CAR_Public/030130.mbx                C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
               Thursday, January 30, 2003, Vol. 5, No. 21

                              Headlines                            

AT&T BROADBAND: Reaches Agreement To Settle CA Cable Customers Lawsuit
BASELINE DESIGN: Recalls 30,000 Beanbag Chairs For Suffocation Hazard
CLEARONE COMMUNICATIONS: UT Attorney's Office Starts Securities Probe
DELTA AIR: SkyMiles Program Participants Commence Antitrust Suit in NY
DIAL CORPORATION: Prepares For Trial In IL Sexual Harassment Lawsuit

ENRON CORPORATION: TX Court Dismisses Five Andersen Partners From Suit
FASTFOOD LITIGATION: Experts Believe More Obesity Lawsuits Are Likely
GOTHAM PARTNERS: Shareholders File Suit Over Blocked First Union Merger
HUBBLE HOMES: Boise Homeowners File Suit Over Shoddy Home Construction
KOREA: Lawsuit System To Be Implemented 100 Days After Roh Inauguration

NEW YORK: Attorney Skeptical of HIV-Infected Inmates' Numbers
OREGON: State Court To Decide Whether To Lift AMHI Suit Consent Decree
PRE-PAID LEGAL: Plaintiffs Voluntarily Dismiss OK Derivative Lawsuit
RURAL CELLULAR: Investors File Several Securities Fraud Lawsuits in MN
SANDATA TECHNOLOGIES: Executes Settlement of Securities Fraud Lawsuit

SOUTH CAROLINA: High Court Decertifies SC Suit Over Return Tax Refunds
TERRORIST ATTACK: Plaintiffs Seek Revision Of Compensation Fund Rules
TOBACCO INDUSTRY: Vector Releases Nicotine-Reduced Cigarettes To Market
UNITED MEDICAL: Liquidator Says Doctors' Lawsuit Is "Counterproductive"
WYETH: Colorado Woman Files Suit Over Hormone Replacement Pill Effects

                     New Securities Fraud Cases

AEGON NV: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Violations Suit in S.D. NY
AMERICREDIT CORPORATION: Schiffrin & Barroway Files TX Securities Suit
ARIBA INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Lawsuit in N.D. CA
BIO-TECHNOLOGY GENERAL: Rabin Murray Lodges Securities Suit in NJ Court
CABLE & WIRELESS: Pomerantz Haudek Commences Securities Suit in E.D. VA

MERILL LYNCH: Schatz & Nobel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
TELLIUM INC.: Rabin Murray Commences Securities Fraud Suit in NJ Court
VERITAS SOFTWARE: Schiffrin & Barroway Files Securities Suit in N.D. CA
VERITAS SOFTWARE: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Lawsuit in N.D. CA
VERITAS SOFTWARE: Cauley Geller Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA

                            *********

AT&T BROADBAND: Reaches Agreement To Settle CA Cable Customers Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
AT&T Broadband, Inc. agreed to settle the consumer class action filed
in Los Angeles Superior Court on behalf of cable customers of MediaOne,
which the Company acquired in a merger in 2000, the Daily Review
reports.

The suit was filed based on a state law that went on the books in
January 1997, setting a $4.75 cap on the amount cable companies could
collect in late fees.  According to court records, AT&T Broadband's
position was that the extra 24 cents it collected was allowable because
it was being passed on as franchise fees paid to local cities, the
Daily Review reports.  Initially, a Superior Court judge agreed with
AT&T Broadband, but an appellate ruled otherwise in 2000.  Shortly
after the appellate court ruling, the Company lowered its late fee and
now charges $4.50.

Under the settlement, about 3 million AT&T Broadband cable TV customers
in California would get a small refund on future cable bills.  
Customers of the cable company, which was acquired last year by Comcast
Corp., have begun getting word of the proposed settlement in bills
going out this month.

Under terms of the proposed settlement, AT&T Broadband would agree to
pay $461,589 while denying any wrongdoing.  Of that amount, $369,271
would be divided up among current customers - and not just those who
paid the late fees - throughout California in the form of a future
refund.

Attorney for the plaintiffs Jonathan Weiss told the Review that
approach is being taken because it would be very difficult to go back
and check records to see which customers paid late charges.  To account
for refunds due to customers who have left AT&T Broadband, another
$92,317 would go to a charity that is yet to be determined.  
Additionally, the settlement calls for AT&T Broadband to pay up to
$225,000 in attorneys' fees and expenses.  The $461,589 settlement
amount represents a disputed portion -- which amounts to 24 cents for
each late charge -- of a $4.99 late fee collected during a three-year
period ending in early 2000.

The settlement has to be approved by the court at a March 27 hearing.


BASELINE DESIGN: Recalls 30,000 Beanbag Chairs For Suffocation Hazard
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline Design is cooperating with the United States Consumer Product
Safety Commission (CPSC) by recalling about 30,000 beanbag chairs
manufactured in 1999.  Some of these beanbag chairs have zippers that
can be opened, allowing access to the polystyrene beads inside the
chairs.  This poses a suffocation hazard to young children who can
unzip the chair and inhale the small beads.  
        
The Company is aware of three incidents in which the chairs were
unzipped freely.  Two of the incidents involved young children who were
able to open the beanbag chair zippers and handle the small polystyrene
beads, including one child who received medical attention after
inhaling the beads.
        
The recalled beanbag chairs are designed with 12-inch double zippers
and have various designs, including a smiley face, a football-shape, a
baseball-shape, a basketball-shape and solid green, yellow, pink and
blue neon colors. The beanbags have a tag that states, in part, "Made
by Baseline Design."
        
Wal-Mart stores located in the Northeast US sold the beanbag chairs
from September 1999 through December 1999 for about $30.
        
For more details, contact the Company by Phone: (800) 497-3626, Ext.
3046, between 8 am and 5 pm ET Monday through Friday or visit
the firm's Website: http://www.foamex.com.   
        

CLEARONE COMMUNICATIONS: UT Attorney's Office Starts Securities Probe
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Attorney's Office for the District of Utah initiated
a criminal investigation of ClearOne Communications, Inc., following a
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) complaint filed against the
Company on January 15,2003, Reuters reports.  

The SEC complaint alleged the Company violated federal securities laws
and filed false financial statements.  The Company also faces a class
action filed in the United States District Court in Utah, which also
names as defendants:

     (1) Chief Executive Officer Frances Flood,

     (2) Chief Financial Officer Susie Strohm and

     (3) ex-Chief Financial Officer Randall Wichinski

The Company told Reuters plans to defend itself vigorously against any
civil allegations made in the class action or others that may be
pending.  The Company also received a request for information from
Nasdaq relating to its trading halt January 21 resulting from the SEC
complaint.  It said it was working aggressively to satisfy Nasdaq's
request for information and that trading in its stock will remain
halted until the company has fully satisfied Nasdaq's request.   


DELTA AIR: SkyMiles Program Participants Commence Antitrust Suit in NY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Delta Air faces a class action filed by three participants in its
SkyMiles program, alleging the Company violated federal law by blocking
consumers from selling or trading miles they earn in Delta's frequent
flier program, Bloomberg News reports.

The suit, filed in New York federal court, charges the Atlanta-based
airline (NYSE: DAL) has broken US antitrust law by penalizing consumers
that sell or trade their miles to others in the program.  Consumers
accumulate miles, which entitle them to tickets and other benefits, by
flying on Delta, using credit cards affiliated with the airline, or
buying them directly from Delta.

Delta declined to comment, the Atlanta Business Journal reports.  
The suit seeks class action status.  Plaintiffs Allison Haas, Jason
Kanefsky and Howard Smith seek undetermined damages.


DIAL CORPORATION: Prepares For Trial In IL Sexual Harassment Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Dial Corporation said it plans to go to trial to fight a sexual
harassment class action brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC), The Wall Street Journal reports.

The lawsuit, filed in 1999, in the United States District Court in
Chicago, alleges the Company engaged in a pattern of discrimination
against some female employees at its Aurora, Illinois, soap-
manufacturing facility by subjecting them to sexual harassment, and
then not promptly addressing their complaints.

Dial, maker of Dial soap, Purex detergent and Renuzit air-fresheners,
denies the EEOC's allegations, and is preparing for a trial in late
April.  In an 8-K filing to the Securities and Exchange Commission, the
Company said that the EEOC was seeking $15 million to settle the case.  
However, the Company assert that based on its own investigations "we do
not believe the facts warrant such a large settlement.  Accordingly we
are preparing for trial."

A lawyer for the EEOC said settlement talks had occurred in the past,
but the commission was now preparing for trial.


ENRON CORPORATION: TX Court Dismisses Five Andersen Partners From Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
United States District Judge Melinda Harmon dismissed five Arthur
Andersen partners from the class action filed by shareholders of fallen
energy trader Enron Corporation, the Houston Chronicle reports.  Judge
Harmon dismissed from the suit:

     (1) Nancy Temple, the former Arthur Andersen attorney whose
         internal memo persuaded a jury to convict the firm of
         obstruction of justice,

     (2) Donald Dreyfuss,

     (3) James Friedlieb,

     (4) Gregory Hale and

    (5) Roger Williard, one of three partners in Andersen's Houston
        office who was put on administrative leave and has since left
        the Company

However, the judge ruled that thirteen other current and former
partners, including former Chief Executive Officer Joseph Berardino,
will remain in the suit.  The judge had earlier ruled that Andersen
itself also stays in the case.

The order could lead to Ms. Temple being absolved of civil liability in
connection with any finding of securities fraud related to Enron, but
she is still subject to a five-year statute of limitations on a
possible criminal charge of obstruction of justice.  A US House
committee has urged the Justice Department to investigate whether
Temple perjured herself while testifying before a congressional panel
investigating Enron, the Houston Chronicle reports.

In June, the accounting firm was found guilty in June of obstructing an
expected SEC investigation of Enron.  Some jurors said the verdict was
not based on Andersen's destruction of records but on Ms. Temple's e-
mail suggesting that Enron's lead auditor delete her name and make
other changes in an internal memo related to the company's third-
quarter earnings report.

Trey Davis, director of special projects for the University of
California, lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, told the Houston Chronicle
the decision "does not appear that it will ultimately have much impact
on the ability of the class to achieve a meaningful recovery."

Judge Harmon dismissed the plaintiffs' complaint that the 18 current
and former Andersen officials could be individually held liable for
securities fraud as part of a "group" of employees that worked at the
company.  The judge said that she was not reluctant to hold a company
accountable for the actions of its employees, but it's a different
matter to hold employees accountable for the actions of a company.  
"The Court concludes that there must be a showing that the individual
employee, himself, violated the securities statute(s) through
substantial participation in the fraud," Judge Harmon wrote, the
Houston Chronicle states.

Judge Harmon has been praised by attorneys on all sides of the civil
case for her reasoned and legally notated decision on the dismissal
motions.  Harry Reasoner, a Vinson & Elkins partner and spokesman, told
the Chronicle his firm and the financial institution defendants must
now consider an attempted appeal without her permission.  Attorneys are
often reluctant to do so for fear or annoying the trial judge who has
their clients' fate in her hands.


FASTFOOD LITIGATION: Experts Believe More Obesity Lawsuits Are Likely
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Legal experts believe that the dismissal of an obesity lawsuit against
fast-food giant McDonald's Corporation will not deter other similar
lawsuits from popping up, Reuters reports.

The original suit, filed in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, blames the Company for their patrons'
health problems like obesity, heart problems and diabetes.  Judge
Robert Sweet dismissed the suit saying the plaintiffs failed to show
that the fast-food chain's products "involve a danger that is not
within the common knowledge of consumers," an earlier Class Action
Reporter story states.

"It wasn't as simple as one, two, three," Victor Schwartz, head of the
public policy group of the law firm Shook, Hardy and Bacon, and general
counsel of the American Tort Reform Association, told Reuters.  Judge
Sweet's ruling left the door open for plaintiffs to re-file the case,
with guidance on how the suit might be strengthened.  Several legal
watchers say the ruling suggests that plaintiffs could pursue the
negligence charge by concentrating on the way McDonald's processes some
of its products -- such as Chicken McNuggets or fries.

"I think what the judge was doing was tipping his hand and saying this
argument could have some merit," Albert Yoon, assistant professor at
Northwestern University School of Law told Reuters.

"For instance, Chicken McNuggets, rather than being merely chicken
fried in a pan, are a McFrankenstein creation of various elements not
utilized by the home cook," Judge Sweet wrote in his opinion.  "If
plaintiffs were able to flesh out this argument in an amended
complaint, "it may establish that the dangers of McDonald's products
were not commonly well known and thus that McDonald's had a duty toward
its customers."

"We can go in with the chicken, the french fries," John Banzhaf III, a
George Washington University Law professor who has been working since
last year on a connection between obesity and the litigation, told
Reuters.  "I'm pretty much sure we can dig up others . he's given us a
road map on possible addiction."

Attorney for the plaintiffs Stephen Hirsch has said they planned to
appeal the decision.  He was on vacation and was not available for
comment, his office told Reuters.

Whatever the outcome of the most recent case, some say fast food and
other food manufacturers must proceed with caution, as much of their
future depends on the public's opinion, Reuters states.  "The law tends
to follow society in developing and identifying the most important
issues of the day," said William McKenna, a partner in the litigation
department of Foley and Lardner.

One of the greatest threats facing the food industry is from the state
attorneys general, who four years ago won a $206 billion settlement
from tobacco companies for smoking-related health-care costs, Reuters
states.  These types of suits remove two huge stumbling blocks that
appear when individuals sue: that the person knew that eating too much
fast-food could result in health problems and that the food itself was
a direct cause of such problems.

"We remain confident," McDonald's spokeswoman Lisa Howard told Reuters.  
"And we believe the facts will prevail. Any effort to resurrect this
frivolous lawsuit will ultimately end up being rejected by the court."


GOTHAM PARTNERS: Shareholders File Suit Over Blocked First Union Merger
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hedge fund Gotham Partners faces a class action in New York State Court
filed last week by several common shareholders of First Union Real
Estate Equity and Mortgage Investments, over the blocked US$81 million
merger between the two entities, TheStreet.com reports.  

Earlier, a group of First Union preferred shareholders convinced a New
York judge to block a proposed merger between the REIT and a money-
losing golf course venture controlled by Gotham.  

The suit alleges the proposed merger was "inherently unfair" because it
was designed to primarily benefit Gotham, which needed the deal in
order to recoup the more than $30 million it had sunk into the golf
venture, Gotham Golf, TheStreet.com reports.  The shareholders want
damages on grounds the aborted merger allegedly prevented managers from
carrying out the REIT's regular operations.  They're asking the court
to name an independent shareholder committee to "manage the affairs of
First Union."  The deal also would have permitted Gotham to cash out
its more than 16% ownership stake in First Union.

Gotham is in the process of liquidating its once-$300 million hedge
fund.  Meanwhile, New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer is looking
into some of the hedge fund's trading and research practices in order
to determine if Gotham engaged in market manipulation, TheStreet.com
reports.


HUBBLE HOMES: Boise Homeowners File Suit Over Shoddy Home Construction
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A second group of homeowners filed suit against a Boise-area housing
developer, claiming poor construction has caused more than 140 homes to
flood, weakening the homes' structural integrity and prompting
dangerous mold growth.

According to the complaint filed yesterday in Ada County District Court
in Boise against Hubble Homes, the damage caused by the stagnant water
has left some homes in the Odiaga Rosecreek development completely
uninhabitable.  In early December 2002, another group of homeowners in
the adjacent Leo Rosecreek subdivision filed suit against the same
developer for similar causes.

Homeowners in the Odiaga Rosecreek subdivision claim defendants Hubble
Homes -- formerly known as Cherry Lane Homes -- and Hubble Engineering
overlooked or ignored obvious drainage issues with the building site,
prompting thriving mold and fungus infiltration, including inside
cooling and heating systems, and damaging the structural stability of
the homes.

"Many of the plaintiffs are worried about the health effects of the
mold that has arisen from the damp conditions," Attorney for the
plaintiffs Steve Berman noted.  "In addition, the impact on property
values has been devastating."

Even more distressing, the suit contends Hubble Homes has performed
mold tests in several Odiaga residents' homes but refuses to release
the results of the tests to homeowners.  The suit also claims Hubble
Engineering ignored several warnings about possible groundwater seepage
into crawlspaces and failed to perform the necessary tests of
subsurface conditions. Even after becoming aware of the defects in the
homes, the suit contends Hubble Homes continued to sell the lots
without mentioning the problems other homeowners experienced.

"We find this to be outrageous behavior in our view, and we will ask
the court for leave to add punitive damages to our claim against this
builder," Mr. Berman added.

Mr. Berman noted that homeowners often reported drainage problems and
tried to work with developers to repair their homes but with little
success.  "The builders have kept a steady pattern of ignoring
homeowners' concerns," he said.

The suit states that at least 50 homeowners have been affected by
construction defects and estimates individual losses for each of the
homes at $50,000 to $200,000, setting the final damages as high as $10
million.  Plaintiffs also have the option to file for punitive damages
against the developers under Idaho law.  The proposed class action, if
approved, would include all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired
real property within the Odiaga Rosecreek Subdivision Nos. 1, 2, and 3
from July 9, 1997 to the present.  The suit cites violations of:

     (1) the Idaho Consumer Protection Act,

     (2) breach of implied warranty and habitability,

     (3) breach of expressed warranty,

     (4) breach of contract,

     (5) negligence,

     (6) misfeasance and nuisance

For more details, contact Steve Berman of Hagens Berman by Phone:
1-206-623-7292, or by E-mail: steve@hagens-berman.com or visit the
firm's Website: http://www.hagens-berman.com


KOREA: Lawsuit System To Be Implemented 100 Days After Roh Inauguration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Korea's proposed class action system for securities disputes and the
special bill for the implementation of free trade agreements are
expected to be implemented within 100 days after the inauguration Roh
Moo-hyun as president in late February, The ChosunIbo reports.

The new government is also expected to adopt within a year the bill
limiting the voting rights of chaebols' financial units have for their
stakes in sister firms, and all-inclusive taxation system on donations
and inheritances.  An official at the Ministry of Finance and Economy
(MOFE) told the ChosunIbo Monday that the ministry reported the
implementation schedule for President Roh's various election pledges to
the presidential transition committee last weekend.  The official said
that the class-action lawsuit bill and the FTA special bill were
designed to compensate farm and fishery industries for damages they
might incur following market openings.


NEW YORK: Attorney Skeptical of HIV-Infected Inmates' Numbers
-------------------------------------------------------------
The percentage of HIV-positive inmates in New York prisons may have
dropped more than 14 percent, but it still exceeds the rest of nation's
percentages, according to recently released federal statistics,
PressRepublican states.

The United States Department of Justice report stated that the number
of HIV-infected New York state prisoners dropped from 7,000 in 1999 to
6,000 in 2000.  From 1995 to 2000, the number of inmate AIDS-related
deaths also nose-dived from 258 to eight.  The most recent figure,
however, still accounted for nearly 25 percent of convicts nationwide
infected with HIV.  

The federal report, called "HIV in Prisons, 2000," shows male and
female infection rates state by state and then compares those numbers
to prior years.  For example, it shows 18.2 percent of female state
prisoners were infected with HIV in 2000.  That's more than double the
percentage of any other state, PressRepublican reports.

Jack Beck, lawyer for the plaintiffs in a class action on behalf of all
HIV-infected state inmates, said that the reduction in infection and
death rates may show a marked improvement for New York prisons but it
doesn't accurately reflect what's going on behind bars to prevent the
disease.  He added that he believes the number of deaths in 2000 was
well above the eight reported.

He told the PressRepublican.com the drop in inmate HIV infections
reflects what's going on with the disease in the community at large,
due to the implementation of needle-exchange programs and medications.  
He also pointed out that infected individuals are living longer because
of medications.

The State Department of Correctional Services, meanwhile, said AIDS-
related deaths increased to 22 in 2001.  For its part, the state has
increased funding for inmate AIDS treatment to more than $70 million in
2000.  That's almost double what the state spent five years earlier.  
State prisons spokesman James Flateau told PressRepublican.com he had
not yet seen the federal report and therefore would not comment on it.


OREGON: State Court To Decide Whether To Lift AMHI Suit Consent Decree
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Trial over the lifting of a 12-year-old consent decree governing
Oregon's adult mental health system will be resumed on Monday in Maine
Superior Court, KJ & Sentinel Online reports.

The consent decree was established in 1990 to settle a class action
filed on behalf of patients of the Augusta Mental Health Institute
(AMHI), over the inadequate conditions at the psychiatric hospital.  
The state originally agreed to have completed the requirements laid out
in the decree but failed to meet the timeline set by the court.  This
led the court to declare to state officials in contempt.

In January 2002, the administration of Gov. Angus King claimed that the
state had come into compliance with the consent decree's terms.  
Lawyers for the plaintiffs disagreed.  Lawyers on both sides have
already presented four weeks of testimony to Chief Justice Nancy D.
Mills, and she has scheduled three more weeks of court time.  However,
Judge Mills has made clear to the legal teams that she expects them to
do everything they can to finish up in the allotted time, the KJ &
Sentinel Online reports.  Judge Mills must now decide, after hearing
seven weeks or more of evidence, whether the state has met its burden.

The state is wrapping up its presentation to the judge.  Lawyers for
the patients, who agree the Maine mental health system has improved
over the past decade, are expected to begin making their case this week
that state mental health officials still have not delivered on the
promise of a radically different system of care for the mentally ill
based on individualized, flexible community mental health care in the
least restrictive setting possible, the KJ & Sentinel Online states.

"We want all individuals, regardless of their disabilities, to know
what resources are available and how to access those resources," Martha
Kluzak, the Department of Behavioral and Developmental Services'
housing coordinator for central Maine told KJ & Sentinel Online.

However, Helen Bailey, an Augusta attorney representing former AMHI
patients and public policy director of the Disability Rights Center,
questioned Ms. Kluzak about the way department officials spent
discretionary housing funds and whether members of the class of former
AMHI patients protected by the consent decree knew the money was
available and how to apply for it, KJ & Sentinel Online reports.


PRE-PAID LEGAL: Plaintiffs Voluntarily Dismiss OK Derivative Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs in a shareholder derivative action brought by certain
shareholders in the United States District Court for the Western
District of Oklahoma on behalf of Pre-Paid Legal Services, Inc.
(NYSE:PPD) voluntarily dismissed the suit, subject to approval by the
Court.

The action charged certain Pre-Paid directors and officers with
breaches of fiduciary duty.  The complaint alleged, among other things,
accounting misconduct and alleged waste of corporate assets of the
Company which was alleged to have occurred between March 18, 1999 and
May 15, 2001.  The complaint alleged similar wrongdoings as alleged in
a securities fraud lawsuit which has been dismissed and is currently on
appeal.  The individual defendants in the shareholder derivative action
were:

     (1) Harland C. Stonecipher,

     (2) Randy Harp,

     (3) Shirley A. Stone,

     (4) Peter K. Grunebaum,

     (5) Martin H. Belsky,

     (6) Wilburn L. Smith,

     (7) Kathleen S. Pinson,

     (8) David A. Savula,

     (9) John W. Hail, and

    (10) John A. Addison

The shareholders who originally brought this action have filed a notice
of voluntary dismissal of the action which must be approved by the
Court.  The plaintiffs have also sold their shares in the Company and
thus no longer have the legal standing necessary to continuing
prosecuting it.

On June 10, 2002, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Consolidated
Amended Verified Shareholder Derivative Complaint, asserting, among
other things, that the complaint was unfounded and premature because
plaintiff's purported injury and damage claim were based primarily on
the securities class action referred to above, which was dismissed with
prejudice.  The motion to dismiss further asserted that the claims were
barred by:

     (i) the director protection provisions of Pre-Paid's Articles and
         the Oklahoma General Corporation Act;

    (ii) the Oklahoma General Corporation Act's protection of directors
         from liability for actions taken in reliance on experts;

   (iii) the Business Judgment Rule's presumption that the directors
         acted on an informed basis, in good faith, and in what they
         believed to be in the best interest of the corporation; and

    (iv) plaintiffs' failure to make a demand on the Board of Directors
         before filing the lawsuit.

Plaintiffs sought voluntary dismissal of this action and did not file a
brief in opposition to the motion to dismiss.  The proposed dismissal
does not involve the payment of any money for costs in bringing the
action or the payment of any attorney fees.

For more details, contact Tanya Autry of Emerson Poynter, LLP by Mail:
P.O. Box 164810, Little Rock, AR 72216-4810 by Phone: 1-800-663-9817 by
E-mail: tanya@emersonfirm.com or contact Curtis L. Bowman of Cauley
Geller Bowman & Coates LLP by Mail: P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock, AR
72221-5438


RURAL CELLULAR: Investors File Several Securities Fraud Lawsuits in MN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Cellular Corporation faces several securities class actions filed
in the United States District Court in Minnesota, alleging that the
Company and some of its officers and directors issued false and
misleading statements about the company's business and financial
condition, which caused the company's shares to sell at artificially
inflated levels, echopress.com reports.

According to allegations by one of the lawsuits, the Company:

     (1) deceived the investing public regarding Rural Cellular's
         business, operations and management and the intrinsic value of
         Rural Cellular common stock, and

     (2) caused plaintiffs and members of the class-action lawsuit to
         purchase Rural Cellular common stock at artificially inflated
         prices.

One law firm, Reinhardt & Anderson of St. Paul, is enlisting investors
in a timeline between May 7, 2001 and November 12, 2002.  Another firm,
Schiffrin and Barroway, is seeking investors from January 6, 2002 to
November 13, 2002, echopress.com reports.  The timelines are different
because different law firms determined varying times in which they feel
the Company was giving out incomplete information.

It is not known at this point as to how many investors will be part of
the suits.  Rural Cellular Corporation was contacted by the Echo Press
about the pending lawsuit, but a company representative said the
company would not make a statement about the allegations.


SANDATA TECHNOLOGIES: Executes Settlement of Securities Fraud Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandata Technologies, Inc. executed a stipulation of settlement with
the members of its Board of Directors and the plaintiffs in a
consolidated securities class actions pending in the Court of Chancery
of the State of Delaware.

The consolidated suit alleges that the defendants breached their
fiduciary duties to the Company and its public stockholders in
connection with Sandata Acquisition Corporation's August 5, 2002
proposal to acquire all of the outstanding public shares of the
Company.  The consolidated actions also allege, among other things,
that the directors serving on the Special Committee of the Board of
Directors of Sandata are not independent and that the consideration to
be received under Sandata Acquisition Corporation's proposal is
inadequate.

The Stipulation of Settlement provides generally for the dismissal of
the consolidated actions and release of any and all causes of action or
claims, among other things, that any of the plaintiffs or members of
the class have against any defendant or their affiliates, including,
among others, any of their associates, officers, directors, attorneys,
investment bankers, investment advisors and valuation experts,
including Sandata Acquisition Corporation and Brean Murray, among
others, arising out of any of the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated
as of October 28, 2002, by and among Sandata, Sandata Acquisition
Corp., Bert E. Brodsky, Hugh Freund and Gary Stoller, the merger, or
any of the transactions contemplated thereby, the negotiation thereof,
and any public filings or statements by the defendants contained in any
of the above.

In consideration for the dismissal of the consolidated action and
release of all causes of action and claims, Sandata Acquisition
Corporation agreed to increase the merger consideration from $1.91 to
$2.21 per share of Sandata common stock.  The Stipulation of Settlement
further provides that the consolidated actions will be maintained as a
class action by the plaintiffs, without the right of any of the members
of the class to opt out.  The parties agreed to file the Stipulation of
Settlement with the Delaware Chancery Court as soon as practicable.  
The Company agreed to mail notice to the members of the class who were
stockholders of record at any time from August 5, 2002, through the
date of the merger.  

The defendants to the consolidated action also agreed not to oppose an
application by the plaintiffs to the Delaware Chancery Court for
plaintiffs' attorneys' fees and expenses not to exceed $60,000.  If the
Delaware Chancery Court approves the settlement, the parties agreed to
move the court for an Order and Final Judgment:

     (1) approving the settlement as fair, reasonable, adequate and in
         the best interests of the class and directing consummation of
         the settlement in accordance with its terms;

     (2) formally certifying the class;

     (3) dismissing the consolidated action with prejudice as against
         the plaintiffs and all members of the class;

     (4) permanently barring and enjoining the members of the class
         from instituting any action or other proceeding in any court
         in any jurisdiction that in any way relates to the settled
         claims;

     (5) authorizing plaintiffs' counsel to execute a release of
         settled claims on behalf of the members of the class;

     (6) awarding plaintiffs' counsel such fees and expenses as the
         court deems appropriate and

     (7) reserving jurisdiction over all matters relating to the
         administration and consummation of the settlement.

The Stipulation of Settlement is subject to final approval of the
settlement by the Delaware Chancery Court of which there can be no
assurances.  Following the execution of the Stipulation of Settlement,
Sandata, Sandata Acquisition Corporation and Mr. Brodsky, Mr. Freund
and Mr. Stoller executed a First Amendment to the Agreement and Plan of
Merger, dated as of January 27, 2003.  The Amendment increases the
merger consideration to be paid to the unaffiliated stockholders of
Sandata in the merger from $1.91 to $2.21 per share of Sandata common
stock.


SOUTH CAROLINA: High Court Decertifies SC Suit Over Return Tax Refunds
----------------------------------------------------------------------
South Carolina's Supreme Court reversed a lower court's ruling granting
certification to a lawsuit filed by 10 Upstate taxpayers, over the
state revenue department's return tax refunds, the Island Packet Online
reports.

The court ruled that Spartanburg County Circuit Court Judge Gary Clary
went too far when he ordered the Revenue Department return tax refunds
seized to pay debts several years ago.  The court reminded it to the
state court for a new hearing.

A 1995 law allowed the agency to take money owed to county hospitals,
local governments, universities and the Internal Revenue Service out of
state income tax refunds, Revenue Department Spokesman Danny Brazell
told the Island Packet Online.  The Revenue Department charges a $25
fee, and local governments and other eligible agencies can add their
own fees, said Kenneth Anthony Jr., a lawyer for the taxpayers.

However, the justices ruled the agencies weren't entitled to charge
those fees.  They also said the agencies' collection notices sent to
taxpayers didn't comply with the 1995 law, which was amended in 1999 to
improve notification, the Island Packet Online states.  There are about
30 named defendants in the suit, including a number of county
hospitals, the Municipal Association of South Carolina and the South
Carolina Association of Counties.


TERRORIST ATTACK: Plaintiffs Seek Revision Of Compensation Fund Rules
---------------------------------------------------------------------
On one of those crisp, clear fall mornings that people want to
remember, people went about the ordinary business of going to work, but
that was a morning no one want to remember, one different from all
others, and not to be forgotten- it was September 11, 2001.

Now, seven plaintiffs, wives and parents of seven of the deceased
victims who were busy at work in the north tower of the World Trade
Center on that fateful morning, are seeking a declaratory judgment
setting forth their rights because of alleged violations by defendants
of the legislation creating the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund
(Fund), according to court documents recently filed.

Where necessary, the plaintiffs seek injunctive relief mandating that
defendants rescind the complained of rules, regulations, criteria and
methodologies now implementing the administration of the Fund and adopt
substitutes that are in compliance with the legislation which created
the Fund; namely, the Air Transportation Safety and System
Stabilization Act of 2001(ACT), according to court documents filed
recently.

John F. Cambria, an attorney with the law firm Salans, in New York, has
filed the class action complaint for this case, June Colaio v. Special
Master Kenneth R. Feinberg, in the US District Court, Southern District
of New York.

The Fund is an unlimited government fund, which provides essentially a
no-fault alternative to private tort litigation against the involved
airlines and others.  The Act does not provide for a cap to be placed
on either the individual compensation awards or on the total amount of
the Fund.  It is limited to individuals who suffered physical injuries
or death as a result of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade
Center, the Pentagon, or the crash near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

The Act provides for a Special Master, appointed by the United States
Attorney General and not subject to Senate confirmation, who is to be
responsible for all aspects of the Fund's administration.  The Special
Master's tasks include drafting rules and regulations for the Fund, as
well as drafting the criteria and methodologies to be employed in the
computing of the awards.

The Act directs the Special Master to determine the extent of harm the
plaintiff has suffered because of the death of the victim, "including
any economic and non-economic losses and the amount of compensation to
which the claimant is entitled based on the harm to the claimant, the
facts of the claim and the individual circumstances of the claimant."  
Further, the Special Master is given responsibility for being the sole
decision maker with regard to individual compensation awards.  The
Special Master's compensation determinations are "final and not subject
to judicial review."

The Act also directs the Special Master to reduce the amount of a
claimant's compensation "by the amount of the collateral source
compensation the claimant has received or is entitled to receive as a
result of the airplane crashes."  Collateral sources would include
"life insurance, pension funds, death benefit programs, and payment by
Federal, State or local governments related to the September 11
terrorist attacks."

No punitive damages may be awarded by the Special Master, and no
negligence or any other theory of theory of liability is to be
considered in the award determination.

The complaint alleges that the conduct of the named defendants, Special
Master, Kenneth R. Feinberg, United States Attorney John Ashcroft and
the Department of Justice, "has been arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of
discretion and not in accordance with law."  The complaint alleges,
more specifically, that the defendants have promulgated rules and
regulations and adopted criteria and methodologies purporting to
implement the intentions of the Act and administer the Fund, which not
only violate the Act's intentions but also violate the statutory law of
the state of New York.  Defendants continue these violations, contends
the complaint, by:

     (1) calculating, limiting and awarding compensation for economic
         loss on the basis of after-tax earnings in contravention of
         New York law;

     (2) calculating, limiting and awarding compensation for economic
         loss for decedents who were not married at the time of their
         deaths by applying an arbitrary and unreasonable consumption
         rate in contravention of New York law;

     (3) calculating, limiting and awarding compensation for economic
         loss for decedents by utilizing as 'average earnings' a 1998-
         2000 three-year income average and disregarding annualized
         earnings for 2001, and refusing to consider any elements of
         compensation other than salary and bonus in contravention of
         New York law; and

     (4) failing to calculate, or to promulgate rules and regulations,
         or to develop methodologies and schedules for awarding
         compensation for economic loss for decedents whose 'average
         earnings' exceeded the 98th percentile of individual income in
         the United States in 2000, and by instituting a de facto,
         arbitrary and unreasonable cap on any individual award in
         contravention of New York law."

Plaintiffs assert, as well, that defendants have violated the Act,
because the Act requires that awards of economic loss be made in
accordance with applicable state law.  The plaintiffs therefore are
asking the court for a judgment declaring that the complained of rules
and regulations, purporting to implement the Air Transportation Safety
and System Stabilization Act of 2001 and to administer the September
11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001, as well as the complained of
criteria and methodologies for calculation of individual compensation
awards, developed by the defendants are in violation of the Act.

They ask, as well, that the court order preliminary and injunctive
relief, mandating, as described earlier above, that "defendants rescind
the complained of rules, regulations, criteria and methodologies and
adopt substitutes that are in compliance with the provisions of the
Act."  Plaintiffs seek also an award of class action attorneys fees and
costs.


TOBACCO INDUSTRY: Vector Releases Nicotine-Reduced Cigarettes To Market
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The first tobacco CEO to acknowledge smoking is addictive is offering a
new cigarette made with genetically modified tobacco that lets smokers
choose their level of nicotine, the Aberdeen American News (SD)
reports.

Vector Tobacco Inc. stops short of marketing its Quest cigarettes as a
smoking-cessation product.  Such a claim could draw the regulatory
attention of the Food and Drug Administration.  The cigarettes are
designed, however, to allow smokers to cut back on nicotine, the
addictive element in tobacco.

"The purpose of this product is to help people get to a nicotine-free
environment, where they can have zero in their system.  Then they can
decide what to do from that point forward," said Bennett LeBow, who
runs parent company Vector Group Ltd.

The company is now spending $15 million on advertising for Quest in
seven Mid-Atlantic and Mid-West states.  It also is funding research at
Duke University on how Quest affects smokers' nicotine intake and urge
to smoke.

"Quest is an intriguing curiosity," said Kenneth Warner, a public
health professor and director of the University of Michigan Tobacco
Research Network, which studies smoking and health.  "Whether Quest
could be used by smokers to consciously wean themselves off smoking
remains to be seen, but it seems worthy of study."

Mr. LeBow's other tobacco company, Mebane-based Liggett Group, was the
first to break ranks with Big Tobacco and settle smoking-related
litigation in 1996.  Mr. LeBow was the first tobacco CEO to acknowledge
that smoking is addictive and causes serious health problems.

A Supreme Court ruling in 2000, that bars the FDA from regulating the
tobacco industry, allows Vector to put Quest on the market without the
extensive testing required of a stop-smoking product categorized as a
drug.  This will remain the case as long as Quest makes no claim to
being a smoke-cessation product.


UNITED MEDICAL: Liquidator Says Doctors' Lawsuit Is "Counterproductive"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Provisional liquidator of collapsed medical insurer United Medical
Protection, David Lombe criticized the class action proposed by a group
of doctors against the Company, saying it is counterproductive to the
future of the insurer and its members, ABC Business News reports.

A group of doctors commenced the suit in response to UMP's request in
2000 that they pay an additional premium, an earlier Class Action
Reporter story states.  The premium is already the subject of a case
running in the Federal Court since 2001, in which a group of doctors is
pursuing a refund, alleging they were assured the payment would not be
required

Dr. Michael Levitt, one of the plaintiffs, told ABC "If we win and
(they) have to refund $74 million to doctors then in fact they will be
presumably insolvent."

The Australian Medical Association says if UMP's recovery is derailed,
hundreds of doctors would be left uninsured.  "I don't think that the
total derailing of UMP would be in the medical profession's or in the
public's best interest," the AMA's Dr Michael Sedgley told ABC.


WYETH: Colorado Woman Files Suit Over Hormone Replacement Pill Effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pharmaceutical giant Wyeth faces a federal suit filed by a Crawford,
Colorado woman, over the hormone replacement pill Prempro, in the
United States District Court in Denver, Colorado.  Clinical trials on
Prempro were halted last year because of health risks to women.

Lead plaintiff Pennie Alexander, 58, told Rocky Mountain News Prempro
nearly killed her.  She developed blood clots and spent a week in
intensive care.  "This company said it was the best thing that could
happen to me," she said.  "For about seven years everything was great,
and then in a matter of hours I was in major trouble."

Ms. Alexander continued by saying that in August last year, just after
clinical trials of Prempro were stopped, she fell ill.  The blood clots
had traveled from her lungs to her heart, she said.  "I'm healthy now,
but to be taken down in a matter of hours is scary," she asserted.

Ms. Alexander's husband, Lee searched the Internet for information on
Prempro and discovered lawsuits filed elsewhere in the country and the
name of Kansas City law firm Stueve Helder Siegel.  The Web site of the
Kansas City firm, Stueve Helder Siegel, asks women who have taken
Prempro to join the case.  

Other law firms also have filed large lawsuits against Prempro's
manufacturer, pharmaceutical giant Wyeth, in California and elsewhere,
Rocky Mountain News reports.  An estimated 6 million women have taken
hormone replacements.  About half of them were taking Prempro before
the trials were halted last summer.

Officials of New Jersey-based Wyeth could not be reached Monday, but
its Web site contains a January 8 announcement that the US Food and
Drug Administration had approved Prempro's new warning label.  Prempro,
which contains the hormones estrogen and progestin, is approved by the
FDA for treatment of hot flashes, night sweats, vaginal dryness and
osteoporosis, Rocky Mountain News reports.

                     New Securities Fraud Cases

AEGON NV: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Violations Suit in S.D. NY
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities class
action on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Aegon N.V. (NYSE:
AEG) between August 9, 2001 to July 22, 2002, inclusive, in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York against the
Company, Don Shepard, Kees Storm and Jos B.M. Streppel

The complaint charges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, by issuing a series of materially false and misleading
statements to the market between August 9, 2001 to July 22, 2002.
Aegon, through its member companies, is an international insurer.  
During the years preceding the class period, and during the class
period, as stock markets suffered substantial declines, increasing
numbers of investors gravitated from variable products to fixed
products.  Aegon distinguished itself from its competitors with the
claim that its purportedly broad product mix better enabled it to take
advantage of this market shift while it simultaneously assured
investors that it had sufficient reserves to fund the sharply
increasing guaranteed payout obligations required by its fixed
products.

The complaint further alleges that Aegon also assured investors that it
was less vulnerable to the vicissitudes of the equity and credit
markets than competitors because the Company matched "high quality
investment assets . in an optimal way to the corresponding insurance
liability, taking into account currency, yield and maturity
characteristics," The Company claimed that, for the foregoing reasons,
"(c)onsistency and reliability in earnings forecasting is a particular
source of pride" and that, while not immune to equity and real estate
market shifts, the Company was not subject to sharp downward variations
in annual net income.

Accordingly, the Company reduced its earnings guidance for 2002 but at
all relevant times maintained its forecast that 2002 net income would
at least equal 2001 net income.

The class period ends on July 22, 2002.  The complaint alleges that, on
that date, the Company shocked the market, announcing that 2002 net
income would not equal 2001 net income but, on the contrary, would be
30% to 35% lower than 2001 net income.  On this news, Aegon shares
declined from a closing price of $16.99 on Friday, July 19, 2002 to a
closing price of $13.25 on Monday, July 22, 2002, when trading resumed.

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


AMERICREDIT CORPORATION: Schiffrin & Barroway Files TX Securities Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas on
behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of the AmeriCredit
Corporation (NYSE:ACF) from April 14, 1999 through January 15, 2003,
inclusive.

The complaint alleges that AmeriCredit and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  
AmeriCredit purchases auto finance contracts without recourse from
franchised and select independent automobile dealerships, and, to a
lesser extent, makes loans directly to consumers buying used and new
vehicles.  Among other things, plaintiff alleges that defendants'
material omissions and the dissemination of materially false and
misleading statements regarding the nature of AmeriCredit's revenues
and earnings caused AmeriCredit's stock price to become artificially
inflated, causing huge damages for investors.

Specifically, defendants were improperly deferring delinquent loans to
avoid consumer defaults so AmeriCredit would have access to cash which
otherwise would have been restricted.

For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz or Stuart L. Berman by Phone:
(888) 299-7706 (toll free) or (610) 667-7706 by E-mail:
info@sbclasslaw.com


ARIBA INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Lawsuit in N.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of California on
behalf of purchasers of Ariba, Inc. (NASDAQ: ARBA) publicly traded
securities during the period between January 11, 2000 and January 15,
2003.

The complaint charges Ariba and certain of its officers and directors
with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Ariba is a
spend-management software solutions provider.  Ariba provides software,
services and network access to enable corporations to evaluate and
manage the cash costs associated with running their business.  On
January 15, 2003, the Company issued a press release entitled, "Ariba
Provides Update on Accounting Review and Restatement of Financial
Statements."  The press release stated in part: "Ariba, Inc. announced
today that it will restate its financial statements for the fiscal
years ended September 30, 2001 and 2000 and for the quarters ended
March 31, 2000 through June 30, 2002 as a result of an ongoing review
of accounting matters."  While Ariba's financial statements were
admittedly false, the Company's top officers and directors took
advantage of this and sold nearly $692 million worth of their Ariba
shares to the unsuspecting public.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: The Law Offices of
Marc S. Henzel, 273 Montgomery Ave, Suite 202 Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004-
2808, by Phone: (888) 643-6735 or (610) 660-8000, by Fax:
(610) 660-8080, by E-mail: Mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182.  


BIO-TECHNOLOGY GENERAL: Rabin Murray Lodges Securities Suit in NJ Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rabin Murray & Frank LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf
of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Bio-
Technology General Corporation securities (Nasdaq:BTGC) during the
period from April 19, 1999 through August 2, 2002, both dates
inclusive.  The suit names the Company, Sim Fass, Christopher G.
Clement, and Yehuda Sternlicht as defendants.

The suit alleges that defendants BTG and certain of its officers and
directors violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making a
series of materially false and misleading statements concerning the
Company's financial results during the class period.  Specifically, the
Complaint alleges that on August 2, 2002, defendants announced that the
Company's reported financial results for fiscal years 1999, 2000 and
2001 would be restated to eliminate revenue that had been improperly
recognized.

BTG has admitted that in 1999 through 2001, it inappropriately recorded
revenue in certain transactions, including shipments to distributors
where significant uncertainties existed concerning realization of the
invoiced amounts.  As a result of defendants' allegedly false and
misleading statements during the class period, shareholders acquired
shares of BTG at artificially inflated prices, and were damaged
thereby.

For more details, contact Eric Belfi and Sharon Lee by Mail: 275
Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, by Phone: (800) 497-8076 or
(212) 682-1818, by Fax: (212) 682-1892, or by E-mail:
email@rabinlaw.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.rabinlaw.com


CABLE & WIRELESS: Pomerantz Haudek Commences Securities Suit in E.D. VA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP initiated a securities
class action in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, case number 03 CV 108A, against Cable & Wireless
PLC (NYSE:CWP) and the Company's Chief Executive Officer and a member
of its Board of Directors on behalf of investors who purchased the
securities of CWP during the period between 1999 and December 6, 2002,
inclusive.

The complaint alleges that CWP, a global telecommunications business
with customers in 80 countries, including the United States, violated
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by
issuing false and misleading statements touting CWP's cash-rich
position, numerous all cash acquisitions of companies, and the benefits
of its August 6, 1999 sale of its 50% ownership stake in One 2 One, a
mobile telecommunications operator, to Deutsche Telekom.  Defendants,
however, failed to disclose a critical contractual term relating to its
disposition of One 2 One, which obligated the Company to set aside 1.5
billion Pounds or $2.4 billion in cash once the Company's long-term
debt rating fell below a certain threshold.

Specifically, the contract contained an indemnification clause that
would obligate CWP to cover any potential tax liabilities arising out
of the sale.  Contained in that indemnification was a trigger mechanism
whereby any future downgrade of CWP long-term debt rating below a
predetermined level would activate the 1.5 billion Pounds obligation on
behalf of CWP.

On December 6, 2002, CWP shocked the market when it announced that a
downgrade by Moody's Investment Service (Moody's) on its long-term debt
rating had triggered its obligation to escrow 1.5 billion Pounds in
cash.  It was only on December 6, 2002, that the Company disclosed its
1.5 billion pounds contingent liability.  As a result of the
disclosure, the stock price of CWP fell $1.57 from $3.90 to a closing
price of $2.33, a single-day drop of 40%.

For more details, contact Andrew G. Tolan by Phone: (888) 476-6529,
(888) 4-POMLAW by E-mail: agtolan@pomlaw.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://www.pomlaw.com


MERILL LYNCH: Schatz & Nobel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Schatz & Nobel PC initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf
of all persons who purchased shares of Merrill Lynch Focus Twenty Fund
(Nasdaq: MAFOX thorough MDFOX) from Focus Twenty's initial public
offering (which took place on or about March 3, 2000) through December
23, 2002, inclusive.

The suit alleges that, in connection with the issuance of shares in the
Fund, Merrill Lynch made materially false statements and omissions in
the Registration Statement and Prospectus.  Based on e-mails and other
Merrill Lynch communications made public as a result of the
investigation conducted by the New York State Attorney General, the
Complaint alleges that defendants misled investors by issuing favorable
analyst reports regarding the underlying securities when they allegedly
knew that the positive recommendations were unwarranted.

Specifically, Merrill Lynch failed to disclose that it had and was
continuing to seek investment-banking relationships with a number of
the companies whose securities were part of the Fund's portfolio.  
Defendants also omitted to disclose that they had served as
underwriters for certain of the companies in the Fund's portfolio.  
Unbeknownst to investors, Merrill Lynch's recommendations and
investments in companies in the Fund's portfolio were influenced by its
efforts to attract lucrative investment banking business from those
same companies.

For more details, contact Nancy A. Kulesa by Phone: 1-800-797-5499 by
E-mail: sn06106@aol.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.snlaw.net


TELLIUM INC.: Rabin Murray Commences Securities Fraud Suit in NJ Court
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rabin, Murray & Frank LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf
of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Tellium,
Inc., (Nasdaq:TELM) common stock during the period from May 17, 2001
through February 1, 2002, both dates inclusive.  The Company, certain
of its officers and directors, and Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. are
named as defendants in the action.

The suit alleges that defendants violated the Securities Act of 1933 by
making a series of false and misleading statements and omissions of
material fact contained in the Company's registration statement and
prospectus for the issuance and initial public offering of Tellium
common stock on May 17, 2001.  Specifically the Prospectus touted the
Company's $300 million agreement with Qwest Communications Corporation
(Qwest), stating, for example, that Qwest had committed to "purchase a
minimum of $300 million of our optical switches over the first three
years of the contract."

The prospectus failed to disclose that Qwest agreed to purchase Tellium
products in exchange for lucrative shares of Tellium in its initial
public offering and that Qwest did not need the large number of
switches they had ordered and, in fact, had no strong obligation to
purchase more switches in the future.  As a result of defendants'
allegedly false and misleading statements and omissions of material
fact in Tellium's Prospectus, shareholders acquired shares of Tellium
common stock at artificially inflated prices, and were damaged thereby.

For more details, contact Eric J. Belfi or Sharon Lee by Mail: 275
Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, by Phone: (800) 497-8076 or
(212) 682-1818, by Fax: (212) 682-1892, or by E-mail:
email@rabinlaw.com.   


VERITAS SOFTWARE: Schiffrin & Barroway Files Securities Suit in N.D. CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of California on
behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of VERITAS Software
Corporation (Nasdaq:VRTS) publicly traded securities during the period
between January 24, 2001 and January 16, 2003, inclusive.

The complaint charges VERITAS Software Corporation and certain of its
officers and directors with issuing false and misleading statements
concerning its business and financial condition.  Specifically, the
complaint alleges that:

     (1) the Company lacked sufficient internal controls and therefore
         was unable to understand its true financial standing;

     (2) the Company had improperly accounted its transaction with AOL
         Time Warner;

     (3) the Company's improper treatment of its transactions and
         revenue recognition policies resulted in material
         overstatement of revenue and income at all relevant times.

The scheme deceived the investing public regarding Veritas's business,
operations and management and inflated the intrinsic value of the
Company's shares.  On January 17, 2003, the Company announced the
restatement of its 2000, 2001 and 2002 financial statements as a result
of its improper accounting for transactions with AOL Time Warner.  The
release stated in part: "(t)he transactions involved in a $50 million
software purchase by AOL and a $20 million advertising services
purchase from AOL."

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


VERITAS SOFTWARE: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Lawsuit in N.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California on behalf of purchasers of VERITAS Software Corporation
(NASDAQ: VRTS) publicly traded securities during the period between
January 24, 2001 and January 16, 2003.

The complaint charges VERITAS and certain of its officers and directors
with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. VERITAS is a
software storage company that provides data protection, storage
management and disaster recovery software.  The complaint alleges that
on January 17, 2003, the Company announced the restatement of its 2000
and 2001 financial statements as a result of its improper accounting
for transactions with AOL Time Warner in 2000.  The release stated in
part: "(t)he transactions involved in a $50 million software purchase
by AOL and a $20 million advertising services purchase from AOL."

While VERITAS' financial statements were admittedly false and its stock
price artificially inflated, the Company's top officers and directors
took advantage of this and sold nearly $15 million worth of their
VERITAS shares to the unsuspecting public.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave,
Suite 202 Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004-2808, by Phone: (888) 643-6735 or
(610) 660-8000, by Fax: (610) 660-8080, by E-mail: Mhenzel182@aol.com
or visit the firm's Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182.  


VERITAS SOFTWARE: Cauley Geller Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California, on behalf of purchasers of VERITAS Software Corporation
(Nasdaq: VRTS) publicly traded securities during the period between
January 24, 2001 and January 16, 2003, inclusive.

The complaint charges VERITAS Software Corporation and certain of its
officers and directors with issuing false and misleading statements
concerning its business and financial condition.  Specifically, the
complaint alleges that:

     (1) the Company lacked sufficient internal controls and therefore
         was unable to understand its true financial standing;

     (2) the Company had improperly accounted its transaction with AOL
         Time Warner;

     (3) the Company's improper treatment of its transactions and
         revenue recognition policies resulted in material
         overstatement of revenue and income at all relevant times.

The scheme deceived the investing public in relation to VERITAS'
business, operations and management and inflated the intrinsic value of
the Company's shares.  On January 17, 2003, the Company announced the
restatement of its 2000, 2001 and 2002 financial statements as a result
of its improper accounting for transactions with AOL Time Warner.  The
release stated in part: "(t)he transactions involved a $50 million
software purchase by AOL and a $20 million advertising services
purchase from AOL."

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/library/user--images/veritas.pdf  


                              *********


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  * * *