CAR_Public/021202.mbx                 C L A S S  A C T I O N  R E P O R T E R

               Monday, December 2, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 238

                            Headlines

APARTHEID LITIGATION: Ed Fagan Widens Suit To Include Three More Firms
CAPERS COMMUNITY: Faces Consumer Suit Over Hepatitis Outbreak in Canada
CITIGROUP INC.: Faces Securities Litigation Over Role in Enron Collapse
CITIGROUP INC.: Faces Securities Suits Over Role in WorldCom Collapse
CITIGROUP INC.: Asks DE Court To Dismiss Shareholder Derivative Lawsuit

CITIGROUP INC.: Faces Suits For Securities Violations in S.D. New York
EQUITY RESIDENTIAL: Faces FL Lawsuit Alleging Illegal Fee Charges
FTD INC.: Merger Results in Suits Concerning Board's Actions, Duties
MANUFACTURERS' SERVICES: Officers Dismissed From NY Securities Lawsuit
NICE SYSTEMS: Reaches Settlement in Remaining Securities Fraud Suits

PEROT SYSTEMS: CA Energy Market Allegations Cue NY, TX Securities Suits
QUICKLOGIC CORP.: Officers, Directors Dismissed From Securities Lawsuit
RADIOSHACK CORPORATION: CA Court Approves Overtime Wage Suit Settlement
SALOMON SMITH: Faces Securities Suits Over Fraudulent IPO Allocations
SPEEDWAY MOTORSPORTS: Consumer Suit Dismissed Without Prejudice

TERADYNE INC.: To Ask MA Court To Dismiss Amended Securities Fraud Suit
TEXAS: Harris County Constable Faces Lawsuit Seeking Unpaid Overtime
UNILAB CORPORATION: Asks NY Court To Dismiss Amended Securities Lawsuit
UNITED LIBERTY: Mediation Commencing in OH Suit Over Insurance Policies

                    New Securities Fraud Cases

AMERICAN ELECTRIC: Spector Roseman Commences Securities Suit in S.D. OH
OM GROUP: Scott + Scott Lodges Suit For Securities Violations in N.D. OH
OM GROUP: Cauley Geller Files Suit For Securities Violations in N.D. OH
OM GROUP: Marc Henzel Lodges Suit For Securities Violations in N.D. OH
QUADRAMED CORPORATION: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA

RETEK INC.: Weiss & Yourman Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MN Court
SALOMON SMITH: Kaplan Fox Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
ST. PAUL: Spector Roseman Commences Securities Suit in CA Federal Court
SYNCOR INTERNATIONAL: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA
TENET HEALTHCARE: Spector Roseman Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA

TENET HEALTHCARE: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Fraud Suit in C.D. CA
TXU CORPORATION: Spector Roseman Commences Securities Suit in N.D. TX

                            *********

APARTHEID LITIGATION: Ed Fagan Widens Suit To Include Three More Firms
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Prominent reparations lawyer Ed Fagan said he has widened a class action
lawsuit against Swiss companies that did business with the apartheid
regime in South Africa, to include Schindler Holding, Unaxis Holding AG
and Holcim AG, AFX news reports.

The suit already includes several multinational firms as defendants,
namely:

               (1) UBS AG,

               (2) Credit Suisse Group,

               (3) Sulzer AG and

               (4) Novartis AG

Nestle AG and Roche Holding AG also were named in a separate suit filed
in New Jersey.Mr. Fagan told AFX he hopes that all lawsuits in the US
will be grouped into one class action in a single court.He has claimed
several billion of dollars in damages from banks and corporations in
several countries on behalf of South African apartheid victims.

On Monday, South Africa's Justice Minister Penuell Maduna spoke out
against lawsuits lodged against international companies and banks
accused of propping up the apartheid regime until 1991.Mr. Maduna said
he is seeking investment from those companies in post-apartheid South
Africa, AFX reports.

Mr. Fagan also demanded an explanation about an article in Swiss
newspaper Dimanche.ch last month, alleging Switzerland's intelligence
service destroyed key documents.The claim is said to be contained in a
confidential draft of a report on ties between Swiss and South African
intelligence services, commissioned by the Swiss defense ministry.The
official report, by a law professor, Rainer Schweizer, is expected
December 16.


CAPERS COMMUNITY: Faces Consumer Suit Over Hepatitis Outbreak in Canada
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Capers Community Markets faces a class action filed relating to the
Hepatitis A outbreak it caused last spring, in the Supreme Court of
British Columbia.

The suit, brought by Mrs. Helen Fakhri and Mr. Ady Aylon, alleges
"Capers breached its duty by failing to ensure that the tainted products
were safe and reasonably fit for human consumption" and that "Capers is
vicariously liable for the negligence of its HAV infected employees who,
prepared, handled, and/or served the Tainted Products".

In March and April 2002 Mrs. Fakhri, who was a regular customer of
Capers, suffered from fever, chills, nausea and fatigue.She was
extremely worried about these symptoms, and consulted several times with
family physicians, because she was one-and-a-half months pregnant at the
time.In blood tests conducted on April 4, 22 and 30, 2002, she was
reactive to Hepatitis A, however, by the time she learned of the Capers
incident through the media it was too late for her to receive the anti-
Hepatitis A inoculation. Mrs. Fakhri miscarried in May 2002.

Mr. Aylon, one of the 6,400 Capers customers who had to be vaccinated,
was also a regular customer of Capers prior to the Hepatitis A outbreak.
Mr. Aylon was vaccinated after consuming potato salad and hummus that he
purchased at the Capers store located on West 4th Avenue.In addition
to being inconvenienced by having to be vaccinated, Mr. Aylon suffered
an almost immediate adverse reaction to the vaccine at the vaccination
clinic and had to rest in a designated area, together with other persons
who were having adverse reactions to the injections.

After returning home Mr. Aylon continued to suffer from flushing,
headache, weakness and nausea and went to the emergency ward of the
Vancouver General Hospital. The attending physician advised him that he
was having an adverse reaction to the injection and kept him under
observation for about four hours. Several days later he experienced the
same symptoms, again went to the emergency ward of VGH where he was once
more examined, put under observation and released after about four
hours.

It would appear that as early as May, 2000, Capers was advised by the
Vancouver/ Richmond Health Board that the overall handling of
preassembled meals at their Robson Street location was unsatisfactory
and it was discovered that their food handler had no food safety
training. The Company was instructed at that time to cease this
activity immediately.

Capers is operated by Alfalfa's Canada Inc., a subsidiary of Wild Oats
Markets, Inc., which is publicly traded on the Nasdaq exchange under the
symbol OATS.Hepatitis A is a viral illness that affects the liver.
Symptoms include nausea, vomiting, fatigue, fever, abdominal pain, dark-
colored urine, light or whitish-colored bowel movements and jaundice,
indicated by yellowing of the skin or whites of the eyes.


CITIGROUP INC.: Faces Securities Litigation Over Role in Enron Collapse
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Citigroup, Inc. faces numerous securities litigation relating to its
role in the collapse of energy giant Enron Corporation in various
federal courts nationwide.

In April 2002, Citigroup and, in one case, Salomon Smith Barney Inc.
(SSB) were named as defendants along with, among others, commercial
and/or investment banks, certain current and former Enron officers and
directors, lawyers and accountants in two putative consolidated class
action complaints that were filed in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas seeking unspecified damages.

One action, brought on behalf of individuals who purchased Enron
securities (NEWBY, ET AL. V. ENRON CORP., ET AL.), alleges violations of
Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended.

The other action, brought on behalf of current and former Enron
employees (TITTLE, ET AL. V. ENRON CORP., ET AL.), alleges violations of
the Employment Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended
(ERISA), and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act
(RICO), as well as claims for negligence and civil conspiracy.

On May 8, 2002, the Company and SSB filed motions to dismiss the
complaints, which are pending.In July 2002, the Company, SSB and
various of its affiliates and certain of their officers and other
employees were named as defendants, along with, among others, commercial
and/or investment banks, certain current and former Enron officers and
directors, lawyers and accountants in a putative class action filed in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
on behalf of purchasers of the Yosemite Notes and Enron Credit-Linked
Notes, among other securities (HUDSON SOFT CO., LTD. V. CREDIT SUISSE
FIRST BOSTON CORPORATION, ET AL.).

The amended complaint alleges violations of RICO and of Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and seeks
unspecified damages.

Additional actions have been filed against Citigroup and certain of its
affiliates, along with other parties, including:

(1) two actions brought in different state courts by state pension
plans alleging violations of state securities law and claims
for common law fraud and unjust enrichment;

(2) an action by banks that participated in two Enron revolving
credit facilities, alleging fraud, gross negligence, and
breach of implied duties in connection with defendants'
administration of a credit facility with Enron;

(3) an action brought by several funds in connection with
secondary market purchases of Enron Corp. debt securities
alleging violations of the federal securities law, including
Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and
claims for fraud and misrepresentation;

(4) a series of putative class actions by purchasers of NewPower
Holdings common stock alleging violations of the federal
securities law, including Section 11 of the Securities Act of
1933, as amended, and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended;

(5) an action brought by two investment funds in connection with
purchases of Enron-related securities for alleged violations
of state securities and unfair competition statutes;

(6) an action brought by several investment funds and fund owners
in connection with purchases of notes of the Osprey I and
Osprey II Trusts for alleged violation of state and federal
securities laws and claims for common law fraud,
misrepresentation and conspiracy;

(7) an action brought by several investment funds and fund owners
in connection with purchases of notes of the Osprey I and
Osprey II Trusts for alleged violation of state and federal
securities laws and state unfair competition laws and claims
for common law fraud and misrepresentation; and

(8) an action brought by the Attorney General of Connecticut in
connection with various commercial and investment banking
services provided to Enron.

Several of these cases have been consolidated with the NEWBY action and
stayed, pending the Court's decision on motions to dismiss NEWBY.

Additionally, the Company and certain of its affiliates have received
inquiries and requests for information from various regulatory and
governmental agencies and Congressional committees as well as from the
Special Examiner in the Enron bankruptcy, regarding certain transactions
and business relationships with Enron and its affiliates.The Company
is cooperating fully with all such requests.


CITIGROUP INC.: Faces Securities Suits Over Role in WorldCom Collapse
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Citigroup, Inc. and its underwriting arm Salomon Smith Barney, Inc.
(SSB) are involved in a number of lawsuits arising out of the
underwriting of debt securities of WorldCom, Inc.

These lawsuits include putative class actions filed in July 2002 by
alleged purchasers of WorldCom debt securities in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York (ABOVE PARADISE
INVESTMENTS LTD. V. WORLDCOM, INC., ET AL.; MUNICIPAL POLICE EMPLOYEES
RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF LOUISIANA V. WORLDCOM, INC., ET AL.), and in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi
(LONGACRE MASTER FUND V. WORLDCOM, INC., ET AL.).

These putative class action complaints assert violations of federal
securities law, including Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of
1933, as amended, and seek unspecified damages from the underwriters.

On October 11, 2002, the ABOVE PARADISE and MUNICIPAL POLICE EMPLOYEES
lawsuits filed in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York were superseded by the filing of a consolidated
putative class action complaint in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of New York (IN RE WORLDCOM, INC. SECURITIES
LITIGATION).

In the consolidated complaint, in addition to the claims of violations
by the underwriters of the federal securities law, including Sections 11
and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, the plaintiffs allege
violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by SSB arising out of
alleged conflicts of interest of SSB and Jack Grubman.

In addition to the consolidated class action complaint, the Southern
District of Mississippi class action has been transferred by the
Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to the Southern District of
New York for centralized pre-trial proceedings with other WorldCom-
related actions.

In addition to the several putative class actions that have been
commenced, certain individual actions have been filed in various federal
and state courts against the Company and SSB, along with other parties,
concerning WorldCom debt securities including individual state court
actions brought by various pension funds in connection with the
underwriting of debt securities of WorldCom alleging violations of
Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and, in one case,
violations of various state securities laws and common law fraud.

Most of these actions have been removed to federal court and an
application has been made to have them transferred to the Southern
District of New York for centralized pre-trial proceedings with other
WorldCom-related actions.

A putative class action on behalf of participants in WorldCom's 401(k)
salary savings plan and those WorldCom benefit plans covered by ERISA
alleging violations of ERISA and common law fraud (EMANUELE v. WORLDCOM,
INC., ET AL.), which was commenced in the United States District Court
for the District of Columbia, also has been transferred by the Judicial
Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to the Southern District of New York
for centralized pre-trial proceedings with other WorldCom-related
actions.


CITIGROUP INC.: Asks DE Court To Dismiss Shareholder Derivative Lawsuit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Citigroup, Inc. and members of its board of directors face several
shareholder derivative lawsuits filed beginning July 2002 in New York
Supreme Court, New York County, and the Court of Chancery of the State
of Delaware alleging claims for:

   (1) breach of fiduciary duty,

   (2) negligent breach of fiduciary duty,

   (3) gross mismanagement,

   (4) waste of corporate assets and

   (5) indemnification

In September 2002, the Delaware actions were consolidated under the
caption IN RE: CITIGROUP INC. SHAREHOLDERS LITIGATION and a motion to
dismiss the action was filed in November 2002.In October 2002, the
actions filed in New York Supreme Court were either dismissed without
prejudice or withdrawn.


CITIGROUP INC.: Faces Suits For Securities Violations in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Beginning in July 2002, Citigroup, Inc. and certain officers were also
named as defendants in putative class actions filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York brought on behalf
of purchasers of the Company's common stock.

The suit alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and, in approximately half
of the actions, claims for common law fraud.

Additional lawsuits containing similar claims to those described above
may be filed in the future.The Company cannot give any assurance that
the litigation will be resolved in its favor.


EQUITY RESIDENTIAL: Faces FL Lawsuit Alleging Illegal Fee Charges
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Equity Residential Properties Trust faces a class action filed in Palm
Beach County Circuit Court in Florida, on behalf of its Florida tenants,
alleging that it took advantage of young consumers and collected
millions of dollars worth of illegal fees, the Associated Press reports.

The suit accuses the Company of illegally charging tenants up to five
months' worth of rent for terminating their leases early or for failing
to notify the company they are not renewing their contract.The
tenants' lawyers said the Company aggressively pursues tenants in small
claims court after they move out of one of its 1,000 apartment
complexes.

"These 'gotcha penalties' seem to be a trend in corporate America,"
attorney Rod Tennyson told AP."We want an injunction to stop these
practices and we want refunds plus interest."

An Equity Residential spokesman declined comment on the Company's
practices or the lawsuit, which he said the company has not received.
"Their attorneys made no attempt to contact us to resolve any potential
issues," spokesman Marty McKenna told AP.

Though the lawsuit filed in Palm Beach County Circuit Court includes
only Florida plaintiffs, attorneys for the tenants said they expect the
same types of suits to be filed against Equity Properties in other
states.


FTD INC.: Merger Results in Suits Concerning Board's Actions, Duties
--------------------------------------------------------------------
FTD Inc. faces several class actions pending in the Court of Chancery
for New Castle County in Wilmington, Delaware, on behalf of all public
stockholders of FTD.COM.The suits name as defendants the Company and:

   (1) Florists Transworld Delivery, Inc.

   (2) FTD.COM, and

   (3) FTD, Inc.'s directors

The suits are labeled as follows:

   (i) Frances Howland v. FTD.COM et al.,

  (ii) Johnathon Anderson v. Richard Perry et al.,

(iii) Stephen Gluck v. Richard C. Perry,
  
  (iv) Geoff Mott v. IOS Brands Corp., and

   (v) Highwood Partners, L.P. v. IOS Brands Corp.

These lawsuits were filed beginning on March 5, 2002, after a press
release announced the 2002 Merger, revealing FTD.COM had become an
indirect wholly owned Company subsidiary and the former public
stockholders of FTD.COM became stockholders of the Company.

The complaints make essentially the same allegations, namely that:

(a) the offer by the Company to exchange 0.26 shares of Class A
Common Stock for each share of FTD.COM common stock is
inadequate;

(b) the individual defendants breached the fiduciary duties they
owed in their capacity as directors by, among other things,
failing to conduct an auction or otherwise check the market
value of FTD.COM before voting to accept the 2002 Merger
proposal;

(c) the Company and its board of directors prevented the FTD.COM
board of directors from conducting a meaningful review of the
transaction; and

(d) the Company, FTD.COM and certain individual defendants timed
the 2002 Merger to deny public stockholders the full potential
increase in FTD.COM's stock price following the 2002 Merger.



MANUFACTURERS' SERVICES: Officers Dismissed From NY Securities Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturers' Services, Limited's officers have been dismissed as
defendants in a consolidated securities class action filed in the United
States District Court, Southern District of New York against them, the
Company and the underwriters that participated in the Company's initial
public offering (IPO).

The complaint, which seeks unspecified damages among other things,
alleges that the prospectus filed by the Company relating to stock sold
in its initial public offering contained false and misleading statements
with respect to the commission arrangements between the underwriters and
their customers.

The Company understands that various other plaintiffs have filed
substantially similar class action cases against approximately 300 other
publicly traded companies and their IPO underwriters, which cases have
been consolidated to a single federal district court for coordinated
case management.

On July 15, 2002, the Company together with the other issuers named as
defendants in these coordinated proceedings filed a collective motion to
dismiss the consolidated complaints against them on various legal
grounds.That motion is currently pending.

On October 9, 2002, the court approved a stipulation between the
plaintiffs and the individual defendants providing for the dismissal of
the individual defendants, without prejudice.


NICE SYSTEMS: Reaches Settlement in Remaining Securities Fraud Suits
--------------------------------------------------------------------
NICE Systems reached settlement agreements on the two remaining
securities lawsuits in the United States.

The company announced in March 2002 that it had settled the securities
litigation in Israel.The lawsuits were filed as a result of the
restatement of the Company's financial results for 1999 and certain
periods in 2000.

The Company has entered into an agreement to settle the securities class
action lawsuit filed against the Company and certain of its former
officers in the United States District Court for the District of New
Jersey. Under the terms of the settlement, which is subject to court
approval, all claims against the Company and all other defendants will
be dismissed without admission of liability or wrongdoing by any party.
The $10 million settlement will be funded entirely by the Company's
directors' and officers' liability insurance.

The Company has also settled a separate action filed against the Company
and its wholly-owned subsidiary by Douglas Chapiewsky in the District
Court, City and County of Denver, State of Colorado.Mr. Chapiewsky was
the sole shareholder of CenterPoint Solutions, Inc., which was acquired
by the Company in April 2000.Under the terms of this settlement, all
claims will be dismissed without admission of liability or wrongdoing by
any party.

The settlement consists of $3 million plus 50,000 shares of the
Company's ordinary shares, which have been in escrow since the second
quarter of 2000, pursuant to an earn-out provision of the original
acquisition agreement.The settlement will be paid during the current
quarter, and the Company is pursuing reimbursement from its insurance
company.

Commenting on these settlements, Haim Shani, chief executive officer of
NICE, said in a statement, "We believe it is in the best interests of
the Company and its shareholders to remove the uncertainty, expense and
distraction of this litigation and we are pleased to have this behind
us."


PEROT SYSTEMS: CA Energy Market Allegations Cue NY, TX Securities Suits
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Perot Systems Corporation faces several securities class actions filed
against it, Ross Perot and Ross Perot, Jr., alleging violations of Rule
10b-5, promulgated under the Securities Act of 1934, as amended, and, in
certain of the cases, allege common law fraud.

These suits allege the Company's SEC filings contained material
misstatements or omissions of material facts with respect to the
Company's activities related to the California energy market. The
Company believes the claims against it are without merit.

Two lawsuits, Herbert Condell v. Perot Systems Corp. et al. and Richard
J. Dowling v. Perot Systems Corp. et al. were filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York.Four lawsuits,
Robert Markewich v. Perot Systems Corp. et al., Vincent Milano v. Perot
Systems Corp. et al., Lori Will v. Perot Systems Corp. et al. and June
Zordich v. Perot Systems Corp. et al. were filed in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division.

June Zordich v. Perot Systems Corp. et al. was transferred to the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman
Division.Two lawsuits, Joffre Berger v. Perot Systems Corp. et al.,
and Daniel Taubenfeld v. Perot Systems Corp. et al., were filed in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman
Division.


QUICKLOGIC CORP.: Officers, Directors Dismissed From Securities Lawsuit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Quicklogic Corporation's officers and directors have been voluntarily
dismissed from the securities class action pending in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York against them, the
Company, and some investment banks that underwrote the Company's initial
public offerings.

The complaint alleges excessive and undisclosed commissions in
connection with the allocation of shares of common stock in the
Company's initial public offering and artificially high prices through
"tie-in" arrangements which required customers to buy shares in the
aftermarket at pre-determined prices in violation of the federal
securities laws.

Plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of damages on behalf of persons
who purchased the Company's stock pursuant to the registration
statements between October 14, 1999, and December 6, 2000.The court
appointed a lead plaintiff in this litigation.

Various plaintiffs have filed similar actions asserting virtually
identical allegations against over 300 other public companies, their
underwriters, and their officers and directors arising out of each
company's public offering. The Company believes that these allegations
against it are without merit.

Defendants in these cases have filed omnibus motions to dismiss on
common pleading issues.Oral argument on these omnibus motions to
dismiss has been scheduled.


RADIOSHACK CORPORATION: CA Court Approves Overtime Wage Suit Settlement
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Orange County, California State Court granted final approval to a
US$29.9 million settlement proposed by Radioshack Corporation to settle
a class action, related to the alleged miscalculation of overtime
wages for certain of its former and current employees in that state.

The suit alleges certain current and former RadioShack store managers in
California were improperly classified as exempt from overtime wages
based on California law, according to an earlier Class Action Reporter
story.

The Company has agreed to the settlement to avoid protracted litigation
that could be a distraction to its business.According to the tentative
settlement, the Company will pay up to US$29.9 million to approximately
1,300 current and former store managers employed in California between
March 27, 1996 and the present.The settlement payment will also be
used to pay the plaintiffs' attorneys' fees and costs, and
administrative expenses.


SALOMON SMITH: Faces Securities Suits Over Fraudulent IPO Allocations
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Salomon Smith Barney, Inc. and one of its prominent analysts Jack
Grubman have been named as defendants in approximately 62 putative class
action complaints since May 2002 by purchasers of various securities
alleging they violated federal securities law, including Sections 10 and
20 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, for allegedly
issuing research reports without a reasonable basis in fact and for
allegedly failing to disclose conflicts of interest with companies in
connection with published investment research, including:

   (1) Global Crossing,

   (2) WorldCom, Inc.,

   (3) AT&T,

   (4) Winstar,

   (5) Rhythm Net Connections,

   (6) Level 3 Communications,

   (7) MetroMedia Fiber Network,

   (8) XO Communications and

   (9) Williams Communications Group Inc.

Similar claims with respect to research have also been included in
approximately 100 cases pending against SSB and other broker dealers in
the IPO Allocation Securities Litigation and the IPO Allocation
Antitrust Litigation, previously disclosed by SSB.Nearly all of these
actions are pending in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York.

Since April 2002, SSB and several other broker dealers have received
subpoenas and/or requests for information from various governmental and
self-regulatory agencies and Congressional committees.These agencies
have been engaged in discussions with a number of broker dealers,
including SSB, about resolving potential enforcement proceedings
relating to research.SSB is cooperating fully with all such requests.


SPEEDWAY MOTORSPORTS: Consumer Suit Dismissed Without Prejudice
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Middle District of North
Carolina dismissed without prejudice the class action pending against
Speedway Motorsports, Inc. and Oil-Chem Research, seeking unspecified
damages for violation of the North Carolina Unfair and Deceptive Trade
Practices Act. The plaintiffs can re-file within one year of this order.

The facts alleged to support this claim are substantially identical to
those of the complaint filed by the Federal Trade Commission on January
31, 2001, against the Company and Oil-Chem, in the United States
District Court, Middle District of North Carolina.


TERADYNE INC.: To Ask MA Court To Dismiss Amended Securities Fraud Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Teradyne, Inc. intends to ask the United States District Court in
Boston, Massachusetts to dismiss the securities class action pending
against it and two of its executive officers, alleging federal
securities violations.

The amended suit alleges, among other things, that the defendants
violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, by making, during the period from July 14, 2000 until October 17,
2000, material misrepresentations and omissions to the investing public
regarding the Company's business operations and future prospects.

The Company strongly believes that the purported class action lacks
merit.

The Company could incur substantial costs defending the lawsuit.The
lawsuit could also divert the time and attention of its management.The
Company cannot predict the outcome of the lawsuits at this time, and can
give no assurance that it will not materially adversely affect its
financial position or results of operations.


TEXAS: Harris County Constable Faces Lawsuit Seeking Unpaid Overtime
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Six office workers and two ex-employees have filed a class action
against Harris County and former Constable Perry Wooten, claiming both
parties failed to pay them overtime for thousands of hours worked, the
Associated Press Newswires reports.

The lawsuit says Mr. Wooten required them to work up to 12 hours a day
without overtime compensation.Mr. Wooten, who faces charges of
official misconduct, is also named in a whistle-blower lawsuit filed by
two of the plaintiffs, Kimil Valentine, 28, and former Sgt. Robert
Casey, 45.Mr. Valentine and Mr. Casey claim they were fired by Mr.
Wooten in retaliation for helping the Harris County district attorney's
office in its investigation of the constable.

Mr. Wooten is accused of running a bogus time-sheet scheme in which he
allegedly used deputies to chauffeur him around and run errands, costing
taxpayers thousands of dollars.The lawsuit also alleges that Mr.
Wooten pressed employees into political work and pressured them for
money, and that he fired a sergeant for refusing to give him $5,000 to
pay his legal bills.

Mr. Wooten stepped down from his office as constable voluntarily when
Harris County Attorney Michael Stafford filed a civil lawsuit seeking to
oust him.However, Mr. Wooten remains on the county payroll while the
investigation continues.


UNILAB CORPORATION: Asks NY Court To Dismiss Amended Securities Lawsuit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Unilab Corporation has asked the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York to dismiss the amended securities class
action pending against it and its board of directors.

The suit was initially commenced in November 1999, by two of the
Company's former stockholders, seeking compensatory damages, prejudgment
interest, expenses on behalf of the class of shareholders and a
preliminary injunction against the November 1999 recapitalization.

The complaint alleges, among other things, that the proxy statement
relating to the Company's recapitalization contained material
misrepresentations and omissions in violation of the federal proxy rules
and that approval of the terms of the recapitalization amounted to a
breach of the fiduciary duties owed to the Company's stockholders by its
directors.

Plaintiffs and defendants negotiated a settlement in principle of the
action, subject to completion of confirmatory discovery and definitive
documentation relating to the settlement and court approval.

However, in November 2000, plaintiffs announced that they would not
agree to consummate the settlement.The plaintiffs then filed a second
amended complaint against the Company and its former board of directors.

The second amended complaint adds as a defendant BT Alex. Brown, the
investment banker that delivered a fairness opinion in connection with
the Company's recapitalization.The complaint asserts additional claims
and allegations, including that the defendants brought the Company
private in order to obtain large profits for themselves and others, to
the detriment of the public shareholders prior to the recapitalization.
The complaint also seeks exemplary damages.

On April 16, 2002, the court granted defendants' motion to dismiss the
second amended complaint, but granted plaintiffs leave to amend.On May
16, 2002, plaintiffs filed their third amended complaint.

The Company believes the plaintiffs' claims are without merit, but
because this matter is in the early stages of litigation it is not
possible to predict the likelihood of a favorable or unfavorable
outcome.


UNITED LIBERTY: Mediation Commencing in OH Suit Over Insurance Policies
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mediation in the class action pending against United Liberty Life
Insurance Company has commenced in Ohio state court, and negotiations
are continuing for settlement of the suit.

The lawsuit refers to a particular class of life insurance policies that
the Company issued over a period of years ending around 1971.It
alleges that the Company's dividend payments on these policies from 1993
through 1999 were less than the required amount.It does not specify
the amount of the alleged underpayment but implies a maximum of about
US$850,000.

The plaintiffs also allege the Company is liable to pay punitive
damages, also in an unspecified amount, for breach of an implied
covenant of good faith and fair dealing to the plaintiffs in relation to
the dividends.The action has been certified as a class action on
behalf of all policyholders whose policies were issued in Ohio and were
still in force in 1993.

The Company denies the suit's material allegations and is defending the
action vigorously.Pre-trial discovery is continuing. The Company has
also filed a motion for summary judgment to which the plaintiffs have
not yet responded.

As a pre-requisite for the mediation, the Company offered to settle the
matter for payments over time, which would include attorneys' fees, and
which would be contingent upon an exchange or reformation of the
insurance policies currently owned by the members of the class.

At this stage of the litigation, the Company is unable to determine
whether an unfavorable outcome of the action is likely to occur or,
alternatively, whether the chance of such an outcome is remote.
Therefore, at this time, management has no basis for estimating
potential losses, if any.

                 New Securities Fraud Cases

AMERICAN ELECTRIC: Spector Roseman Commences Securities Suit in S.D. OH
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Spector, Roseman & Kodroff, PC initiated a securities class action on
behalf of purchasers of the securities of American Electric Power
Company, Inc. (NYSE: AEP) between April 24, 2001 and October 9, 2002,
inclusive, in the United States District Court, Southern District of
Ohio, Eastern Division against the Company, E. Linn Draper, Jr. and
Susan Tomasky.

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 24, 2001 and October 9, 2002, thereby artificially
inflating the price of Company securities.

Throughout the class period, as alleged in the complaint, AEP issued
materially false and misleading statements regarding its increasing
energy trading revenues and earnings.As alleged in the complaint,
these statements were materially false and misleading because they
failed to disclose, among other things, that:

(1) the Company failed to implement appropriate risk management
procedures regarding information provided to trade
publications;

(2) as a result of this failure to implement appropriate risk
management procedures, the Company was manipulating price
indices used throughout the industry;

(3) as a result of this manipulation, the Company gained revenue
and profits that it could not maintain absent manipulation;

(4) without improper manipulation, the Company could not
successfully maintain its energy trading business; and

(5) as a result, the energy trading business was not the business
opportunity that the Company presented throughout the class
period.

On October 9, 2002, the last day of the class period, AEP announced that
it had fired five of its thirty natural-gas traders, who AEP stated had
given false gas pricing data to index publishers.While AEP
acknowledged that its traders had not been engaged in "ethical business
practices," it claimed that it did not know whether the false data
affected the published indices.In fact, no one at AEP asked any of the
fired traders why they engaged in the fraudulent activities.

As alleged in the complaint, by making this announcement, AEP was
essentially admitting that it had failed to institute appropriate
oversight measures to prevent the wrongful activity, and by doing so,
was able to make substantial profits from its energy selling activities.

For more details, contact Robert Roseman by Phone: 1-888-844-5862 or by
E-mail: classaction@srk-law.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.srk-law.com/dbjoinaclassaction.asp


OM GROUP: Scott + Scott Lodges Suit For Securities Violations in N.D. OH
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott + Scott, LLC initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio on behalf of
purchasers of OM Group Inc. (NYSE: OMG) publicly traded securities
during the period between July 30, 2002 and Oct. 30, 2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.The
Company produces and markets metal-based specialty chemicals and related
materials.Certain of the Company's products are value-added and some
are commodity.

It is also alleged that, during the class period, defendants made false
statements about the Company's business and prospects.After reporting
somewhat disappointing 2Q02 results, defendants told investors that its
business was strong and all the indicators were for a good second half.
As a result, Company stock continued to trade above $50 per share.

On September 19,2002, the Company warned the 3Q02 results would be
slightly lower than prior statements, but that results would still be
significantly higher than in the prior year.Then, on October 29,2002
the Company announced a huge loss, an inventory write-down and a future
restructuring.Company stock dropped to as low as $8.60 per share on
volume of $22 million shares.

Later, on October 31,2002, it was disclosed that OM Group's Chief
Executive Officer had sold all his holdings to cover a margin call on
some 710,000 shares on OM Group stock which he had used as collateral
for a huge loan.On this news, the stock dropped even further to as low
as $6.12 per share.

For more details, contact Neil Rothstein by Phone: 800/404-7770 by E-
mail: nrothstein@scott-scott.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.scott-scott.com.


OM GROUP: Cauley Geller Files Suit For Securities Violations in N.D. OH
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio,
on behalf of purchasers of OM Group, Inc. (NYSE: OMG) common stock
during the period between April 25, 2002 and October 30, 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.The Company produces and markets
metal-based specialty chemicals and related materials.Certain of the
Company's products are value- added and some are commodity.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that after reporting somewhat
disappointing 2ndQ 02 results, defendants told investors that its
business was strong and all the indicators were for a good second half.
As a result, Company stock continued to trade above $50 per share.

On September 19,2002, the Company warned the 3rdQ 02 results would be
slightly lower than prior statements, but that results would still be
significantly higher than in the prior year.Then, the Company
announced a huge loss, an inventory write-down and a future
restructuring.Company stock dropped to as low as $8.60 per share on
volume of $22 million shares.

Later, on October 31,2002, it was disclosed that OM Group's Chief
Executive Officer had sold all his holdings to cover a margin call on
some 710,000 shares on Company stock which he had used as collateral for
a huge loan.On this news, the stock dropped even further to as low as
$6.12 per share.

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


OM GROUP: Marc Henzel Lodges Suit For Securities Violations in N.D. OH
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio on
behalf of purchasers of OM Group Inc. (NYSE: OMG) publicly traded
securities during the period between July 30, 2002 and Oct. 30, 2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. OM
Group produces and markets metal-based speciality chemicals and related
materials.Certain of the Company's products are value-added and some
are commodity.

The complaint alleges that during the class period, defendants made
false statements about the Company's business and prospects.After
reporting somewhat disappointing 2ndQ 02 results, defendants told
investors that its business was strong and all the indicators were for a
good second half.As a result, Company stock continued to trade above
$50 per share.

On September 19,2002, the Company warned the 3rdQ 02 results would be
slightly lower than prior statements, but that results would still be
significantly higher than in the prior year.Then, on October 29,2002,
the Company announced a huge loss, an inventory write-down and a future
restructuring.Company stock dropped to as low as $8.60 per share on
volume of $22 million shares.

Later, on October 31,2002, it was disclosed that the Company's Chief
Executive Officer had sold all his holdings to cover a margin call on
some 710,000 shares on OM Group stock which he had used as collateral
for a huge loan.On this news, the stock dropped even further to as low
as $6.12 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


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.

The Company 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, the
Company 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, the Company 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, Company
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 or by E-mail: mail@kaplanfox.com


RETEK INC.: Weiss & Yourman Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MN Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Weiss & Yourman initiated a securities class action against Retek, Inc.
(NASDAQ:RETK), and certain of its officers and directors in the United
States District Court for the District of Minnesota, on behalf of
purchasers of Company securities between October 17, 2001 and July 8,
2002.

The complaint charges the defendants with violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.The complaint alleges that defendants issued
false and misleading statements which artificially inflated the stock.

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


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. ("Salomon"), 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 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. Also, it
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.In issuing Metromedia
reports, in which it recommended the purchase of Metromedia common
stock, defendants failed to disclose material, non-public, adverse
information, which 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. The
class period 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, Donald Hall or Laurence D.
King by Mail: 805 Third Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10022 by Phone:
800-290-1952 or visit the firm's Website: http://www.kaplanfox.com


ST. PAUL: Spector Roseman Commences Securities Suit in CA Federal Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Spector, Roseman & Kodroff, PC initiated a securities class action on
behalf of purchasers of the securities of St. Paul Companies (NYSE: SPC)
between November 5, 2001 and July 9, 2002, inclusive, against the
Company, Chief Executive Officer J.S. Fishman and Chief Financial
Officer Thomas A. Bradley, in the United States District Court in
California.

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

During the class period, the suit also alleges, 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).

Plaintiff claims that although trial of the Western MacArthur litigation
commenced in approximately March 2002, the Company first disclosed the
existence of the litigation on or about May 15, 2002, but did not
disclose or quantify the amount or general magnitude of potential
exposure to liability which St. Paul might suffer as a result of the
litigation, nor did the Company increase its reserves at that time.

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 was only $367 million.

The suit 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, and that 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 Robert Roseman by Phone: 1-888-844-5862 by E-
mail: classaction@srk-law.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.srk-law.com


SYNCOR INTERNATIONAL: 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,
Western Division on behalf of all persons who purchased Syncor
International Corp. (NasdaqNM: SCOR) common stock during the period
March 30, 2000 through and including November 5, 2002.

The suit charges 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 press releases and public filings trumpeting
significant sales growth in the Company's international business.

According to the suit, these press releases and public filings were
materially false and misleading in that they failed to disclose that
throughout the class period, the Company's Chairman of the Board and the
director of its Asian division were making illegal payments to Syncor's
overseas customers.

Before the market opened on November 6, 2002, the Company shocked the
market by announcing that it was conducting an internal investigation
into illegal payments to its overseas customers and had contacted the
Justice Department and the Securities Exchange Commission, and that its
previously announced acquisition by Cardinal Health, Inc. was in doubt.

As a result of this news, Syncor's stock price dropped sharply in pre-
market trading to $22.50 per share, down $13.42 per share from its
previous closing price of $35.92, and NASDAQ halted trading of Syncor's
stock pending a satisfactory response to its request for additional
information from 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


TENET HEALTHCARE: Spector Roseman Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Spector, Roseman & Kodroff, PC initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the Central District of California
on behalf of purchasers of Tenet Healthcare Corporation (NYSE: THC)
publicly traded securities during the period between October 3, 2001 and
October 31, 2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.The
Company, through its subsidiaries, owns or operates general hospitals
and related health care facilities serving communities in the United
States.It also alleges that during the class period, defendants
represented that the Company's favorable financial results were due to
its commitment to quality and cost-effective care.Throughout the class
period, defendants repeatedly stated that Tenet's financials were
strong, the Company's stellar bottom line was attributed to its state-
of-the-art facilities and high-quality patient care, and that Tenet was
consistently achieving record results.

The plaintiffs contend the defendants actually knew that the quality of
Tenet's profits were inflated by, among other things, wrongfully
inducing patients into undergoing unnecessary and invasive surgeries.
Defendants knowingly or in conscious disregard for the truth engaged in
a scheme to cause patients to undergo unnecessary invasive coronary
procedures.The scheme allegedly included unnecessary heart
catheterizaton, including angiogram and intravascular ultrasound, stent
placement, angioplasty, coronary artery bypass surgery and heart valve
replacement surgery.

On October 31, 2002, The Associated Press issued a press release
entitled, "Tenet Healthcare Stock Plunges After Report of
Investigation." The press release stated in part: "Shares of Tenet
Healthcare Corp. plunged more than 26 percent Thursday after federal
prosecutors in Sacramento filed an affidavit regarding alleged false
billing by two doctors at the company's hospital in Redding, Calif.

The stock was also hurt by a rumor, denied by the company, that the FBI
had searched its corporate headquarters in Santa Barbara, Calif." These
disclosures shocked the market, causing Tenet's stock to decline to less
than $29 per share before closing at $28.75 per share on October 31,
2002, on volume of more than 50 million shares.

For more details, contact Robert Roseman by Phone: 1-888-844-5862 or by
E-mail: classaction@srk-law.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.srk-law.com


TENET HEALTHCARE: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Fraud 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 Tenet Healthcare Corporation (NYSE: THC)
publicly traded securities during the period between October 3, 2001 and
October 31, 2002.

The complaint charges Tenet and certain of its officers and directors
with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.Tenet, through
its subsidiaries, owns or operates general hospitals and related health
care facilities serving communities in the United States.

The complaint alleges that during the class period, defendants
represented that Tenet's favorable financial results were due to its
commitment to quality and cost-effective care.Throughout the class
period, defendants repeatedly stated that Tenet's financials were
strong, the Company's stellar bottom line was attributed to its state-
of-the-art facilities and high-quality patient care, and that Tenet was
consistently achieving record results.


Defendants allegedly knew that the quality of Tenet's profits were
inflated by, among other things, wrongfully inducing patients into
undergoing unnecessary and invasive surgeries.Defendants knowingly or
in conscious disregard for the truth engaged in a scheme to cause
patients to undergo unnecessary invasive coronary procedures.The
scheme included unnecessary heart catheterizaton, including angiogram
and intravascular ultrasound, stent placement, angioplasty, coronary
artery bypass surgery and heart valve replacement surgery.

On October 31, 2002, The Associated Press issued a press release
entitled, "Tenet Healthcare Stock Plunges After Report of
Investigation." The press release stated in part: "Shares of Tenet
Healthcare Corp. plunged more than 26 percent Thursday after federal
prosecutors in Sacramento filed an affidavit regarding alleged false
billing by two doctors at the company's hospital in Redding, Calif.

The stock was also hurt by a rumor, denied by the company, that the FBI
had searched its corporate headquarters in Santa Barbara, Calif."These
disclosures shocked the market, causing Tenet's stock to decline to less
than $29 per share before closing at $28.75 per share on October 31,
2002, on volume of more than 50 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: Spector Roseman Commences Securities Suit in N.D. TX
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Spector, Roseman & Kodroff, PC initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas,
Dallas Division, against defendants TXU Corporation (NYSE: TXU), and
certain of its officers and directors, on behalf of purchasers of the
stock of TXU during the period from January 31, 2002 through October 11,
2002, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder.Specifically, the lawsuit claims that the defendants
artificially inflated the Company's stock price by misrepresenting the
condition of the Company's European operations throughout the class
period.

The complaint alleges that the Company lacked a reasonable basis for its
earnings projections for fiscal 2002 and 2003.Specifically, the
defendants failed to disclose to investors that:

(1) TXU's operations in Europe and, specifically, those in the
United Kingdom were plagued with deficient, inadequate, and
faulty internal and financial controls;

(2) TXU's risk management in Europe was virtually non-existent,
and there was no means of addressing the risk to TXU from the
UK's unregulated electricity market;

(3) at least one credit facility worth approximately $500 million
contained "cross-default" provisions between TXU Europe and
TXU;

(4) TXU's UK operations used wholesale electricity "structured
transactions" to meet earnings goals in violation of Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles by shifting earnings and
profits from one quarterly period to another;

(5) the Company's UK operations had entered into and carried long-
term electricity purchase contracts that were "out of the
money" by some $700 million; and

(6) European operations were impaired and overvalued by billions
of dollars.

On October 4, 2002, the Company announced that it was revising its
earnings expectations for fiscal 2002 and 2003.Company stock plummeted
as a result of this disclosure and subsequent negative disclosure in an
October 7, 2002 analyst meeting, falling from a close of $32.90 per
share on October 3, 2002 to $13.85 on October 8, 2002.

For more details, contact Robert Roseman by Phone: 1-888-844-5862 or
visit the firm's Website: http://www.srk-law.com/dbjoinaclassaction.asp

                        *********


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* * *