceptable corrective
action plan.  With a corrective action plan in place to which the FDA
agrees, "then we shall be in a position to move forward and satisfy all
of their outstanding issues and concerns," said Ashley Lee, vice
president of finance and chief financial officer for Cryolife.


FEDEX CORPORATION: Appeals Adverse CA Court Judgment in Consumer Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Fedex Corporation appealed the United States District Court in San
Diego, California's decision granting summary judgment to plaintiffs in
a class action filed against the Company, generally alleging that
customers who had late deliveries during the 1997 Teamsters strike at
United Parcel Service were entitled to a full refund of shipping
charges pursuant to our money-back guarantee, regardless of whether
they gave timely notice of their claim.

At the hearing on the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, the
court ruled against the Company.  The judgment totaled approximately
$68 million, including interest and fees for the plaintiffs' attorney.

The Company appealed the judgment to the United States Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit, and expects a ruling in the next 12 to 18
months.  The Company has denied any liability with respect to this
claim and intend to vigorously defend ourselves in this case.   The
Company also believes the case is without merit and it is probable we
will prevail upon appeal.


FEDEX CORPORATION: Court Grants Preliminary Approval To Suit Settlement
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Illinois state court granted preliminary approval to the settlement
of a class action against Fedex Corporation, alleging the Company
imposed a fuel surcharge in a manner that is not consistent with the
terms and conditions of its contracts with customers.

Under the terms of the proposed settlement, the Company will issue
coupons to qualifying class members toward the purchase of future FedEx
Express shipping services.  The coupons will be subject to certain
terms and conditions and will be redeemable for a period of one year
from issuance.

Although the court has granted preliminary approval of the proposed
settlement, class members will have an opportunity to object.  A
hearing to consider any objections and to approve the proposed
settlement is expected by the end of December 2002.


HMO LITIGATION: Court Agrees To Hear Arbitration Appeal for RICO Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal by
UnitedHealth Group Inc. and PacifiCare Health Systems Inc., relating to
a class action commenced in 2000 by several doctors against fifteen
healthcare companies, accusing them of violating the federal Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), the Associated Press
reports.

The Company earlier moved to compel arbitration in the suit, but a
Miami judge ruled that the two lead plaintiffs, Dr. Dennis Breen and
Jeffrey Book, did not have to arbitrate the racketeering claims because
their arbitration agreement with the Companies limits the damages an
arbitrator can award.  The judge said the limitation would prohibit
arbitrators from awarding the plaintiffs the triple damages provided
for under the racketeering law, AP reports.

A US appeals court later upheld the lower court's ruling.  The
Companies later appealed to the Supreme Court, saying the ruling sets
"a dangerous precedent" and "undermines the critical role" the Federal
Arbitration Act plays in promoting alternative dispute resolution, AP
reports.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs urged the Supreme Court to reject the
appeal, saying there was no conflict among the appeals courts and that
the Supreme Court already has decided the question.  Trial in the
overall case by the doctors against all the defendants has been set for
May 19, but could end up being delayed by the Supreme Court's decision
to hear the appeal by the two HMOs.


INDIAN FUNDS: Native American Gains Right To Draft Trust Reform Plan
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Indian plaintiffs, who brought a class action seeking to reform the
way their trust fund has been handled by the Department of Interior, at
long last have won a landmark victory in the history of this battle,
the Chicago Tribune reports.

The presiding judge, US District Judge Royce Lamberth, recently had
found Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton in contempt of court for
deceiving him about the Department's failure to reform the trust fund.  
Judge Lamberth's ruling calls for a trial beginning in May, against the
cabinet officials charged with the criminal and civil contempt.

Under the ruling came forth one more important point:  The plaintiffs
in the class action have been authorized to develop a structured plan
for reforming the trust, which could lead to the appointment of a
receiver, removing the trust from the Interior Department.

Elouise Cobell, lead plaintiff of the class action, called the ruling
"a tremendous victory for the plaintiffs."  Ms. Cobell, 55, a member of
the Blackfeet Indian tribe of northwestern Montana, filed the lawsuit
against the US government to find out what caused the accounting mess
which the Indian trust fund had become, and to gain reform.  The recent
ruling by Judge Lamberth, entitling the Indians to come forth with a
plan for how their funds are to be handled in the future, as well as a
plan for ascertaining what happened to their funds in the past, is a
definitive step on the way to collecting a very large amount of money
for the trust fund, an amount which could be as large as $40 billion.

Ms. Cobell, who was in Chicago recently to accept a social justice
award from Dominican University, talked about why she took the first
step toward filing the lawsuit.  "Their (the Indians') entire quality
of life was being robbed, so how could I let something like that go
on?," she said.

What she felt compelled to stop was what she called "a massive swindle"
perpetrated by the Interior Department against Native Americans for
more than 100 years.  It began in 1887, when Congress opened up 90
million acres of tribal reservations to settlement by white ranchers.  
In return, the Indian tribes were granted land allotments.  The Indians
were allowed to lease or sell their property only with government
approval.  Leasing would include the right to use the land for grazing,
quarrying, farming, drilling for oil, natural gas, timber removal,
minerals mining.  Money from the leasing, the royalties from its use,
were to be held in a trust and distributed to each Indian family.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), under the Interior Department, was
to oversee the trust fund.  The Treasury Department was to mail out the
checks.

Ms. Cobell, because she had taken accounting classes in college was
offered the position of treasurer of the Blackfoot Nation's account.  
The tribe's accounting system, she recalls was a nightmare, and she
began asking questions.  For example, why was she seeing evidence of
money leaving the tribe's account when she was the only one authorized
to write any checks?  When she went to the local office of the BIA, she
was told she should learn to read a financial statement.

Ms. Cobell wrote many letters to the Interior Department.  Finally, she
began winning the ear of some people in Washington.  In 1992, the House
Committee on Government Operations issued a highly critical report
titled, "Misplaced Trust:  The Bureau of Indian Affairs' Mismanagement
of the Indian Trust Fund."  Two years later, Congress passed the
landmark Indian Trust Fund Management Reform Act, appointing a trustee
to fix the accounting mess. Still, nothing happened.

Ms. Cobell began considering a lawsuit against the federal government -
she knew it would be one of the largest class actions ever filed.  
Lawyers told her it would cost millions of dollars to pay the legal
fees and to hire accountants to sort through 100 years of inept
bookkeeping.

She approached the Otto Bremer Foundation, a St. Paul-based foundation
that promotes social justice.  The foundation gave her a $75,000 grant
and a $600,000 loan.  On June 10, the Boulder, Colorado-based Native
American Rights Fund filed a class action against the Interior and
Treasury Departments, with Ms. Cobell as lead plaintiff.

"Elouise has the kind of quiet strength you need when you are going
into sustained battle," says Keith Harper, an attorney for the Native
American Rights Fund.   "I sit in awe of her."  In 1997, the John D.
MacArthur Foundation gave Ms. Cobell a $300,000 "genius grant."  She
donated most of the money to the legal defense fund for the class
action.  

So far, the lawsuit's legal and accounting expenses have totaled $8
million.  Of that amount $4.1 million has been paid by the Lannan
Foundation, based in Santa Fe, which has a history of backing Native
American causes.

Jaune Evans, executive director of programs, says foundations only
reluctantly support legal cases because they can be "notoriously
expensive."  However, the Lannan Foundation decided to support Ms.
Cobell's class action, because it was "an agent of change," said Ms.
Evans.

"We found Elouise to be as compelling a citizen as we had ever met,"
said Ms. Evans.  "She is a totally dedicated activist of the spirit as
well as an activist of the people."


NABORS INDUSTRIES: Asks TX Court To Dismiss Suits Over Re-Incorporation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nabors Industries, Inc. asked the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Texas to dismiss several securities class actions
filed by its shareholders against it and its directors, alleging that
the Company's May 10, 2002 proxy statement/prospectus contained certain
material misstatements and omissions in violation of federal securities
laws and state law.

Steve Rosenberg, a company shareholder, filed the first suit relating
to the Company's May 10, 2002 proxy statement/prospectus, which was
sent to shareholders in connection with the special meeting to consider
and vote on the Company's proposed reorganization and effective re-
incorporation in Bermuda.  The AFL-CIO moved to intervene in the first
suit, and also filed a complaint containing similar allegations.  
On June 5, 2002, Marilyn Irey, an individual shareholder of the
company, filed a complaint that was nearly identical to Steve
Rosenberg's complaint.

The three shareholders requested that the court either enjoin the
closing of the shareholder vote on the scheduled date or the
effectuation of the reorganization.  In addition, two of the
shareholders (Steve Rosenberg and Marilyn Irey) purported to bring a
class action on behalf of all shareholders, alleging that the Company
and its directors violated their state law fiduciary duties by making
these alleged misstatements and omissions.

Since the beginning of the litigation, two of the shareholders (Steve
Rosenberg and the AFL-CIO) have amended their complaints, but have not
added any substantive allegations.

On June 13, 2002, the Court granted the AFL-CIO's motion to intervene.  
On June 15, 2002, the Court denied a motion for temporary restraining
order brought by two of the shareholders (Steve Rosenberg and the AFL-
CIO) in their attempts to prevent the closing of the Company's
reorganization and its effective re-incorporation in Bermuda.  On July
2, 2002, the Court granted an agreed motion to consolidate Mr.
Rosenberg's and Ms. Irey's suit.  

The Company and its directors have moved to dismiss the lawsuits of all
three shareholders, and that motion is currently pending.  The Company
and its directors believe that the allegations in this lawsuit are
without merit, and the Company and its directors will defend vigorously
the claims brought against them.

The Company is unable, however, to predict the outcome of this action
or the costs to be incurred in connection with its defense and there
can be no assurance that this litigation will be resolved in the
Company's favor.


PALM INC.: Plaintiffs File Amended Shareholder Suit in CA State Court
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs in the shareholder derivative and class action pending
against Palm, Inc. filed an amended suit in California Superior Court.  
The suit was originally filed in January 2001, alleging that the
Company's directors breached fiduciary duties by not having it's public
stockholders approve the Company's 1999 director stock option plan.  

3Com Corporation, the sole stockholder at the time, approved the 1999
director plan prior to our March 2000 initial public offering.  The
complaint alleged that the Company was required to seek approval for
the plan by stockholders after the initial public offering.

The plaintiffs then amended the suit in November 2001 adding new
defendants and new allegations, including that defendants breached
fiduciary duties by approving the Company's 2001 director stock option
plan and by making misrepresentations in its September 2001 proxy
statement concerning the 2001 director stock option plan and the 1999
employee stock option plan.

Thereafter the plaintiff filed a second amended complaint in June 2002.  
The plaintiff added a fifth claim based on allegations that the Company
did not have proper board approvals for some of the actions taken in
connection with the Company's separation from 3Com, including the
merger between Palm Computing, Inc. and Palm, the issuance of its
stock, and the adoption of equity and stock option plans.

The plaintiff also alleges that it does not have, and has never had, a
valid board.  The plaintiff has not specified the amount of damages, if
any, he may seek.  However, he has indicated that he seeks to rescind
the Company's director and employee stock option plans.  The plaintiff
also purports to seek an accounting and to enjoin the Company from any
distribution of PalmSource stock.

The case is currently in discovery.  No trial date has been set.  


PENNSYLVANIA: School District Protests Testimony in School Fraud Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Midland School District broke off ties with the Pennsylvania
Association of Rural and Small Schools, because the association's head
testified in a class action against the Midland-based Western
Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School, the Beaver County Times reports.

The charter school faces a suit filed by thirty-nine school districts
in Butler County Court, saying that it was operating illegally.  The
suit alleged that:

     (1) the Midland cyberschool is not a charter school under current
         state law;

     (2) the charter application wasn't completed until after the
         school opened in fall 2000; and

     (3) several of Midland's school district officials have doubled as
         members of the cyberschool board

Joe Bard, the association's head, recently testified as an expert
witness on behalf of the plaintiffs.  Mr. Bard was questioned last week
in a taped deposition, and was paid a fee of US$800.  

Midland Superintendent Nick Trombetta told the Beaver County Times,  
"I'm very disappointed that we were sold out by the executive director
of an association that is supposed to be representing our best
interests. We paid $650 in taxpayer dollars for membership in the
association, but he apparently went to the highest bidder," he said.

"It's fine that he (Bard) testified, but not that he did so without
speaking to anyone here in the district or at the cyberschool. He
should have been professional enough to call and research what we do
here. He should have done his homework," he added.  "A phone call would
have been enough."

Thus, the Midland School Board voted unanimously to withdraw from the
state association and demand a refund of the $650 fee it paid to belong
this school year.  The association acts as a voice for smaller schools
with the state Department of Education, state school board and
Legislature.

Earlier, Mr. Bard told The Allegheny Times he was not wearing his hat
as executive director of the 190-member state association when he
testified.  "My testimony had nothing to do with my employment with the
Pennsylvania Association of Rural and Small Schools, and PARSS had
nothing to do with my testimony," he said.

"My being there had more to do with the fact that I was the
commissioner for elementary and secondary education during the Casey
administration, at the time the home-schooling law was put in place,"
he added.  "One of the major contentions of the litigants is that this
(cyberschool) is a form of home-schooling."


POLO RALPH: Lawyers Seeking More Plaintiffs For "Wardrobing" Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyers for a lawsuit against prominent clothing retailer Polo Ralph
Lauren are making efforts to attract more plaintiffs to join the class
action.  The suit, filed by employee Toni Young in the US District
Court in San Francisco, contests the Company's "wardrobing" practices,
Modbee.com reports.

The suit alleges that the Company forced its sales associate to spend
up to a third of their annual income on Ralph Lauren fashions to keep
their jobs.  The employees reported are required to keep up with the
retailer's latest clothing lines.

"It's important as this case moves forward that there be more people
named as plaintiffs," said Jon Greer, a spokesman for attorney Patrick
Kitchin, who is representing Toni Young in her suit against Polo,
Modbee.com reports.  A Web site explaining the lawsuit was posted to
help spread the word to other potential plaintiffs, he said.

A spokeswoman for Polo Ralph Lauren in New York said the company does
not comment on pending litigation.


REDDI BRAKE: Working To Settle Securities Fraud Suit in CA State Court
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Reddi Brake Supply Corporation is negotiating a settlement for the
class action pending against it in the Los Angeles Superior Court on
behalf of all persons or entities who bought its common stock prior to
March 23, 1996, and/or who bought or sold any shares thereafter until
August 13, 1996.

The complaint asserts causes of action for breach of fiduciary duty by
officers and directors and conspiracy to manipulate the price of the
common stock of the defendant.  The Company has denied the claims.  

In May 1999, the parties reached a tentative settlement agreement,
which was presented to the court in June 1999 and in September 1999,
the court ruled that the settlement was fair, reasonable and adequate
to members of the settlement class.  

In December 2000, representatives of the named class members announced
their intention to renegotiate certain provisions of the settlement.  
In January 2001, defendants served notice of their withdrawal from the
settlement.  

In June 2001, the court rejected the proposed settlement, found the
Plaintiffs' counsel inadequate, decertified the settlement class, and
ordered the class action allegations stricken from the complaint.  

On August 6, 2002, the California Court of Appeal rejected the
plaintiffs' former counsel's appeal of the Superior Court's June 2001
order.   The action currently is pending in the Superior Court and the
named plaintiffs have stated their intention to amend the complaint to
re-assert class action allegations.  The parties have been negotiating
a settlement agreement, which remains unresolved at the report date.


RITE AID: FTC Starts Probe into Consumer Privacy, Advertising Practices
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Federal Trade Commission is investigating Rite Aid Corporation,
relating to its consumer privacy and advertising practices, according
to a Form 10-Q filed Tuesday with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.

The Company told Dow Jones Newswires it hasn't been accused of any
wrongdoing and is fully cooperating with the FTC's investigation.  The
Company said the investigation is in its preliminary stages and that it
can't predict the outcome now.

The company provided no further information on the issue.


VASCA INC.: CA Court Dismisses Suit Over Lifesite Hemodialysis System
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court in California dismissed the class
action pending against Vasca, Inc., relating to its LifeSiter
Hemodialysis Access System.

The suit asserted claims arising out of concerns raised in an FDA
Warning Letter issued to the company in November 2001.  According to
the suit, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received at
least 129 complaints, including alleged deaths and serious injuries,
experienced by patients using the LifeSite system.  The suit further
contends that the Company failed to timely report complaints.

The dismissal was based in part on the fact that the FDA had sent the
Company follow-up letters advising that the company had resolved all of
the issues of concern raised in the FDA Warning Letter.

"Vasca was confident that this matter would be successfully resolved
and we are pleased by the Court's order of dismissal," stated Tom
Glover, President and Chief Executive Officer of Vasca, Inc.  "Clinical
results with the LifeSite System continue to demonstrate that it is a
safe and effective alternative to standard hemodialysis catheters for
patients with end-stage renal disease."


VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: French Shareholder Group Commences Securities Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Vivendi Universal faces another securities class action, filed by
French association Association de Defense des Actionnaires Minoritaires
(ADAM), a group representing minority shareholders, in California
court.

The suit alleges irregularities in financial reporting at Vivendi at
the time when ousted CEO Jean-Marie Messier was buying up media assets
to turn the French water utility into an international multimedia
group, Reuters reports.  The suit is due to be examined on November 1,
according to Colette Neuville, the group's chairman.

The Company already faces several shareholder lawsuits which seek class
action status and accuse the company of the "publishing of false
information" and of "presentation of false balance sheets" during the
time when Messier ran up debts of 19 billion euros, precipitating a
cash squeeze at Vivendi last summer, according to a Reuters report.


WORLDCOM INC.: NY Comptroller Says New Allegations Will Strengthen Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
New York State Comptroller Carl McCall stated that the new allegations
of financial collusion and deception disclosed in the WorldCom class
action he filed last week will strengthen the case of shareholders and
bondholders trying to recoup billions of dollars lost as a result of
corporate wrongdoing by the telecommunications giant and its business
partners

"This web of wrongdoing is astounding and deeply disturbing," Mr.
McCall said in a statement.  "Participants in these schemes appear to
lack any ethical compass and are guided only by greed."

He added, "These allegations raise yet another example of corporate
coziness costing investors billions of dollars and they raise troubling
questions about the integrity of information investors receive.  These
allegations prove the need for better disclosure, stronger oversight
and other corporate reforms I've long advocated to restore credibility
and investor confidence in the markets."

Mr. McCall's complaint details allegations of fraud and negligence on
the part of former WorldCom Chief Executive Officer Bernard J. Ebbers
and other executives, Arthur Andersen, LLP, Salomon Smith Barney and
its lead telecommunications analyst Jack Grubman, Citigroup and
underwriter defendants in the case.  

The suit also includes new allegations that Mr. Ebbers received loans
totaling US$679 million from Travelers Insurance Company that tied his
financial interests more closely to those of Travelers Insurance/
Citigroup and which may have influenced Salomon's ratings of the stock.

"Our lawsuit alleges extraordinary fraud and negligence that permeated
the upper echelons of WorldCom and its business associates, and
ultimately caused the company to unravel," Mr. McCall asserts.  "The
innocent investors I represent paid dearly to support this corporate
greed, and I intend to ensure that they get paid back."

The suit notes that starting in the fall of 1999, Mr. Ebbers received
loans totaling US$679 million from Travelers Insurance, which is an
operating arm of Citigroup.  The loans, allegedly used in part to
purchase 460,000 acres of land in Alabama, Tennessee and Mississippi,
were allegedly backed by Mr. Ebbers' holdings in WorldCom stock rather
than being secured by the real estate purchased with the funds.

These loans by Travelers were made to Ebbers just months before Salomon
was selected by WorldCom to be lead underwriter for two bond offerings
worth US$17 billion.  As a result of this connection between these
loans and Mr. Ebbers' WorldCom stock, Citigroup had a US$679 million
interest in maintaining the price of WorldCom stock through its analyst
records.

Mr. McCall, lead plaintiff in the WorldCom suit, filed the class action
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York.  The lawsuit was in response to WorldCom overstating its earnings
by more than US$7.7 billion from April 1999 through June 2002.

Mr. McCall, sole trustee of the New York State Common Retirement Fund,
was appointed August 12 by a Manhattan Federal District judge to serve
as lead plaintiff in the WorldCom litigation.  "These latest
allegations regarding the conduct of Bernie Ebbers and those in the
securities industry with whom he was dealing are yet another blow to
the confidence of the average investor," Mr. McCall states.

The New York State Common Retirement Fund is responsible for leading
the prosecution of civil claims on behalf of all investors who
purchased WorldCom stocks and bonds over past several years.  The suit
alleges that the Company engaged in accounting violations that resulted
in overstating its income and earnings on the financial statements
thereby artificially inflating the value of its securities.

"It is absolutely essential that we get justice for the nearly one
million members of the New York State Pension Fund and the countless
others who lost their hard-earned savings as a result of the misdeeds
of a few," Mr. McCall said.  "These corporate officials who violated
the public trust at tremendous personal cost to untold families, must
be held accountable.  We must send a loud and clear message that
corporate abuse of the public trust will not go unpunished."

The Fund estimated that it lost more than US$300 million as a result of
the defendants alleged wrongdoing in the class period.  The Fund is
represented in the case by the law firms of Barrack, Rodos and Bacine
and Bernstein Litowitz, Berger and Grossman LLP.


                   New Securities Fraud Cases


BELLSOUTH CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. GA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel commenced a securities class action
in the United States District Court, Northern District of Georgia, on
behalf of purchasers of the securities of BellSouth Corporation (NYSE:
BLS) between January 22, 2001 and July 19, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint charges 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 materially false and misleading
statements to the market between January 22, 2001 and July 19, 2002,
thereby artificially inflating the price of Company securities.

According to the complaint, defendants reported quarter after quarter
of "record" financial results and financial growth despite a rapidly
deteriorating market for telecommunications companies.  However,
unbeknownst to the investing public:

     (1) the Company had been recognizing advertising and publishing
         revenues, purportedly in connection with the performance of
         services for customers who had not been billed (phantom
         customers), and that $163 million of this revenue was required
         to be reversed;

     (2) Generally Accepted Accounting Principles were violated because
         the transactions with "phantom customers" were not complete
         and there was not an "appropriate provision for uncollectible
         accounts."

On July 22, 2002, defendants revealed that the Company's earnings had
dropped by 67% for the second quarter of 2002, missing Wall Street
estimates.  The Company revealed that weak economic conditions in
Central and Latin America had been, and were continuing to have a
material, adverse impact on the Company's earnings and profitability.

In response to the Company's July 22, 2002 revelation, Company stock
dropped by more than 18% to $22 per share.  Company executives, privy
to the truth regarding the Company's financial condition, did not share
in these losses, having sold millions of dollars of Company stock.

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 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182    


CONCORD EFS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in W.D. TN
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Western District of
Tennessee on behalf of purchasers of Concord EFS, Inc. (NASDAQ: CEFT)
common stock during the period between October 30, 2001 and September
4, 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 an electronic transaction processor.  The complaint alleges
that during the class period, the Company and its top officers issued
false and misleading statements and concealed the truth about the
Company's results and business in order to allow Company stock to trade
at artificially inflated levels.

Defendants repeatedly misrepresented the strength of the Company's
operating performance and its ability to post 30%-35% earnings per
share growth in order to prop up the price of Company stock so that
defendants could complete acquisitions using Company stock as currency
and sell off 5.4 million of their own shares at prices as high $32.07
per share, for over $160 million in proceeds.

The truth, however was that the Company's business was not growing as
represented, but rather was suffering from increased costs and
declining margins.  The "record" growth and profits defendants reported
were phony, resulting from the inclusion of non-operating gains in its
results and the exclusion of operating expenses from its reported
results.  These manipulations allowed Concord to report favorable
results despite the fact that its business operations were not as
strong as represented.

Then, on September 5, 2002, Concord shocked the market with news that
its CEO was stepping down and that its 2002 and 2003 earnings would be
much lower than represented.  On this news, Concord's stock dropped to
$12.60 per share. Concord's stock price has fallen more than 60% from
its class period high of more than $35 per share.

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 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182    


CONSECO INC.: Wechsler Harwood Commences Securities Suit in S.D. IN
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Wechsler Harwood LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana on behalf
all persons who purchased or acquired Conseco, Inc. (NYSE:CNC)
(OTCBB:CNCE) securities between the period of October 30, 2001 and July
15, 2002, inclusive against the Company and certain of its officers and
directors.

The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors
with violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and rule 10b-5 of the Securities and Exchange Commission.  

Among other things, plaintiff claims that defendants disseminated a
series of materially false and misleading statements regarding problems
with the Company's liquidity and the Company's manufactured-homes
financing business.

The disclosure on the last day of the class period that the Company
would miss certain bond payments caused the price of Company stock to
drop 11.5%.  The suit charges that defendants were in possession of
materially adverse information about the Company's liquidity problems
and manufactured-homes financing business but failed to fully disclose
the information to investors, causing Conseco's stock price to become
artificially inflated, inflicting damages on investors.

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@whesq.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.whesq.com  


CORRPRO COMPANIES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in E.D. OH
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Ohio
against Corrpro Companies, Inc. (AMEX: CO) and certain of its officers
and directors.  The case was filed on behalf of all persons who
purchased the Company's common stock during the period April 1, 2000
through March 20, 2002 inclusive.

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 materially false and misleading
statements concerning the Company's financial results that had the
effect of artificially inflating the price of Corrpro common stock
during the class period.

Specifically, on March 20, 2002, Corrpro announced that it had
discovered accounting irregularities causing the Company's consolidated
operating income before taxes through December 31, 2001 to be inflated
by between $4.5 and $5.3 million.

In addition, the Company announced that as a result of these
"irregularities," it is expected to have to take a charge to pre-tax
earnings in the Company's fiscal fourth quarter ending March 31, 2002
of between $5.3 and $6.7 million.  The irregularities are alleged to
have occurred at the Company's Australian subsidiary and appear to date
back to at least calendar year 2000.  

The Company "expects" that it will have to restate its audited
financial statements for the March 31, 2001 fiscal year as well as
unaudited financial results for the first nine months through December
31, 2001 of its fiscal year ending March 31, 2002.

The Company also admitted that, due to the irregularities and likely
restatement, Corrpro will be in default under the financial covenants
of its senior secured credit agreement and its senior note facility.
Upon default, Corrpro's lenders may accelerate repayment of principal
which could have a material adverse impact on the Company's liquidity,
its financial position and/or its ability to operate as a going
concern.  The Company also announced that it had replaced its CFO, the
fourth CFO the Company had employed in the past three years.

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 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182    


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

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

For more details, contact 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 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182    


ELECTRONIC DATA: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities Suit in E.D. TX
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Texas, Sherman Division, on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of
Electronic Data Systems Corp. [NYSE: EDS] between September 7, 1999 and
September 24, 2002, 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.  Specifically, the complaint alleges
that defendants made misstatements of material facts and omitted to
state material facts in their public statements and elsewhere,
including:

     (1) failing to disclose that the Company's backbone revenue from
         its Information Solutions IT outsourcing business is highly
         susceptible to interruption due to terms in the Company's
         service contracts that enable its customers to unilaterally
         suspend discretionary spending on IT outsourcing,

     (2) affirmatively misrepresenting the predictability of its future
         cash flows by touting the anticipated revenue that EDS would
         supposedly receive from its IT outsourcing service contracts
         with customers without disclosing that payments under such
         contracts were not guaranteed, and

     (3) failing to disclose that EDS faced significant potential
         threats to its liquidity if its share price fell because of
         put-option and other obligations that ultimately obligated EDS
         to in effect buy back a total of 5.44 million shares of EDS
         stock at fixed prices averaging over $60.00 per share.

The complaint alleges that after Wall Street began to learn about the
foregoing on September 18, 2002 after executives of EDS warned that a
lack of new revenues would wipe out more than $0.60 per share of its Q3
earnings target of $0.74, the price of EDS stock plummeted to a 52-week
low of $20, down from a class period high of $72.45.

The complaint alleges that after further revelations regarding EDS's
put-option and other liabilities emerged in the wake of the foregoing
disclosures, EDS's share price tumbled even further, reaching an intra
day low of $10.09 on September 24, 2002.

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


FLEMING COMPANIES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in E.D. TX
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas,
Texarkana Division, on behalf of purchasers of Fleming Companies, Inc.
(NYSE: FLM) common stock during the period between February 27, 2002
and July 30, 2002, inclusive.  The action, is pending, against the
Company and:

     (1) Mark Hansen (CEO, Chairman),

     (2) Neal J. Rider (CFO) and

     (3) Thomas G. Dahlen (Executive FP, President of retail
         operations)

The complaint alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a), of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.  
Specifically, the suit alleges that beginning in early 2002, the
defendants issued numerous positive statements regarding the Company's
"price-impact" retail supermarket division.

These statements were made despite the fact that the defendants knew,
or recklessly disregarded, that the performance of the Company's
"price-impact" retail supermarket division was, in the words of the
defendants, "disappointing."

These statements falsely portrayed the Company's business prospects and
artificially inflated and maintained the price of its common stock.  
The defendants capitalized on their false and misleading statements by:

     (1) lowering the interest rate and extending the maturity on $250
         million of Fleming's debt;

     (2) raising over $155 million through the June 13, 2002 sale of 8
         million shares of Fleming common stock at $19.40 per share;

     (3) raising an additional $200 million through the June 13, 2002
         sale of Fleming Notes due 2010; and

     (4) using the proceeds of the June 13, 2002 securities sales to
         complete the purchase of Core-Mark International, Inc. and
         Head Distributing for $330 million in cash -- acquisitions
         described by the defendants as "key" to Fleming's
         implementation of its strategic transformation into an
         efficient, national, multi-tier supply chain for consumer
         packaged goods.

Then, approximately six weeks after defendants sold $355 million worth
of Fleming securities, Fleming announced after the close of trading on
July 30, 2002 in an abrupt departure to the repeated and positive
statements made by the defendants during the class period, that its
"price-impact" retail supermarket division was not only performing
poorly, but performing so poorly that Fleming was considering
abandoning this line of business entirely.

The price of Fleming common stock dramatically declined on this
announcement, falling from $15.21 on July 30, 2002 to $13.75 on July
31, 2002, on huge trading volume of 3.9 million shares, and continued
to decline over the next two heavy trading days to a 52-week low of
$10.76 on August 2, 2002.

Since then, the price of Fleming common stock has never recovered, and
currently trades well below the $19.40 price at which Fleming sold 8
million shares to unsuspecting investors on June 13, 2002.

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 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182    


HEALTHSOUTH CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in AL
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Alabama, on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Healthsouth
Corporation (NYSE: HRC) between January 14, 2002 and August 27, 2002
inclusive.  The action is pending against the Company and:

     (1) Richard M. Scrushy (CEO, Chairman),

     (2) Weston L. Smith (CFO, Executive VP),

     (3) William Owens (Chief Operating Officer) and

     (4) George Strong (director)

The complaint charges 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 materially false and misleading
statements to the market between January 14, 2002 and August 27, 2002.

According to the complaint, throughout the class period, the Company
issued press releases and filed reports with the SEC announcing
impressive revenue and earnings growth and repeatedly assuring the
market that the Company was well on its way to meeting its financial
targets for the year 2002 and that its fundamentals were strong.

According to the complaint, these and other statements were materially
false and misleading because they failed to disclose that the Centers
for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) had issued directives
reclassifying certain categories of reimbursements, which would have a
materially negative impact on the Company's business.

The suit further alleges that defendants failed to disclose these
facts, which had been known to them for many months, in order to allow
Mr. Scrushy and Mr. Strong to sell (collectively) millions of shares of
the Company's stock at artificially inflated prices and so that the
Company could commence a $998 million note exchange/offer on more
favorable terms than if the truth regarding the CMS directives and
their impact on the Company was known publicly.  

The note exchange/offering was commenced on August 27, 2002 -- one-day
before the Company disclosed the negative developments for the first
time.  According to the complaint, on August 27, 2002, the Company
shocked the market by issuing a press release announcing that CMS
directives issued on July 1, 2002 concerning reimbursements may result
in a $175 million shortfall in EBITDA from previously issued financial
guidance for 2002 and that it could not provide further guidance for
2002 and 2003 because of uncertainties posed by the directives.

In addition, the Company announced that it would spin-off its surgery-
center division as part of a massive restructuring undertaken to deal
with the developments and that Mr. Scrushy would be replaced as CEO by
Mr. Owens.

In response to this disclosure, Company stock plummeted by over 43% to
close at $6.71 per share in a single day on extremely high trading
volume.

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 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182    


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, 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 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 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182    


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
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 the Company's 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 July 2001 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 2002, (before the market opened), ICN preannounced 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, 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 Ave.,
Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735
by Fax: 610-660-8080 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182    


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 action, 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
Insight'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
Insight 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, Insight, 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 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182    


MERRILL LYNCH: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP initiated a securities class action against
Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., and Internet stock analyst and First Vice
President of Merrill Lynch, Henry Blodget, in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all
persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the common
stock of Exodus Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: EXDS) between December 8,
1999 and June 19, 2001 inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities
laws by issuing analyst reports regarding Exodus that recommended the
purchase of Exodus common stock and which set price targets for Exodus
common stock, without any reasonable factual basis.

Furthermore, when issuing their Exodus analyst reports, the defendants
failed to disclose significant, material conflicts of interest which
they had, in light of their use of Mr. Blodget's reputation and
defendants' Exodus analyst reports, to obtain investment banking
business for Merrill Lynch.

Furthermore, in issuing their Exodus analyst reports, in which they
were recommending the purchase of Exodus common stock, the defendants
failed to disclose material, non-public, adverse information which they
possessed about Exodus.

Throughout the class period, the defendants maintained "BUY/BUY"
recommendation on Exodus in order to obtain and support lucrative
financial deals for Merrill Lynch.  As a result of Defendants' false
and misleading analyst reports, Exodus common stock traded at
artificially inflated levels during the class period.

For more details, contact Robert N. Kaplan, Frederic S. Fox or Donald
R. Hall by Mail: 805 Third Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10022 by
Phone: 800-290-1952 by E-mail: mail@kaplanfox.com


MERRILL LYNCH: Schatz & Nobel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in NY
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Schatz & Nobel, PC 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 or otherwise acquired the common stock of
Exodus Communications, Inc. (formerly Nasdaq: EXDS; currently OTC
Bulletin Board: EXDSQ) from December 8, 1999 through June 19, 2001,
inclusive.  Also included are those who acquired Exodus' shares through
its acquisitions of Keylabs Inc., Mirror Image or GlobalCenter Group,
Inc.

The suit alleges that Merrill Lynch and its well-known Internet stock
analyst Henry Blodget violated the federal securities laws by knowingly
issuing false and misleading analyst reports regarding Exodus during
the class period.

Based on e-mails and other internal Merrill Lynch communications, which
were made public as a result of the investigation conducted by the New
York State Attorney General, the suit alleges that defendants' failed
to disclose a significant conflict of interest between their investment
banking and research departments.

Specifically, Henry Blodget and other Merrill Lynch analysts issued
favorable analyst reports regarding Exodus to the public when they
allegedly knew that positive recommendations were unwarranted.
Unbeknownst to the investing public, Merrill Lynch's buy
recommendations and price targets for Exodus were influenced by its
efforts to attract lucrative investment banking business from Exodus
and other internet companies.

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


MERRILL LYNCH: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York against Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., and Internet stock analyst and
First Vice President of Merrill Lynch, Henry Bloget, on behalf of all
persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the common
stock of Internet Capital Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: ICGE) between August 30,
1999 and November 8, 2000, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that the defendants violated the federal
securities laws by issuing analyst reports regarding ICGE that
recommended the purchase of ICGE common stock and which set price
targets for ICGE common stock, which were materially false and
misleading and lacked any reasonable factual basis.

The complaint further alleges that, when issuing their ICGE analyst
reports, the Defendants failed to disclose significant, material
conflicts of interest, which resulted from their use of Mr. Blodget's
reputation and his ability to issue favorable analyst reports, to
obtain investment banking business for Merrill Lynch.

Furthermore, in issuing their ICGE analyst reports, in which they
recommended the purchase of ICGE stock, the Defendants failed to
disclose material, non-public, adverse information they possessed about
ICGE.

Throughout the class period, the Defendants maintained an
``ACCUMULATE/BUY'' recommendation on ICGE in order to obtain and
support lucrative financial deals for Merrill Lynch.  As a result of
defendants' false and misleading analyst reports, ICGE's common stock
traded at artificially inflated levels during the class period.

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 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182    


MERRILL LYNCH: Wolf Haldenstein Commences Securities 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 all purchasers of Merrill Lynch Global Technology
Fund shares, of all four share classes (Symbols: MAGTX thorough MDGTX)
from October 2, 1999 through October 1, 2002, inclusive against Merrill
Lynch & Co., Inc., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., Merrill
Lynch Global Technology Fund, Inc., and others for violations of
Sections 11, 12 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and of the
Investment Company Act of 1940.

The defendants were:

     (1) the underwriters for the common stock of certain of the
         companies in the Global Technology Fund's portfolio;

     (2) the investment bankers and corporate finance specialists for
         certain of the companies whose securities are in the Fund's
         portfolio;

     (3) seeking to obtain additional investment banking business from
         these present and former clients and from other companies
         whose shares also were/are in the Fund's portfolio;

     (4) the issuers of the shares in the Fund;

     (5) preparing and publicly disseminating research reports and
         recommendations on many of the companies whose shares were in
         the Fund's portfolio; and

     (6) the broker for certain members of the class.

This action arises as a result of the issuance by the defendants of
shares in the Fund, and concerns material misstatements and omissions
by defendants in the Prospectus, relating to defendants' conflicts of
interest, which include but are not limited to the following:

     (i) defendants failed to disclose and omitted material information
         that Merrill Lynch had had investment banking relationships
         with, including having brought public, certain of the
         companies whose securities were part of the Fund's portfolio.
         Defendants disclosed neither this general fact nor the
         identities of the particular companies with which it had
         investment banking relationships;

    (ii) defendants failed to disclose and omitted material information
         concerning that Merrill Lynch was continuing to seek
         investment banking relationships with many of the companies
         whose securities were part of the Fund's portfolio; and

   (iii) defendants failed to disclose and omitted material information
         concerning that a material part of the total compensation paid
         to Merrill Lynch research analysts was based upon obtaining
         investment banking business for Merrill Lynch and not upon the
         accuracy of their research about a given company.  

Hence, Merrill Lynch and its affiliated companies including the Fund
recommended investments in and/or invested in companies in order to
enhance Merrill Lynch's opportunity to obtain investment banking
business from those companies (without regard to whether they were good
investments for the investors including plaintiffs and the Class).

For more details, contact George Peters, Derek Behnke, Robert B.
Weintraub or Daniel W. Krasner 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. E-mail should refer  
to Merrill Lynch Global Technology Fund.


NICOR INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. IL
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois against Nicor Inc. (NYSE: GAS) and two of the Company's senior
officers on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired the
securities of the Company during the period from January 24, 2002
through July 18, 2002, inclusive.

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

After the market closed on July 18, 2002, the Company issued a press
release announcing it may restate prior results in response to
improprieties at its gas business.  The Company indicated that the
Illinois Commerce Commission and other governmental agencies are
investigating allegations that the gas distribution business acted
improperly in connection with a performance-based rate program.

Also according to the press release, reported results for the six
months ended June 30, 2002 were negatively impacted by accounting
irregularities at a retail energy marketing joint venture which is 50%
owned by the Company and 50% owned by Dynegy Inc.

For more details, contact 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 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182    


QUADRAMED CORPORATION: 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 QuadraMed Corporation (NASDAQ:
QMDCE) publicly traded securities during the period between May 11,
2000 and August 11, 2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The
Compnay is a healthcare information and technology company that
provides software solutions and consulting services to hospitals and
medical providers to meet their medical records, business and
compliance needs.

On August 12, 2002, the Company issued a press release entitled,
"QuadraMed to File For Extension For Form 10-Q."  The press release
stated in part: "QuadraMed Corporation announced today that it will
file with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") for an
automatic 5-day extension of the deadline for submitting its second
quarter 2002 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. The Company will use the
additional five calendar days to complete a restatement of its
consolidated financial statements for the fiscal years ended December
31, 2000, 2001, and for the interim period ended March 31, 2002."

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 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182    


SALOMON SMITH: Stull Stull Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Stull Stull & Brody LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on
behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Metromedia Fibre Network,
Inc. (NASDAQ:MFNXQ) between November 25, 1997 and July 25, 2001,
inclusive, against Salomon Smith Barney, Inc. and its star
telecommunication research analyst, Jack Grubman.

The complaint alleges that Salomon and Mr. Grubman urged investors to
purchase Metromedia Fibre stock when defendants knew or should have
known that such purchases were not a good investment.  The complaint
alleges that defendants:

     (1) issued "Buy" recommendations about Metromedia Fibre without
         any rational economic basis;

     (2) failed to disclose that they were issuing "Buy"
         recommendations to obtain investment banking business; and

     (3) concealed significant, material conflicts of interests that
         prevented them from providing independent objective analysis.

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


TELLABS INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. IL
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Tellabs, Inc.
(NASDAQ: TLAB) between December 11, 2000 and June 19, 2001 inclusive.  
The action, is pending against the Company and:

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

     (2) Michael J. Birck (Chairman).

The complaint charges 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 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 its new
products were enjoying strong demand, that the seeming slowdown in its
business was due to "component-parts shortages which have been
corrected" and that 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, its new
optical networking line of products were inferior to the competition
and their products were not well-received or in high demand.

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

On June 19, 2002, Tellabs 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 Tellabs' 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 Tellabs common
stock at prices between $64.25 to $65.38 per share, grossing proceeds
of more than $5.18 million.

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 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182    


TXU CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit in N.D. TX
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Texas on behalf of purchasers of TXU Corp. (NYSE:TXU) publicly traded
securities during the period between April 25, 2002 and October 11,
2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The
Company provides electric and natural gas services, merchant energy
trading, energy marketing, telecommunications and energy-related
services.

The complaint alleges that during the class period, defendants
represented that the Company could succeed in the competition created
by deregulation.  Defendants then represented that the Company's
European operations were improving, it would succeed competition in the
U.K. market and it was on track to report EPS of $4.35+ and $4.60+ in
2002 and 2003, respectively.  As a result of these allegedly false
statements, TXU's stock traded at artificially inflated levels, as high
as $56 per share.

Due to this inflation, defendants were able to complete a secondary
offering of 11.8 million shares of common stock, priced at $51.15 per
share and 8.8 million units of FELINE PRIDES (equity linked debt
securities), raising nearly a billion dollars in much needed financing.
Subsequent to the offering, defendants needed to maintain a high stock
price to avoid triggering additional debt and the conversion of
preferred stock into common stock pursuant to a partnership agreement.

On October 4, 2002, the Company issued an earnings warning, indicating
that due to customer attrition and ongoing problems in Europe the
Company would report 2002 EPS of only $3.25. On this news, the
Company's stock price declined to $27 per share, from more than $40 per
share the prior week.  However, the stock continued to be inflated as
defendants concealed the extreme liquidity problems from which the
Company was suffering. Defendants even assured the market that the
Company was strong financially and that the dividend was "sound and
secure."

Then, before the market opened, TXU stunned the market with news that
it was cutting its dividend 80%, to $0.125 per share and would no
longer support its European operations. The Company's stock price
immediately collapsed on this news to as low as $10.10 per share before
closing at $12.94, a one day drop of 31%, on volume of 39 million
shares.

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


WORLDCOM INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York, on behalf of persons who purchased, converted, exchanged or
otherwise acquired the common stock of WorldCom, Inc. (NASDAQ: WCOM)
between January 3, 2000 and April 29, 2002, inclusive, against the
Company and:

     (1) Bernard J. Ebbers, President and Chief Executive Officer,

     (2) James C. Allen,

     (3) Max E. Bobbitt,

     (4) Francisco Galesi, and

     (5) Arthur Andersen, LLP

The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated by the SEC
thereunder, as well as pendant state law claims for fraud, negligent
misrepresentation, and intentional deceit and seeks to recover damages.  
The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities
laws by making misrepresentations and/or omissions in connection with
false and/or misleading financial statements.

The complaint specifically alleges that defendants misrepresented the
Company's earnings in its public filings with the SEC and elsewhere as
a result of failing to record write-downs of goodwill and other
intangible assets associated with the Company's acquisition of numerous
telecommunications companies at premium prices.

The complaint further alleges that defendants affirmatively misstated
the value of goodwill and other intangible assets associated with
WorldCom's acquisition of numerous telecommunications companies at
premium prices and carrying such assets on the Company's balance sheet
at the cost of acquiring them long after it had become apparent that
WorldCom had overpaid to acquire such assets.

Additionally, defendants failed to disclose that WorldCom's goodwill
and other intangible assets associated with WorldCom's acquisitions of
numerous telecommunications companies at premium prices were being
carried at unrealistically and misleadingly high values on WorldCom's
balance sheet.

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 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182    


                              *********


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  * * *