CAR_Public/030205.mbx                C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
              Wednesday, February 5, 2003, Vol. 5, No. 25

                            Headlines                            

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE: Group Lauds OH Court's Refusal to Certify Lawsuit
CABLE & WIRELESS: UK Law Firm Joins Investors Suit, Seeks GBP1 Billion
CALIFORNIA: City Joins Lawsuit To Recover Costs For Damage To Pavilion
CATHOLIC CHURCH: Diocese Confirms Priest's Affair, Fathering Of Child
CCA-TREATED WOOD: Plaintiffs Ask Court To Seal Certification Documents

CMS GENERATION: Agrees To Settle CA Residents' Suit Over 1999 Tire Fire
CREDIT SUISSE: Suspends Banker Frank Quattrone Over Stock Controversy
DAIMLERCHRYSLER: Chicago Customers Commence Racial Discrimination Suit
ENRON CORPORATION: Unsecured Creditors Sue To Recover $70M in Transfers
FLORIDA: Homeowners Seek Injunction, City Proceeds With Canal Dredging

LOUISIANA: St. Bernard Parish To Settle Water Pollution Injury Lawsuit
LOUISIANA: Airport To Expand Buyout Plan As Residents Complain Of Noise
MANUFACTURERS' LIFE: Plaintiffs in Consumer Suit To Evaluate Progress
MICROSOFT CORPORATION: Korean Civic Group To Sue Over "Slammer" Damages
MICROSOFT CORPORATION: Negotiating With Apple For Antitrust Settlement

OWENS CORNING: Shareholders Commence Securities Fraud Suit in OH Court
RAMBUS INC.: CA Court Dismisses Consolidated Securities Fraud Lawsuit
RAMBUS INC.: Oral Arguments on Derivative Suit Dismissal Set Feb. 2003
RAMBUS INC.: Plaintiffs File Second Amended Consumer Suit in CA Court
OKLAHOMA: Tulsa FOP Witness Objects To Consent Decree In Bias Lawsuit

SKILLSOFT PLC: SEC Commences Probe Into Smartforce Merger Disclosures
TENNESSEE: Inmates Commence Lawsuit Over Jail's Overcrowded Conditions
WILLIAMS COMMUNICATIONS: Defendants For Dismissal of OK Securities Suit

                  Meetings, Conferences & Seminars

* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
* Online Teleconferences

                     New Securities Fraud Cases    

AMERICREDIT CORPORATION: Schatz & Nobel Commences Securities Suit in TX
AMERICREDIT CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Files Securities Suit in N.D. TX
ARIBA INC.: Schatz & Nobel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA
ARIBA INC.: Bernstein Liebhard Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA
ARIBA INC.: Glancy & Binkow Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA

OWENS CORNING: Kirby McInerney Commences Securities Lawsuit in N.D. OH
SALOMON SMITH: Klayman & Toskes Commences Securities Fraud Suit in NY
VERITAS SOFTWARE: Scott + Scott Commences Securities Lawsuit in N.D. CA
VERITAS SOFTWARE: Bernstein Liebhard Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. CA
VERITAS SOFTWARE: Bernard Gross Commences Securities Lawsuit in N.D. CA

                           *********


AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE: Group Lauds OH Court's Refusal to Certify Lawsuit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Alliance of American Insurers hailed the Ohio Court of Appeals'
decision denying class certification in a case challenging the use of
non-original equipment manufacturer (non-OEM) parts, the Collision
Repair Industry Insight states.  AAI said the decision is a reasonable
ruling that brings an element of common sense to the aftermarket parts
debate and the hearing of class actions.

In affirming a trial court's ruling in Augustus v. Progressive
Corporation, the justices said they denied the request for class-action
status because individual questions of fact outweighed common questions
of fact.  The court also ruled that it would be "inconceivable" that an
automobile is not returned to its "pre-loss condition" because a non-
OEM part is used in making a repair.

"Granting of this class action would have further coerced insurers from
using aftermarket parts, just as Avery v. State Farm, did in 1999,"
Kirk Hansen, Alliance director of claims, told the Insight.  "Too often
the courts let multi-state class actions usurp state regulation of
insurance, permitting judges to become de facto regulators of insurance
industry practices."

Mr. Hansen also noted that the court's reasoning strengthens the
insurance contract language permitting insurers to use non-OEM parts in
repairs.  "The court's ruling clearly suggests that people are
recognizing the fact that generic aftermarket parts are of like kind
and quality to OEM parts," he said, the Insight reports. "This decision
should help the small, but important aftermarket parts industry to
flourish."

The case also shows effective administration of the law relating to
class actions.  "The court correctly realized that the trial of the
case would involve different facts for each purported class member.  
With class members spread all over the country, the court wisely
concluded that the case would be unmanageable as a class action," Joyce
Kraeger, an Alliance attorney told the Insight.

In the original case, plaintiff Eric Augustus brought a class action
against Progressive and several affiliates alleging they used a
company-wide policy that required the use of "imitation parts" in
repairing and/or replacing damaged insured automobiles.  He also
alleged that use of these parts understates the amount necessary to
repair the damaged automobile to its pre-loss condition, resulting in a
breach of contractual obligation, the Insight reports.

Mr. Augustus sought certification for "All persons in the United States
insured by a Progressive automobile insurance policy who, within the
past 15 years, made a claim for vehicle repairs pursuant to their
policy and had imitation crash parts installed on their automobile or
who received monetary compensation determined by the cost of such
imitation crash parts."

The trial court hearing the case concluded that it could not be
certified as a class action because it failed to meet the requirements
of Ohio law, the Insight states.  Mr. Augustus appealed; however, the
appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision, noting that the
case failed the most basic requirement under Ohio law to qualify as a
class action: that a high degree of commonality exist among class
members.

The court found that Augustus failed to address the fact that specific
policy language authorized the use of non-OEM parts to restore vehicles
to pre-loss condition.  Further, the policies required replacement
parts to be "of like kind and quality" and limited liability to the
amount needed to repair the damaged property to its pre-loss condition.  
Also, the policies provided that in returning a vehicle to its pre-loss
condition, the insurer may use new, refurbished, used, OEM or non-OEM
parts.


CABLE & WIRELESS: UK Law Firm Joins Investors Suit, Seeks GBP1 Billion
----------------------------------------------------------------------
British lawyers have joined an American class action seeking up to
GBP1.8 billion in damages from Cable & Wireless after the troubled
telecom group's failure last year to disclose a massive potential tax
liability.

Class Law Solicitors is the first UK law firm to become involved in the
US style litigation against the Company.  They have teamed with Milberg
Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, a law firm based in San Francisco that
specializes in class-action suits, to launch the action on behalf of
C&W shareholders.

The two firms are seeking damages following the Company's disclosure in
December that it faced a possible GBP1.5 billion tax liability rising
from the sale of the One 2 One mobile phone division to Germany's
Deutsche Telekom.  


CALIFORNIA: City Joins Lawsuit To Recover Costs For Damage To Pavilion
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The city of Atascadero, California recently joined a class action
against the maker of the roofing tiles that are crumbling on the
Pavilion on the Lake, The San Luis Obispo Tribune reports.  The
manufacturer of the tiles has gone out of business, presenting another
hurdle to the city's effort to recover costs.

While the roofing situation is not dire, it is clear the tiles must be
replaced, said the city officials.  The Pavilion is a city-owned
meeting and performance center at Atacadero Lake.  The roof was
installed in 1992, after a community group, Friends of the Pavilion,
raised $35,000 to upgrade the roof from the originally planned standard
composition shingle material, according to Community Services Director
Geoffrey English.

Now, the tile has become so brittle that if anyone walks on it, it
breaks instantly, which means no one can go up to fix the roof, which
is about two and a half times the size of a basketball court, said
Robert Joslin, the city's facilities supervisor.  The tiles were
supposedly engineered to grow tougher with age, said Mr. Joslin.

Atascadero's problems are typical of more than 1,000 cases in
California, said Daniel Rottinghaus, an attorney with the Alamo office
of the law firm Berding & Weil, which is pursuing the class action.  
The lawsuit names two companies, Shake Co. of California and Cal-Shake
Inc., which bought Shake Co.'s assets and equipment in 1986.  The
attorneys for both companies said they were investigating the class
action's allegations, which they described as serious, but would not
comment further.

Cal-Shake attorneys have in turn filed a lawsuit against 400 California
roofers, saying the tiles are breaking because the roofers did not lay
them correctly, Mr. Rottinghaus said.  His suit for the city and others
cannot move ahead until the judge rules on the validity of the case
against the roofers.  If, however, the parties decide to settle and not
go to court, the class action could be resolved as early as this fall.


CATHOLIC CHURCH: Diocese Confirms Priest's Affair, Fathering Of Child
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Rev. Greg Schuler resigned as a priest at Lexington, Kentucky's,
Christ the King Cathedral last year after officials learned he had a
sexual affair with a married woman in the parish, church officials of
the Diocese confirmed recently, The Lexington Herald Leader reports.

In addition, Lexington church officials say they had known since the
early to mid-1990s that Rev. Schuler fathered a child in 1977, by
another woman, a married member of St. Peter parish in Lexington, when
he was a priest in training.  Rev. Schuler was named cathedral rector
at Christ the King in 1994.  Officials said they did not know whether
he had made the admission about the paternity at that point.

The release of information about Rev. Schuler came after allegations
contained in a sex-abuse lawsuit against the diocese were unsealed
recently.  Because the allegations about Rev. Schuler were stricken
from the lawsuit, they remained under seal even after the rest of the
lawsuit was unsealed.  Fayette Circuit Judge Mary Noble unsealed the
stricken material recently.  The allegations about Rev. Schuler did not
directly involve the plaintiffs, but he was named as an example of
priests "who have been shielded by the diocese," according to the
complaint.

Rev. Schuler has declined to comment through the diocese.  He is on a
one-year leave of absence from his ministry and cannot present himself
as a Roman Catholic priest.  He is living in northern Kentucky, where
the diocese pays him half his ordinary salary, about $8,000 a year.  
His medical benefits are extended until September 2003.

The ultimate decision on what will happen to Rev. Schuler's ministry
will rest with Bishop-Elect Ronald W. Gainer when he assumes his office
on February 22.  Further, the diocese has clarified the issue of
support for the child.  Rev. Schuler assumed responsibility for the
child's support when he told then-Bishop Kendrick Williams about the
child, who is now an adult.  The diocese, after claiming it was a
personal matter, has finally revealed that Rev. Schuler entered a
treatment facility in St. Louis after leaving Lexington.

David Clohessy, national director of the Survivors Network for those
Abused By Priests, said it was an encouraging sign that the diocese
made admissions.  It is getting harder and harder for dioceses to
ignore or deny the truth, he said.


CCA-TREATED WOOD: Plaintiffs Ask Court To Seal Certification Documents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
National putative class action representatives in a case against the
treated wood industry in the United States District Court in Southern
District of Florida filed a motion asking the clerk of court to seal
exhibits supporting certification of their class, Mealeys.com reports.  
The exhibits are documents describing attitudes about the use of
chromated copper arsenate-treated wood, including a 1992 industry
survey of public opinion.

According to the survey executive summary, buyers of CCA-treated wood
are more likely to have concerns about its use in public applications
such as utility poles, railways, guardrails and marine pilings than
about the residential use of the product, mealeys.com reports.  The
focus group phase of the survey found that purchasers of CCA-treated
wood "expect additional information to be provided at stores by the
wood-preservation industry," according to the report.

Purchasers want "assurances that there are no dangers in making skin
contact, information about the chemicals and processes used, answers
about whether toxins will leach out from pressure-treated wood, tips on
installation and care (and) an explanation about why pressure treated
wood should not be burned," according to the report.

The survey concludes that most Americans were not concerned in 1992
about the use of CCA-treated wood.  Some 79 percent of those asked
expressed no concern about home use, and 77.1 percent expressed no
concern about public use, according to the survey.


CMS GENERATION: Agrees To Settle CA Residents' Suit Over 1999 Tire Fire
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CMS Generation Company, which formerly owned Oxford Tire Recycling of
Northern California agreed to settle for US$9 million the class action
filed against it and six other firms on behalf of persons who allegedly
suffered health problems from the massive 1999 tire fire outside
Westley, California, the Modesto Bee reports.

The suit, filed on behalf of 11,000 people, relates to the September
1999 Westley fire that began when lightning struck mounds of tires.  
The blaze burned for two months, giving off toxic smoke into the air,
contaminating the land and threatening groundwater supplies in the
canyon near Interstate 5.  The suit also named as defendants:

     (1) Modesto Energy Limited Partnership, which operated the tire-
         burning plant at the site;

     (2) Edward Filbin, a rancher that started the pile four decades
         ago; and

     (3) Mark Kirkland, who bought the pile in 1995 and established
         Oxford Tire Recycling

The settlement must still receive final approval by the court, a
process that could take months.  It does not cover the other defendants
in the case.  


CREDIT SUISSE: Suspends Banker Frank Quattrone Over Stock Controversy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Investment firm Credit Suisse First Boston (CSFB) suspended prominent
banker Frank Quattrone, pending an internal investigation of hot stock
offerings that has badly battered CSFB's reputation, Reuters reports.

Mr. Quattrone's success in the late-1990s technology boom is legendary
on Wall Street.  Mr. Quattrone ran CSFB's technology banking operation
from Palo Alto, California.  His group became famous for getting large
fees in the late 1990s for taking big companies such as Amazon.com,
Inc. and Linux Systems, Inc. public.

Mr. Quattrone allegedly is at the center of a controversy related to
the handling of initial public offerings of stock that has badly
tarnished CSFB's reputation, Reuters reports.  The New York-based firm
cited "questions about Mr. Quattrone's response to an inquiry last week
by the firm about whether he was aware of pending investigations in
2000 when he sent an e-mail to employees regarding document retention
issues."

"The new information raised questions about whether Mr. Quattrone acted
appropriately in December 2000 when he sent that e-mail and permitted a
subordinate to send a similar e-mail to employees," CSFB said in a
statement.

Mr. Quattrone's e-mail was about the firm's document retention policy
in light of possible lawsuits relating to the bursting of the dot-com
bubble, to a person familiar with the matter told Reuters.

"I did nothing wrong," Mr. Quattrone, 47, said in a statement. "I am
confident that the investigation will show that."

"It was just a matter of time," Jim Cox, professor of corporate and
securities law at Duke University told Reuters.  "We all fully expect
that he's out of the industry for the rest of his life. The only
question now is any NASD or SEC actions against him and what exposure
in private litigation in which he's been named as a defendant. And
that's going after the home, the milk money, the whole bit."

In his absence, staffers at CSFB's technology group will report to the
firm's global head of investment banking, Adebayo Ogunlesi, the person
familiar with the matter said, according to Reuters.


DAIMLERCHRYSLER: Chicago Customers Commence Racial Discrimination Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A group of customers filed a class action against DaimlerChrysler's
(Chrysler) (NYSE: DCX) financing subsidiary accusing the Company of
denying credit to customers in the Chicago area based on race, and
repossessing vehicles of customers living in predominantly black
neighborhoods without justification or proper notification.

The suit claims Chrysler management systematically and intentionally
denied low-interest vehicle financing to creditworthy blacks in two
Chicago neighborhoods, based on the neighborhood in which they lived
and the dealership they selected to purchase the car.  The suit also
contends that the practice continues today in the Chicago area and
Chrysler's Illinois sales zone.

Filed in the US District Court in Illinois on behalf of six black
purchasers of Chrysler vehicles, the suit seeks to represent all people
of color in Chrysler's Illinois sales zone who have been denied
financing from Chrysler despite their creditworthiness.  The suit names
DaimlerChrysler Services North America, LLC, d/b/a Chrysler Financial
Company, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary and captive financing arm of
DaimlerChrysler, as the defendant.

The suit describes meetings between Chrysler and its dealerships in
which Chrysler executives disclosed - using racist slurs and derogatory
comments - that Chrysler did not want to finance car purchases by
blacks, claiming they are inherently higher credit risks.

"We intend to show that Chrysler is using race in a most repugnant way
- to deny creditworthy blacks financing based solely on the color of
their skin," Steve Berman, managing partner of Hagens Berman, one of
the law firms representing the plaintiffs said in a statement.  "To
think that one of the world's largest companies would tolerate and
perpetuate this type of racism is revolting."

According to the suit, Chrysler uses an automated computer program
called the ACE (Automated Credit Evaluation) System, which is designed
to give colorblind, objective credit evaluations to customers applying
for financing from Chrysler.  However, the complaint argues that
Chrysler modified the ACE System software with a "disabling switch"
that rerouted all applications from particular dealerships for
subjective review by an employee at Chrysler Regional Headquarters.  
The suit cites two dealerships in which virtually every credit
application submitted by a black customer was denied financing
regardless of credit scores.

Plaintiff Jerrell Coburn, one of the six named plaintiffs, received a
score of 656 on the Empirica scale, a system used by one of the three
largest credit-reporting bureaus in the United States, and a score that
should have qualified him for Chrysler promotional financing, according
to the complaint.  After Chrysler denied his credit application, Mr.
Coburn received financing from another financial institution at a much
higher interest rate.

"Last year, Chrysler asked me to come in, telling me that they had
great financing available, and that if I was in the market for a new
Jeep, now was the time," Mr. Coburn said.  "I thought 'hey, they are
rewarding me for being a valued customer for so many years' -- little
did I know that I was something very different than a 'valued customer
. If Chrysler thinks that they can judge me by the color of my skin or
the neighborhood in which I choose to buy my house, well, they have
another thing coming."

The suit claims Chrysler has denied financing to creditworthy black
applicants at two Chicago-area dealerships since at least April 2001.  
In September of 2002, Chrysler began denying all credit applications
from the Marquette dealership, and continues to deny financing to the
dealership, the complaint states.

Another named plaintiff, Vanessa Dampeer, had a similar experience;
finding out Chrysler refused to finance her purchase only after taking
delivery of the Chrysler Sebring.  "Overnight, we went from zero
percent financing to 14 percent," Ms. Dampeer said.

Mr. Berman believes that other dealerships around the country suffer
from redlining by Chrysler.  "These extreme comments and policies
existed at Chrysler for too long to simply be an anomaly," he said.

Corroborated by several witnesses and detailed in the complaint, two
separate Chrysler zone managers charged meetings with racial slurs and
extremely derogatory comments such as:

     (1) "We found out these 'mulingianos' (a derogatory racial slur)
         were getting (sales contracts) bought and (financing) approved
         by Chrysler when they should be standing on the bus.  And if
         it weren't for Rosa Parks, those niggers would still be
         standing in the back of the bus." (par. 77)

     (2) "My whole office knows that I don't buy nigger paper."
         (Meaning: My whole office knows that I don't provide financing
          for black customers.) (par. 78)

     (3) "Now you can see why I don't buy (financing for) mulingianos."
         (par. 94)

Addressing a question about the disparity between financing customers
in minority populated neighborhoods and suburban neighborhoods: "Well,
you've got to give the nigger a little credit for shopping in the
suburbs where the washrooms are cleaner, and he has a better chance of
getting off the lot with his new ride without getting killed." (par.
105)

The suit also states Chrysler leadership was well aware of the
attitudes and behaviors of its regional operations.  According to the
suit, during a meeting in June 2002, Chrysler Financial Vice President
Brad Norman participated in a meeting in which the Chicago zone manager
stated, "Well guys, what did we decide to do with Gerry's nigger
deals?"  At no time did the executive from Chrysler's corporate
headquarters in Detroit challenge the racist remark, the suit contends.

The complaint also charges that when 70 Marquette dealership customers
obtained financing, Chrysler renounced the executed financing
agreements as 'nigger deals,' and unlawfully repossessed all or some of
the 70 vehicles.  According to the complaint, many of the vehicles were
repossessed from owners who never missed a payment or were only
marginally late with a payment.

Chrysler's attempts to repossess these vehicles began a series of
meetings that exposed Chrysler's allegedly racist policies.  In these
meetings, Chrysler's regional zone manager asserted that the only way
the black purchasers of Chrysler vehicles qualified for financing in
the first place was through a fraudulent conspiracy between dealership
employees and insiders within Chrysler, the complaint states.  Despite
having no evidence, Chrysler's zone manager forced Marquette owner
Gerald Gorman into taking financial responsibility for the allegedly
fraudulent deals by threatening to close down his dealership unless a
full recourse deal was signed, the complaint argues.

In this deal, the zone manager promised to allow Gorman to assist with
collecting payments on the sales contracts, provide notice to Gorman if
customers fell behind in their payments, and help mitigate the costs to
Gorman as a result of the repossessions, the suit states.  According to
the complaint, Chrysler immediately began repossessing vehicles
purchased by blacks and returning them to the Marquette dealership,
without notifying Gorman.

The repossessions turned away customers from the dealerships and
severely hurt their bottom line, according to the complaint.  The two
dealerships have filed suit against Chrysler, claiming breached
contracts and forced agreements brokered by Chrysler zone managers
resulted in severe financial losses.

The class action seeks damages related to civil rights violations and
the paying of higher interest rates by plaintiffs, as well as punitive
damages to deter the company from discriminatory conduct.

For more details, contact Steve Berman by Phone: (206) 623-7292 by E-
mail: steve@hagens-berman.com or contact Mark Firmani by Phone:
(206) 443-9357 by E-mail: mark@firmani.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.hagens-berman.com


ENRON CORPORATION: Unsecured Creditors Sue To Recover $70M in Transfers
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Enron Corporation's unsecured creditors have commenced a lawsuit
against former Enron chairman and chief executive Kenneth Lay and his
wife Linda in the United States Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan, Reuters
reports.

The committee representing the creditors filed the suit, to recover
more than $70 million in transfers, according to court papers obtained
Monday.  According to the suit, during the year before Enron's Chapter
11 filing, Mr. Lay allegedly used Enron common stock to repay loans he
had received from the company.  The committee says "the tendering of
Enron's own stock to repay loans taken in cash was not a fair exchange
for Enron."

Enron's stock traded at 4 cents a share on the first trading day after
its bankruptcy filing, compared with more than $65 a share about a year
earlier, Reuters states.  The committee alleged that former chairman
Lay received information throughout 2001 that indicated Enron was in
"dire financial condition."

Despite this knowledge, the committee said Mr. Lay used company common
stock to repay more than $94 million in cash loans from May 3, 1999,
through Nov. 27, 2001.  More than $74 million of the repayments
occurred within the year before Enron's bankruptcy filing in December
2001.  Mr. Lay resigned in January 2002.


FLORIDA: Homeowners Seek Injunction, City Proceeds With Canal Dredging
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the homeowners in the Plantation Isles and Plantation Harbor
communities are unhappy with the assessments levied by the city for the
canal-dredging project it is undertaking for Plantation Isles, The
Miami Herald reports.  They have filed a class action seeking an
injunction, and a hearing is scheduled before Broward Circuit Judge
Richard D. Eade on Friday, February 7.

After months of discussion earlier, in June of last year, an agreement
was reached that the 474 canal-front homeowners in Plantation Isles and
neighboring areas will be assessed a fee ranging from about $1,500 to
$5,500 per property.  The city, meanwhile, is moving forward with the
$1.5 million canal-dredging project for the Plantation Isles community.  
Much preparation work has been completed, such as bulkhead inspections
on all 474 properties.  Reports will be sent to homeowners as to which
bulkheads can be repaired and which will have to be replaced.  For
homeowners having to replace the costly bulkheads, financial
information will be included in the report, said City Engineer Brett
Butler.

While the bulk of the project money is coming from homeowners, the city
is contributing an additional $50,000 for homeowners hardest hit by the
assessment.


LOUISIANA: St. Bernard Parish To Settle Water Pollution Injury Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
St. Bernard Parish in Louisiana and its insurer will pay $1.15 million
to settle a class action stemming from a January 1998 refinery
discharge that allegedly tainted the parish's drinking water, attorney
said, according to the Associated Press Newswires.  About 9,000
plaintiffs claim they became ill after chemicals discharged by the
refinery, co-owned by Exxon Mobil Corporation and Petroleos de
Venezuela, seeped into the parish water plant.

The parish's share of the settlement will be $180,000, said J. Wayne
Mumphrey, the parish's lawyer.  The parish's insurer, Genesis Insurance
Co., will cover the rest of the settlement, $970,000.  The pending
settlement leaves Chalmette Refining LLC as the only defendant.  A
trial is set for June 9.


LOUISIANA: Airport To Expand Buyout Plan As Residents Complain Of Noise
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Residents of the Kenner area, near the Louis Armstrong International
Airport will have a chance to present their complaints about airport
noise at a public hearing, The Times-Picayune reports.

Many of the residents are coming to the hearing because they want the
airport to extend the boundaries of the original buyout zone, buy their
homes and pay to move them away from the area.  They say the noise is
even worse, because the homes that were razed in the 1990s used to
serve to buffer them from the sound.

The buyout program was born of a 1980 class action over airport noise.  
The suit was settled in 1989, requiring the airport to seek federal
money for the buyout program, whereby the airport bought and razed 500
homes and paid to move the owners.

If the airport officials think the buyout and move of the residents are
warranted, the proposal is handed to the Federal Aviation
Administration, which has six months to review the proposal.  If the
FAA approves the plan, the availability of money will determine whether
it is carried out.


MANUFACTURERS' LIFE: Plaintiffs in Consumer Suit To Evaluate Progress
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Barbadians who held policies with the Manufacturers Life Insurance
Company (Manulife) will have an opportunity next week to gauge the
progress in the class action brought against the Company, the Barbados
Advocate reports.  Harvey Strosberg and Dr. Patricia Speight, lawyers
for the suit, will be holding a public meeting on Thursday at the
Sherbourne Conference Centre.

Wismar Greaves, one of the principals behind the suit, told the
Advocate that the meeting is part of the ongoing exercise to alert the
former policyholders on the developments so far.  He said they have a
case and that the ex-policyholders need to be informed.

Mr. Greaves, who is a former supervisor of insurance and who now heads
the Insurance Corporation of Barbados, said interest in the case
remains very high.  Mr. Greaves, along with three former policyholders,
have brought the action against Manulife over what they said was the
company's failure to honor its commitments to the Barbadians when it
demutualized in the 1990s.  They are claiming $150 million.

In their action the plaintiffs said that on December 31, 1996, Manulife
purported to terminate the membership rights in Manulife of the
plaintiffs and of the other members of the class by selling their
policies to Life of Barbados, without their consent and without payment
of fair and equitable compensation.


MICROSOFT CORPORATION: Korean Civic Group To Sue Over "Slammer" Damages
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Microsoft Corporation might face a potential class action filed by
Korean civic group The People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy
(PSPD), over the computer worm attack that brought down Korea's
internet activity last month, the Korea Herald states.

Last month, the worm, called "slammer," caused Internet networks all
over the world to shut down.  PSPD said Microsoft SQL servers were
especially vulnerable to the worm.  PSPD further claimed that Microsoft
should have done more to protect its customers from a threat it was
conscious of.

"We plan to collect plaintiffs beginning next week for a class-action
suit against Microsoft," Bae Shin-jung of the PSPD told the Korea
Herald.  Mr. Bae said the suit will be based on either Korean laws on
product liability (PL) and damages or US PL law.  PL laws grant
consumers the right to sue manufacturers for losses stemming from
defective products.  The PSPD, she added, is scheduled to hold a forum
Thursday, in which experts, lawyers and civic activists will discuss
how to bring the case to court.

"Microsoft has denied responsibility, claiming that it warned of the
worm attack, issued a patch for the flaw and e-mailed users, but we
believe those were insufficient measures given the disastrous results
of the worm attack," she told the Korea Herald.  Ms. Bae insisted that
Microsoft should have phoned or visited server operators to help them
prepare for the incident.

PSPD officials also said the organization plans to petition the
government's communications panel to help Internet users secure
compensation from major Internet service providers, including KT
Corporation, the Korea Herald states.  More than 3,000 people have
already signed the petition, which will be filed with the
communications committee under the Ministry of Information and
Communications.


MICROSOFT CORPORATION: Negotiating With Apple For Antitrust Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Microsoft Corporation is currently in talks with Apple Computer Inc. to
avoid a challenge to its proposed $1.1 billion antitrust settlement in
California, Bloomberg reports.  Apple responded to the proposed
settlement on January 13, 2003 saying it didn't go far enough.

Under the terms of the settlement, Microsoft will offer vouchers,
ranging in amount from US$4 to $29, to California customers who
purchased Microsoft software between February 18, 1995, and December
15, 2001.  Two-thirds of the amount not claimed by individuals will be
donated to 4,700 of California's neediest schools, according to Brad
Smith, Microsoft general counsel, and Eugene Crew, lead counsel for
Townsend and Townsend and Crew LLP, the San Francisco firm that brought
the suit nearly four years ago.

One-third of the value of the unclaimed vouchers reverts to Microsoft,
which maintains no admission of fault or any violation of the law in
the matter.  Microsoft's attorneys pointed out that in many class
action cases, all unclaimed damages revert to the defendant, MacWorld
reports.

"Apple strongly believes that Microsoft should make the entire pool of
unclaimed voucher funds available to our schools to purchase any
technology products that best meet their needs," Apple said in a
statement.  "Microsoft should not be allowed to recoup one third of the
unclaimed voucher funds and should not be allowed to dictate which
technology our schools choose to buy with these funds.  Remember --
this is a settlement imposed against Microsoft for breaking the law,
and it should not allow them to unfairly compete in education -- one of
the few remaining markets where they don't have monopoly power."

Microsoft and Apple have held meetings to discuss Apple's complaints,
according to Microsoft and Eugene Crew, a lawyer who represents
plaintiffs in the antitrust suits.  "The school decides what it wants.
There's no incentive one way or another" for schools to choose the
software or cash. How to "ameliorate any concern Apple has depends on
what Apple wants and how flexible Microsoft is," Mr. Crew told
MacWorld.com.  Microsoft says the settlement is "competitively
neutral."


OWENS CORNING: Shareholders Commence Securities Fraud Suit in OH Court
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Owens Corning's former and current officials face a new class action
filed by New York City holders of its stock, alleging they knew the
company's financial situation was much worse than the public did before
the firm filed bankruptcy on October 5, 2000, ToledoBlade.com reports.  
The suit, filed in the United States District Court in Toledo, Ohio, is
the first of its kind, and asks for actual damages, but does not name
an amount.

Shareholder Robert Greenburg filed the suit against former chief
executive officer Glen Hiner and:

     (1) J. Thurston Roach, chief financial officer until April, 2000,

     (2) Michael Thaman, current company chairman,

     (3) Deyonne Epperson, comptroller and senior vice president, and

     (4) Landon Hilliard, a board member who signed a financial
         disclosure document in March 2000.

The suit alleges the defendants committed securities fraud because they
signed documents submitted to the US Securities and Exchange Commission
in March and May 2000, about the firm's financial health, when they
knew its financial picture was much worse.  Keeping that knowledge from
investors deprived them of the right to sell, or not buy more shares,
hurting them financially when the bankruptcy was filed, the suit
contends.

Under a proposed reorganization plan filed by the Company last month,
the stock of Toledo's third largest corporation will become worthless
when the firm emerges from Chapter 11.  If the plan is approved by a
bankruptcy judge, executives plan to issue new stock and distribute it
to creditors, ToledoBlade.com reports.

The lawsuit asks to be certified as a class action, so other OC
shareholders could be included in seeking damages.  It seeks
unspecified compensatory damages, legal fees, and the "awarding of such
other and further relief as may be just and proper."

A key issue in the complaint will be whether the filing is too late,
given a two-year statute of limitations on shareholder claims.  An
Company spokesman could not be reached for comment, but a likely
defense argument will be that the permitted time frame for such suits
expired two years after the bankruptcy filing, or in October.  The
plaintiff contends, however, that the clock didn't begin until concrete
evidence of the alleged wrongdoing surfaced in later motions filed in
the bankruptcy case, ToledoBlade.com reports.

Mr. Greenburg could not be reached for comment, nor could his New York
attorneys.  However, Timothy J. Fitzgerald, a Cleveland attorney
working on the case, said, "We believe there's a valid claim here.
Whatever the defense brings up, I'm sure will be litigated throughout
the (process.)"


RAMBUS INC.: CA Court Dismisses Consolidated Securities Fraud Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Northern District of
California dismissed the consolidated securities class action pending
against Rambus, Inc. on behalf of a class of plaintiffs who purchased
the Company's common stock between January 11, 2000 and May 9, 2001,
inclusive.

The suit asserted claims under Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and
Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, as well as Rule 10b-5.  The suit
alleges that the Company misled shareholders concerning its business
and the status of its intellectual property in light of allegations
concerning its involvement in JEDEC.

Class plaintiffs have 45 days to file an amended complaint.  The
Company intends to continue to vigorously defend itself in this action.


RAMBUS INC.: Oral Arguments on Derivative Suit Dismissal Set Feb. 2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oral arguments for the dismissal of the consolidated shareholder
derivative lawsuit pending against Rambus, Inc. and its directors is
set for February 13, 2003 in the Delaware Chancery Court.  The suit
alleges the individual defendants caused the Company to engage in an
improper course of conduct relating to JEDEC and its intellectual
property beginning in 1992 and continuing through the Infineon trial in
May of 2001.  

The complaint alleges breaches of fiduciary duty and misappropriation
of confidential information for personal profit.  The suit asks for
contribution or indemnification from the named director defendants.  
The Company then filed a motion to dismiss this complaint.  Plaintiffs
have opposed it, and briefing is now completed.

Similar derivative actions were filed in California Superior Court,
Santa Clara County.  The complaints assert claims for breaches of
fiduciary duty and violation of California's proscription against
insider trading.  The court consolidated the cases on November 9, 2001.  
The court on that date also granted defendants' motion to stay the
consolidated case in deference to the earlier filed Delaware actions
described above.  The Company and plaintiffs in two subsequent cases
brought on similar grounds have agreed to stay those cases on similar
terms.  Plaintiffs agreed to consolidate all of these cases together by
stipulation with defendants on or around July 3, 2002.  On July 18,
2002, the California Superior Court ordered this stay as stipulated by
the parties.


RAMBUS INC.: Plaintiffs File Second Amended Consumer Suit in CA Court
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs in the consumer class action filed against Rambus, Inc.
filed a second amended suit in the California Superior Court, Santa
Clara County.  The suit was filed on behalf of an alleged class of
"indirect purchasers" of memory from January 2000 to March 2002.

The plaintiffs allege those purchasers paid higher prices for various
types of dynamic random access memory (DRAM) due to the Company's
alleged unlawful use of market power in the various DRAM markets to
coerce vendors of equipment using that technology to enter into
supposed agreements in restraint of trade.  Plaintiffs base their
claims on the Company's alleged anticompetitive actions in patenting
and licensing various technologies relating to DRAM, which plaintiffs
assert, occurred during the Company's involvement at JEDEC in 1992
through 1996, as well as during the Company's subsequent patent
licensing and litigation efforts.

The Company demurred to this complaint in its entirety on June 24, 2002
and a hearing on this demurrer occurred on August 27, 2002, at which
point the court granted the Company's demurrer, giving plaintiffs leave
to amend the suit.  Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on September
26, 2002.  The Company filed a demurrer to the amended complaint and a
hearing was held on this demurrer on December 3, 2002.  The court
granted the Company's demurrer and again gave plaintiffs leave to amend
its complaint.

The Company expects to file a demurrer shortly.  Discovery is stayed in
this case as to all issues other than those pertaining to class
certification issues.


OKLAHOMA: Tulsa FOP Witness Objects To Consent Decree In Bias Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Tulsa Fraternal Order of Police's (FOP) collective bargaining
agreement with the city does not allow city officials "to bargain away"
the union's rights in order to settle a racial lawsuit, the group'
president, Robert Jackson said at the fairness hearing being held
before Judge Sven Erik Holmes, the Tulsa World reports.

Judge Holmes has been hearing witnesses' comments on the proposed
consent decree that would settle the racial discrimination class action
brought by a number of black police officers in the Tulsa Police
Department.

The FOP, which was allowed by Judge Holmes to intervene in the nine-
year-old lawsuit in September, did not sign the consent decree and has
claimed that many of its provisions violate its collective bargaining
agreement with the city.  The FOP president expressed his view that the
city is supposed to negotiate with the union prior to implementing new
policies, unless there has been a waiver by the FOP or the changes are
so minor that they do not affect the terms and conditions of officers'
employment.

Mr. Jackson also expressed his concern about what would become of the
information compiled under a computerized data-collection system that
is called for in the decree.  Deputy City Attorney Larry V. Simmons
responded to the issue, saying that virtually all the information about
officers' activities that would be analyzed already is compiled and
that the new system will merely centralize that data.

Ziva Branstetter, Tulsa World projects editor, expressed concerns about
sections of the consent decree whose wording appeared to shroud the
work of the proposed Dispute Resolution Committee and an independent
auditor in secrecy.  Ms. Branstetter said a description of the disputes
before the committee, the positions of the parties and disclosure of
how such matters are being resolved, will allow the public to know what
issues are developing as the decree is implemented.  Judge Holmes
called for further briefing on the matter and indicated he will order
papers to be filed on other issues in the case.


SKILLSOFT PLC: SEC Commences Probe Into Smartforce Merger Disclosures
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is
commencing an investigation into online education company SkillSoft
Plc's   and the financial disclosures and accounting at its
merger partner SmartForce Plc, Reuters reports.

SkillSoft and SmartForce merged in 2002.  In November, Skillsoft
announced it had discovered "several accounting issues" in SmartForce's
pre-merger statements and would restate financial results.  The SEC
investigation is looking at SmartForce's financial statements beginning
in 1999 and running through June 2002, SkillSoft said in a statement.  
SkillSoft further said it is cooperating with the SEC.

Skillsoft and Smartforce also face several securities class actions in
the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire.  
These lawsuits allege that the Company misrepresented or omitted to
state material facts in its SEC filings and press releases regarding
its revenues and earnings and failed to correct such false and
misleading SEC filings and press releases, which are alleged to have
artificially inflated the price of its American Depositary Shares
(ADSs), an earlier Class Action Reporter states.  These lawsuits seek
unspecified monetary damages, including punitive damages together with
interest, costs, fees and expenses.  The Company is in the process of
reviewing these complaints.


TENNESSEE: Inmates Commence Lawsuit Over Jail's Overcrowded Conditions
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jail overcrowding has led to a lawsuit filed on behalf of five inmates
against Claiborne County, Tennessee, that could become class action in
status, the Associated Press Newswires reports.

The inmates were part of a riot at the Claiborne County jail last
month, and three were part of another riot that took place in April.  
At the time of the January riot, the Claiborne jail held 63 inmates.  
It is designed to accommodate 34.  Crowd too many people inside a
"dark, dank" place with plumbing problems and few safety measures and
violence is sure to erupt, said Knoxville attorney John Eldridge, who
filed the lawsuit.  

The lawsuit alleges, among other things, that the jail was packed with
83 inmates during the April riot.  County officials admit there is an
overcrowding problem but say budget constraints prevent them from doing
much to alleviate the problem.

Mr. Eldridge initially filed suit in US District Court in Knoxville, in
2000, alleging the same crowded conditions.  Two years later, he filed
the suit including the April and January riots.  A federal judge has
combined the two lawsuits, and Mr. Eldridge is seeking to have the
legal action certified as a class-action lawsuit so that it would
include as plaintiffs all current inmates and future prisoners.

Vergil Herrell, Claiborne County Executive, said the county realizes it
needs to do something.  Claiborne County leaders are aware of the jail
problems, but have done little to address them.  The county is fighting
Mr. Eldridge's push for class action status.  A hearing on the issue is
scheduled for February 19 at the US District Court.


WILLIAMS COMMUNICATIONS: Defendants For Dismissal of OK Securities Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyers for Williams Companies, Inc., executives of the former Williams
Communications Group Inc. and auditors Ernst & Young filed motions to
dismiss a securities fraud class action filed in the United States
District Court, in Tulsa, Oklahoma, brought by the former shareholders
of Williams Communications Inc., the Tulsa World reports.

Judge Sven Erik Holmes has given the class action lawyers, who
represent former shareholders of Williams Communications, until mid-
February to file briefs in opposition to the motions to dismiss.  U.
Seth Ottensoser of the New York law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes
& Lerach LLP, lead attorneys for the class-action shareholders, said he
hopes a court hearing will be held in early spring.

The lawsuit is the main legal hurdle that remains from the six-month
bankruptcy reorganization of Williams Communications, which was spun
off as an independent company from Williams Companies, in April 2001,
and filed for Chapter 11 protection from creditors a year later.

The class action originally was filed January 29, 2002.  It was amended
and refiled September 27, on behalf of purchasers of Williams
Communications stock between July 24, 2000, and April 22, 2002.  
Lawyers for the shareholders allege that company executives
consistently downplayed the depression in the telecommunications market
and its effect on Williams Communications after the spin-off in April
2001.  In public statements, executives said the company was not being
affected by decreased demand and declining prices for broadband.

The spin-off of Williams Communications from Williams Companies was
engineered for the sole purpose of removing Williams Communications'
mounting losses and rising expenses from Williams Companies' balance
sheet, class action lawyers allege. The shareholders' lawsuit recites
an extensive list of actions, which resulted in Williams
Communications' loss of revenue.

As part of Williams Communications' bankruptcy reorganization, class
action shareholders agreed to a channeling injunction that limits their
abilities to pursue and recover for securities fraud claims against
Williams Communications' executives, officers, consultants, and
executives and officers of Williams Companies.

The channeling injunction further provides that holders of securities-
related claims will be "channeled" into a fund made up of two percent
of the equity of the reorganized company, which emerged from bankruptcy
October 15, as WilTel Communications Group Inc.  Shareholders also are
eligible to pursue claims against the $135 million liability insurance
policies of Williams Communications executives and directors.


                  Meetings, Conferences & Seminars


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

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
   INSURANCE COVERAGE 2003: CLAIM TRENDS AND LITIGATION
      Practicing Law Institute
         PLI New York Center
            Contact: 800-260-4PLI; info@pli.edu.

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
   TOXIC MOLD LITIGATION
      Marriott East Side Hotel, New York
         Contact: 1-888-224-2480;
            http://www.americanconference.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 17-18, 2003
   FEN-PHEN LITIGATION CONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         The Fairmont Hotel, Dallas
            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

March 23-24, 2003
   CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL UPDATE
      Bridgeport Continuing Education
         Long Beach
            Contact: 818-505-1490

March 27-28, 2003
   ASBESTOS LITIGATION
      Hotel Nikko, San Francisco
         Contact: 1-888-224-2480;
            http://www.americanconference.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 IN CALIFORNIA
      Bridgeport Continuing Education
         San Francisco
            Contact: 818-505-1490

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

April 10-11, 2003
   HANDLING CONSTRUCTION RISKS 2003:
      ALLOCATE NOW OR LITIGATE LATER
         Practicing Law Institute
            PLI New York Center
               Contact: 800-260-4PLI; info@pli.edu.

April 15, 2003
   WALL STREET FORUM: ASBESTOS
      Mealey Publications
         The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Battery Park
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

April 28-29, 2003
   EPHEDRA LITIGATION CONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         The Ritz-Carlton Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena, CA
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

April 28-29, 2003
   BAD FAITH AND PUNITIVE DAMAGES
      Hotel Nikko, San Francisco
         Contact: 1-888-224-2480;
            http://www.americanconference.com  

May 1-2, 2003
   ASBESTOS LITIGATION 2003
      Andrews Publication
         New Orleans Grande Hotel, New Orleans
            Contact: seminar@andrewspub.com

May 14-15, 2003
   CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL UPDATE
      Bridgeport Continuing Education
         San Jose
            Contact: 818-505-1490

June 2-3, 2003
   BAYCOL LITIGATION CONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Amelia Island, FL
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 2-3, 2003
   ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCY CONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         The Westin Hotel Philadelphia
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 9, 2003
   ANTI-SLAPP STATUTE CONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         The Ritz-Carlton Huntington Hotel & Spa
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 9, 2003
   CCA-TREATED WOOD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Amelia Island, FL
            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

June 16-17, 2003
   LITIGATING EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION &
      SEXUAL HARASSMENT CLAIMS
         Practicing Law Institute
            PLI New York Center
               Contact: 800-260-4PLI; info@pli.edu.

June 16-17, 2003
   ASBESTOS LITIGATION 101 CONFERENCE
      Mealey Publications
         The Fairmont Hotel, Dallas
            Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
               mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 8-9, 2003
   CORPORATE GOVERNANCE: LIABILITY OF CORPORATE
      OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS
         Mealey Publications
            The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Amelia Island, FL
               Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
                  mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

TBA
   Water Contamination Litigation Conference
      Mealey Publications
         Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
            mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

TBA
   Fair Labor Standards Conference
      Mealey Publications
         Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
            mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com


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

February 06-28, 2003
   ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN MASS TORT
      AND CLASS ACTION LITIGATION IN TEXAS
         CLE Online Seminar
            Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

February 06-28, 2003
   NBI PRESENTS "LITIGATING THE CLASS
      ACTION LAWSUIT IN FLORIDA
         CLE Online Seminar
            Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

May 14, 2003
   CLASS ACTION BASICS
      ABA-CLE
         Contact: 800-285-2221; abacle@abanet.org

PAXIL LITIGATION
   LawCommerce.Com
      Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

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.

                    New Securities Fraud Cases    

AMERICREDIT CORPORATION: Schatz & Nobel Commences Securities Suit in TX
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Schatz & Nobel PC initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Texas on behalf of
all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly traded
securities of AmeriCredit Corporation (NYSE: ACF) from April 14, 1999
through January 15, 2003, inclusive.

The suit alleges that AmeriCredit, an independent middle market auto
finance company, and certain of its officers and directors issued
materially false and misleading statements concerning the nature of
AmeriCredit's revenues and earnings.  Specifically, defendants were
improperly deferring delinquent loans to avoid consumer defaults so
that AmeriCredit would have access to cash to which it would have
otherwise been restricted.  On January 16, 2003, the Company announced
net losses of $27.6 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2002. On
this news, the stock plummeted 54% to $3.70, from the previous day's
close of $8.10 per share.

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


AMERICREDIT CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Files Securities Suit in N.D. TX
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
on behalf of purchasers of AmeriCredit Corp. (NYSE: ACF) publicly
traded securities during the period between April 14, 1999 and Jan. 15,
2003.

The complaint charges AmeriCredit and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  
AmeriCredit is a national consumer finance company specializing in
purchasing, securitizing and servicing automobile loans.  The complaint
alleges violations of the federal securities laws arising out of
defendants' issuance of false and misleading statements about the
Company's business, operating performance and prospects.

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 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.  


ARIBA INC.: Schatz & Nobel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Schatz & Nobel PC initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf
of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly traded
securities of Ariba, Inc. (Nasdaq: ARBAE) from January 11, 2000 through
January 15, 2003, inclusive.  Also included are those who acquired
shares through the acquisitions of Tradex Technologies,
SupplierMarket.com and Trading Dynamics, Inc.

The suit alleges that the Company and certain of its officers and
directors issued numerous positive press releases and Securities and
Exchange Commission Filings regarding Ariba's revenue growth, thereby
falsely portraying Ariba's business prospects.  Ariba is a spend
management software solutions provider which provides network access to
enable corporations to evaluate and manage cash costs associated with
running their business.  

On January 15, 2003, Ariba issued a press release announcing that it
was going to restate its financial results for ten quarters, covering
the quarter ended March 31, 2000 through the quarter ended June 30,
2002, and that fiscal years 2000 and 2001 would also be restated.  
While Ariba's financial statements were admittedly false, the Company's
top officers and directors sold nearly $692 million worth of their
Ariba shares to the public.

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


ARIBA INC.: Bernstein Liebhard Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz LLP initiated a securities class action
on behalf of all persons who purchased or acquired common stock of
Ariba, Inc. (NASDAQ: ARBAE) between January 11, 2000 through and
including January 15, 2003.  The case is pending in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California against the
Company and:

     (1) Kirk A. Cruikshank,

     (2) Rune C. Eliasen,

     (3) Robert J. Desantis,

     (4) Paul Hegarty,

     (5) Edward P. Kinsey,

     (6) Karl C. Kleissner and

     (7) Keith J. Krach

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 Ms. Linda Flood, Director of Shareholder
Relations, by Mail: 10 East 40th Street, New York, New York 10016 by
Phone: (800) 217-1522 or 212-779-1414 by E-mail: ARBA@bernlieb.com or
visit the firm's Website: http://www.bernlieb.com.


ARIBA INC.: Glancy & Binkow Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Glancy & Binkow LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf
of all persons who purchased securities of Ariba, Inc. (Nasdaq:ARBAE)
between January 11, 2000 and January 15, 2003, inclusive.

The suit charges the Company and certain of its executive officers with
violations of federal securities laws.  Among other things, plaintiff
claims that defendants' material omissions and the dissemination of
materially false and misleading statements concerning Ariba's revenue
and earnings caused Ariba's stock price to become artificially
inflated, inflicting damages on investors.  Ariba provides software,
services and network access to enable corporations to evaluate and
manage the cash costs associated with running their business.  The
Complaint alleges that, in order to inflate the price of Ariba's stock,
defendants caused the Company to falsely report certain financial
results.

The complaint alleges that the Company informed investors that the
financial information contained in Ariba's previously filed annual
reports for the fiscal years ended September 30, 2000 and 2001, and in
Ariba's quarterly reports for the quarters ended March 31, 2000 through
June 30, 2002 were unreliable.  Additionally, defendants announced that
Ariba would restate its financial statements to reflect payments and
chartered air services provided to Larry Mueller, Ariba's then-
President and Chief Operating Officer, and that the Company improperly
recorded stock options issued to individuals by companies that Ariba
acquired during 2000.  

The Company revealed to the public that the Securities and Exchange
Commission had begun an investigation into the Company's accounting
practices and that it may be delisted by the Nasdaq Stock Market
because it has not filed its annual report with the SEC for 2002.  
Ariba's stock plunged 15% on the day of the announcement, completing a
98% decline from the class period high.  The suit further alleges that
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 Michael Goldberg by Mail: 1801 Avenue of the
Stars, Suite 311, Los Angeles, California 90067, by Phone: 310/201-9161
or 888/773-9224 or by E-mail: info@glancylaw.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://www.glancylaw.com.


OWENS CORNING: Kirby McInerney Commences Securities Lawsuit in N.D. OH
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kirby McInerney & Squire, LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio,
Western Division, on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock or
preferred stock of Owens Corning Inc. (OTCBB:OWENQ) during the period
from September 20, 1999 through October 5, 2000.

The complaint asserts claims for violation of Section 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 against five Owens Corning
executives, including Owens Corning's Chief Executive Officer, two
Chief Financial Officers, and Comptroller, as well as one Owens Corning
director.  Due to the automatic stay of proceedings afforded by Owens
Corning's bankruptcy filing, Owens Corning is not named as a defendant
in this action.  The alleged violations, according to the complaint,
stem from materially false and misleading statements made by the
defendants during the class period that materially misrepresented Owens
Corning's financial health and performance, thereby causing Owens
Corning stock to trade at artificially-inflated prices.

The complaint charges that defendants described Owens Corning's
financial viability in two different ways to different audiences at the
same time.  At the very same time that the defendants were publicly
representing that Owens Corning's National Settlement Program (the
"NSP") -- implemented by Owens Corning in 1999 in order to extinguish
Owens Corning's asbestos liabilities -- was effectively managing and
extinguishing Owens Corning's asbestos liabilities and that the NSP
would leave Owens Corning largely liability-free after 2001, the
defendants told a very different -- and more accurate - story to a
small, select group of Owens Corning investors who were positioned to
control Owens Corning in the event of a bankruptcy.

To the latter group, according to the complaint, defendants revealed
the truth -- the NSP plan wasn't working, and would in fact capsize
Owens Corning unless NSP-mandated payments were drastically curtailed.

As the complaint charges, the share price of Owens Corning stock was
artificially inflated during the class period by defendants' positive
public statements, which materially misled the public as to Owens
Corning's true financial state and very financial viability.  During
late 1999 and early 2000, Owens Corning stock -- supported by
defendants' statements -- traded at between $15 and $25 per share.  In
mid- and late 2000, as defendants slowly began to reveal to the public
a more accurate assessment of Owens Corning and its asbestos
liabilities, Owens Corning's share price deflated. On October 5, 2000,
Owens Corning shares fell to $1 per share when Owens Corning declared
bankruptcy and admitted that it had been overwhelmed by the asbestos
liabilities that defendants claimed publicly to have solved.

For more details, contact Jeffrey H. Squire or Ori 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


SALOMON SMITH: Klayman & Toskes Commences Securities Fraud Suit in NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klayman & Toskes, P.A. filed an additional, individual securities
arbitration claim on behalf of a WorldCom (Nasdaq:WCOEQ.PK) Employee
Stock Option Plan (ESOP) participant in McLean, Virginia. The claim
filed before the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) against Salomon Smith
Barney, Inc. (Salomon) seeks to recover losses sustained in excess of
$3,900,000.  The claim seeks compensatory damages for alleged unlawful
conduct at its Atlanta, Georgia, Peach Tree Road branch office.  
Salomon won the exclusive right to serve as the Plan Administrator for
the exercise of the WorldCom stock options for all 10,000 WorldCom
employees who held them.

K&T represents large groups of WorldCom ESOP participants and other
large shareholders with margined, concentrated positions in WorldCom.  
The claims focus on the mismanagement of the concentrated portfolios
due to the fact that risk management strategies that were available
were not employed.  Although Salomon advertises and promotes hedging
and other risk management strategies for concentrated stock positions,
no such advice was rendered.  In fact, WorldCom ESOP participants could
have protected the value of their concentrated portfolio with the use
of a simple option strategy known as a "zero cost" collar.

For more details, contact Lawrence L. Klayman by Phone: 888/997-9956 or
visit the firm's Website: http://www.nasd-law.com.


VERITAS SOFTWARE: Scott + Scott Commences Securities Lawsuit in N.D. CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott + Scott, LLC 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 regarding 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 David R. Scott or Neil Rothstein by Mail: 108
Norwich Avenue, Colchester, Connecticut 06415 by Phone: 800/404-7770 by
Fax: 860/537-4432 by E-mail: drscott@scott-scott.com or
nrothstein@scott-scott.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.scott-scott.com


VERITAS SOFTWARE: Bernstein Liebhard Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz LLP initiated a securities class action
on behalf of all persons who purchased or acquired common stock of
Veritas Software Corporation (NASDAQ: VRTS) between January 24, 2001
through and including January 16, 2003, in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California against the Company and:

     (1) Gary L. Bloom,

     (2) Kenneth E. Lonchar, and

     (3) Paul A. Sallaberry

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 Linda Flood, Director of Shareholder
Relations, by Mail: 10 East 40th Street, New York, New York 10016 by
Phone: (800) 217-1522 or 212-779-1414 by E-mail: VRTS@bernlieb.com or
visit the firm's Website: http://www.bernlieb.com.


VERITAS SOFTWARE: Bernard Gross Commences Securities Lawsuit in N.D. CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Bernard M. Gross initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California, on behalf of all persons and entities who purchased the
common stock of Veritas Software Corporation (Nasdaq:VRTS) between
January 24, 2001 and January 16, 2003, inclusive.

The suit charges the Company, Gary L. Bloom, President and Chief
Executive Officer, Kenneth E. Lonchar, Chief Financial Officer and
Executive Vice President, and Paul A. Sallaberry, Executive Vice
President Worldwide Field Operations with violations of Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5, by
issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements to the
market during the class period.

Specifically, as alleged in the Complaint, 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 (AOL) 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.  Then, in October 2002, it
was discovered that Mr. Lonchar has lied about his background in that
he claimed to have received an MBA from Stanford University.  When it
was discovered that this was not true, Mr. Lonchar resigned.  Mr. Bloom
was quoted as stating: "While Ken's misstatements about his academic
credential is unfortunate, it has no bearing on the accuracy of our
financial results."  Then, January 17, 2003, VERITAS admitted that in
fact its financial statements had been inaccurate and announced they
would be restated to eliminate $17 million in revenue and $7 million in
net income previously reported for the fourth quarter of 2000.

For more details, contact Deborah R. Gross or Susan R. Gross by Phone:
866-561-3600 (toll-free) or 215-561-3600 or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.bernardmgross.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  * * *