CAR_Public/021104.mbx                C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

               Monday, November 4, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 218

                            Headlines

AVENUE A: Agrees To Settle Federal and State Suits Over Privacy in WA
CANADA: Retired Ontario Civil Servants File Suit Over Medical Benefits
DEUTSCHE TELEKOM: NY Court Grants Certification to Securities Lawsuit
DYNEGY INC.: UC Board of Regents Appointed Lead Plaintiff in Lawsuits
FUJITSU COMPUTER: Sued Over Mishandling of 300T Faulty Hard Disk Drives

LINK IT: Hypertouch Inc. Sues Over Unsolicited Advertisements in CA
MAINE: Nursing Director Testifies in Hearings Over AMHI Consent Decree
MASCO CORPORATION: Homeowners to Receive $107M in Mold Suit Settlement
NEW JERSEY: Passaic County Detainees Complain of Inhumane Conditions
TYSON FOODS: IL Court Dismisses Suit Over Illegal Hiring of Immigrants

                     New Securities Fraud Cases

AMERICAN ELECTRIC: Strauss & Troy Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in OH
AMERICAN ELECTRIC: Cauley Geller Commences Securities Suit in S.D. OH
AMERICAN ELECTRIC: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Securities Suit in OH
AES CORPORATION: Cauley Geller Files Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA
AES CORPORATION: Wechsler Harwood Commences Securities Suit in E.D. VA

ASIA GLOBAL: Stull Stull Commences Securities Fraud Lawsuit in C.D. CA
CIGNA CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. PA
CIGNA CORPORATION: Abbey Gardy Commences Securities Fraud Suit in PA
COMERICA INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. MI
CREDIT SUISSE: Rabin & Peckel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in NY

CREDIT SUISSE: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
DPL INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Lawsuit in S.D. OH
ELECTRONIC DATA: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
ESS TECHNOLOGY: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA
KINDRED HEALTHCARE: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in W.D. KY

METRIS COMPANIES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MN
QUADRAMED CORPORATION: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
RETEK INC.: Fruchter & Twersky Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MN
RETEK INC.: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MN Court
RIVERSTONE NETWORKS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA

SALOMON SMITH: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
SEARS ROEBUCK: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. IL
ST. PAUL: Kirby McInerney Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MN Court
TXU CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. TX
TXU CORPORATION: Berger & Montague Commences Securities Suit in N.D. TX

                           *********

AVENUE A: Agrees To Settle Federal and State Suits Over Privacy in WA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Avenue A, Inc. (Nasdaq: AVEA) and the plaintiffs' class counsel reached
an agreement to settle all the federal and state class action privacy
litigation against the Company.  In the agreement, the Company commits
to a series of industry-leading privacy protections for online
consumers while continuing to offer its full range of products and
services.

The settlement agreement will result in the dismissal of the federal
and state class action privacy lawsuits that were filed against the
Company starting in November 2000.  The Court set a final approval
hearing for March 6, 2003 in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Washington.

As part of this agreement, the Company has agreed to adhere for the
next two years to these practices and policies:

     (1) Clear Notice: Avenue A's privacy policy will include easy-to-
         understand explanations of its online ad serving services;

     (2) Enhanced Choice: If Avenue A collects and uses personally
         identifiable information, previously collected anonymous data
         obtained by Avenue A from across web sites can only be
         combined and used with the personally identifiable information
         after the provision of clear and conspicuous notice to the
         Internet user and receipt of the Internet user's opt-in
         choice;

     (3) Consumer Education: Avenue A will undertake a consumer
         education effort, funded by its insurer, which includes 100
         million consumer privacy banner ads that invite consumers to
         learn more about how to protect their online privacy;

     (4) Consistency: Avenue A will ensure that an Internet user's
         online data will not be used in a manner materially
         inconsistent with the privacy policy under which it was
         collected, unless the consumer has given permission to do
         otherwise;

     (5) Purging of Data and Cookie Life: Avenue A will institute
         internal policies to ensure the protection and routine purging
         of data collected online.  Avenue A has also agreed to limit
         to five years the life of new ad serving cookies;

     (6) Settlement Compliance: For the next two years, a nationally
         recognized independent accounting firm will conduct annual
         reviews of Avenue A's compliance with specified terms of the
         settlement, expanding on the company's current auditing
         program.

For more details, contact Jeffrey J. Miller of Avenue A, Inc. by Phone:
1-206-816-8346 or William J. Doyle II of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes &
Lerach LLP by Phone: 1-619-231-1058 or visit the Website:
http://www.avenueainc.com/privacy/settlement


CANADA: Retired Ontario Civil Servants File Suit Over Medical Benefits
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A group of retired Ontario civil servants today launched a class action
suit against the Ontario government for severely cutting back their
health, hospital and dental benefits.

In a statement of claim filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice,
the employees claim that the cutback in their benefits violated their
rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms because it
"disproportionately impacted the retirees as a result of their age" and
it also constituted a breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty.

The retirees are asking for damages "in an amount to be determined" and
for $ 1 million in punitive damages.  They will be asking the court to
certify the suit as a class proceeding and to appoint retiree Barbara
Kranjcec as the representative for the class.

Ms Kranjcec, 63, of Mississauga, Ontario, was a government employee for
over 25 years.  She retired in August 1993 from the position of
Supervisor, Medical Claims, at the Ontario Health Insurance Program.

Ms Kranjcec suffers from various disabilities that include ataxia,
which causes her a speech impediment and difficulty with her balance
for which she uses a wheelchair.  She also suffers from hypothyroidism,
asthma and eczema.  She suffered from these conditions prior to her
retirement and used a walker while still at work.

The benefit cutbacks include:

     (1) $100 annual deductible for all dental services,

     (2) Extending dental recall for examination from 6 to 9 months, a
         reduction in claims coverage,

     (3) A $100 Reimbursement for only the lowest priced generic
         equivalent drugs, requiring the retiree to pay any difference
         between the generic and brand name drug,

     (4) Elimination of coverage of over the counter (non-prescription)
         drugs,

     (5) Introducing a per prescription deductible of $3 effective
         January 1, 2003, to be raised to $5 per prescription in 2004,

     (6) Eliminating out-of-country medical coverage,

The retirees were informed of the cutbacks by a memorandum from the
Government's Management Board Secretariat that justified the reduction
on the grounds that benefits for retirees must be the same as benefits
negotiated between the Government and the Ontario Public Service
Employees Union.

The Statement of Claim notes that on or about 1974 the Government
outlined the benefits in "A Guide to your Benefits after Retirement,"
distributed to all employees and retirees.  It does not contain any
terms allowing the government to reduce or eliminate a retiree's
benefits during his or her retirement.

The Statement of Claim outlines the serious impact of the benefit
reduction on the retirees.  Ms Kranjcec has been unable to afford to
attend to her most recent dental cleaning, has been unable to afford
the cost of arm braces that she needs to stabilize her arms and
minimize the pain that she periodically experiences.  She must also now
pay for Tylenol and other over-the-counter drugs that were previously
covered.

"The Retirees plead that the retiree benefits as set out in the Plan
became a fundamental term of their employment and retirement . The
benefits constituted deferred compensation for their employment
service," the Statement of Claim says.

It notes that the retirees were "in no position to negotiate" since
they are no longer active employees and that they "were also
particularly vulnerable as a result of their advanced age and
susceptibility to health problems, and their limited capacity to
increase financial burdens as a result of their retired status."

For further information, contact Paul Cavalluzzo by Phone:
416-964-5500


DEUTSCHE TELEKOM: NY Court Grants Certification to Securities Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
granted class action status to a securities class action filed against
German telecommunications company Deutsche Telekom AG on behalf of
purchasers of the Company's American Depository Shares (ADSs) from June
19, 2000 through February 21, 2001, Reuters reported.

The suit alleges that the Company made false and misleading statements
in its prospectus to offer shares, in violation of federal securities
laws.  The Company allegedly made false and misleading statements in
its prospectus and registration when it filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on May 22, 2000, to offer 45 million ADRS for sale.

The lead shareholder, represented by law firm Milberg Weiss Bershad
Hynes & Lerach, alleges the telecommunications company failed to
disclose its planned purchase of wireless service provider VoiceStream,
which ultimately helped drive down shares, according to court
documents, Reuters reports.

The suit also accuses Deutsche Telekom of concealing the over-valuation
of its real estate portfolio, which later would prompt the company to
announce in February 2001 it would take a charge of 2 billion euros, or
$1.8 billion, for a special write-down for land values.

Deutsche Telekom could not be reached for comment, according to
Reuters.


DYNEGY INC.: UC Board of Regents Appointed Lead Plaintiff in Lawsuits
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court in Texas appointed The University of
California's board of regents to be the lead plaintiff in the
securities class action pending against energy firm Dynegy, Inc, the
Houston Chronicle reports.  William Lerach of prominent law firm
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, LLP was also appointed lead
counsel.

Several suits were filed against the Company and certain of its
officers and directors on behalf of purchasers of the Company's
publicly traded securities during the period between April 17, 2001 and
April 24, 2002, in June 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 the Company and its top officers inflated the
price of the Company's stock in order to pursue an accelerated
securities sale program.

Judge Sim Lake stated in his order that the board was best suited to
serve as lead plaintiff because it has the largest financial interest.
The board estimates stock losses of $113 million between Nov. 1, 2000,
and May 7, 2002, the Houston Chronicle reports.

"The University of California will shoulder its responsibility as lead
plaintiff with the deepest sense of obligation to the UC family of
employees, retirees and students and to the millions of shareholders
who placed their trust in Dynegy," James E. Holst, the university's
general counsel, said in a prepared statement.

John Sousa, a spokesman for Dynegy, told the Chronicle the news was
anticipated and that the company would defend itself against the
lawsuit.

In a related matter, Lake designated law firms Keller Rohrback of
Seattle and Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld and Toll of Washington, D.C., as
co-lead counsel in consolidated cases alleging losses to Dynegy
employment retirement plans.  The local law firm of Campbell, Harrison
and Dagley will serve as liaison counsel.


FUJITSU COMPUTER: Sued Over Mishandling of 300T Faulty Hard Disk Drives
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fujitsu Computer Products US faces a class action filed in the Superior
Court of the State of California, alleging that the Company mishandled
the replacement/recall of up to 300,000 faulty hard disk drives, The
Register reports.  The suit also names as defendants Hewlett Packard
(whose Pavilion 7845, the suit alleges, suffered multiple failures due
to the problem) and up to 100 other (currently unknown) defendants.

The suit alleges that the Company and HP knew MPG3xx series of HDDs but
continued to say they were of satisfactory quality, and failed to warn
customers of their inherent faults or of the need to be vigilant about
backing up data.  The two defendants allegedly refused to repair the
problem, and instead replaced faulty drives faulty drives still under
guarantee and then offering only similar drives, which might also be
subject to failure.

Keith Warburton, executive director at UK system builders trade
organization the PC Association, told the Register that the case might
also affect UK system builders, who might find themselves named in
further lawsuits.

"Class actions are not a feature of the UK, or indeed many other
European legal systems, however there are thousands of disgruntled
users within the EU who'll be watching developments in California with
interest," he warns in a letter to UK system builders.  Mr. Warburton
tells his members that if system builders fail to act they'll be
leaving themselves "wide open" to lawsuits, particularly if the US
class action succeeds.


LINK IT: Hypertouch Inc. Sues Over Unsolicited Advertisements in CA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Southern California based company Link It Software Corporation faces a
class action filed in San Mateo County Superior Court by Redwood City
based Hypertouch, Inc., the first Internet Service Provider (ISP) in
California to sue under the state's tough anti-spamming statute.

The suit alleges that Link It violated Business and Professions Code
statute 17538.45 by sending Hypertouch and its customers unwanted and
unsolicited electronic mail advertisements.  The lawsuit also alleges
trespassing and unfair business practices.

Link It Software failed to use the letters "ADV" in the subject line as
required by law, class action legal expert and attorney for the
plaintiffs John Fallat explained.  The products and services advertised
by the unsolicited e-mails include:

     (1) software packages EZ Maintenance and Job Master,

     (2) distributorships for said software packages,

     (3) offers of consumer "bad Credit" file "replacement," and

     (4) offers to provide bulk e-mail services

The lawsuit seeks $50 per violating e-mail, as provided under the
statute, and unspecified other damages to be determined at trial.  Any
money recovered by Hypertouch from the legal action will be donated to
non-profit organizations that provide the homeless and unemployed with
computer office skills training.

"It is not just a matter of deleting offending emails," says Hypertouch
President and Founder Joe Wagner.  "The volume of spam e-mails is
beginning to choke the Internet and slow down service provided by ISPs
such as Hypertouch."

"Our goal in this suit is to punish unrepentant spammers," said Mr.
Fallat, and "to send a message to other would-be spammers that they can
expect California to deal harshly with those who thumb their noses at
the law."

For more details, contact John Fallat by Phone: 415-457-3773 or visit
the firm's Website: http://legal.hypertouch.com


MAINE: Nursing Director Testifies in Hearings Over AMHI Consent Decree
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Director of Nursing at the Augusta Mental Health Institute (AMHI)
Kathleen Whitzell testified before the Kennebec County Superior Court,
saying that she had found errors in AMHI's dispensing of medication,
but said that many services at the hospital often result in excellent
care, the KJ and Sentinel Online reports.

The court is trying to determine whether the state has met the
requirements of a consent decree established in 1990, as a result of a
class action that alleged that the AMHI was providing inadequate care
for the patients.

Under the terms of the decree, the state must prove "substantial
compliance" in addressing the grievances.  The state is seeking to
persuade the judge to lift court control of much of the state's adult
mental health system.

Ms. Whitzell testified that she and other hospital officials recorded
unrealistically low medication error rates.  Following studies of
problems with drugs dispensed at the hospital, she said many more
medication errors were discovered, the KJ and Sentinel Online reports.

"The way we were compiling the errors, perhaps we were not getting a
true picture," she stated.  However, she added that safeguards have
been implemented to reduce future errors.

Lawyers for the more than 3,000 plaintiffs assert that steps to reduce
medication errors and to address other problems at the state hospital
were not completed by Jan. 25.  They questioned Whitzell about
medication problems, about large numbers of patient grievances, the
accuracy of documents detailing patient counseling by nurses, reasons
for cancellation of medical and other appointments in the hospital, and
the use of seclusion and restraint at AMHI, the KJ and Sentinel Online
reports.


MASCO CORPORATION: Homeowners to Receive $107M in Mold Suit Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Homeowners who coated their houses, decks and fences with Masco
Corporation's Behr stains and wood sealant, will receive nearly
US$107.5 million in settlement of claims that the product failed to
protect wood from mildew and other weather-related damage, and promoted
mold growth, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports.  An additional $55
million may be granted to about 5,000 homeowners in Western Washington
who used four specific products.

The Company reached the nationwide settlement this week, and a
California court has tentatively approved the settlement in the class
action, which covers homeowners nationwide.

"It didn't do what it was supposed to do.  We followed all the
directions because we wanted to preserve the deck, the beautiful color
and everything," Marge Oswald of Arnold, Calif., one of the named
plaintiffs in the suit, told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

A representative for the company declined to comment beyond a corporate
statement released yesterday.  "All claims relating to the products
would be dismissed without any admission of liability or wrongdoing
following final court approval of the settlements," the statement says.

The national class action arose from a smaller suit filed in Western
Washington in 1998.  According to court documents, the chemical company
that makes the mildew-killing poison Behr used in its stain warned
against using the poison in products that also use raw linseed oil.
Behr advertised its product highlighting the use of linseed oil,
however lawyers revealed that linseed oil actually feeds mildew,
promoting its spread, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports.

Behr made several products under this nationwide claim, Natural Seal
Plus 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 92, 31-79, 31-81, 31-82, 31-83, 31-84, 31-
92 and 92, and Super Liquid Raw-Hide 12, 13, 31-12 and 31-13. Nearly 90
percent of the product was sold through Home Depot stores nationwide
since Jan. 1, 1991.

For more information, contact the Company by Phone: 1-877-637-5997 or
visit the firm's Website: http://www.behrsettlement.com


NEW JERSEY: Passaic County Detainees Complain of Inhumane Conditions
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Several immigration detainees from the Passaic County Jail in New
Jersey released a statement saying the jail was crowded and unclean,
NorthJersey.com reports.

The statement, released by a coalition of rights groups, described a
roach-infested jail with pods in which more than 40 people were
crammed.  The statement asserts that crowding had triggered "numerous
altercations."  Detainees also complained about substandard food, poor
health care, and limited access to social services.

The jail holds detainees under contract from the United States
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS).  Those held include
convicted criminals awaiting deportation, and others - mostly Arab,
South Asian, and Muslim men - arrested as part of the terrorism
investigation and held on routine immigration violations,
NorthJersey.com reports.

"The living conditions here, we strongly feel, do not meet the
standards for human habitation," the statement said.

The statement was released through a coalition of more than a dozen
groups, including the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee,
Council on American-Islamic Relations, Jews for Racial and Economic
Justice, and the Latino Workers Center.

Passaic County and INS officials disputed the charges, and stressed
that the detainees are held in humane conditions.  "The Passaic County
Jail meets all federal, state, and local laws and guidelines," Bill
Maer, a spokesman for the county Sheriff's Department, which oversees
the jail told NorthJersey.com.  "A significant amount of resources are
spent for the upkeep of the facility, including extermination.  Though
certainly conditions may not be perfect in a 50-year-old facility, but
the administrator works to make sure that the detainees are kept in a
humane environment."

INS officials in Newark said that an annual, unannounced inspection
they conducted last week found the jail to be satisfactory.  INS
spokesman Kerry Gill said that during the inspection, detainees told
the agency officers about roaches and poor-quality food, but that the
inspectors found no evidence to back up the complaints.

"When the INS asked them to back up these allegations, they were unable
to do so," Mr. Gill said.  "They didn't find evidence that the
detainees had been denied medical care and social services. In general,
the INS found the facility to be clean, and the food to be quite
satisfactory in terms of quality and quantity."

Members of the coalition expressed skepticism about the depictions of
jail conditions as satisfactory.  Sarah Eisenstein, of the Jews for
Racial and Economic Justice, told NorthJersey.com "This is a statement
about conditions straight from 75 people in this jail.  That itself is
pretty clear evidence."

In April, the Center for Constitutional Rights filed a class action
suit in federal court in Brooklyn, saying that post-Sept. 11 detainees
were routinely beaten, deprived of sleep, and isolated.  The suit
focuses on conditions at the Passaic County Jail and the Metropolitan
Detention Center in Brooklyn.


TYSON FOODS: IL Court Dismisses Suit Over Illegal Hiring of Immigrants
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois
dismissed a class action filed against Tyson Foods, Inc.'s IBP meat
packing unit, alleging that the Company reduced wages by hiring illegal
immigrants.  This allegedly allowed the company to start workers at
about $4 an hours less than the set starting wages, Reuters reports.

A ruling by Judge Michael Mihm stated that the court lacks jurisdiction
in the case since wages at IBP's Joslin, Illinois, beef plant are
governed by a collective bargaining agreement between the company and a
labor union, Tyson said in a statement.

"Our company works hard to hire responsibly, to make sure our team
members are legally documented and are fairly compensated," said Ken
Kimbro, Tyson's senior vice president of human resources, in the
statement.

In July, a Tennessee judge dismissed a separate lawsuit against Tyson
that also alleged the company depressed wages by hiring illegal
immigrants, Reuters states.

In yet another case involving illegal immigrants, federal charges,
filed in December of last year, are still pending against Tyson, the
company said.  In that case, in which Tyson has entered not guilty
pleas, two Tyson executives and four former managers were indicted on
charges of allegedly smuggling in illegal immigrants to work in Tyson
plants, Reuters reports.

                     New Securities Fraud Cases

AMERICAN ELECTRIC: Strauss & Troy Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in OH
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Strauss & Troy initiated a securities class action in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, on behalf of all
persons who purchased the common stock of American Electric Power Co.,
Inc. (AEP) (NYSE: AEP) between May 17, 1999, and October 9, 2002.

The complaint alleges that the Company and certain of its officers,
directors and three underwriters violated Sections 11 and 15 of the
Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing materially false and misleading
statements during the class period.

The complaint alleges that the Company's trading operations were in
disarray and its management controls left the company at risk of
contingent legal liabilities arising out of the actions of its electric
power traders.  The Company, after first denying it engaged in
activities referred to as "wash" or "round-trip" trading later admitted
to engaging in such trades.

On August 30, 2002 AEP revealed that the SEC had initiated an informal
inquiry into its trading practices and on October 9, 2002 disclosed
that it had fired five employees for reporting inaccurate price
information.  As a result of this disclosure AEP's shares tumbled to a
52-week low.

For more details, contact Richard S. Wayne, William K. Flynn, or Joseph
Braun by Mail: 150 East Fourth Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 by Phone:
800-669-9341 or 513-621-2120 or by E-mail: classactions@strauss-
troy.com.


AMERICAN ELECTRIC: Cauley Geller Commences Securities Suit in S.D. OH
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio,
Eastern Division on behalf of purchasers of American Electric Power
Company, Inc. (NYSE: AEP) publicly traded securities during the period
between May 17, 1999 and October 9, 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 made misstatements
of material facts and omitted to state material facts in their public
statements and elsewhere, including:

     (1) failing to disclose that AEP was engaging in electricity
         trades involving transactions involving sequential trades with
         the same terms and counter parties;

     (2) overstating AEP's revenues in its SEC filings and elsewhere by
         including in such revenues sums received in connection with
         such sequential trades with the same terms and counter
         parties; and

     (3) failing to disclose that AEP's traders were falsely reporting
         energy prices to Platt's, which publishes energy market
         reports regarding power trading prices and volumes.

The complaint alleges that after Wall Street learned about widespread
practices in the power industry regarding so-called "round-trip" trades
and AEP admitted to having engaged in transactions involving sequential
trades with the same terms and counter parties, AEP stock tumbled to as
low as $22.74 following an earnings warning on July 18th, down 53% from
a 52-week high of $48.90.

The complaint alleges that following a disclosure on October 9th that
five AEP traders had been dismissed for reporting false and misleading
price information for use in indexes compiled by trade publications,
shares of AEP further declined to a 52-week low of $15.10.

The complaint further alleges that defendants Goldman Sachs & Co., J.P.
Morgan Securities, Inc. and Salomon Smith Barney Inc. violated Section
11 of the Securities Act in connection with misstatements and omissions
of material fact contained in the Prospectus for a secondary offering
of AEP stock in June 2002, of which they served as joint book-running
managers.

For more details, contact Jackie Addison, Heather Gann or Sue Null by
Mail: P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock, AR 72221-5438 by Phone: 888-551-9944
by E-mail: info@cauleygeller.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.cauleygeller.com


AMERICAN ELECTRIC: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Securities Suit in OH
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern
Division on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of American
Electric Power Company, Inc. (NYSE:AEP) between May 17, 1999 and
October 9, 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 made misstatements of material facts and omitted to
state material facts in their public statements and elsewhere,
including failing to disclose that the Company was:

     (1) engaging in electricity trades involving transactions
         involving sequential trades with the same terms and counter
         parties;

     (2) overstating AEP's revenues in its SEC filings and elsewhere by
         including in such revenues sums received in connection with
         such sequential trades with the same terms and counter
         parties; and

     (3) failing to disclose that AEP's traders were falsely reporting
         energy prices to Platt's, which publishes energy market
         reports regarding power trading prices and volumes.

The complaint alleges that after Wall Street learned about widespread
practices in the power industry regarding so-called "round-trip" trades
and AEP admitted to having engaged in transactions involving sequential
trades with the same terms and counter parties, AEP stock tumbled to as
low as $22.74 following an earnings warning on July 18th, down 53% from
a 52-week high of $48.90.

The complaint alleges that following a disclosure on October 9th that
five AEP traders had been dismissed for reporting false and misleading
price information for use in indexes compiled by trade publications,
shares of AEP further declined to a 52-week low of $15.10.

The complaint further alleges that defendants Goldman Sachs & Co., JP
Morgan Securities, Inc. and Salomon Smith Barney Inc. violated Section
11 of the Securities Act in connection with misstatements and omissions
of material fact contained in the Prospectus for a secondary offering
of AEP stock in June 2002, of which they served as joint book-running
managers.

For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz or Stuart L. Berman by Phone:
1-888-299-7706 (toll free) or 1-610-667-7706 by E-mail:
info@sbclasslaw.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.sbclasslaw.com


AES CORPORATION: Cauley Geller Files Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Virginia on behalf of purchasers of AES Corporation (NYSE: AES)
publicly traded securities during the period between April 26, 2001 and
February 14, 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
defendants issued numerous statements, highlighting the Company's
strong financial performance, specifically its business operations in
the United Kingdom.

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

     (1) that the United Kingdom adopted a new framework for the
         pricing of energy that undermined the Company's ability to
         achieve profitability in its United Kingdom activities, and
         as a result, the Company would experience a rapid decline in
         its UK financial operations;

     (2) the adoption of NETA (New Energy Arrangements) in the United
         Kingdom caused the Company's Fifoots utility operations to
         operate at a loss, as expected; defendants, however,
         continuously touted AES's United Kingdom operations as
         profitable;

     (3) that in the first quarter of 2001, Fifoots had an after-tax
         loss of $11 million; and

     (4) that the Company's United Kingdom operations were severely
         impaired as a result of new pricing arrangements adopted there
         and that the Company lacked adequate long-term contracts to
         avoid a rapid decline in its United Kingdom operations as a
         result of the new pricing arrangements.

On February 14, 2002, AES shocked the market by announcing that it had
ceased operations at its Fifoots Point power station in the United
Kingdom because of "sliding wholesale electricity prices."  The price
of the Company's stock dropped precipitously in inordinate trading
volume when the Company, for the first time, announced that it was
experiencing problems in its Fifoots Point power plant in the United
Kingdom and as a result the plant would be closed.

In response to the news, AES plummeted over 25% on February 15, 2002
after the truth concerning AES's Fifoots Point plant and future
prospects were finally revealed, dropping from $9.50 per share on
February 14, 2002, to $7.00 per share on February 15, 2002, on enormous
trading volumes of 29,962,400 (far greater than the Company's average
trading volume of 3.3 million shares).

For more details, contact Jackie Addison, Heather Gann or Sue Null by
Mail: P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock, AR 72221-5438 by Phone: 888-551-9944
by E-mail: info@cauleygeller.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.cauleygeller.com


AES CORPORATION: Wechsler Harwood Commences Securities Suit in E.D. VA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wechsler Harwood LLP initiated a securities class action on behalf of
purchasers of the securities of AES Corporation (NYSE:AES) between
April 26, 2001 and February 14, 2002, inclusive, in the United States
District Court in Eastern District of Virginia.

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 April 26, 2001 and February 14, 2002, thereby
artificially inflating the price of AES securities.

The complaint alleges that, throughout the class period, defendants
issued numerous statements which highlighted the Company's strong
financial performance, specifically its business operations in the
United Kingdom.

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

     (1) that the United Kingdom adopted a new framework for the
         pricing of energy that undermined the Company's ability to
         achieve profitability in its United Kingdom activities, and as
         a result, the Company would experience a rapid decline in its
         U.K. financial operations;

     (2) the adoption of NETA (New Energy Arrangements) in the United
         Kingdom caused the Company's Fifoots utility operations to
         operate at a loss, as expected; defendants, however,
         continuously touted AES's United Kingdom operations as
         profitable;

     (3) that in the first quarter of 2001, Fifoots had an after-tax
         loss of $11 million; and

     (4) that the Company's United Kingdom operations were severely
         impaired as a result of new pricing arrangements adopted there
         and that the Company lacked adequate long-term contracts to
         avoid a rapid decline in its United Kingdom operations as a
         result of the new pricing arrangements.

On February 14, 2002, AES shocked the market by announcing that it had
ceased operations at its Fifoots Point power station in the United
Kingdom because of "sliding wholesale electricity prices." The price of
the Company's stock dropped precipitously in inordinate trading volume
when the Company, for the first time, announced that it was
experiencing problems in its Fifoots Point power plant in the United
Kingdom and as a result the plant would be closed.

In response to the news, AES plummeted over 25% on February 15, 2002
after the truth concerning AES's Fifoots Point plant and future
prospects were finally revealed, dropping from $9.50 per share on
February 14, 2002, to $7.00 per share on February 15, 2002 -- on
enormous trading volumes of 29,962,400 (far greater than the Company's
average trading volume of 3.3 million shares).

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


ASIA GLOBAL: Stull Stull Commences Securities Fraud Lawsuit in C.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Stull Stull Brody LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Central District of California, Western
Division on behalf of purchasers of Asia Global Crossing, Ltd. (Pink
Sheets:ASGXF) securities between October 6, 2000 and January 28, 2002,
inclusive.

The suit alleges that Asia Global went public in October of 2000 with
the intention of being a leading pan-Asian telecommunications carrier
which provides Internet, data and voice services, all the while knowing
that the Company's financial conditions, as disseminated to the
investing public through filings with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC), news releases, and analysts, were falsely stated.

The suit charges that certain officers and directors of the Company,
who were also officers and/or directors of Global Crossing Ltd. (Global
Crossing), issued false and misleading statements concerning both Asia
Global and Global Crossing's business and financial condition during
the class period.

The suit alleges that as a result of these false and misleading
statements the price of Asia Global stock was artificially elevated
during the class period and members of the Class were damaged.

For more details, contact Patrice L. Bishop by Phone: 888-388-4605 by
E-mail: info@secfraud.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.secfraud.com


CIGNA CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. PA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania, on behalf of purchasers of the securities of CIGNA Corp.
(NYSE: CI) between May 2, 2001 to October 24, 2002, inclusive, against
the Company and:

     (1) H. Edward Hanway (CEO, President and Chairman),

     (2) James G. Stewart (CFO) and

     (3) James A. Sears (Chief Accounting Officer)

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 May 2, 2001 to October 24, 2002.

According to the complaint, the Company issued numerous press releases,
and filed financial reports with the SEC, regarding its performance
during the class period which represented that the Company was
experiencing strong growth, that its operating income for 2002 is
expected to be $1.1 billion and that its liabilities on its
discontinued reinsurance operations were not expected to be material to
its liquidity.

The complaint further alleges that these, and other, representations
were materially false and misleading because they failed to disclose
that CIGNA had been under-reserving for its reinsurance obligations,
particularly for its reinsurance of guaranteed minimum death benefits
(GMDB), by (at least) hundreds of millions of dollars.

In addition, according to the complaint, the statements were materially
false and misleading because CIGNA was experiencing declining demand
for its offerings, particularly in its Employee Health Care, Life and
Disability segment, and its income guidance for 2002 was lacking in any
reasonable basis when made.

The suit further alleges that defendants engaged in the conduct alleged
therein because CIGNA was planning to, and on October 16, 2002, did,
issue $250 million of 6 3/8% notes and that the offering would have
been negatively affected if the truth regarding the Company's business
and financial condition was known.

On September 3, 2002, after the market closed, CIGNA issued a press
release announcing that it will take a $720 million after-tax ($1.1
billion pre-tax) charge in order to manage its GMDB liabilities, but
reaffirmed its previously issued guidance for 2002.

In response, credit ratings agencies Standard & Poor's and Fitch
reduced CIGNA's credit rating and CIGNA's stock price dropped by 6%.
Then, on September 24, 2002, after the close of trading, CIGNA shocked
the market by announcing that, contrary to its recent reaffirmations,
it would not meet its 2002 earnings guidance due to weakness in its
Employee Health Care, Life and Disability segment.

In reaction to the announcement, the price of CIGNA common stock
plummeted by 42%, falling from a $63.60 per share close on October 24,
2002 to trade as low as $36.81 per share on October 25, on extremely
heavy 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


CIGNA CORPORATION: Abbey Gardy Commences Securities Fraud Suit in PA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbey Gardy, LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the District of Pennsylvania on behalf of of
all persons who purchased securities of CIGNA Corporation (NYSE:CI)
between May 2, 2001 and October 24, 2002, inclusive.  The suit names as
defendants the Company and:

     (1) H. Edward Hanway,

     (2) James G. Stewart and

     (3) James A. Sears

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

The suit alleges that throughout the class period defendants issued
press releases announcing CIGNA's quarterly and annual results of
operations and filed reports with the SEC, which reported its financial
performance and seemingly impressive earnings growth and represented
that operating income in 2002 was expected to be $1.1 billion.

The suit alleges that defendant's representations during the class
period were materially false and misleading when made because they
failed to disclose that CIGNA had failed to adequately reserve for its
obligations under the Guaranteed Minimum Death Benefits (GMDB)
reinsurance that it had provided, thereby artificially inflating its
earnings and net worth and its projected income figure was lacking in
any reasonable basis when made.

On September 3, 2002, after the market closed CIGNA issued a press
release announcing that it has instituted a program "to manage run-off
reinsurance exposure" for its GMDB obligations, requiring it to take a
$720 million after-tax ($1.1 billion pre-tax) charge. In reaction to
the announcement, the price of CIGNA common stock dropped by 10% during
the day, closing at $82.65.

On October 24, 2002, the Company revealed that it would not meet its
third quarter and year 2002 guidance, even excluding the recent $720
million and $315 million 2002 guidance, even excluding the recent
$63.60 per share close on stock plummeted by 42%, falling from a $63.60
per share close on October 24, 2002 to trade as low as $36.81 per share
on October 25, on extreme heavy trading.

For more details, contact Nancy Kaboolian by Phone: 800-889-3701 by E-
mail: nkaboolian@abbeygardy.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.abbeygardy.com


COMERICA INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. MI
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, on
behalf of purchasers of the securities of Comerica Incorporated (NYSE:
CMA) between July 17, 2002 and October 1, 2002, inclusive. The action
is pending against the Company and:

     (1) Ralph W. Babb Jr.,

     (2) Elizabeth S. Acton and

     (3) Marvin J. Elenbaas

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 July 17, 2002 and October 1, 2002, thereby artificially
inflating the price of Comerica securities.

Throughout the class period, as alleged in the complaint, defendants
issued statements regarding the Company's financial performance and
filed a quarterly report with the SEC which described the Company's
increasing revenues and financial performance.

These statements were materially false and misleading because they
failed to disclose and/or misrepresented the following adverse facts,
among others:

     (i) that the Company had materially overstated its net income by
         approximately $23 million in the second quarter of 2002;

    (ii) that the Company lacked adequate internal controls and was
         therefore unable to ascertain the true financial condition of
         the Company; and

   (iii) that as a result, the value of the Company's net income and
         financial results were materially overstated at all relevant
         times.

On October 2, 2002, before the market opened for trading, the Company
issued a press release announcing that it will record a $328 million
charge "related to an incremental provision for credit losses and
goodwill impairment for the company's Munder Capital Management
subsidiary."

As a result, the Company will be restating its second quarter earnings
to $161 million, compared to previously reported earnings of $184
million.  The Company further reported that the additional provision
and charge-offs related to the second quarter "were determined during a
recent subsidiary regulatory examination."

Following this report, shares of Comerica fell $10.19 per share, or
$20.3%, to close at $40 per share, on volume of more than 10.855
million shares traded, or more than ten times the average daily 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


CREDIT SUISSE: Rabin & Peckel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in NY
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Rabin & Peckel LLP initiated a securities class action 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 Agilent
Technologies, Inc. securities (NYSE:A) between December 13, 1999 and
September 9, 2002, both dates inclusive against Credit Suisse First
Boston and Elliot Rogers.

The complaint alleges that the defendants violated section 10(b) the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder
by the Securities and Exchange Commission.  In particular, the
complaint alleges that defendants:

     (1) issued and maintained "Buy" and "Hold" recommendations on
         Agilent securities without any rational economic basis;

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

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

The suit alleges that as a result of these false and misleading
statements and omissions of material fact, the price of Agilent
securities were artificially inflated throughout the class period
causing plaintiff and the other members of the Class to suffer damages.

For more details, contact Eric J. Belfi or Sharon Lee by Phone:
800-497-8076, 212-682-1818 by Fax: 212-682-1892 or by E-mail:
email@rabinlaw.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.rabinlaw.com


CREDIT SUISSE: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP initiated a securities class action against
Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation (CSFB), in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all
persons or entities who purchased the common stock of Agilent
Technologies (NYSE:A) between December 13, 1999 and September 9, 2002,
inclusive.

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

The complaint further alleges, among other things, that when issuing
its Agilent analyst reports, CSFB failed to disclose significant,
material conflicts of interest which it had concerning the Agilent
reports, because of CSFB's desire to obtain investment banking business
from Agilent.

Throughout the class period, CSFB maintained "BUY" or "HOLD"
recommendation on Agilent in order to obtain and support lucrative
financial deals for CSFB.  As a result of CSFB's false and misleading
analyst reports, Agilent common stock traded at artificially inflated
levels during the class period.

For more details, contact Joel B. Strauss, Donald R. Hall by Mail: 805
Third Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10022 by Phone: 800-290-1952 or
212-687-1980 by Fax: 212-687-7714 or by E-mail: mail@kaplanfox.com


DPL INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Lawsuit in S.D. OH
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio -
- Western Division on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of
DPL Inc. (NYSE: DPL) from March 30, 1999 through August 14, 2002,
inclusive.

The complaint charges DPL Inc. and certain of its officers and
directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its
business and financial condition.  Specifically, the complaint alleges
that, during the class period, defendants falsely represented that the
Company's portfolio of financial assets, comprising approximately 25%
of DPL's total assets, were "highly diversified both in terms of
geography and industry" and were a hedge against the Company's energy
business.

Defendants failed to disclose that DPL's investment portfolio was
highly concentrated in Argentinean debt securities and other securities
that were highly risky.  The facts began to be revealed after the close
of regular trading on July 1, 2002, when DPL issued a press release
announcing that it was revising downward its estimate of earnings for
the full year 2002, largely as a result of a $110 million, or $0.92 per
share, write-down of its financial assets. The write-down related
primarily to investments in Latin America.

The Company's results for the second quarter of 2002 were subsequently
reported on July 29, 2002 precipitating a review of DPL's debt for
possible downgrading.  On August 14, 2002, DPL revealed further
information concerning DPL's investment portfolio and a contingent
obligation to fund up to another $430 million of investments.

The plaintiff alleges that defendants engaged in this scheme to enrich
themselves.  For example, in 2000 defendant Forster received $1.2
million for managing the company's financial assets and $2.1 million
when the price of DPL common stock reached $26 per share.

During the class period, shares of the Company's common stock closed at
as high as $33.68 per share.  When the truth about the losses in DPL's
portfolio of financial assets was revealed after the close of regular
trading on July 1, 2002, the price of DPL common stock fell to $21.57
per share.  DPL common stock continued to decline as additional
information was revealed.  DPL common stock closed on October 2, 2002
at $16.60 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


ELECTRONIC DATA: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
on behalf of all persons who purchased, converted, exchanged or
otherwise acquired the common stock of Electronic Data Systems Corp.
(NYSE:EDS) between September 7, 1999 and September 24, 2002, inclusive.

The lawsuit 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 and seeks to recover damages.  The action, is pending in the
US District Court for the Southern District of New York.

According to the complaint, defendants made misstatements of material
facts and omitted to state material facts in their public statements
and elsewhere, including failing to disclose that:

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

     (2) 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
intraday low of $10.09 on September 24, 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


ESS TECHNOLOGY: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud 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 ESS Technology Inc. (NASDAQ:
ESST) publicly traded securities during the period between Jan. 23,
2002 and Sept. 12, 2002.

The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors
with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The complaint
alleges that defendants disseminated false and misleading statements
concerning the Company's operations and its prospects for 2002.

Taking advantage of the inflation in Company stock, certain of the
Company's officers sold $1.8 million worth of their own Company stock
at artificially inflated prices of as much as $25.78 per share, while
the Company itself sold $45.5 million worth of its own 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


KINDRED HEALTHCARE: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in W.D. KY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Western District of
Kentucky on behalf of purchasers of Kindred Healthcare, Inc. (NASDAQ:
KIND) securities during the period between August 14, 2001 and October
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 issued a
series of statements to the public indicating that the Company was
successfully emerging from bankruptcy and implementing a growth plan.

To that end, defendants announced an increased credit facility to
facilitate acquisitions, and a public offering of Kindred common stock
priced at $46 per share.  The offering was crucial for Kindred, which
had been struggling for months to regain its market capitalization and
renewed analyst interest.  A successful offering would allow the
Company to resume selling its stock on the Nasdaq National Market
System rather than the Over-the-Counter bulletin board, where the stock
had been languishing since Kindred's emergence from bankruptcy in April
2001.

During the class period, defendants reported quarter after quarter of
improved financial results and acquisitions.  In response, Kindred
stock traded at over $45 per share during April 2002.  Defendants
failed to reveal that due to a dramatic increase in professional
liability claims, especially in Florida, defendants were not properly
reserving for these incurred claims.

During May 2001, Florida had enacted reform legislation, effective
October 5, 2001.  There was a marked increase in the number of
professional liability lawsuits filed in Florida in anticipation of the
new law taking effect.  Medical liability insurance premiums
skyrocketed and certain insurance companies stopped writing medical
liability insurance in Florida.

As a result, Kindred competitors such as Beverly Enterprises took
charges in order to account for the increase in lawsuits.  Defendants
assured investors and analysts that Kindred (which was largely self-
insured) carefully reviewed its reserves for claims on a monthly basis,
and would not have to take a large "catch-up" charge since it
maintained adequate reserves.

Despite defendants' failure to properly maintain reserves for millions
of dollars in claims, individual defendants signed sworn statements on
August 13, 2002, affirming the accuracy of Kindred's financial
statements and public filings.

As a result of the Company's misrepresentations, Kindred investors have
sustained tremendous losses.  On October 10, 2002, after the close of
trading, the Company shocked the market by revealing that it would
withdraw its previous earnings projections for 2002 and revised its
third quarter 2002 estimates.  The enormous shortfall was attributed to
increased costs for professional liability claims incurred in fiscal
2001 and 2002.

Specifically, defendants revealed that Kindred will record
approximately $55 million of additional costs for professional
liability claims above its normal provision for the third quarter ended
September 30, 2002.  Approximately two-thirds of the "dramatic increase
in professional liability costs" arose from the Company's operations in
Florida.

Defendants revealed that as a result of the increase in claims, Kindred
would likely divest all of its operations in Florida.  In response to
the Company's devastating news, Kindred's stock price dropped by an
astonishing 43%, dropping $11.88 to close at $15.84 on volumes of 10
million 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


METRIS COMPANIES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MN
-------------------------------------------------------------------
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 all purchasers of the common stock of Metris Companies, Inc.
(NYSE: MXT) securities between Nov. 5, 2001 and July 17, 2002,
inclusive.

The Company is in the business of providing financial products and
services, including issuing and managing credit cards through its
wholly owned subsidiary, Direct Merchants Credit Card Bank, N.A.
(Direct Merchants).

Specifically, the complaint alleges that Metris misled the investing
community concerning the existence of a Report of Examination (ROE)
released by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the
primary federal regulator of Direct Merchants.

Moreover, the suit charges that defendants misled the investing
community regarding the adverse material effect the ROE would have on
the Company's financial condition.

The suit also alleges that the OCC released the ROE to defendants on
November 5, 2001, but that defendants failed to reveal the existence of
the ROE to the public until April 17, 2002, and thereafter
misrepresented the effect it would have on the Company.

As outlined in the suit, the findings of the ROE were ultimately
addressed in a consent agreement between Direct Merchants and the OCC,
and obligated Direct Merchants to restructure significant parts of its
operations including its credit policies, credit risk assessment, debt
forbearance, allowance for loan and lease losses and internal controls.
The suit further alleges that as a result of defendants' actions,
plaintiff and the class were damaged.

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: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP initiated a securities class action against
QuadraMed Corporation (Nasdaq:QMDCE) and certain of its officers and
directors, in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California, alleging violations of the federal securities
laws.  This suit is brought on behalf of all persons and entities who
purchased the Company's publicly traded securities between April 19,
1999 and October 16, 2002, inclusive.

QuadraMed 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.

The complaint alleges that throughout the class period, QuadraMed
issued false and misleading financial statements in violation of
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) by improperly
recognizing revenue on software licenses.

After several partial disclosures about the inaccuracy of its financial
statements, on October 16, 2002, QuadraMed finally announced that it
would restate its financial statements for the years ended December 31,
1999, 2000 and 2001 and the quarter ended March 31, 2002 due to the
Company's improper revenue recognition practices.

As a result of the defendants' false and misleading statements,
QuadraMed securities traded at artificially high levels during the
class period.

For more details, contact Robert N. Kaplan, Hae Sung Nam by Mail: 805
Third Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10022 by Phone: 800-290-1952 or
212-687-1980 by Fax: 212-687-7714 by E-mail: mail@kaplanfox.com


RETEK INC.: Fruchter & Twersky Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MN
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Fruchter & Twersky LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the District of Minnesota on behalf of
purchasers of Retek Inc. (NASDAQ: RETK) securities during the period
between October 17, 2001 and July 8, 2002.

The complaint 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 promulgated thereunder, by issuing
a series of material misrepresentations to the market during the class
period thereby artificially inflating the price of Company securities.

The complaint alleges that, throughout the class period, defendants
issued numerous statements, highlighting the Company's business
alliance with IBM and the Company's prospects.  As alleged in the
complaint, these statements were materially false and misleading
because they failed to disclose and/or misrepresented the following
adverse facts, among others:

     (1) the IBM alliance was in shambles and projected revenues of
         more than $1 billion for the two companies for the year 2003
         was a fallacy; and

     (2) that by the beginning of the class period, many of the
         Company's projects were faltering and its new products were
         riddled with bugs.

Finally, the defendants' projections were not only stale but actually
false when made as the defendants knew or made a conscious decision to
ignore the fact that circumstances underlying those projections
actually compelled the conclusion that the Company could not possibly
achieve the projections.

For more details, contact Jack G. Fruchter by Phone: 212-279-5050 or
800-440-8986 by Fax: 212-279-3655 by E-mail:
JFruchter@FruchterTwersky.com.


RETEK INC.: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MN Court
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of
Minnesota on behalf of purchasers of Retek Inc. (NASDAQ:RETK)
securities during the period between October 17, 2001 and July 8, 2002.

The complaint charges the Company certain of its officers and directors
with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The Company is
a leading provider of software solutions and services to the retail
industry.

In April 2000, the Company announced that it had formed an alliance
with IBM to develop a partnership to develop a merchandising solution
for the food and drug segment of the retail market.  The complaint
alleges that the defendants continuously led the market to believe not
only that the alliance was fully intact but also that the alliance was
on track to generate revenues of more than $1 billion for the two
companies for the year 2003.

Defendants, however, concealed that not only was the $1 billion
prospect a fallacy, but that throughout the Class Period the so-called
alliance was in shambles.  The Company wanted access to IBM's
consulting deals and IBM wanted the Company to change its software
applications so that they ran on IBM's platform, not Oracle's.

By October 2001, defendants realized that the conversion would be too
costly in the short run and delayed the full conversion to IBM
platforms, including the most critical, a merchandising product for
large-scale retail operations.

The complaint further alleges that by the beginning of the class
period, many of the Company's projects (IBM) were faltering and its new
products (Retek 10), which were scheduled to boast earnings, were
riddled with bugs. Moreover, one of the Company's joint ventures,
PerformanceRetail Inc. (PRI), was hemorrhaging nearly $200,000 of the
Company's monies per month.

Finally, the defendants' projections were not only stale but actually
false when made as the defendants knew or made a conscious decision to
ignore the fact that circumstances underlying those projections (i.e.,
problems with Retek 10, the IBM alliance, PRI, an eroding customer
base) actually compelled the conclusion that the Company could not
possibly achieve the projections.

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


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

The Company designs, manufactures and markets Internet infrastructure
equipment to telecommunications service providers in the metropolitan
area network.  The suit charges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10-b(5). The
action alleges that defendants issued a series of false and misleading
statements concerning the Company's financial condition and sales.
Specifically, defendants misled the investing community concerning the
true effect that the downturn in telecom spending had upon the Company.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave.,
Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735
by Fax: 610-660-8080 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182


SALOMON SMITH: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP initiated a securities class action against
Citigroup Inc., Salomon Smith Barney Inc., and Jack Grubman, 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 Metromedia Fiber Network, Inc. (Nasdaq: MFNX)
between November 25, 1997 and July 25, 2001, inclusive.

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

The complaint further alleges that, when issuing its Metromedia analyst
reports, defendants failed to disclose significant, material conflicts
of interest which it had, in light of defendants' Metromedia reports,
to obtain investment banking business for Salomon.

Furthermore, in issuing Metromedia reports, in which it recommended the
purchase of Metromedia common stock, defendants failed to disclose
material, non-public, adverse information they possessed about
Metromedia.

Throughout the class period, Defendants maintained a "BUY"
recommendation on Metromedia in order to obtain and support lucrative
financial deals for Salomon.

The class period begins on November 25, 1997 the date when Salomon
"initiated coverage" of and issued their first report on Metromedia,
and ends on July 25, 2001, the date Defendants belatedly downgraded
Metromedia from a "Buy" to a "Neutral".

As a result of Defendants' false and misleading analyst reports,
Metromedia common stock traded at artificially inflated levels during
the class period.

For more details, contact Frederic S. Fox or Donald R. Hall by Mail:
805 Third Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10022 by Phone: 800-290-1952
or 212-687-1980 by E-mail: mail@kaplanfox.com


SEARS ROEBUCK: 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 Sears, Roebuck &
Co. (NYSE: S) between January 17, 2002 to October 17, 2002, inclusive,
against the Company and:

     (1) Alan Lacy (CEO, President and Chairman),

     (2) Glenn Richter (CFO from October 4, 2002, Senior V.P., Finance
         since inception of class period),

     (3) Paul J. Liska (CFO until October 4, 2002) and

     (4) Thomas E. Bergmann (Chief Accounting Officer)

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 17, 2002 to October 17, 2002.

According to the complaint, defendants, throughout the class period,
represented that Sears was growing its earnings strongly, driven by its
Credit and Financial Products segment and that it would achieve
earnings growth of 22% in 2002 over 2001.

In addition, in each of its press releases and SEC reports filed during
the class period, the Company reported its provisions for uncollectible
accounts and in, its 2001 annual report represented that such reserves
were "adequate."

These, and other statements detailed in the complaint, were allegedly
false and misleading because, according to the complaint, they did not
disclose that the Company's risk for uncollectible accounts had
increased materially throughout the class period and, in addition, that
Sears was under-reserving for its uncollectible accounts which inflated
its earnings and balance sheet.

On October 17, 2002, the Company reported in a press release that it
will grow its 2002 earnings by 15%, rather than the 22% it reaffirmed
as recently as ten days previously, because of a "$222 million increase
in the domestic provision for uncollectible accounts."

In addition, according to the press release, earnings for the third
quarter were 26% less than the previous year.  In reaction to the press
release, the price of Sears common stock plummeted 32%, from an October
16 close of $33.95 per share to close at $23.15 per share on October
17, on extremely heavy 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


ST. PAUL: Kirby McInerney Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MN Court
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Kirby McInerney & Squire, LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota on
behalf of all purchasers of The St. Paul Companies (NYSE:SPC) common
stock during the period from November 5, 2001 to July 9, 2002.

The action charges the Company, Chief Executive Officer J.S. Fishman
and Chief Financial Officer Thomas A. Bradley with violations of
Sections 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and of Rule
10(b)-5 promulgated thereunder, and charges the individual defendants
with violation of 20(a) of the Exchange Act.

The violations stem from defendants' alleged omissions and misleading
statements concerning the Company's exposure to asbestos claims
liability, which had the effect of artificially inflating the Company's
stock price during the class period.

The complaint alleges that during the class period, defendants failed
to make adequate disclosures or take adequate reserves concerning
litigation filed in 1993 in California state court known as Western
MacArthur Co. et al. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., et al.,
Case No. 721595-7 (consolidated with Case No. 828101-2, Superior Court
of California, Alameda County).

According to the complaint, although trial of the Western MacArthur
litigation commenced in approximately March 2002, the Company did not
disclose the existence of the litigation until May 15, 2002, and even
then the Company neither increased its reserves nor quantified the
amount or general magnitude of potential exposure to liability which
the Company might suffer as a result of the litigation.

On June 3, 2002, the Company announced that a settlement had been
reached whereby St. Paul would pay almost $1 billion to satisfy the
claims reflected in the litigation, although the Company's SEC filings
stated that as of December 31, 2001, the Company's net reserves for
asbestos claims were only $367 million.

The complaint charges that the Company tried to disguise the impact of
the Western MacArthur litigation settlement by focusing on the alleged
after-tax impact of the litigation and falsely claiming that $150
million of the litigation payments could be charged to the Company's
reserves.

According to the complaint, a subsequent SEC filing by the Company
reflected St. Paul's failure to take adequate reserves for its
potential liability in the litigation.  News of the Western MacArthur
litigation settlement caused the price of the Company's stock to
decline during the class period from a high of $49.20 on November 5,
2001 to a low of $34.65 on July 9, 2002, the last day of the class
period.

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


TXU CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. TX
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel 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 TXU'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, TXU 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 remained 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, on October 14,2002, 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 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: Berger & Montague Commences Securities Suit in N.D. TX
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Berger & Montague, PC initiated a securities class action against TXU
Corporation (NYSE: TXU) and several of its officers and directors on
behalf of all persons or entities who purchased common stock between
April 25, 2002 and October 11, 2002 inclusive, in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors and its underwriters with violations of the Securities Act of
1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, arising out of
defendants' issuance of false and misleading statements about the
Company's business, operating performance and prospects.

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 TXU's European
operations were improving, it would succeed in 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.  On October 4,
2002, TXU 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 remained 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, on October 14, 2002, 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 Merrill G. Davidoff, Jacob A. Goldberg, Eric
Cramer, 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

                              *********


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  * * *