---

               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
               Wednesday, December 4, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 239

                              Headlines                            

AMERICA'S CUP: Top US Lawyer Acting For Team Dennis Conner In Dispute
AOL TIME: Pension Benefits Dispute Focus of ERISA Violations Suit in NY
BEVERLY ENTERPRISES: False Statements Alleged in Securities Suit in AK
CANADA: Farmers Commence Suit Against Ottawa Govt Over Mad-Elk Disease
CH ROBINSON: Denies Allegations in Overtime Wage Lawsuit in MN Court

CHORDIANT SOFTWARE: Asks NY Court To Dismiss Securities Fraud Lawsuit
CITIGROUP INC.: Abstains From Initial Sale For Chair's Daughter's Firm
COPPER MOUNTAIN: NY Court Dismisses Officers, Directors from Fraud Suit
deCODE GENETICS: Officers Dismissed From Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY
ERPENBECK: Peoples Bank In Trouble As Shareholders Approve Assets Sale

FLEXSYS LP: Faces Lawsuits Over Rubber Chemicals in CA, FL, NE Courts
FLORIDA: Gay, Lesbian Couples Fight For Same Sex Marriage Legalization
GAYLORD ENTERTAINMENT: Fairness Hearing For Settlement Set For Dec 2002
GOLF TRUST: Trial in Securities Fraud Lawsuit Set June 2003 in MD Court
HOLLAND AMERICA: Norwalk Infection Spreads, Customers Commence Lawsuits

ILLINOIS: State's Supreme Court Changes Class Action Lawsuits' Rules
LASERGATE COMMUNICATIONS: Plaintiffs Asked To Justify Class in Lawsuit
METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Alleged Omissions Spark Securities Suits
METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Court Dismisses Officers, Directors From Suit
MICROSOFT CORPORATION: Seven States Drop Out Of Federal Antitrust Suit

MODEM MEDIA: Court Dismisses Officers, Directors From Securities Suit
NATIONWIDE FINANCIAL: Summary Judgment Granted, Certification Denied
NATIONWIDE FINANCIAL: CT Court Refuses To Dismiss ERISA Insurance Suit
NAVIGANT CONSULTING: Mediation in Securities Suit Set Dec. 2002 in CA
NEW ZEALAND: Lawyers Hope UK Will Settle Vets' Nuclear Exposure Claims

RESONATE INC: Court Dismisses Officers, Directors From Securities Suits
SCOTLAND: Hospital Workers Still On Strike, National Pay Accord Scored
SOUTH KOREA: Millenium Democratic Party Pushes For Corporate Reforms
TELSTRA: Business Owner Threatens To Commence Consumer Fraud Lawsuit
TICKETS.COM: Plaintiffs To Ask For Dismissal of Individual Defendants

UNITED AIRLINES: International Association of Machinists Rejects Deal
UNITED STATES: Landowners On Katy Trail Awarded over $400,000 Damages
WASHINGTON: US Supreme Court Hears Billion Dollar Foster-Child Lawsuit

                  Meetings, Conferences & Seminars

* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
* Online Teleconferences

                             *********

ALLEGHENY ENERGY: Berman DeValerio Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
DPL INC.: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. Ohio
FOOTSTAR INC.: Weiss & Yourman Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
FOOTSTAR INC.: Cauley Geller Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
TRANSACTION SYSTEMS: Kirby McInerney Commences Securities Suit in NE

                             *********

AMERICA'S CUP: Top US Lawyer Acting For Team Dennis Conner In Dispute
---------------------------------------------------------------------
One of America's top U.S. Lawyers, Richard Scruggs, has moved from
defending the tobacco executive who blew the whistle on what the
tobacco companies knew about the addictive properties of cigarettes, to
backing long-time friend Dennis Conner in his America Cup's legal
dispute, the New Zealand Herald reported.

Team Dennis Conner would not confirm whether Mr. Scruggs, a Mississippi
lawyer who made his legal mark taking class actions over asbestos
poisoning, later moving into tobacco lawsuits, was acting for them and
Prada, in a joint bid to have OneWorld Challenge thrown out of the
America's Cup over allegedly using other teams' design secrets.  
Reportedly, however, Mr. Scruggs has written to OneWorld and told them
to pull out to protect the "dignity" of the event.

The New York Times said that Mr. Scruggs has accused OneWorld of using
lawsuits to try to prevent evidence against the Seattle team being
presented to the America Cup's Arbitration Panel, which will hear the
dispute the first week in December.

Team Conner spokesman said Mr. Scruggs was not currently in New
Zealand, and would not say whether Mr. Scruggs was an addition to Mr.
Conner's legal team in the New York Yacht Club's battle with the
Seattle Yacht Club.


AOL TIME: Pension Benefits Dispute Focus of ERISA Violations Suit in NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
AOL Time Warner, Inc. faces a class action pending in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York.  The suit names
as defendants the Company and:

    (1) Time Warner Entertainment, Inc.,

    (2) Warner-Elektra-Atlantic Corporation,

    (3) WEA Manufacturing Inc.,

    (4) Warner Bros. Records,

    (5) Atlantic Recording Corporation,

    (6) various pension plans sponsored by the companies and

    (7) the administrative committees of those plans.

The suit, originally filed in the United States District Court in the
Central District of California, allege that defendants miscalculated
the proper amount of pension benefits owed to them and other class
members as required under the plans in violation of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

The Company believes the lawsuit has no merit, but due to its
preliminary status, the Company is unable to predict the outcome of the
case or reasonably estimate a range of possible loss.


BEVERLY ENTERPRISES: False Statements Alleged in Securities Suit in AK
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Beverly Enterprises, Inc. faces several securities class actions filed
in the United States District Court, Western District of Arkansas, Fort
Smith Division, namely:

     (1) Ernest Baer v. Beverly Enterprises, Inc., et. al.,

     (2) Stanley V. Kensic v. Beverly Enterprises, Inc., et. al., and

     (3) Charles Krebs v. Beverly Enterprises, Inc., et. al.

The suits were filed as purported securities fraud class actions under
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.  The suits name as defendants the
Company:

    (i) William R. Floyd,

   (ii) David R. Devereaux,

  (iii) Jeffrey P. Freimark, and

   (iv) Ernst & Young LLP

In all three cases, the purported class period runs from October 16,
2000 to and including July 19, 2002.  Plaintiffs claim that the
defendants, during the purported class period, made false and
misleading statements.  They claim that:

     (a) the Company's assets and earnings were overstated and loss
         provisions and expenses were understated;

     (b) the defendants were aware that the provision for doubtful
         accounts was inadequate; and

     (c) patient care liability reserves were not determined in
         accordance with generally accepted accounting principles

No defendant in these cases has been served with a summons or
complaint.  Due to the preliminary state of the Baer Case, the Kensic
Case and the Krebs Case and the fact that none of these cases alleges
damages with any specificity, the Company is unable at this time to
assess the probable outcome of the cases.

The Company believes that plaintiffs' allegations that the defendants
acted unlawfully are without merit.  


CANADA: Farmers Commence Suit Against Ottawa Govt Over Mad-Elk Disease
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Saskatchewan elk and deer farmers are suing the federal government, say
it failed to prevent the spread of a chronic wasting disease to their
herds from imported animals, The Globe and Mail reports.  Lawyers for
the farmers said that they will seek class-action status for the
lawsuit, filed recently in the Court of Queen's Bench, in Saskatchewan.

The lawsuit alleges that the federal government was negligent in
allowing animals with so-called "mad-elk disease" to enter Canada from
the United States.  The farmers also allege that the government failed
to warn farmers who were importing elk from the United States that the
animals might be afflicted with the deadly disease.


CH ROBINSON: Denies Allegations in Overtime Wage Lawsuit in MN Court
--------------------------------------------------------------------
C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. faces a class action filed in Minnesota
federal court, alleging that nearly all of the Company's sales force
have been mischaracterized as exempt in order to deprive them of
overtime wages for working more than 40 hours a week, an earlier Class
Action Reporter story states.  

The plaintiffs in both lawsuits seek unspecified monetary and non-
monetary damages and class action certification.  The Company denies
all allegations.  Currently, the amount of any possible loss to the
Company cannot be estimated; however, an unfavorable result could have
a material adverse effect.


CHORDIANT SOFTWARE: Asks NY Court To Dismiss Securities Fraud Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Chordiant Software, Inc. asked the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York to dismiss the consolidated securities
class action pending against it and certain of its officers and
directors.

The suit alleges that the Company's registration statement and
prospectus contained untrue statements of material fact or omitted
material facts regarding the compensation to be received by, and the
stock allocation practices of, the IPO underwriters and thus claimed
that the Company, certain of its officers and directors and its IPO
underwriters had violated the federal securities laws.

Similar complaints were filed in the same court against over one
hundred other public companies that had conducted IPOs of their common
stock in the late 1990s.  On August 8, 2001, the IPO Lawsuits were
consolidated for pretrial purposes before United States Judge Shira
Scheindlin of the Southern District of New York.  Judge Scheindlin held
an initial case management conference on September 7, 2001, at which
time she ordered, among other things, that the time for all defendants
to respond to any complaint be postponed until further order of the
Court.  Thus, the Company has not been required to answer the
complaint, and no discovery has been served on it.

In accordance with Judge Scheindlin's orders at further status
conferences in March and April 2002, the appointed lead plaintiffs'
counsel filed amended, consolidated complaints in the IPO Lawsuits on
April 19, 2002.  The issuer and individual defendants filed their
omnibus motion to dismiss the IPO Lawsuits on July 15, 2002, in
accordance with the briefing schedule established by the court.

Judge Scheindlin does not expect to issue a decision on this motion
until at least November 2002.  The Company believes that this lawsuit
is without merit.


CITIGROUP INC.: Abstains From Initial Sale For Chair's Daughter's Firm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Salomon Smith Barney, the investment bank unit of Citigroup Inc., has
decided not to seek a role in arranging the initial stock sale for
National Financial Partners Corp., a company run by the daughter of
Citigroup Chairman Sanford I. Weill, the Los Angeles Times reported.

This decision is fueled, in part, by the fact that Citigroup, the
world's biggest financial services company by market value, is being
probed by regulators for conflicts of interest.  In addition to not
wanting to arouse additional investigation by the regulators, there is
also present the possibility that any matter that provides fresh cause
for investigation by the regulators will also stir the interest of
investors and subsequently provide them evidence, of substance or not,
for class actions.

Citigroup's decision shows how probes by New York Attorney General
Eliot Spitzer and the Security and Exchange Commission have forced the
company to reconsider the way it does business, the analysts said about
this new occurrence.

Chairman Weill's daughter, Jessica Bibliowicz, is president and chief
executive of National Financial, a firm backed by financier Leon Black
that buys insurance and financial planning firms.  "Sandy and Jessica
agreed together that it was more appropriate to use other bankers,"
said Citigroup spokeswoman Leah Johnson.

Mr. Spitzer is reviewing Mr. Weill's role in helping former Salomon
analyst Jack Grubman get his children into an exclusive New York
nursery school and Mr. Weill's request that Mr. Grubman "take a fresh
look" at AT&T Corp., of which Mr. Weill was a board member.  Citigroup
was hired to help arrange a sale of shares in AT&T's mobile-phone
business after Mr. Grubman raised his rating on AT&T.

Mr. Weill agreed last month to leave the AT&T board, where he has been
a director since 1998.  Citigroup probably will pay a $500 million fine
to settle investigations into whether Salomon analysts misled
investors, people familiar with the talks said.


COPPER MOUNTAIN: NY Court Dismisses Officers, Directors from Fraud Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
dismissed certain of Copper Mountain Networks, Inc.'s officers and
directors as defendants in the securities class action filed on behalf
of the Company's shareholders.

The suit alleges that the Company, certain of its officers and
directors and its IPO underwriters violated the federal securities laws
because the Company's IPO registration statement and prospectus
contained untrue statements of material fact or omitted material facts
regarding the compensation to be received by, and the stock allocation
practices of, the IPO underwriters.  

Similar complaints were filed in the same court against numerous public
companies that conducted initial public offerings (IPOs) of their
common stock since the mid-1990s.  These suits were consolidated for
pretrial purposes before United States Judge Shira Scheindlin of the
Southern District of New York.

Judge Scheindlin held an initial case management conference on
September 7, 2001, at which time she ordered, among other things, that
the time for all defendants to respond to any complaint be postponed
until further order of the court.  

On July 15, 2002, the Issuer defendants in the IPO Cases, including the
Company and its named officers and directors, filed a motion to dismiss
the claims against them.  Judge Scheindlin heard oral argument on the
motion on November 1, 2002.  

The claims against the named officers and directors were dismissed
without prejudice pursuant to a stipulation providing for a tolling of
the statutes of limitations against those defendants.  No discovery has
been served on the Company.  The Company intends to vigorously defend
against the suit.


deCODE GENETICS: Officers Dismissed From Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
deCODE genetics, Inc.'s executive officers have been dismissed as
defendants in the securities class action pending in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The suit alleges violations of federal securities laws on behalf of
certain purchasers of the Company's common stock.  The complaint
originally named the Company, two of the Company's current executive
officers, and the two lead underwriters for the Company's initial
public offering in July 2000 as defendants.

In the amended pleading, the plaintiff alleges violations of Section 11
of the Securities Act of 1933 and violations of Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder)
against the Company, the individual defendants and the underwriter
defendants.  In addition, the amended complaint alleges violations of
Section 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the individual defendants.

Generally, the amended complaint alleges that the underwriter
defendants:

     (1) solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions
         from certain investors in exchange for which the underwriter
         defendants allocated to those investors material portions of
         the shares of the Company's stock sold in the IPO;

     (2) entered into agreements with customers whereby the underwriter
         defendants agreed to allocate shares of our stock sold in the
         IPO to those customers in exchange for which the customers
         agreed to purchase additional shares of the Company's stock in
         the aftermarket at pre-determined prices; and

     (3) improperly used their analysts, who purportedly suffered from
         conflicts of interest, to manipulate the market.

The amended complaint further alleges that the prospectus incorporated
into the registration statement for the IPO was materially false and
misleading in that it failed to disclose these arrangements.  The
amended complaint also alleges that the Company and the individual
defendants had numerous interactions and contacts with the underwriters
from which the Company and the individual defendants either knew of, or
recklessly disregarded, the underwriters' purported wrongful acts.

The suit seeks unspecified monetary and recissionary damages and
certification of a plaintiff class consisting of all persons who
purchased shares of the Company's common stock from July 17, 2000 to
December 6, 2000.

The Company is aware that similar allegations have been made in
hundreds of other lawsuits filed (many by some of the same plaintiff
law firms) against numerous underwriter defendants and issuer companies
(and certain of their current and former officers) in connection with
various public offerings conducted in recent years.  All of the
lawsuits that have been filed in the Southern District of New York have
been consolidated for pretrial purposes before Honorable Judge Shira
A. Scheindlin.

The individual defendants have been dismissed from the action without
prejudice.  The Company believes that the allegations against it and
its officers are without merit and intends to contest them vigorously.  
The Company has filed a motion to dismiss these allegations.

Judge Scheindlin heard oral argument on this motion on November 1,
2002.  The Company does not know when Judge Scheindlin will rule on
this motion.  At this juncture, the litigation remains in its
preliminary stage, and the Company cannot predict its outcome and the
ultimate effect, if any, on its financial condition.


ERPENBECK: Peoples Bank In Trouble As Shareholders Approve Assets Sale
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eight months after discovering that its biggest borrower, Erpenbeck
Co., was in serious financial trouble, Peoples Bank of Northern
Kentucky recently won shareholder approval for an assets sale
transaction that will take it out of the banking business, The
Cincinnati Enquirer reported.  The Peoples Bank signs on its eight
branches, after the assets sale transaction, will have been replaced by
signs bearing the name, The Bank of Kentucky.

Shareholders, early in the bank's troubles, brought a class action.  
What they will receive ultimately for the devaluation of their shares
will depend on how much money remains after all debts and claims are
paid.  The bank's original shareholders paid about $8 a share in 1992,
after adjusting for stock splits and dividends.  Peoples expects them
to receive $8 to $11 for their shares.

The transaction, a $15 million asset sale, involving its eight
branches, deposits and loans, was approved by 99 percent of the roughly
1.1 million shares voted on behalf of the 10-year-old, privately owned
bank.  The deal also received the approval of banking regulators.  .

In March, Peoples directors learned that the Erpenbeck Co. was in
default on nearly $8 million in loans.  Over the next several weeks,
those directors learned that two of the bank's top officers had real
estate dealings with Erpenbeck and that Erpenbeck had defaulted on tens
of millions of dollars in obligations to home buyers, banks and
suppliers.  By the end of April, the two officers were out, and the
federal government began a massive multi-agency investigation of the
Erpenbeck-Peoples connection.

Because Erpenbeck had used its accounts at Peoples to deposit about $25
million in home-purchase checks intended for construction lenders,
Peoples faced an onslaught of lawsuits holding it accountable for the
missing money.  In July, with lawsuits and claims still pouring in,
Peoples announced its deal with The Bank of Kentucky.

The bank had no alternative to selling.  Its capital base had eroded to
the point where the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation was likely to
order a liquidation, Peoples said in a legal document given to its
shareholders.

The transaction has put about $15 million into the Peoples' kitty for
creditor claims and shareholder payoffs.  However, the shareholders
will not see their money anytime soon.  Under Kentucky law, creditors
of liquidated banks have two years to file claims before the bank's
shareholders can be compensated.


FLEXSYS LP: Faces Lawsuits Over Rubber Chemicals in CA, FL, NE Courts
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Flexsys, L.P., a 50/50 rubber chemicals joint venture between Solutia
and Akzo Nobel N.V., has been named as a defendant in four class
actions along with other producers of rubber chemicals:

    (1) Bruce v. Crompton Corporation, et al., Superior Court of the
        State of California in the County of Los Angeles,

    (2) Homes v. Crompton Corporation et al. in Superior Court of the
        State of California in the County of Los Angeles,

    (3) Myers v. Crompton Corporation et al. in the Circuit Court of
        the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County,
        Florida, and

    (4) Carr v. Crompton Corporation et al. in the District Court of
        Lancaster County, Nebraska

Each seeks actual and treble damages under state law on behalf of all
retail purchasers in that state of tires manufactured using rubber-
processing chemicals sold by defendants, including the Company, since
1994.

The Company has been fully cooperating with the authorities and will
continue to do so.  It also intends to defend vigorously against the
litigation.


FLORIDA: Gay, Lesbian Couples Fight For Same Sex Marriage Legalization
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Two New York City snowbirds are like a lot of other couples in Century
Village, a massive West Palm Beach senior community.  They are both
retired, they find 24-hour togetherness can get a little grating and
they have little spats, only to make up very soon afterwards.  After
all, they have been together 27 years and cannot imagine life without
each other.  However, some things will be very different for them as
they and their neighbors age, Florida's Orlando-Sentinel reported.

As a lesbian couple, Ruth Berman and Connie Kurtz today can register as
domestic partners in some states and seal their union with a commitment
ceremony in others.  They cannot legally marry in any state, however.  
That means that when one dies, the other will not be entitled to Social
Security survivor benefits.  In Florida, they could not adopt one of
their grandchildren even if the parents approved.  Federal tax laws are
different for them if one transfers property to another.

"Legally, we are not a couple until we have been joined by a recognized
(civil union).  Domestic-partnership laws are very nice, but that is
just feeding little crumbs of cheese to the mice," said Ms. Berman, who
with Ms. Kurtz recently addressed the Open Door group.

Sponsored by the Ruth Rales Jewish Family Service, the Open Door was
Palm Beach County's first program for older adult gays and lesbians.  
It celebrated its fourth anniversary this month.  The two women urged
the 60 people crowded into the room at the Weinberg Senior Center in
Delray Beach, to be more politically active.

In particular, Ms. Berman and Ms. Kurtz urged the gathering to support
the Freedom to Marry Collaborative being organized by gay-rights
attorney and advocate Evan Wolfson.  The group's goal is to bring civil
marriage to at least one state within the next five years.

Besides the proposition of "get out and vote," Ms. Berman, 68, and Ms.
Kurtz, 65, also pushed one other message.  It is never too late to
accept and be yourself.


GAYLORD ENTERTAINMENT: Fairness Hearing For Settlement Set For Dec 2002
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fairness hearing for the settlement proposed by Gaylord
Entertainment, Inc. in the class action pending against it is set for
December 12,2002 in the Second Circuit Court of Davidson County,
Tennessee.

The suit relates to the manner in which Gaylord Opryland distributed
service and delivery charges to certain employees.  Tennessee has a
"Tip" statute that requires a business to pay tips shown on statements
over to its employee or employees who have served the customer.

On October 15, 2002, the court preliminarily approved a settlement of
this matter for an amount that was approximately equal to the Company's
accrued reserve for this particular claim.  A final hearing on the
settlement is set for December 12, 2002, and if the agreement is
approved, final distribution of the settlement funds will be made
within thirty days from December 30, 2002.  The Company agreed to the
settlement without any admission of wrongdoing and for the sole purpose
of ending the lawsuit.


GOLF TRUST: Trial in Securities Fraud Lawsuit Set June 2003 in MD Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Trial in the securities class action filed against Golf Trust of
America, Inc. is set for June 23,2003 in the Circuit Court for
Baltimore City, Maryland.

The suit names as defendants the Company, its directors and officers,
Mr. Larry Young, a former director of the Company, and Banc of America
Securities LLC.  The complaint purports to be a derivative action
brought by Mary Ella Crossley, who claims to be one of the Company's
stockholders.

The plaintiff alleges that payments to the Company's officers under
their employment agreements and an agreement to sell golf courses to
Legends resulted from a breach of the defendants' fiduciary duties to
stockholders.  

The complaint also alleges that the Company's officers defrauded the
company in connection with the renegotiation of the officers'
employment agreements.  Finally, the complaint alleges that the actions
of the defendants in approving the payments under the employment
agreements and the Legends transaction constituted a breach of our
charter resulting in the unjust enrichment of certain individual
defendants.

All of the defendants moved to dismiss the complaint.  In response to
the motion filed by Banc of America Securities LLC, the plaintiff
agreed to dismiss Banc of America Securities LLC from the case without
prejudice.  The plaintiff opposed the motion to dismiss filed by the
Company and the directors, and on May 20, 2002, the court denied the
Company's motion.

On June 19, 2002, the Company and its directors responded to the
complaint by filing a general denial of liability.  The case is now in
the discovery stage.  On October 9, 2002, plaintiff filed a motion to
compel the production of additional documents.  The defendants must
submit pleadings in opposition to that motion by November 15, 2002.


HOLLAND AMERICA: Norwalk Infection Spreads, Customers Commence Lawsuits
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Amsterdam owner Holland America faces a compensation onslaught from
affected passengers, Lloyd's List International reported. It is
believed, say a few involved officials, more lawsuits may be filed.

The Norwalk gastrointestinal virus has snowballed into an epidemic of
bad publicity at Holland America, with a class action filed by the
disgruntled passengers of the grounded Amsterdam, and a fresh batch of
passengers on the Statendam claiming to be infected as well.

Lawyers representing about 500 passengers on the last four voyages of
the 1,380-passenger ship Amsterdam have brought a civil lawsuit against
Holland America in its hometown of Seattle, accusing the Company of
delaying the decision to take the ship out of service for
decontamination.  The passengers reportedly were taken ill during the
Amsterdam's last four voyages before it was finally grounded on
November 21.

A set of class actions, unrelated to the class action arising out of
the afflicted ship, the Amsterdam, already is pending against Holland
America due to outbreaks of the Norwalk virus on the 1,266-passenger
ship, the Ryndam, in July. Separately, 10 passengers on the Ryndam's
sister ship, the Statendam, claimed to be infected when the ship
returned from its last voyage.  However, Holland America has denied
claims that the Norwalk virus is involved in the mild discomfort
experienced by passengers aboard the Statendam.  

A spokeswoman for the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta said a
pair of federal officials recently went aboard the Statendam
unannounced, as it lay anchored in San Diego.  The ship came through
the inspection with flying colors.


ILLINOIS: State's Supreme Court Changes Class Action Lawsuits' Rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Illinois Supreme Court is changing its rules to allow defendants in
class actions to immediately appeal judges' decisions allowing such
cases to proceed, the Associated Press Newswires reports.

The change, which takes effect January 1, would let either side in a
lawsuit seek an appeal of whether a suit was properly certified as a
class action before the suit goes to trial.  The question of whether or
not a plaintiff represents a wider group of potential plaintiffs who
are similarly situated, is one of the first issues decided in the
proceedings.  For the lawsuit to proceed as a class action to discovery
and trial, a trial judge must certify that a representative class of
plaintiffs exists.

Under current state Supreme Court rules, the question of whether the
judge properly certified, or failed to certify, a class of plaintiffs
cannot be appealed until the lawsuit is completed.  This rule, in its
practice, can often be a time-consuming and costly process.  The new
rule mirrors a federal rule adopted four years ago by the US Supreme
Court.

The Illinois Supreme Court's seven justices unanimously approved the
new rule this month at the recommendation of Chief Justice Mary Ann G.
McMorrow, a Chicago Democrat.  A spokesman for the Supreme Court said
that Judge McMorrow has expressed concerns about the rising costs of
litigation for both plaintiffs and defendants.

Madison County has drawn nationwide attention and criticism for the
number of class actions filed there. 60 cases were filed last year and
39 the year before.

Edward Murnane, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League, said
that certification of a class action can cause a defendant to settle
the suit immediately, even if the company believes it is not at fault.
A defendant's right to appeal certification before trial might make
plaintiffs' attorneys think twice about filing suit in Illinois, said
Mr. Murnane.

However, Stephen Tillery, a Belleville plaintiffs' lawyer, who has
filed a number of class actions in Madison County, said he does not see
the new rule as a "sea change."  He said certification of class actions
was far from automatic in Illinois, indicating that it was a thoughtful
process that would not be easily overturned on appeal by a defendant.
Mr. Tillery said that in one of his cases, the defendant flew an expert
witness in from London, and the judge heard three days of testimony
before certifying the case.


LASERGATE COMMUNICATIONS: Plaintiffs Asked To Justify Class in Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs in the securities class action against LaserGate Systems,
Inc. are required to file a motion certifying a valid class exists in
order for the case to proceed as a class action.

The suit was commenced in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of New York, alleging that the Company failed to
disclose, in a 1994 registration statement filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission, that prior to the date of the offering of
Company securities, Sterling Foster & Co., Inc., the underwriter of the
offering, had secretly agreed to release several shareholders from
"lock-up" agreements for the purpose of selling their shares to
Sterling Foster at reduced prices.

The plaintiffs allege that the Company violated Sections 11 and 12(2)
of the Securities Act of 1933, Sections 10(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder and Section
349 of the New York General Business law, as well as made other
negligent misrepresentations.

In August 1999, the Company filed a motion with the court to dismiss
the complaint against it.  In June of 2002, the court issued its
decision on the motion to dismiss, whereby plaintiff's claims asserted
under Section 349 of the New York General Business law and claims based
on alleged negligent misrepresentations were dismissed.  The court
sustained plaintiff's claims asserted under Securities Act of 1933
and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The Company is in the process of preparing an answer to the remaining
claims in the case, and intends to file a cross-claim against Sterling
Foster & Co. and certain former principals of Sterling Foster & Co. for
indemnity.  


METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Alleged Omissions Spark Securities Suits
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Metawave Communications faces several securities class actions pending
against it and certain of its current and former officers in the United
States District Court for the Western District of Washington, on behalf
of persons who purchased the Company's common stock between April 2001
and March 2002.  

The complaints allege the Company made false and misleading statements
or omissions in violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) and Rule 10b-5 of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and seek unspecified compensatory
damages and other relief.

The Company labeled the suits without merit, but cannot give any
assurance that the litigation will be decided in their favor.


METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Court Dismisses Officers, Directors From Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
dismissed Metawave Communications, Inc.'s officers and directors from
the consolidated securities class action filed against them, the
Company and the underwriters who handled the Company's April 26, 2000
initial public offering of common stock. The Company and the
underwriters remain defendants in the case.  

The suit, filed on behalf of persons who purchased the Company's common
stock during the time period beginning on April 26, 2000 and ending on
December 6, 2000, alleges violations of the Securities Act of 1933 and
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 primarily based on the assertion
that there was undisclosed compensation received by the Company's
underwriters in connection with the Company's initial public offering.


MICROSOFT CORPORATION: Seven States Drop Out Of Federal Antitrust Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seven states backed out of the antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft
Corp., leaving only Massachusetts and possibly West Virginia to appeal
a landmark settlement between the computer software company and the
federal government, The Commercial Appeal (Memphis, TN) reports.

Massachusetts recently appealed a US judge's decision accepting the
settlement, which the Massachusetts attorney general criticized as a
"loophole-filled deal" that will not affect Microsoft's aggressive
practices.

Seven other states plus the District of Columbia plan no court action,
said Iowa's attorney general, Thomas Miller.  Mr. Miller has been
coordinating the antitrust fight ever since the Bush administration
negotiated the settlement last year.  Officials in West Virginia
indicated they would decide next week whether to join Massachusetts in
appealing the settlement of the antitrust lawsuit.

US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly this month accepted nearly all
the provisions of the settlement between the government and Microsoft.  
She rebuffed arguments that tougher sanctions were necessary to restore
competition to the computer industry and concluded that some penalties
imposed by the holdout states would chiefly benefit the company's
rivals.

Some legal scholars say that Massachusetts faces an uphill fight in
trying to convince the appellate judges that Judge Kollar-Kotelly erred
in her decision.  "If I were making the call for Massachusetts, I would
say, 'We have fought the good fight, now let's move on to other
problems,'" said Southwestern University law professor Lawrence
Sullivan, who advised the federal government in bringing the suit
against Microsoft.

Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said the decision
"demonstrates both resolve and resources -- each essential to enforce
hard-won remedies against any recurrence of Microsoft's anti-consumer
lawbreaking."  Mr. Blumenthal concluded, therefore, that "consumer
interests are now best served by turning our focus to enforcement."

Mr. Blumenthal added that Microsoft also has agreed to pay $28.6
million to the states, about $25 million to cover legal costs and fees
and $3.6 million for future enforcement and compliance.

Microsoft still faces a series of class actions brought on behalf of
consumers, along with civil suits brought by Sun Microsystems Inc. and
other competitors who claim they were victimized by the company's anti-
competitive tactics.

The Chicago Tribune contributed to this story.


MODEM MEDIA: Court Dismisses Officers, Directors From Securities Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
dismissed Modem Media, Inc.'s officers and directors as defendants in
the consolidated securities class action.  The suit initially named as
defendants the Company, and:

     (1) G.M. O'Connell, Chairman,

     (2) Steven Roberts, former Chief Financial Officer,

     (3) Robert C. Allen II, Board member, a Managing Director and
         former President,

     (4) FleetBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc.,

     (5) BankBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc.,

     (6) Bear Stearns & Co., Inc.,

     (7) Nationsbanc Montgomery Securities and

     (8) Banc of America Securities LLC

The suit alleges, among other things, that the underwriters of the
Company's initial public offering violated the securities laws by
failing to disclose certain alleged compensation arrangements (such as
undisclosed commissions or stock stabilization practices) in the
offering's registration statement and by engaging in manipulative
practices to artificially inflate the price of Company stock in the
after-market subsequent to the IPO.

The Company defendants are named in the amended complaint pursuant to
Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 10(b) and Rule
10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on the basis of an alleged
failure to disclose the underwriters' alleged compensation arrangements
and manipulative practices.  The complaint seeks unspecified damages.

Similar complaints have been filed against over 300 other issuers that
have had initial public offerings since 1998 and all such actions have
been included in a single coordinated proceeding.  In October 2002, the
actions against the individual defendants were dismissed without
prejudice.

Due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation, the Company cannot
accurately predict the ultimate outcome of the litigation.


NATIONWIDE FINANCIAL: Summary Judgment Granted, Certification Denied
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Ohio State Court granted summary judgment in favor of Nationwide
Financial Services, Inc. and ruled that class certification is moot in
the lawsuit relating to the sale of deferred annuity products for use
as investments in tax-deferred contributory retirement plans.  The suit
names as defendants the Company and:

    (1) Nationwide Life Insurance Company and

    (2) Nationwide Life and Annuity Insurance Company

The amended complaint is brought as a class action on behalf of all
persons who purchased individual deferred annuity contracts or
participated in group annuity contracts sold by the Company and the
other named Company affiliates, which were used to fund certain tax-
deferred retirement plans.

In June 1999, the Company and the other named defendants filed a motion
to dismiss the amended complaint.  The court later denied the motion to
dismiss the amended complaint filed by the Company and the other named
defendants.

On January 25, 2002, the plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to amend
their complaint to add three new named plaintiffs.  The plaintiffs
later filed a motion for class certification.

On April 16, 2002, the Company filed a motion for summary judgment on
the individual claims of plaintiff Mercedes Castillo.  On May 28, 2002,
the court denied plaintiffs' motion to add new persons as named
plaintiffs, so the action is now proceeding with Mercedes Castillo as
the only named plaintiff.

On November 4, 2002, the court issued a decision granting the Company's
motion for summary judgment on all plaintiff Mercedes Castillo's
individual claims, and ruling that plaintiff's motion for class
certification is moot.  Judgment for the Company has not yet been
entered.


NATIONWIDE FINANCIAL: CT Court Refuses To Dismiss ERISA Insurance Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court in Connecticut refused to dismiss the
class action filed against Nationwide Financial Services, Inc. and
Nationwide Life Insurance Company, on behalf of a class of retirement
plans that purchased variable annuities from Nationwide Life Insurance
Company to fund qualified Employee Retirement Income Security Act
(ERISA) retirement plans.

The amended complaint alleges that:

     (1) the retirement plans purchased variable annuity contracts from
         the Company that allowed plan participants to invest in funds
         that were offered by separate mutual fund companies;

     (2) the Company was a fiduciary under ERISA;

     (3) the Company breached its fiduciary duty when it accepted
         certain fees from the mutual fund companies that purportedly
         were never disclosed by the Company; and

     (4) that the Company violated ERISA by replacing many of the funds
         originally included in the plaintiffs' annuities with  
         "inferior" funds because the new funds purportedly paid higher
         fees to the Company.

The amended complaint seeks disgorgement of the fees allegedly received
by the Company and other unspecified compensatory damages, declaratory
and injunctive relief and attorney's fees.

On December 3, 2001, the plaintiffs filed a motion for class
certification, which the Company opposed.  The Company intends to
defend this lawsuit vigorously.


NAVIGANT CONSULTING: Mediation in Securities Suit Set Dec. 2002 in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The securities class action pending against Navigant Consulting, Inc.
is scheduled for mediation this month in California State Court.

The suit, filed in 2000 against the Company and two of its former
officers, allege that in 1999 the defendants improperly prevented
stockholders from hedging approximately 40,000 shares of the Company's
stock.  They seek compensatory and punitive damages from defendants
based on various theories.

The Company is vigorously defending this action.  Trial is scheduled
for May 2003.


NEW ZEALAND: Lawyers Hope UK Will Settle Vets' Nuclear Exposure Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Two lawyers are hopeful that the British Government will compensate New
Zealand nuclear test veterans and their families before their
multimillion-dollar claims reach court, according to a report by the
Waikato Times.

The 551 New Zealand veterans made up the ships' companies of two New
Zealand frigates.  When the frigates sailed through radioactive clouds
during British nuclear bomb tests in 1957 and 1958, at the Malden and
Christmas Islands, these men, in the service of the British Government,
were exposed to nuclear radiation.

Since then, many have died and many have contracted cancers and other
illnesses.  The New Zealand Nuclear Test Veterans Association claims
their illnesses and deaths were a result of the radiation exposure.

British lawyers Mervyn Fudge and David Harris are being paid by the
British Legal Services Commission to take a class action for negligence
against the British Government, on behalf of New Zealand and Fijan
servicemen exposed to radiation from nine nuclear blasts.

Of the original 551 veterans only 220 are still alive.  They have met
with their lawyers in Auckland for medical examinations for the purpose
of gathering medical evidence.  The two lawyers said that scientific
advances enabled the gathering of data of such a nature that they are
confident many of the cancers the servicemen now have or have died
from, were a direct result of the radiation.

"Although the British Government has vehemently denied any liability so
far, we believe science is such now, that the denial will not stand,"
said Mr. Fudge.

Mr. Fudge said that they hoped when the evidence was presented to the
British Government, it would settle out of court.  Mr. Harris said the
biggest hurdle would be convincing the British Government on the
accepted legal standard of the "balance of probabilities," that the
cancers were caused by radiations.

The two lawyers said they hoped to have collated enough scientific
evidence by next year to convince the British Government that the
radiation caused the sicknesses.


RESONATE INC: Court Dismisses Officers, Directors From Securities Suits
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
dismissed Resonate, Inc.'s officers and directors from the securities
class action filed on behalf of purchasers of the Company's common
stock from August 2,2000 to December 6,2000.

The suit initially names as defendants the Company, certain of its
officers and directors and certain investment bank underwriters for the
Company's initial public offering (IPO).  The suit generally alleges
undisclosed and improper practices by the underwriters concerning the
allocation of the Company's IPO shares, in violation of federal
securities laws.

Other actions have been filed making similar allegations regarding the
IPOs of more than 300 other companies.  All of these have been
coordinated for pretrial purposes under Judge Shira Scheindlin of the
Southern District of New York.

Defendants in these cases have filed omnibus motions to dismiss on
common pleading issues.  Oral argument on the omnibus motions to
dismiss were conducted on October 29, 2002. The Company believes it has
meritorious defenses to the claims against it.


SCOTLAND: Hospital Workers Still On Strike, National Pay Accord Scored
----------------------------------------------------------------------
More than 300 hospital workers were still on strike in north Glasgow
after condemning a national agreement on low pay as a betrayal of their
regrading claim, The Herald (Glasgow, Scotland) reports.

The clerical and administrative staff, who have been on strike for
three weeks, said the concordat drawn up by their union, Unison, and
other health unions with the Scottish Executive, contained what was
virtually a "no strike" clause.

The executive is expected to back the government with a new minimum pay
rate for all NHS in Scotland.  However, the unofficial strikers said
they had been on the verge of an agreement with North Glasgow NHS Trust
over their regrading claim when the low pay agreement was brought
closer, and the Trust drew back.

Carolyn Leckie, the north Glasgow Unison branch secretary, that there
clearly is a specific strategy to avoid settling legitimate outstanding
claims.  "Organization and action have been shown to be successful.  
This is about defeating that organization.  If the national agreement
is signed up to by the workers, the employers will have won a major
victory with the only too willing help of certain officers in Unison
who equally want to solve the "North Glasgow problem," she said.

Ms. Leckie said that clauses in the concordat effectively stipulate a
no-strike agreement.  "What happens to the disputes procedures?  Who is
the employer?  How can legal industrial action take place and against
whom?"

"These proposals are in direct opposition to current Unison health
conference policy.  There is an attempt to railroad the national
agreement through, and the consequences for all of our members could be
disastrous," she continued.


SOUTH KOREA: Millenium Democratic Party Pushes For Corporate Reforms
--------------------------------------------------------------------
South Korea's Millenium Democratic Party (MDP) is pushing for corporate
reforms designed to prevent the strengthening of chaebol's (large
corporations and conglomerates operating under special rules) hold on
the economy, while securing, as well, a robust growth of seven percent
by controlling inflation and encouraging fair distribution of wealth,
the Asia Pulse reports.

One of the primary reforms promised by MDP is that, once in office, it
will move for the transparency of business activities across the board.
Coupled with the goal of transparency, is MDP's pledge to introduce
Class actions that will allow the plaintiffs to hold corporate
management and large shareholders responsible for their decisions.  The
party has fielded the "progressive" Roh Moo-hyun as its candidate for
the presidential race scheduled for December 19.

Some of the party's other goals are:

     (1) To limit expansion of chaebol companies into such areas as the
         banking sector and businesses that should be reserved for   
         small and medium-sized companies;

     (2) To maintain restrictions on investment by subsidiaries of
         conglomerates and prevent guaranteeing of payments for sister
         firms within the same business group;

     (3) To legislate comprehensive taxation of inheritances and gifts
         by the wealthy, while expanding policies like employee share
         holdings and systematic distribution of profits between
         managers and employees;

     (4) To advocate the lowering of tax rates for smaller business
         concerns;

     (5) To provide measures that will aid small and medium-sized
         businesses sell their products on the market, as a means to
         make them more competitive;

     (6) To build 2.5 million houses in the coming years with 500,000
         earmarked as affordable rental homes for lower income
         families; and

     (7) To give bigger tax breaks for workers making less than 30
         million won per year, while increasing deductibles for
         salaried employees.

Meanwhile, MDP officials have argued that Roh's pledges were the best
choice to move the country forward on an even keel with both businesses
and workers profiting from greater opportunities.


TELSTRA: Business Owner Threatens To Commence Consumer Fraud Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Ann Garms, who may be Telstra's worst nightmare, is in action again and
is demanding a government inquiry into the conduct of the corporation
and threatening a class action if she does not get satisfaction on a
series of complaints, The Age reports.

The Garms case began in 1989, when Ms. Garms complained that the
carrier, then Telecom, had damaged her Brisbane theater-restaurant
business by failing to maintain an adequate telephone service.  Her
complaints have been the subject of six governmental or judicial
inquiries, the most recent this year by the Australian Communications
Authority (ACA).

Along the way, Telstra paid Ms. Garm and two other complainants, Ralph
Bova and Ross Plowman, $10 million, of which Ms. Garm received $6
million.  She now says that she has been advised that the agreement
they signed when the money was received did not constrain them from
further action.

Ms Garms lost her case in the Supreme Court of 1998, and was ordered to
pay costs.  The ACA report this year found that the Company had met its
commitments, however, Ms. Garms claims the decisions were erroneous.

At a recent news conference, arranged by a Melbourne public relations
company, Ms.Garms said she wanted her losses to be assessed on a
commercial basis and that she wanted to see a "change in the culture at
senior levels" of Telstra management and a government-sponsored
independent inquiry into the company's behavior since her complaints
began in 1989.

Ms. Garms has claimed that Telstra has lied, hidden or mislaid
documents supporting her allegations and vital to her case.  She also
said the Company 'bugged' her phone and supplied transcripts to the
corporation's lawyers.  The Company denied the 'bugging' but said they
had monitored calls on the line to check service levels.

Damage to her business due to the inadequate service as well as legal
and other expenses associated with the ongoing legal action had cost
her "dearly," she said.  But now, says Ms. Garms, she has the backers
for a possible class action.


TICKETS.COM: Plaintiffs To Ask For Dismissal of Individual Defendants
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs in the securities class action pending against Tickets.com,
Inc. intends to ask the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York to dismiss certain of Tickets.com, Inc.'s officers
and directors from the lawsuit.  The suit also names certain investment
banks as defendants.

The suit was brought under Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of
1933, as amended.  The complaints allege that the Company's
underwriters engaged in unlawful stock allocation and commission
practices concerning the Company's initial public offering, including
alleged tie-in arrangements with their customers.  

The suit also alleges that the prospectus and registration statement in
the Company's initial public offering contained materially false and
misleading statements related to underwriting fees, commissions and
other economic benefits arising from the alleged underwriter
activities.  The suit further alleges causes of action under Sections
11, 12(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, as well as Sections
10(b) and 20(a) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

On March 7, 2002, one of the plaintiff's lead counsel proposed that the
issuers and plaintiffs enter into non-binding mediation in an attempt
to pare the case down to ultimately the plaintiffs and the
underwriters.  Upon the agreement of the defendant/issuers (including
the Company), mediation hearings have been conducted and are currently
concluding.

In addition to the foregoing, the plaintiffs have circulated a proposed
dismissal and tolling agreement, proposing that the case will be
dismissed against all individual defendants, without prejudice, where
the entity associated with an individual defendant maintains insurance,
and the individual defendant agrees to an agreement tolling the statute
of limitations as to the defendants, enabling the plaintiffs to re-file
an action against the defendant, should additional facts be discovered
giving rise to a viable claim.


UNITED AIRLINES: International Association of Machinists Rejects Deal
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The International Association of Machinists, District 141M, said
recently that its 13,000 members had rejected a proffered deal of pay-
cutbacks by a 57 percent margin, according to a report by the Los
Angeles Times.

United, a unit of UAL Corp., is the largest operator at Los Angeles and
San Francisco International airports.  The mechanics' rejection
jeopardizes pay-cut agreements with sister unions, including those for
pilots and flight attendants, which said givebacks were contingent on
every union taking part in the sacrifices.

United posted massive financial losses in 2001, after the September 11
terrorist attacks, and again this year as revenue remained weak.  The
airline recently secured $5.2 billion in wage cuts from its other
employees, including five separate unions, as part of a financial
recovery plan, to put before the Air Transportation Stabilization Board
(ATSB).

United has asked the agency to back $1.8 billion of a $2 billion loan.  
Industry experts say a decision from the ATSB will determine the near-
term fate of United as it tries to avoid restructuring through the
courts.  The rejection of the pay-cut agreement by the International
Association of Machinists could jeopardize United's bid for support by
the ATSB.


UNITED STATES: Landowners On Katy Trail Awarded over $400,000 Damages
---------------------------------------------------------------------
A federal judge has awarded 13 property owners on the Katy Trail about
$410,000, virtually all of the $414,720 they had sought, for land taken
for construction of the Katy Trail bike path that stretches from St.
Charles to Sedalia, in the state of Missouri, the St. Louis Post-
Dispatch reported.

The ruling by Judge Eric Bruggink of the U.S. Court of Claims, was the
first phase in a class action in which attorneys are seeking
compensation for 298 landowners.  Judge Bruggink ruled from the bench
after a two-week trial in the Thomas T. Eagleton U.S. Courthouse in St.
Louis.  William Travis, attorneys for the landowners, said that he
hopes to obtain damage awards for the remaining property owners next
year.

Mr. Travis said the judge rejected the government's argument that most
of the owners should receive compensation for only one-half of the land
taken.  However, that offer was based on the logic that they still have
the right to use the Katy Trail, said Mr. Travis.

The government took the property in 1987, and the landowners filed suit
in 1993.  The case was then delayed while a similar case was reviewed
by the courts, and it also went through the process of being certified
as a class action.


WASHINGTON: US Supreme Court Hears Billion Dollar Foster-Child Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rodney Reinbold, 55, is a lawyer who lives in the small town of
Okanogan in the state of Washington, and most of his days are spent
listening to small-town woes: contracts gone bad, car accidents, and
bankruptcies.  Now, Mr. Reinbold is appearing before the US Supreme
Court as the justices hear arguments about a lawsuit he started more
than a decade ago, has won in several lower courts and which now is
filed as a class action, The Seattle Times reported.

The quality of life for thousands of foster children is at stake.  So
are billions of taxpayers' dollars and the sanctity of Social Security
benefits.  The case poses an ironic dilemma.  If successful, Mr.
Reinbold's suit could protect individual federal benefits for orphaned
foster children and help them build their lives as young adults.
However, the cash-strapped states that believe they, the states, are
entitled to those benefits to defray the cost of the children's care
would have to pay back those billions of dollars, used for their care
over the years, in damages.  This financial burden would prompt the
states to reduce care to other vulnerable children in order to balance
budgets.

The Children's Defense Fund, Child Welfare League of America and
Catholic Charities are so concerned that they have hired attorneys to
oppose Mr. Reinbold.

The case began with a 12-year-old whose grandmother came to Mr.
Reinbold seeking legal help.  The boy, Danny Keffeler, was a former
neighbor who walked to school with Mr. Reinbold's daughter.  Mr.
Reinbold had set up a trust for Danny after his mother died in
1990.  The fund included his mother's monthly Social Security.  It all
seemed routine until government letters started arriving, claiming the
Social Security checks on behalf of Danny's care.

Most states collect the Social Security payments awarded to foster
children to help defray the cost of their care.  While the practice is
common, Mr. Reinbold objected when the state of Washington's Department
of Social and Health Services (DSHS) sought Danny Keffeler's benefits.  
To Mr. Reinbold, it was akin to the state collecting a debt Danny did
not owe.

When DSHS would not compromise, Mr. Reinbold, without much hope of
payment for his services, brought suit.  Over the years, several
hearing officers and courts sided with Mr. Reinbold.  When the state
Supreme Court upheld his claim in October 2001, DSHS appealed to the US
Supreme Court.  The department was joined by 39 states that also garner
foster children's benefits.

If Mr. Reinbold prevails, the states may be ordered to repay benefits
collected for the past 20 years.  In papers submitted to the High
Court, attorneys general for the states involved have called this a
"highly significant case, which threatens all States with potential
liability totaling billions of dollars."

Washington Attorney General Christine Gregoire, presenting the state's
case, will argue that foster children cannot double-dip into public
funds.  Foster children receiving federal financial aid should use that
money to repay state coffers, said William Collins, senior assistant
attorney general.

The Social Security Administration and the White House agree with DSHS
and support the use of individual Social Security benefits to offset
the cost of foster care.  However, AARP, formerly known as the American
Association of Retired Persons, has sided with Mr. Reinbold, claiming
that Social Security payments are sacrosanct.

Danny Keffeler had a rough childhood.  His father beat him and the rest
of the children.  When Danny's mother decided to sue for full custody
of the children in the mid-1980s, Mr. Reinbold was ready to help.  
However, Danny's mother had alcohol and mental-health problems, and her
children were taken into state custody in July 1990.  Three months
later, she died in a car accident.  Danny was 12 at the time.  Of the
four children, only Danny remained in foster care until he was 18,
bouncing among as many as 11 homes.  Danny is now 24.

As a dependent minor, Danny was entitled to his mother's Social
Security benefits:  $136 a month.  Mr. Reinbold created a trust account
for a $24,000 life insurance policy and the Social Security payments
and named Danny's grandmother as guardian.  All of Danny's finances
were supervised by a judge.

In April 1991, the Social Security Administration sent notice rejecting
the grandmother as his representative.  Instead, said the agency, it
would send the benefit checks directly to the DSHS Trust Fund Unit,
which would use them to help pay for Danny's foster care.  Records
indicate that DSHS paid Danny's families a monthly stipend of $393 from
state child-welfare funds.  That stipend would not have been any less
if Danny had not received Social Security benefits.

Mr. Reinbold guesses he has spent 2,000 hours on the case and has never
been paid a cent.  In filing a class action, he is banking on a
victory.  That would make him eligible for about 25 percent of any
damages awarded in Washington state, which could reach $70 million to
$100 million.

After the class action was filed, the state stopped garnering Danny's
Social Security checks.  However, Mr. Reinbold still sought $5,000 in
past benefits and an injunction to stop DSHS from collecting funds from
all other foster children.

On January 5, 1999, Okanogan Superior Court Judge Jack Burchard ruled
the state could not take benefits from children under its care.  He
said he was most swayed by past cases that barred prisons and mental
hospitals from collecting Social Security benefits to pay for
incarceration or care.  On October 11, 2001, the state Supreme Court
upheld Judge Burchard's ruling.  The DSHS eventually settled with
Danny, paying back the $5,000 that had been garnered.  

The DSHS has its own point of view, however, about its stand on the
Social Security checks.  The agency does not rob from children; it
directs taxpayer money to its best use.  "This is not taking money from
orphans, it is getting money for orphans," said DSHS Secretary Dennis
Braddock.

In the vast majority of cases, foster children receive Social Security
because DSHS applied on their behalf.  The cost of care, says Mr.
Braddock, is typically much more than the benefits.  In court papers,
for example, the state noted that it paid $30,097 to care for a foster
girl for two years, but applied only $7,912 in Social Security.   It is
not the purpose of Social Security to buy toys, said Mr. Collins of the
Attorney General's office.

The Social Security Administration has long approved how DSHS handles
benefits to foster children.  Mr. Braddock seen no reason that should
change, despite Mr. Reinbold's earlier court victories.  He says he
would be very surprised if the state did not prevail in the US Supreme
Court.

If the High Court upholds Mr. Reinbold, the states and child-welfare
groups worry that the cost could drain already tight foster-care
budgets.  Instead of increasing funding to compensate for lost Social
Security revenues, state legislatures might reduce the stipend paid to
foster parents.

Mr. Reinbold will not argue the case on Tuesday, but he has hired an
Atlanta firm with more US Supreme Court experience to present his side.  


                  Meetings, Conferences & Seminars


* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
-------------------------------------------------

December 5-6, 2002
   CONSTRUCTION DEFECT LITIGATION CONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         The Ritz-Carlton Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena, CA
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 9-10, 2002
   EMERGING LITIGATION IN DRUGS & MEDICAL DEVICES CONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         The Ritz-Carlton Golf Resort, Naples, FL
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
                  mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 9-10, 2002
   CALIFORNIA SECTION 17200 CONFERENCE
    Mealey Publications
         The Ritz-Carlton Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena, CA
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
                  mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 9-10, 2002
   ADVANCED NURSING HOME LITIGATION CONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         The Ritz-Carlton Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena, CA
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 13, 2002
   THE SCIENCE OF MOLD
      Bridgeport Continuing Education
         San Francisco
            Contact: 818-505-1490

December 16, 2002
   FEN-PHEN GLOBAL SETLLEMENT UPDATE
      Mealey Publications
         The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Philadelphia
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 16 - 17, 2002
   DRUG AND MEDICAL DEVICE LITIGATION
      American Conference Institute
         The Plaza Hotel, New York, NY
            Contact: 1-888-224-2480; 1-877-927-1563;
               mktg@americanconference.com

January 4-9, 2003
   CIVIL LITIGATION NATIONAL CLE CONFERENCE
      Law Education Institute
         Snowmass Village at Aspen, Colorado
            Contact: 1-800-926-5895; lei@podellandpodell.com

January 13-14, 2003
   EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES LIABILITIES: CLAIMS AND COVERAGE   
      Mealey Publications
         La Jolla Marriott, San Diego, CA
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

January 16-17, 2003
   ADVANCED INSURANCE COVERAGE CONFERENCE --
      TOP 10 ISSUES FOR PRACTITIONERS
         Mealey Publications
            The Westin Hotel, Philadelphia
               Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
                  mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

January 30-31, 2003
   REINSURANCE CONFERENCE: A PRACTICAL OVERVIEW OF CURRENT ISSUES
      Mealey Publications
         The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Philadelphia
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

February 3-4, 2003
   DEFENSE STRATEGIES FOR PHARMACEUTICAL AND MEDICAL DEVICE LITIGATION
      Mealey Publications
         The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Phoenix, AZ
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

February 3-4, 2003
   MOLD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         La Jolla Marriott, San Diego, CA
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

February 13-14, 2003
   PRODUCTS LIABILITY
      American Law Institute
         Coral Gables, Florida
            Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

February 14, 2003
   THE SCIENCE OF MOLD
      Bridgeport Continuing Education
         Sacramento
            Contact: 818-505-1490

February 19, 2003
   ASBESTOS PREMISES LIABILITY CONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         The Marriott Hotel, Philadelphia
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

February 20-21, 2003
   ASBESTOS LITIGATION 101 CONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         The Marriott Hotel, Philadelphia
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 3-4, 2003
   PRACTICAL TRAINING FOR THE CLAIMS PROFESSIONAL
      Mealey Publications
         The Westin Hotel, Stamford
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 6-7, 2003
   VACCINE LITIGATION CONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         The Ritz-Carlton, Boston Commons, Boston
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 20-21, 2003
   FUNDAMENTALS OF INSURANCE COVERAGE LAW
      Mealey Publications
         The Westin Hotel, Philadelphia
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

April 2-5, 2003
   INSURANCE INSOLVENCY & REINSURANCE ROUNDTABLE
      Mealey Publications
         The Fairmont Scottsdale Princess, AZ
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

April 4-5, 2003
   TOXIC TORT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IN CALIFORNIA
      Bridgeport Continuing Education
         Contact: 818-505-1490

April 8, 2003
   SILICA LITIGATION CONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Boston
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 12-13, 2003
   ENVIRONMENTAL INSURANCE: PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE
      American Law Institute
         Boston
            Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614


* Online Teleconferences
------------------------

December 12, 2002
   ASBESTOS: NEW DEFENDANTS AND NOVEL CLAIMS
      Andrews Conferences
         Contact: Phone: 1-877-595-0449; 610-225-0510

December 17, 2002
   EMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION TELECONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
            mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

January 8, 2003
   EMERGING LITIGATION IN PHARMACEUTICALS: EPHEDRA
      Andrews Conferences
         Contact: Phone: 1-877-595-0449; 610-225-0510

INTRODUCTION TO CLASS ACTIONS AND LARGE RECOVERIES
   Big Class Action
      Contact: seminars@bigclassaction.com

RECOVERIES
   Big Class Action
      Contact: seminars@bigclassaction.com

SHOULD I FILE A CLASS ACTION?
   LawCommerce.Com
      Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

THE EFFECTS OF ASBESTOS ON THE PULMONARY SYSTEM
   LawCommerce.Com
      Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

THE STATE OF ASBESTOS LITIGATION: JUDICIAL PANEL DISCUSSION
   LawCommerce.Com
      Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

TRYING AN ASBESTOS CASE
   LawCommerce.Com
      Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

The Meetings, Conferences and Seminars column appears in the Class
Action Reporter each Wednesday.  Submissions via e-mail to
carconf@beard.com are encouraged.


                              *********


ALLEGHENY ENERGY: Berman DeValerio Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo initiated a securities
class action against Allegheny Energy, Inc. (NYSE:AYE) and four of its
top officers today, accusing them of issuing misleading financial
statements about the Company.  The complaint was filed in the US
District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of all
investors who bought Company stock from April 23, 2001 through November
4, 2002.

The lawsuit claims that throughout the class period Allegheny Energy
artificially inflated its revenue, trading volumes, and growth rates by
relying on "wash" or "round-trip" energy trades performed by its
subsidiary, Global Energy Markets (G.E.M.), which it had purchased from
Merrill Lynch in 2001.  These sham transactions are based on the
simultaneous purchase and sale of energy at the same quantity and price
between the same parties.

The complaint says the Company's problems first drew public attention
on September 25, 2002 when the company filed a lawsuit against Merrill
Lynch admitting G.E.M's business depended heavily on "wash"
transactions, including trades with Enron.  When allegations surface
about wrongdoing at Enron, Allegheny Energy could not sustain its
revenues, the lawsuit asserts.

The Company's admissions about G.E.M. led to the company's debt being
downgraded to "junk bond" status and the eventual decline in its stock
price.

For more details, contact C. Oliver Burt, III, by Mail: 515 North
Flagler Drive, Suite 1701, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 by Phone:
(561) 835-9400 or by e-mail: lawfla@bermanesq.com


DPL INC.: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. Ohio
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities class
action on behalf of purchasers of the securities of DPL, Inc. (NYSE:
DPL) between March 30, 1999 and August 14, 2002, inclusive, in the
United States District Court, Southern District of Ohio, Western
Division against the Company and:

     (1) Peter H. Forster,

     (2) Allen M. Hill and

     (3) Elizabeth H. McCarthy

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 March 30, 1999 and August 14, 2002, thereby artificially
inflating the price of Company securities.

Throughout the class period, as alleged in the suit, defendants issued
numerous statements and filed quarterly and annual reports with the SEC
describing the Company's "highly diversified" investment portfolio.  
Defendants repeatedly downplayed the risks associated with the
Company's investments by stressing the diversification of the
investments, their "financial flexibility, liquidity and stability."

Defendants also stated that the Company's financial assets were valued
at "fair market value" and identified DPL's investment portfolio as one
of the Company's "four distinct value drivers," and as a consistent
contributor to the Company's earnings.

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:

     (i) that the Company's "highly diversified" financial portfolio
         was invested in high-risk, speculative investments in Latin
         America, which were subject to political uncertainty and the
         risk of currency devaluation;

    (ii) that the economic crisis in Latin America was having, and
         would continue to have, a material adverse impact on the
         Company's investment portfolio;

   (iii) that the value of the Company's financial assets was
         materially overstated; and

    (iv) that as a result, defendants' positive statements regarding
         the value and status of the Company's investment portfolio and
         the Company's future prospects and earnings were lacking a
         reasonable basis when made.

On July 1, 2002, the Company shocked the market by announcing that it
would be revising its earnings estimate for the year 2002 because its
previous estimates assumed "a return to normal weather, modest recovery
of the economy reflected in retail sales, an increase of wholesale
process and political stability," which, according to the Company, did
not occur.

Specifically, the Company announced that it will be forced to write
down its financial assets by approximately $110 million after tax, or
$0.92 per share, because of the "uncertainty and instability"
surrounding the future of the economy in Latin America, particularly in
Argentina.

Following this announcement, on July 2, 2002, the next day, shares of
DPL fell $4.68, or 22% to close at $21.57 per share, on extremely heavy
trading volume.  Subsequent disclosures, through and including August
14, 2002, provided additional details regarding the nature of the
Company's investments, which until that time, had not previously been
revealed to investors.

For more details, contact Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman by
Mail: One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl. New York, NY 10119-0165 by
Phone: (800) 320-5081 by E-mail: DPLcase@milbergNY.com or visit the
firm's Website: http://www.milberg.com


FOOTSTAR INC.: Weiss & Yourman Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Weiss & Yourman initiated a securities class action against Footstar,
Inc. (NYSE:FTS), and certain of its officers was commenced in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on
behalf of purchasers of Company securities between February 8, 2002 and
November 12, 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.


FOOTSTAR INC.: Cauley Geller Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Footstar, Inc.
(NYSE: FTS) publicly traded securities during the period between
February 8, 2002 and November 12, 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, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the
market between February 8, 2002 and November 12, 2002, thereby
artificially inflating the price of Company securities.

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

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:

     (i) that, since at least 2001, the Company had cumulatively
         understated its accounts payable by approximately $35 million;

    (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 balance sheet and
         financial results were materially overstated at all relevant
         times.

On November 13, 2002, Footstar shocked the market by announcing that it
had "discovered discrepancies in the reporting of its account payable
balances," following management's review of the account reconciliation
processes of its accounts payable balances.

Specifically, defendants had cumulatively understated the Company's
accounts payable balances in its athletic segment by approximately $35
million.  As a result, the Company announced that it will likely be
restating its financial statements for the first nine months of 2002
and prior periods, with a significant portion of the discrepancies
affecting fiscal year 2001 and earlier.

Following this announcement, shares of Footstar fell $1.25, or almost
20%, to close at $5.05, after hitting an intraday low of $3.30, on
volume of 2,137,700 shares traded, or almost six times Footstar's
average daily trading volume.

For more details, contact Jackie Addison, Heather Gann or Sue Null by
Mail: P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock, AR 72221-5438 by Phone:
1-888-551-9944 by E-mail: info@cauleygeller.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://www.cauleygeller.com


TRANSACTION SYSTEMS: Kirby McInerney Commences Securities Suit in NE
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Kirby McInerney & Squire, LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for District of Nebraska on behalf of
all purchasers of Transaction Systems Architects, Inc. common stock
during the period from December 29, 1999 and August 14, 2002,
inclusive.

The action charges the Company, as well as its chief executive and
chief financial officers, with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The violations, as the
complaint alleges, stem from the issuance of allegedly false and
misleading financial statements during the period identified, which had
the effect of artificially inflating the price of Company shares.

On August 14, 2002 the Company announced that it would conduct a re-
audit of the financial statements for fiscal years (ended September
30th) 1999, 2000 and 2001. On November 19, 2002, the Company confirmed
that all these financial statements would be restated.

After these disclosures Company shares swiftly lost value.

For more details, contact Pamela E. Kulsrud or Orie Braun by Mail: 830
Third Avenue, 10th Floor New York, New York 10022 by Phone:
(212) 317-2300 or (888) 529-4787 by E-Mail: obraun@kmslaw.com or visit
the firm's Website: http://www.kmslaw.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  * * *