CAR_Public/030501.mbx                C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
                Thursday, May 1, 2003, Vol. 5, No. 85

                           Headlines                            

BEVERLY HILLS: Brockovich Firm Files Claims V. City, High School
COUNTRY HOME: Country Home Recalls Lawnmowers For Injury Hazard
CREDIT CARDS: Groups Say Lawsuit Could Affect Bank Card Industry
CREDIT CARDS: NTU Head Says Antitrust Suit To Have Repercussions
DIAL CORPORATION: Agrees To Resolve IL Sexual Harassment Claims

DRUGSTORE.COM: NY Court Refuses To Dismiss Securities Fraud Suit
IDAHO: Judge Grants Certification To Suit Against Field Burning
JV TRADING: Recalls Chili Sauce in Jars For Undeclared Peanuts
KINDERMUSIC INTERNATIONAL: Recalls Instruments For Choking Hazard
MICHIGAN: Hospital Sued For Leaving Drug Addict Pharmacist Alone

MICHIGAN: Attorney General Forges Settlement in Abortion Lawsuit
MONSANTO CORPORATION: Trial in PCB Lawsuit Set For October 2003
NABI BIOPHARMACEUTICALS: Expects To Be Named in AWP Suit in MA
NORTHWEST AREA: Hispanic Plaintiffs Obtain Judge's Suit Recusal
PACIFIC SEAFOOD: Recalls Seafood Mix for Undeclared Ingredients

PACIFIC SUNWEAR: Reaches Agreement To Settle Overtime Wage Suits
PAN PHARMACEUTICALS: To Face Possible Suits Over Product Recall
PRODUCT RECALLS: CPSC Says Consumers Still Use Recalled Products
SECURITIES LITIGATION: More Lawsuits Expected After Settlement
SOLUTIA INC.: Antitrust Suit V. Rubber Chemical Producers in CA

SOLUTIA INC.: Trial in PCB Damage Lawsuits Proceeds in AL Court
WARNER-LAMBERT CO.: Health Insurers Lawsuit Allowed To Proceed
WEYERHAUSER: Two More Antitrust Suits Filed in OR Federal Court

                  New Securities Fraud Cases

ACCLAIM ENTERTAINMENT: Schatz & Nobel Files Stock Lawsuit in NY
FIFTH THIRD: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. OH
MICROTUNE INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in E.D. TX
MONTEREY PASTA: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
NAM TAI: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY

NICOR INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Lawsuit in N.D. IL
RURAL CELLULAR: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Fraud Suit in MN

                          *********


BEVERLY HILLS: Brockovich Firm Files Claims V. City, High School
----------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental activists Erin Brockovich and Ed Masry, subjects of the
popular film "Erin Brockovich," are filing claims against the city of
Beverly Hills and Beverly Hills High School on behalf of 25 alumni who
believe they contracted cancer from gases lurking beneath the campus,
Reuters reports.  The claims are precursors to suits that will be filed
against the city and the school, along with five oil companies.

Mr. Masry and Ms. Brockovich believe that 50 years of oil drilling on
school property released toxic levels of such chemicals as benzene and
hexane.  The suit started when two former Beverly Hills High School
students met in a doctor's office where they were being treated for
cancer.  One of the patients later noticed an abnormal number of cancer
cases among her schoolmates and mentioned this to Ms. Brockovich at a
book signing.

Oil companies Getty Oil and Standard Oil stated drilling in the city in
1973.  Significant oil and gas reserves were discovered under the city
of Beverly Hills at the start of the 20th century, but were only
lightly drilled until after World War II, according to a 1973
environmental impact report on the field.  The leases brought the city,
school district and citizens more than $25 million in 1973.

The claims are a legal precursor to suing the governmental agencies,
which almost always reject them, Reuters reports.  "We have over 200
alumni with cancer and the rates go out at over 20 times the national
average," Ms. Masry said.  "I've never heard of a rate like that in any
lawsuit I've handled.  You get to two or three times the national
average - that's huge."

Representatives of the Beverly Hills Unified School District could not
immediately be reached for comment, Reuters states.


COUNTRY HOME: Country Home Recalls Lawnmowers For Injury Hazard
---------------------------------------------------------------
Country Home Products, Inc. is cooperating with the United States
Consumer Product Safety Commission by voluntarily recalling 2,800
Cordless Electric Lawnmowers.  Because these lawnmowers lack a safety
guard, a consumer's foot could go under the plastic housing and be
struck by the blade.  These lawnmowers do not comply with the mandatory
federal safety standard for lawnmowers under the Consumer Product
Safety Act.  The Company has not received any reports of injuries.

The recalled lawnmowers were sold under the NEUTON-brand name.  They
have model number EM 4.1 printed on one side of the deck and "NEUTON"
printed on the other.  The lawnmowers have a 14-inch cutting width with
rear bagging capability.

Country Home Products catalog and Web site sold these lawnmowers
nationwide from January 2003 through March 2003 for about $399.

For more details, contact the Company by Phone: (800) 673-1225 between
8 a.m. and 7 p.m. ET Monday through Friday or contact Michelle
Stockmann by Phone: (802) 877-1201, Ext. 1027.


CREDIT CARDS: Groups Say Lawsuit Could Affect Bank Card Industry
----------------------------------------------------------------
A consumer banking group alleges that the pending antitrust class
action filed against credit card firms Visa and MasterCard by thousands
of retailers could shake up the bank card industry and determine
whether consumers can use debit cards as easily as they do now,
startribune.com reports.

The suit was filed by retailers like Wal-Mart, The Limited, Sears
Roebuck, Safeway, Circuit City, and three trade associations, in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.  The
suit relates to how the stores process transactions made with debit
cards, which deduct cash from consumers' existing bank accounts, rather
than building up their debt with credit accounts.  The suit charges
both MasterCard and Visa USA with violating US antitrust law by
monopolistic and anticompetitive business practices concerning debit
cards, an earlier Class Action Reporter story states.

Consumer Bankers Association spokesman Fritz Elmendorf told Reuters
that consumers probably will come out OK "because they are in the
driver's seat . This is all about providing the most efficient payment
system for consumers.  They'll continue to have that one way or the
other."

Early this week, MasterCard reached a settlement, just before the suit
was about to go to trial.  The parties in the settlement have refused
to divulge details.  Both Visa and MasterCard have not commented on the
settlement.

The amount of money at stake "potentially is tens of billions of
dollars," Mr. Elmendorf told the Star Tribune.  "That's certainly real
money that could shake up the industry."

"I don't know if it'll be a good thing or a bad thing for consumers,"
Linda Sherry, editorial director of Consumer Action, a 32-year-old
California consumer group, told the Tribune.  "They could make it less
convenient to use your debit card" -- at a time when debit cards are
more popular with customers than credit cards.


CREDIT CARDS: NTU Head Says Antitrust Suit To Have Repercussions
----------------------------------------------------------------
National Taxpayers Union (NTU) President John Berthoud criticized
strongly the retailers antitrust class action filed against credit card
giants Visa and MasterCard in the United States District Court in
Brooklyn, New York.  The suit charges that the Company's policy of
"honor all cards" unfairly forces retailers to accept debit cards.

NTU believes the case could have some drastic ramifications.  
"Wal-Mart is trying to use the courts to take control of how consumers
pay for purchases away from consumers.  Right now control belongs to
consumers and we believe that is where it should stay," Mr. Berthoud
said in a statement.

He noted that right now consumers currently have maximum choice and
flexibility at the checkout counter, but if Wal-Mart and its allies win
in court, competition will be diminished and costs will rise for
consumers.  "Further, consumers will be saddled with the millions of
dollars in litigation costs for this case on both sides," he continued.

Mr. Berthoud also pointed out that, if Wal-Mart prevails, the case will
set a dangerous precedent for America's economy, as it will undoubtedly
encourage other lawyers to file more industry vs. industry class action
cases.

"We would have preferred that Wal-Mart resolve its issues with the
credit card companies in private negotiations.  It is in the interest
of American business to move away from a trend of more business versus
business lawsuits.  If anything, businesses such as Wal-Mart should be
trying to lead a trend in the opposite direction," he asserted.


DIAL CORPORATION: Agrees To Resolve IL Sexual Harassment Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Dial Corporation agreed to resolve claims by the United States
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), alleging sexual
harassment at Dial's Montgomery, Illinois facility.  The parties have
reached a settlement that involves payment by the Company of $10
million pursuant to a consent decree entered today by the court to
resolve the case.

EEOC's Regional Attorney in Chicago, John Hendrickson, said, "EEOC
believes that the agreement reached in this case is in the best
interests of both the Dial family-employer and employees-and the
public.  We are heartened by Dial's determination to resolve the
litigation and to move ahead in providing a work environment that is
safe and free of harassment.  We are pleased to have worked with Dial
to put together a Consent Decree which will meet the needs and
aspirations of the parties and the Court."

Christopher J. Littlefield, Dial's senior vice president and general
counsel, said, "Today's announcement closes the door on this lawsuit
and we have agreed with the EEOC to put the past behind us.  Instead of
looking backward, we have made a business decision to move forward with
our commitment to the moral and business importance of providing equal
opportunity and a positive work environment for all of our employees.  
Simply put, Dial does not tolerate harassment of any kind.  It is
directly contrary to our No Harassment Policy, as well as our Cultural
Contract and Code of Ethics and Business Responsibilities that guide
our decisions and actions every day."

In addition to monetary relief, the parties have mutually agreed upon
revisions to be made to the Company's existing policies and procedures
that prohibit sexual harassment at the Montgomery, Illinois
manufacturing facility.  Further, an independent third party will be
mutually agreed upon to help resolve any future disagreements over the
resolution of complaints at the Montgomery, Illinois manufacturing
facility.

For more details, contact EEOC Regional Attorney John C. Hendrickson by
Phone: 312/353-8551 or Supervisory Trial Attorney Noelle Brennan by
Phone: 312/353-7582 or Cindy Demers of the Dial Corporation by Phone:
480/754-4090


DRUGSTORE.COM: NY Court Refuses To Dismiss Securities Fraud Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
refused to dismiss the consolidated securities class action filed
against drugstore.com, certain of its present and former officers and
directors and the underwriters of the Company's July 27, 1999 initial
public offering and its March 15, 2000, secondary offering.

The suit, filed on behalf of purchasers of the Company's common stock
during the period July 28, 1999 to December 6, 2000, alleges that the
prospectuses through which the Company conducted the initial public
offering and the secondary offering were materially false and
misleading for failure to disclose, among other things, that:

     (1) the underwriters of the Offerings allegedly had solicited and
         received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain
         investors in exchange for which the underwriters allocated to
         those investors material portions of the restricted number of
         shares issued in connection with the Offerings; and

     (2) the underwriters allegedly entered into agreements with
         customers whereby they agreed to allocate drugstore.com shares
         to customers in the offerings in exchange for which customers
         agreed to purchase additional drugstore.com shares in the
         aftermarket at predetermined prices.

The complaint asserts violations of various sections of the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended, and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended.  The action seeks damages in an unspecified amount and other
relief.

The action is being coordinated with approximately 300 other nearly
identical actions filed against other companies.  On July 15, 2002, the
Company moved to dismiss all claims against it and the individual
defendants.  On October 9, 2002, the court dismissed the individual
defendants from the case without prejudice based upon Stipulations of
Dismissal filed by the plaintiffs and the Individual Defendants. On
February 19, 2003, the court denied the motion to dismiss the complaint
against the Company.  

The Company disputes the allegations of wrongdoing against it in these
complaints and intends to vigorously defend itself in these matters.  
The Company maintains insurance policies that it believes will provide
coverage for these claims and therefore believes that these claims will
not have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect
on its business prospects, financial condition or operating results.  
However, an unfavorable resolution in these matters could materially
affect the Company's business and future results of operation,
financial position or cash flow.


IDAHO: Judge Grants Certification To Suit Against Field Burning
---------------------------------------------------------------
Northern Idaho residents fighting the practice of grass burning won a
major victory yesterday when Idaho District Judge John T. Mitchell gave
the go-ahead for a class action filed against grass growers and the
state of Idaho to proceed.

The original suit was filed in June 2002 against 79 grass farmers and
has since become a highly contentious issue with farmers turning to the
state legislature and winning special immunity for damages caused by
field burning.  The suit was filed on behalf of a group of individuals
who suffer significant health effects from the smoke due to respiratory
conditions.  Now certified as a class, the suit represents anyone
suffering from inflammatory airway conditions have lived in Bonner,
Benewah, Boundary, Kootenai or Spokane counties at any time in the last
three years.

"The judge's ruling is a welcome, objective voice among a chorus of
hysterics by the farmers and some of the state legislature," said Steve
Berman, the attorney for the plaintiffs.  "The court already ruled that
there is very little doubt that the field burning is hurting -- even
killing -- northern Idaho residents.  This class certification gives us
what we need to give the residents access to justice."

According to Mr. Berman, the recent bill signed by Gov. Kempthorne does
not affect this class action.  "The bill the state legislature passed
grants the grass farmers broad immunity from poisoning the air with
smoke in the future, but it doesn't cover them for past actions," he
added.

Mr. Berman also noted that he thought the legislation would likely be
struck down as unconstitutional.  He is filing a motion challenging the
new law's constitutionality with Judge Mitchell's court tomorrow.  It
is not known how quickly the judge will act on the motion.  "The
state's own legal experts said the bill -- now law -- is tragically
flawed and will topple upon constitutional review," he added.  "We plan
to help hasten that determination."

In the ruling granting class certification, Judge Mitchell roundly
dismissed the grass farmers' objections to the motion for class
certification, repeatedly noting the farmers' lack of case law to
substantiate their arguments.  

The suit, filed against the state of Idaho and 79 grass farmers and
seed companies, calls for an immediate end to grass burning.  The suit
also calls for the creation of a medical monitoring and education
program to protect Idaho residents confronted with grass-burning smoke
every August and September.  The suit alleges that Idaho's burn policy,
which allows grass-seed farmers to burn in excess of 20,000 acres every
year, lags far behind other states -- including neighboring Washington
-- which have effectively outlawed grass burning altogether.

Idaho grass-seed farmers use the burns to remove the grass-stalk
residue after harvesting.  Grass farmers in Washington and Oregon use
other farming practices to remove grass-stalk residue while keeping the
air free of pollutants.  Seeking to protect those most affected by the
grass burning pollutants, the suit represents individuals with cystic
fibrosis, chronic heart disease or a medically diagnosed inflammatory
airwave disease such as asthma or chronic bronchitis among other
conditions.

For more details, contact Steve Berman by Phone: (206) 623-7292 or by
E-mail: steve@hagens-berman.com  


JV TRADING: Recalls Chili Sauce in Jars For Undeclared Peanuts
--------------------------------------------------------------
J.V. Trading Glendale Ltd. recalled jars of CHILI SAUCE because they
contain undeclared peanuts.  People who have an allergy or severe
sensitivity to peanuts run the risk of serious or life-threatening
allergic reaction if they consume this product.

CHILI SAUCE was distributed nation-wide through retail stores and
wholesale distributors.  CHILI SAUCE is packaged in 300gr. glass jars
with red and tan labeling, all Chinese writing and with red metal screw
caps.  There is no apparent code on the jars.  

No illnesses have been reported to date in connection with this
problem.  The recall was initiated after routine sampling by Food
Inspectors of the New York State Dept. of Agriculture and Markets
revealed the presence of peanuts not declared on the label.

For more details, contact the Company by Mail: 385 W. John St.,
Hicksville, NY 11801 and by Phone: (516) 942-9308.


KINDERMUSIC INTERNATIONAL: Recalls Instruments For Choking Hazard
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kindermusik International is recalling 32,000 Fiddlestick instruments,
wooden rhythm instruments designed for use in the Kindermusik classroom
and at home.  The recalled instrument is 7" long, 1" in diameter, and
is made of wood.  It is hollowed out in the middle.  Steel balls are
inserted into the middle of the instrument to create a shaker sound and
the ends are capped with wooden plugs.  They are primarily sold as part
of a music instructional kit.  Kindermusik educators sold the music
kits, including the Fiddlesticks, in the United States and Canada from
December 2002 through January 2003.

Some of the Fiddlesticks have caps that can become loose, allowing ball
bearings to spill from the inside of the sticks.  Both the caps and the
ball bearings pose a potential choking hazard to young children.  No
injuries have been reported.

For more details, contact the Company by Phone: (800) 628- 5687 between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday by E-mail:
fiddlesticks@kindermusik.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.kindermusik.com.


MICHIGAN: Hospital Sued For Leaving Drug Addict Pharmacist Alone
----------------------------------------------------------------
Southfield, Michigan attorneys Cy Weiner and Liz Thomson filed a class
action in the Circuit Court for the County of Ogemaw, against the West
Branch Regional Medical Center and pharmacist Thomas Perry Gates, a
drug addict who used his unsupervised access to painkillers for his own
habit, diluting his employer's inventory to hide his theft.

The suit alleges that West Branch Regional Medical Center was
negligent, allowing Mr. Gates full access to painkillers to which it
knew he was addicted.  Mr. Gates' tampering with these controlled drugs
led to patients' suffering severe pain, to the continuing anguish of
their families.

Beverly Brown, 40, of West Branch, spent her last days at West Branch
Regional Medical Center in 2001, suffering with terminal lung cancer.  
In excruciating pain, she continually asked for more or stronger
medication.  No matter what her doctors prescribed, she was in constant
agony.  Nothing brought her relief, to the despair of her frantic
husband, Jack.

Three days before her death, it was discovered that someone had
tampered with the pain medications in the medical center's locked
pharmacy storage area.  The drugs involved were codeine, morphine and
Demerol.

"Based on information from the Michigan State Police, in 1999, West
Branch Regional Medical Center found Gates to be taking and using
morphine from its supply to feed his addiction," said attorney Liz
Thomson.  "They reinstated him in the pharmacy after he was treated for
this addiction, without proper supervision, and allowed him full access
to these controlled substances.  If they had monitored his activities,
the pain and suffering he caused so many people could have been
prevented."

The class action is brought by Jack Brown, as a representative of all
patients at West Branch Regional Medical Center who were unknowingly
taking pain medications that had been tampered with or diluted, as well
as their family members who were forced to witness their loved ones in
severe pain.  Hundreds of patients may have been affected by Mr. Gates'
tampering.

Mr. Gates pled guilty in 2001 to the theft of the painkilling drugs, a
four-year felony, after additional treatment at a substance-abuse
hospital in Brighton.  


MICHIGAN: Attorney General Forges Settlement in Abortion Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox announced that a settlement
agreement has been filed with the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Michigan strengthening the intent of PA 685 (2002),
a law designed to protect women from being pressured financially into
having an abortion.

"This settlement defends the intent of the legislation passed by the
House and Senate without a costly, drawn out legal battle," Mr. Cox
said.  "With this agreement, women will be safeguarded against
abortionists who seek to trap them financially into having an abortion
procedure."

PA 685, the subject of the lawsuit entitled Northland Family Planning
Clinic, Inc., et al v. Janet Olszewski, et al, prohibited collection of
physician fees during the 24-hour mandated waiting period that follows
either the receipt of informational material required to be reviewed by
a woman considering an abortion or the actual scheduling of an
abortion.  Northland sued the state claiming the law violated
constitutional rights of both doctors and their patients.

The settlement, however, not only stipulates that fees cannot be
collected during the waiting period, as was written in the law, but
also explicitly bans any "pre-payment" for an abortion prior to the 24-
hour decisional period.  The settlement also states that patients must
sign a consent form prior to the performance of an abortion that reads
in part:

"I understand that I may sign this form if I have made payments to the
physician or an agent of the physician, in whole or in part, for
medical services provided to or planned for me, as long as I did not
make such payments within 24 hours after I scheduled an abortion to be
performed by the physician and/or I did not make such payments within
24 hours after the physician or a qualified person assisting the
physician personally gave me a copy of the written materials listed in
paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) in the consent form"

"This really is a win-win," added Mr. Cox.  "Not only will these
additional safeguards now go into effect, but they will do so without
substantial delay."


MONSANTO CORPORATION: Trial in PCB Lawsuit Set For October 2003
---------------------------------------------------------------
The first phase of the trial of the class action filed against
Monsanto, Inc. is set for October 14,2003 in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Alabama.  The suit was filed on
behalf of 15,300 plaintiffs and relates to the alleged release of
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and other materials from the Company's
Anniston, Alabama plant site.

The parties had selected eight plaintiffs from two "disease categories"
for a phase I trial.  On February 25, 2003, the court allowed
plaintiffs to dismiss with prejudice the claims of two phase I
plaintiffs selected by the Company and indicated that plaintiffs should
withdraw two of their phase I selections.


NABI BIOPHARMACEUTICALS: Expects To Be Named in AWP Suit in MA
--------------------------------------------------------------
Nabi Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. expects to be named as one of the
defendants in the consolidated multidistrict litigation over the
alleged manipulation of the Average Wholesal Price of drugs pending in
the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

The Company was named as one of over 40 pharmaceutical and
biopharmaceutical defendants in three class action lawsuits, filed in
the Superior Court of the State of California, two filed in the County
of San Francisco in August 2002 and September 2002 and one filed in the
County of Alameda in July 2002.  All three cases were removed to the
United States District Court in the Northern District of California.

The cases each involve claims that insurers and consumers of
defendants' products made overpayments for those products based on an
alleged manipulation of Average Wholesale Price (AWP), a standard which
governs amounts that physicians, hospitals and other providers receive
as reimbursement for purchases of defendants' products.  The plaintiffs
seek damages, equitable relief and disgorgement of profits.  The three
lawsuits are in their preliminary stages; no class has been certified.

To date, the Company has been served in only one of the three suits,
but all the cases have now been transferred to the District of
Massachusetts and assigned to the Hon. Patti Saris for inclusion in the
consolidated multi-district litigation (MDL).  The Company anticipates
that it will be formally added as a defendant in the Master
Consolidated Complaint that governs the AWP MDL and, thereafter, will
join the pending motion to dismiss.


NORTHWEST AREA: Hispanic Plaintiffs Obtain Judge's Suit Recusal
---------------------------------------------------------------
US District Court Judge Alan McDonald, in Yakima, Washington, has
voluntarily removed himself from a case involving Hispanic plaintiffs
at the request of their Seattle lawyer, Matthew Metz.  Judge McDonald
recently signed an order asking that the case be reassigned to another
judge, his office confirmed, according to Associated Press Newswires.

Mr. Metz said he had to ask for the recusal when he learned that Judge
McDonald had been reprimanded by the Ninth US Circuit Judicial Council
three years ago for passing offensive notes with a clerk in court.  
Among the notes was one written by McDonald's clerk during a Yakima
trial that said:  "It smells like oil in here--too many 'Greasers.' "

The Judicial Council decided that Judge McDonald was not prejudiced
against any religious, racial or ethnic groups.  The Judicial Council
did say, however, that the notes created an appearance of bias and
undermined public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary.

Mr. Metz represents Julio Romero, a Mexican immigrant, and the lead
plaintiff in a proposed class action that could include about 300
Yakima-area residents, most of whom are recent immigrants.  Last month,
they filed their proposed class action against the Northwest Area
Foundation of Minneapolis, founded by the heirs of railroad magnate
James. J. Hill.  Two years ago, the foundation said it would consider
investing $15 million to reduce poverty in the Yakima Valley.  The
project was part of a larger plan to spend $150 million in 16
communities in eight states.

The foundation asked local Hispanics, including Mr. Romero, to work on
an anti-poverty plan for Yakima.  However, in August, it rescinded the
offer, saying residents did not develop the plan quickly enough.


PACIFIC SEAFOOD: Recalls Seafood Mix for Undeclared Ingredients
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific Seafood of Portland Oregon is recalling its Pacific Fresh
Seafood Mix because it contains egg whites and wheat flour in one of
the ingredients, imitation crab meat.  People who have an allergy or
severe sensitivity to egg whites or wheat flour run the risk of serious
or life threatening allergic reaction if they consume these products.

Product was distributed in retail stores in Washington, Oregon,
Northern California, Nevada, Kansas, Texas and Utah.  The product is
frozen, packed in a 1/LB Pacific Fresh Seafood Mix plastic bag.  All
products not containing ingredient label for imitation crab meat are
affected.

No allergic reactions or illnesses have been reported to the firm to
date.

For more details, contact Charles Kirschbaum by Phone: 1 503 226 2200.


PACIFIC SUNWEAR: Reaches Agreement To Settle Overtime Wage Suits
----------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific Sunwear of California Inc. (Nasdaq:PSUN) reached an agreement
to settle all claims related to two lawsuits concerning overtime pay,
filed in the California Superior Court for the County of Orange.  

The suits are Auden v. Pacific Sunwear of California Inc. filed on
September 17, 2001 and Adams v. Pacific Sunwear Inc. of California
filed May 3, 2002. The suits allege that the company improperly
classified certain California-based employees as "exempt" from overtime
pay.

The settlement is subject to court approval.  The company indicated
that it will pay approximately $4 million.  Of this amount, the company
had accrued $3.9 million at February 1, 2003, the end of the prior
fiscal year.  The settlement will not have any material impact on
results for the first quarter which ends May 3, 2003.  The court is
expected to review the settlement within the next 60 days.

While the company denies the allegations underlying the suit, it has
agreed to the settlement to avoid the cost, distraction and uncertainty
associated with protracted litigation during the important summer and
back-to-school selling seasons.  The suit is one of many similar suits
filed against retailers with operations in California.

For more information visit the Company's Website:
http://www.pacsun.com.  


PAN PHARMACEUTICALS: To Face Possible Suits Over Product Recall
---------------------------------------------------------------
Australian medical firm Pan Pharmaceutical might face numerous legal
actions, after it instituted Australia's largest medical recall, the
Advertiser reports.  Earlier, the Company announced that its license
has been suspended for six months, and that it was recalling 219 of its
products due to safety and quality fears.

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) started a
probe whether the Company fulfilled its corporate disclosure
obligations, after it was notified of its suspension by the Therapeutic
Goods Administration (TGA).  

Melbourne law firm Maurice Blackburn Cashman said it was already acting
for two clients who were seeking damages after suffering serious side
effects from a defective travel sickness drug, the Advertiser states.  
The firm's public liability partner Eugene Arocca raised the specter of
a class action by the pharmaceutical firm's shareholders and businesses
supplied with Pan products.

"ASIC's inquiries center on issues of continuous disclosure and trading
in Pan Pharmaceutical shares prior to the trading halt sought yesterday
by the company," ASIC said, according to the Advertiser.

Pan's Chief Executive Jim Selim went to ground today but in a written
statement said the company was seeking legal advice and intended to
regain its manufacturing license.  Mr. Selim also foreshadowed a
management overhaul and the appointment of an independent industry
expert to oversee the reform process.

"The Pan board and management will work with the TGA, meeting with its
officers over the next few days in order to address the production
process issues identified by the TGA," Mr. Selim said.  "We anticipate
that once the TGA is satisfied that the production processes meet
requirements, the TGA will lift the suspension."

Prime Minister John Howard said the suspension could be extended in
light of suggestions Pan had not fully cooperated with TGA
investigations.  "It would be treated very seriously and if there is
... clear evidence of non-compliance clearly the law will be enforced
very vigorously," he told Melbourne radio station 3AW.

Pan, named after the Greek god of panic, is Australia's largest
contract manufacturer of herbal, vitamin and nutritional supplements,
representing about 70 per cent of the Australian market, the Advertiser
states.


PRODUCT RECALLS: CPSC Says Consumers Still Use Recalled Products
----------------------------------------------------------------
Despite recall notices and warnings, consumers continue to use products
that have the potential to seriously injure or kill, according to the
US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).  The CPSC has unveiled a
list of many common hazardous consumer products and urged consumers to
use the list to check their homes and destroy or fix unsafe products.

"These products have previously received substantial attention because
they were recalled or addressed by safety standards.  But they continue
to be used each year, leading to deaths, injuries, and property
damage," said CPSC Chairman Hal Stratton.  "These products may be in
any home.  They may be sold at yard sales or donated to charity or
thrift shops.  Some of them can be fixed, but most simply need to be
destroyed."

"We don't want to see deaths or serious injuries caused by previously
recalled products or by products that don't meet current safety
standards.  We want to prevent these needless tragedies," said Mr.
Stratton.  "Through recalls, safety standards, and consumer
information, CPSC helps make American homes safer by taking hazardous
products off the market and identifying those products that need to be
fixed to be safe.

Mr. Stratton showcased the products on the "most hazardous" list at a
news conference today at CPSC headquarters.  Below are some of the
hazardous products that consumers are most likely to find in their
homes:

     (1) Old Power Tools that present an electrocution hazard.  In a
         recent year, there were approximately 15 electrocution deaths
         associated with old power tools.  Old electric power tools
         (made before the 1980s) may not have modern safety features to
         prevent electrocution.  For example, old power tools were made
         with metal housings, while newer tools are made with plastic
         housings to provide double-insulation against electric shock.
         Old power tools also may not have proper grounding or may have
         frayed wires or other hazards.  Discard old power tools.  Do
         not give them to thrift stores or sell them at a yard sale;

     (2) Old Extension Cords that present a fire or shock hazard. Old
         extension cords, power strips and surge protectors may have
         undersized wires, loose connections, faulty components or
         improper grounding.  Old extension cords may fail to meet
         current safety standards and can be overloaded easily.  In a
         recent year, electrical cords and plugs were involved in about
         5,200 fires resulting in 40 deaths.  Look for cords with the
         label from an independent testing lab such as UL (Underwriters
         Laboratories) or ETL.  Use cords that have polarized plugs or
         grounded three-pronged plugs to reduce the risk of shock.
         Don't overload cords with too many appliances;

     (3) Window blind cords with loops that can strangle           
         children.  Window blinds may have pull cords that end in a
         loop or inner cords that can form a loop if pulled by
         children.  Both can cause strangulation.  CPSC knows of about
         160 strangulation deaths to children in looped window covering
         cords since 1991.  In 1994, CPSC worked with industry to
         provide a repair for old window blinds to eliminate the loops
         on the end of pull cords and to eliminate that looped cord on
         new blinds.  In 2000, CPSC worked with industry to repair old
         blinds so that the inner cord can't form a loop if pulled by a
         young child.  The industry also redesigned new blinds to
         address this hazard.  Old window blinds with looped pull cords
         and inner cords that can be pulled to form a loop must be
         repaired.  There are about 85 million units sold each year.
         The Window Covering Safety Council offers free repair kits
         that include small plastic attachments to prevent the inner
         cords from being pulled loose, and safety tassels for pre-1995
         window blinds with outer pull cords ending in loops.  
         Consumers should cut the loops and install a safety tassel at
         the end of each pull cord.  Consumers who have vertical
         blinds, draperies or pleated shades with continuous loop cords
         should request special tie-downs to prevent strangulation in
         those window coverings;

     (4) Halogen torchiere floor lamps that can cause fires when
         combustibles such as drapes come too close to the bulb.  These
         lamps need a wire or glass guard and a bulb that is 300 watts
         or less to help reduce the fire risk.  More than 40 million
         halogen floor lamps made before 1997 by numerous firms were
         recalled because they have no guard to protect against fire.
         CPSC knows of 290 fires and 25 deaths since 1992 related to
         halogen torchiere floor lamps.  People can get the free wire
         guards by sending a postcard to Catalina Lighting Consumer
         Services, 18191 NW 68th Avenue, Miami, FL 33015;

     (5) Old cribs made before CPSC and industry safety standards can
         entrap, strangle, or suffocate children.  Old cribs with more
         than 2-3/8 inches between crib slats; corner posts; or cut-
         outs on the headboard or footboard present suffocation and
         strangulation hazards.  Cribs with missing or broken parts or
         cornerposts higher than 1/16 inch also present a risk of
         death.  CPSC estimates there are about 30 deaths per year in
         cribs, many of which are older, used models.  Destroy old
         cribs and those with missing or broken parts or cornerposts
         higher than 1/16 inch.  Use only those cribs that meet current
         safety standards;

     (6) Cadet Heaters that could cause a fire.  CPSC is aware of more
         than 320 reports of Cadet and Encore heaters (models FW, FX,
         LX, TK, Z, ZA, RA, RK, RLX, RX, RW, and ZC) that smoked,
         sparked, caught fire, emitted flames, or ejected burning
         particles or molten materials.  These incidents have allegedly
         resulted in four deaths, two serious burn injuries and
         property damage claims exceeding $4.3 million.  Due to Cadet's
         bankruptcy, the opportunity to obtain discounted heaters
         expired on February 17, 2002.  CPSC strongly urges consumers
         to stop using these 1.9 million recalled Cadet and Encore
         heaters and replace them.  In addition, some RM and ZM model
         heaters sold separately or provided as replacements for some
         of the previously recalled heaters can overheat and cause a
         fire.  Cadet will arrange for a free service call for affected
         RM and ZM heaters.  The Cadet recall hotline is 800-567-2613
         and the Web site is www.cadetco.com/recall/recall_program.htm;  

     (7) Hairdryers without immersion protection devices to prevent
         electrocution.  Since the early 1990s, hairdryers have had
         built-in shock protection devices to prevent electrocution if
         they fall into water.  However, electrocutions from old
         hairdryers are still occasionally reported.  Replace the old
         hairdryer with a new one with a large rectangular plug and the
         mark of a recognized testing laboratory;

     (8) Disposable and novelty lighters that are not child-resistant.
         CPSC set a standard (effective in 1994) requiring disposable
         and novelty lighters to be child-resistant.  Since the
         standard took effect, there has been a 58 percent reduction in
         fires caused by children under age 5, representing the
         prevention of hundreds of deaths and injuries and thousands of
         fires.  However, in a recent year there were still 2,400 fires
         resulting in 70 deaths and 480 injuries because of children
         under age 5 playing with lighters.  Keep all cigarette
         lighters away from children and make sure all of your lighters
         are child-resistant; and

     (9) Drawstrings around the neck on children's jackets and
         sweatshirts can catch and strangle children.  In 1995, CPSC
         worked with industry to eliminate hood and neck drawstrings on
         kids' jackets and sweatshirts.  CPSC knows of 23 deaths and 56
         non-fatal incidents from January 1985 through November 2000.
         Pull out or cut all neck drawstrings on children's jackets and
         sweatshirts.  Do not sell them at garage sales or give them to
         thrift stores.  In 1998, CPSC found that many thrift stores
         were selling recalled, hazardous products, including
         children's jackets with drawstrings.

For more information, contact the CPSC by Mail: Washington, D.C. 20207
or visit the agency's Website: http://www.cpsc.gov/cpsclist.asp


SECURITIES LITIGATION: More Lawsuits Expected After Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------------
The $1.4 billion settlement formulated by 10 Wall Street investment
firms to settle securities fraud charges against them could provide
attorneys in the securities class actions against a wealth of evidence
for the suits, the Dow Jones Newswires reports.

The settlement is considered the largest in Wall Street history, with
ten investment firms participating and three of the most profitable
brokerages during the late 1990s market boom -- Citigroup Inc.'s
Salomon Smith Barney unit , Credit Suisse Group's CSFB
and Merrill Lynch & Co. paying a total of $800 million,
according to the Securities and Exchange Commission, an earlier Class
Action Reporter story states.  

Thousands of investors filed suits against companies who made their
initial stock offerings during the technology stock bubble, naming as
defendants 55 underwriters, 309 issuers of stock in high technology and
Internet-related stocks and thousands of individuals.  The suits target
a high percentage of the more than 460 high technology and Internet-
related companies that raised capital by selling ownership of their
company to the public from January 1998 to December 2000.

The suits similarly alleged that the value of the plaintiffs'
investments plummeted as a result of alleged fraud - misstatements in
financial statements and prospectuses, unauthorized underwriter
agreements, improper disclosure - that caused the prices of stocks to
be artificially inflated.

The settlement will provide evidence for plaintiffs in the suits and
increases the plaintiffs' likelihood of recovery, several attorneys
said.  Lawrence Klayman, an attorney at Klayman & Toskes, told Dow
Jones the settlement "will put into the investors' hands a lot of
ammunition to pursue claims against brokerage firms."

Under the settlement, the investment firms agreed to disclose to the
public e-mails in which analysts privately derided stocks they touted
to clients.  

"(The settlement) will provide a tremendous amount of evidence at a low
cost to ongoing litigation," Samuel H. Rudman, an attorney with Cauley
Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman LLP, a firm that often represents
shareholders in class actions, told Dow Jones.

"The most beneficial effect (of the settlement) will be for people
bringing arbitration claims whose lawyers don't have the resources to
conduct the same kind of discovery a firm like mine can," Melvyn I.
Weiss, a partner with Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, a firm that
represents plaintiffs in shareholder lawsuits seeking billions of
dollars in damages, told Dow Jones.  "They will be able to use this
evidence in their cases."

This free discovery should do two things - improve the likelihood of
recovery in the lawsuits and lead to an increase in the number of suits
filed against the firms implicated in the e-mails, James E. Miller, an
attorney with Shepherd Finkelman Miller & Shah LLC, another firm which
often represents shareholders told Dow Jones.

"In any case where a customer purchased a stock based on a broker's
biased recommendation, it's my opinion it will be hard for (the
brokerages) to defend the conduct in recommending the stock," Mr.
Miller continued.  "I think the class cases will become stronger and it
will improve the customer's ability to recover."

"Plaintiffs are going to start filing lawsuits the second the e-mails
are disclosed," an attorney who often defends firms in shareholder
litigation told Dow Jones.  "This is the type of information that can
totally undermine an attorney's ability to defend his client.  It's
almost like a confession."


SOLUTIA INC.: Antitrust Suit V. Rubber Chemical Producers in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Solutia, Inc. and Flexsys, its 50/50 joint venture with Akzo Nobel NV,
was named as a defendant in several class actions filed against
producers of rubber chemicals, each seeking actual and treble damages
under state law on behalf of all retail purchasers of tires in the
relevant state since 1994.

On April 8, 2003, a purported class action, Rubber Engineering and
Development Company v. Akzo Nobel, N.V., et al, was filed in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California against a
number of companies including Solutia and Flexsys.  The plaintiff
alleges price fixing and seeks treble damages and injunctive relief
under US antitrust laws on behalf of all individuals and entities that
purchased rubber chemicals in the United States from the defendants,
their predecessors, or their controlled subsidiaries from January 1,
1995 until October 10, 2002.

On April 9, 2003, a second purported class action, Standard Rubber
Products, Inc. v. Akzo Nobel N.V., et al, was filed in the same
court.  The second action names the same defendants, makes
substantially the same allegations and seeks substantially the same
relief as the first action.


SOLUTIA INC.: Trial in PCB Damage Lawsuits Proceeds in AL Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
Trial continues in the class actions filed against Solutia, Inc. in the
Circuit Court for Etowah County, Alabama over the alleged release of
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and other materials from the Company's
Anniston, Alabama plant site.

Four consolidated cases were brought on behalf of approximately 3,500
plaintiffs.  Trial in this action recommenced on March 17, 2003, with
arguments to the jury regarding compensatory damages for plaintiffs
making property damage and exposure claims.

As of April 8, 2003 the jury had returned compensatory damages verdicts
for the original 17 trial plaintiffs.  The Company asked the trial
court to sever these claims and certify them for appeal to the Alabama
Supreme Court.  The trial court denied the request.

As of April 22, 2003, the jury had returned compensatory damage
verdicts totaling approximately $11.8 million to 51 plaintiffs who have
made property damage and exposure claims, but no final appealable
judgment has been entered with respect to these verdicts.  No claims of
personal injury have been tried or presented to the jury.


WARNER-LAMBERT CO.: Health Insurers Lawsuit Allowed To Proceed
--------------------------------------------------------------
In what one lawyer called a "watershed" opinion, an appeals court has
allowed health insurers and self-funded health plans to sue a
pharmaceutical company to try to recover more than $1 billion in money
paid for a diabetes drug with health risks they say were covered up by
the company.

BlueCross BlueShield of Louisiana and an Employee Retirement Income
Security Act plan for a textile workers union are the lead plaintiffs
in the lawsuit, which is seeking class action status, according to
Richard W. Cohen, an attorney with law firm Lowey Dannenberg Bemporad &
Selinger, P.C.  Mr. Cohen argued the appeal for the insurers.  He said
there are several thousand US health insurers and self-funded plans
with several thousand third-party payers who could be members of the
class.

They filed the suit against Warner-Lambert Co., a company of Pfizer
Inc., alleging it aggressively marketed the diabetes drug Rezulin
despite clinical data that showed patients were three to six times more
likely to suffer liver injury than patients taking a placebo, according
to the complaint.

Although a district court had granted Warner-Lambert's motion to
dismiss, saying the health insurers were "financial intermediaries" and
lacked standing to sue drug companies unless the insureds were injured
by the drug, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
on April 18 said insurers, as the buyers of the drugs, have the right
to sue, the plaintiffs' attorneys said in a statement.

It's a significant decision, Mr. Cohen said, because the district court
dismissal was picked up by pharmaceutical companies and used in legal
arguments around the United States.  One court in West Virginia used
the decision to dismiss a case, he said.

However, it's important to keep in mind that the appeals court didn't
rule on the merits of the case, said Bryant Haskins, a spokesman with
Pfizer.  "The court's decision addresses only a preliminary motion, not
the merits of the plaintiffs' claims," he said. "It doesn't comment on
the likelihood of success, and the plaintiffs will be required to meet
significant legal and factual challenges."

Pfizer is confident that it has strong defenses, and it will pursue
them vigorously, Mr. Haskins said.

Rezulin was approved by the FDA on January 29, 1997.  Warner-Lambert
marketed Rezulin aggressively and priced it at almost three times the
cost of other diabetes drug treatments, the lawsuit said.  In an April
2001 consolidated complaint, the plaintiffs were looking for relief on
behalf of all health benefits providers that paid for Rezulin between
February 1997 and April 2001, along with relief for the cost of
providing liver-function monitoring of former Rezulin users.  The
plaintiffs said health plans paid about $1.4 billion to buy the drug,
which cost health plans about $135 a month.

The lawsuit alleged that two doctors who conducted studies on the drug
had financial interests in promoting Rezulin.  Plaintiffs also alleged
that a doctor who said Rezulin had little therapeutic advantage and
reported that people who used Rezulin during the six-month review were
four times more likely to develop liver problems than patients taking a
placebo, was removed from the review after Warner-Lambert met with the
doctor's superiors at the FDA.

In addition, the lawsuit said Warner-Lambert released a statement in
February 2000 that said it believed Rezulin didn't cause any liver-
failure deaths after June 1999, when the FDA changed the drug's label
to say patients using the drug should undergo liver-function testing
before beginning treatment and that the drug shouldn't be used as a
stand-alone therapy.  However, "the day after Warner-Lambert made the
statement, the FDA discredited it, saying the agency had been informed
of six cases of liver failure with onset after July 1999, of which at
least three resulted in death," according to the suit.

The company withdrew Rezulin from the US market on March 21, 2000, at
the request of the FDA, which concluded that Rezulin's continued use
posed an "unacceptable risk," the lawsuit said.


WEYERHAUSER: Two More Antitrust Suits Filed in OR Federal Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
On the heels of a $79 million dollar jury verdict against Weyerhaeuser
that found the Company guilty of illegally monopolizing the alder
industry, two more large lawsuits were filed late Monday by Haglund
Kirtley Kelley Horngren and Jones.

One of the lawsuits filed in the United States District Court in
Portland, Oregon, was brought on behalf of four alder mills in the
Pacific Northwest - two mills in Oregon and two in Washington.  The
Oregon mills are Westwood Lumber, Inc., located in Reedsport, and
Morton Alder in Willamina.  The Washington-owned mills are Cascade
Hardwoods of Chehalis and Alexander Lumber Mill, Inc., located in
Onalaska, Washington.  The mill owners are seeking damages estimated in
excess of $100 million dollars.  They also seek wide-ranging injunctive
relief, and a court-ordered breakup (divestiture) of Weyerhaeuser's
alder division.

The second lawsuit, also filed Monday in the same court, was brought by
Coast Mountain Hardwoods, a Canadian company, which seeks $500 million
dollars in damages.  In their complaint, Coast Mountain claims that
Weyerhaeuser defrauded it out of millions of dollars in sales revenue
during the 7 years that Weyerhaeuser sold Coast Mountain's alder
lumber.  Throughout the 1990's, Coast Mountain Hardwoods was the
largest alder producer in British Columbia.  

When Weyerhaeuser had the sales relationship with Coast Mountain
Hardwoods, it also had access to their financial records.  The lawsuit
contends that Weyerhaeuser deliberately kept the Canadian firm in a
weak financial position so it could ultimately purchase Coast Mountain
at a fraction of its real value.  When Weyerhaeuser purchased Coast
Mountain in late 2000, it obtained Coast Mountain's alder forest
licenses, the only alder forest licenses in B.C., giving Weyerhaeuser
exclusive rights to most of the alder resources on provincial forest
lands.

During the recent antitrust trial, a Weyerhaeuser senior manager
admitted that Weyerhaeuser placed little value on the forest licenses
when it acquired Coast Mountain Hardwoods for $26 million dollars.  
Coast Mountain estimates the value of the forest licenses to be in
excess of $100 million dollars.

The lawsuit brought on behalf of the 4 alder mills in Oregon and
Washington seeks immediate relief from Weyerhaeuser practices they
allege are anti-competitive.  In addition, temporary restraining orders
were filed in court Monday against Weyerhaeuser, seeking relief from
alleged anti-competitive tactics.  

As stated in the complaints, Weyerhaeuser has developed "right of
refusal" relationships with most of the industrial forest owners (land
owners who own more than 5000 acres of timberland).  One of the
plaintiffs, Grant Wheeler, President of Westwood Lumber, explained,
"Even though our company is willing to pay top-dollar on a competitive-
bid basis, Weyerhaeuser uses its muscle to maneuver landowners into
agreeing not to put their alder up for competitive bid.  Instead, they
work behind closed doors to work out a price with Weyerhaeuser."

Mr. Wheeler continued, "We don't want to be treated preferentially. We
want the opportunity to compete head to head with Weyerhaeuser on a
sealed bid basis."

Key issues brought in these two new lawsuits were already decided by
jury in a previous trial, which ended this month (on Good Friday).  In
that trial, Weyerhaeuser was found to have monopolized the alder saw
log market.  Those findings will be binding on Weyerhaeuser in these
new cases.

According to attorneys for the plaintiffs, Michael Haglund and Michael
Kelley (from the Portland, Oregon law firm Haglund Kirtley Kelley
Horngren and Jones), if the plaintiffs prevail, the cases will proceed
to a divestiture phase where the judge will consider whether to order
the breakup of Weyerhaeuser's alder division.  Currently, Weyerhaeuser
(headquartered in Federal Way, WA) owns seven alder mills in Oregon,
Washington and British Columbia.  Plaintiffs contend that
Weyerhaeuser's market share of the alder industry is about 75%.

According to attorney Mike Haglund, "Perhaps the wheels of
Weyerhaeuser's consolidation/monopolization strategy are finally
starting to come off.  Within days of the Good Friday verdict finding
Weyerhaeuser guilty of monopolizing the timber industry, the US Supreme
Court refused to derail a class action case alleging that Weyerhaeuser
and other giants in the corrugated box industry conspired to reduce
capacity and push prices upward in the mid-1990's.  Both developments
speak to the illegality of a wood products market being controlled by
one company like Weyerhaeuser in alder or just a few giants in
corrugated boxes."

For more details, contact Michael Haglund by Phone: 503/225-0777, or
India Simmons at PR Ink by Phone: 206/229-2501.


                     New Securities Fraud Cases


ACCLAIM ENTERTAINMENT: Schatz & Nobel Files Stock Lawsuit in NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
Schatz & Nobel PC initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on behalf of
all persons who purchased the publicly traded securities of Acclaim
Entertainment, Inc. (Nasdaq: AKLM) from January 11, 2002 through
September 19, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that Acclaim, a developer of interactive
entertainment software, and certain of its officers and directors made
misrepresentations concerning Acclaim's financial condition.  Among
other things the complaint alleges that:

     (1) defendants engaged in "channel stuffing," the practice of
         inducing client's to receive products that they neither need
         or can sell in the short term;

     (2) defendants failed to disclose that Acclaim was experiencing
         adverse circumstances concerning the development, content,
         cost, distribution and sales of products and that the
         declining demand for Acclaim's products, was causing Acclaim's
         inability to achieve revenue and earnings guidance provided by
         defendants for fiscal 2002 and beyond;

     (3) Acclaim's distribution and retail tracking information systems
         were insufficient, allowing Acclaim to materially miscalculate
         the provisions for sales returns and price concessions.

Accordingly, defendants' projections and forecasts were lacking in a
reasonable basis.  On September 19, 2002, defendants announced that
Acclaim expected to report an operating loss for the fourth quarter of
2002, principally because of lower revenues that were reduced below
defendants' guidance.  Additionally, Acclaim reduced its revenue
guidance for the first and second quarters of its 2003 fiscal year.

For more details, contact Schatz & Nobel, PC by Phone: (800) 797-5499,
or by E-mail: sn06106@aol.com.


FIFTH THIRD: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. OH
---------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz initiated a securities class
action on behalf of those individuals who purchased or otherwise
acquired the common stock of Fifth Third Bancorp (Nasdaq: FITB) from
September 24, 2001 through January 31, 2003, inclusive.  The suit,
entitled German v. Fifth Third Bancorp, et al., 03 CV 297, was filed in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio,
Western Division, against the Company and certain of its senior
officers and directors.

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 September 24, 2001 and January 31,
2003.

Among other things, the complaint alleges that Fifth Third issued press
releases and filed financial reports with the SEC which represented
that the Company had successfully and seamlessly integrated a large
corporate acquisition of Old Kent into its operations.  The Company
further represented that its business was stronger than ever and that
the Company would continue to grow and provide investment safety.

According to the complaint, these statements were materially false and
misleading because they failed to disclose that the Old Kent merger (as
well as other mergers) seriously strained the Company's infrastructure,
causing deficiencies in its internal controls and other business
critical systems.

On September 10, 2002, the Company announced that it would be taking a
$54 million after-tax ($81.8 million pre-tax) charge for impaired
funds, resulting from a botched accounting reconciliation.  According
to the complaint, the Company played down the incident as a one time
immaterial event, which was false and misleading because it was
symptomatic of material, company-wide infrastructure deficiencies.  

On November 14, 2002 the Company revealed that the write-off had
triggered investigations by banking regulators and the SEC.  On January
31, 2003, the Company reported that banking regulators would likely
take formal action against the Company, which would likely require
Fifth Third to improve its internal controls, by among other things,
adding personnel and processes.  On February 3, 2003 the first trading
day following the announcement, the price of Fifth Third common stock
closed at $52.21 per share, a decline of 15% from the November 14, 2002
close of $62.53, the day Fifth Third first revealed that it was being
investigated by banking regulators and the SEC.

For more details, contact Fred Taylor Isquith, Michael Miske, George
Peters or Derek Behnke by Mail: 270 Madison Avenue, New York, New York
10016, by Phone: (800) 575-0735 by E-mail: classmember@whafh.com or
visit the firm's Website: http://www.whafh.com. All e-mail  
correspondence should make reference to Fifth Third.


MICROTUNE INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in E.D. TX
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas,
Sherman Division on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of
Microtune, Inc. (Nasdaq: TUNE) from April 22, 2002 to February 20,
2003, inclusive.

The complaint charges Microtune, Inc. and certain of its officers and
directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its
business and financial condition.  Specifically, the complaint alleges
that defendants issued numerous statements and filed quarterly reports
with the SEC which described the Company's increasing revenues and
financial performance.

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

     (1) that the Company had materially overstated its revenue by
         immediately recognizing as revenue certain sales which should
         have been categorized as deferred revenue, as payment was not
         assured and in fact was not made for substantial periods of
         time;

     (2) that the Company failed to disclose that a material portion of
         its revenues had not in fact been paid for;

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

     (4) as a result of the foregoing, the Company's financial
         statements issued during the class period were materially
         false and misleading.

On February 20, 2003, the last day of the Class Period, after the close
of regular trading, Microtune shocked the market by announcing that its
loss for the fourth quarter of 2002, the period ending December 31,
2002, was $80.2 million, or almost double the loss of $47 million which
it had reported in the same period of the prior year. Despite having
shipped $16.1 million of product during the fourth quarter of 2002, the
Company announced that it would only be reporting revenues of $2.2
million "as a result of charges relating to five customers, including
(a) credits granted and/or (b) lack of timely payments."

As a result of this development, the Company announced that its Board
of Directors has directed its audit committee to conduct an inquiry of
the events that led to these "material negative charges."  The next
morning, when the market opened for trading, shares of Microtune fell
more than 35%, to approximately $1.20 per share, a far cry below their
Class Period high of $13.81 per share, on extremely heavy trading
volume.

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


MONTEREY PASTA: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California on behalf of purchasers of Monterey Pasta Company (NasdaqNM:
PSTA) common stock between July 11, 2002 and December 16, 2002,
inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendant violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the
market between July 11, 2002 and December 16, 2002, thereby
artificially inflating the price of Monterey Pasta securities.

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


NAM TAI: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York on
behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Nam Tai Electronics, Inc.
(NYSE: NTE) between July 29, 2002 and February 14, 2003, inclusive.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing false and misleading
statements regarding its financial performance, and failing to issue
timely reports concerning adverse developments in certain material
litigation.  

Adverse news regarding Nam Tai was released by the Company after the
close of trading on February 14, 2003.  In reaction to this unexpected
bad news, Nam Tai shares fell significantly, closing at $27.65 per
share on February 18, 2003, down $5.76, a decline of more than 15%.

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


NICOR INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Lawsuit in N.D. IL
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois against Nicor Inc. (NYSE: GAS) and two of the Company's senior
officers on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired the
securities of Nicor during the period from January 24, 2002 through
July 18, 2002, inclusive.

The lawsuit charges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing false and misleading
financial statements and press releases concerning the Company's
publicly reported earnings.  After the market closed on July 18, 2002,
Nicor issued a press release announcing it may restate prior results in
response to improprieties at its gas business.  The Company indicated
that the Illinois Commerce Commission and other governmental agencies
are investigating allegations that the gas distribution business acted
improperly in connection with a performance-based rate program.  Also
according to the press release, reported results for the six months
ended June 30, 2002 were negatively impacted by accounting
irregularities at a retail energy marketing joint venture which is 50%
owned by the Company and 50% owned by Dynegy Inc.

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


RURAL CELLULAR: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Fraud Suit in MN
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota on
behalf of purchasers of Rural Cellular Corporation (NASDAQ: RCCC)
publicly traded securities during the period between May 7, 2001 and
November 12, 2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The
complaint alleges that during the class period, defendants caused the
Company's shares to trade at artificially inflated levels through the
issuance of false and misleading financial statements.  Then, on
November 12, 2002, after the market closed, defendants revealed that
Rural Cellular's fiscal 2001 through Q2 2002 results had been
materially misstated and would have to be restated.

Rural Cellular has now admitted that it inappropriately recorded
transactions included in its FY 2001 through Q2 2002 results, and has
restated those results to remove millions in improperly reported income
(which illegally decreased the Company's losses) such that its FY 2001
through Q2 2002 financial statements were not a fair presentation of
Rural Cellular's results and were presented in violation of Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles and SEC rules.

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


                              *********


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 2003.  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  * * *