CAR_Public/030612.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
               Thursday, June 12, 2003, Vol. 5, No. 115

                           Headlines                            

ALLAIRE CORPORATION: Enters into MOU in MA Securities Fraud Suit
BAYER AG: Reaches Out-of-Court Settlements For 888 Baycol Suits
CRAYFISH CO.: Reaches Agreement To Settle Securities Suit in NY
CREDIT CARDS: Merchants May Get Lump Sum In Debit Card Lawsuit
CREDIT CARDS: Merchants Commence Suit For RICO Violations in NC

EL PASO: Largest Shareholder Suggests Replacement of Directors
KENTUCKY: Louisville Diocese Reaches Agreement for Abuse Suits
MCDATA CORPORATION: NY Court Dismisses in Part Securities Suit
MILBERG WEISS: Break-up Will Create Smaller, Competing Firms   
NORDSTROM INC.: Participates in Mediation For CA Antitrust Suit

PAXIL: UK Health Dept Warns Against Using Paxil to Treat Youth   
SLAVE REPARATIONS: Lawyers Find 104-Year-Old Witness To Slavery
UNITED STATES: Court Rules Direct Evidence Of Bias Not Needed
VITAMIN FIRMS: MA Court Approves $850T Antitrust Suit Settlement

                     New Securities Fraud Cases

ALLOU HEALTHCARE: Abbey Gardy Lodges Securities Suit in E.D. NY
CORNERSTONE PROPANE: Abbey Gardy Launches Securities Suit in CA
CREDIT SUISSE: Chitwood & Harley Lodges Securities Lawsuit in NY
CREDIT SUISSE: Rabin Murray Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY
CRYO-CELL INTERNATIONAL: Brodsky & Smith Lodges Stock Suit in FL

DAISYTEK INTERNATIONAL: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Stock Suit in TX
DAISYTEK INTERNATIONAL: Chitwood & Harley Files Stock Suit in TX
DAISYTEK INTERNATIONAL: Emerson Poynter Lodges Stock Suit in TX
DIVINE INC.: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Lawsuit in N.D. IL
eUNIVERSE INC.: Faruqi & Faruqi Files Securities Suit in C.D. CA

FEDERAL HOME: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY
FEDERAL HOME: Brian Felgoise Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY
FEDERAL HOME: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY
J. JILL: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in MA Court
J. JILL: Chitwood & Harley Lodges Securities Fraud Lawsuit in MA

RECOTON CORPORATION: Brodsky & Smith Files Securities Suit in FL

                           *********

ALLAIRE CORPORATION: Enters into MOU in MA Securities Fraud Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Allaire Corporation entered into a memorandum of understanding
with plaintiffs in the consolidated securities class action
filed against it and certain of the Company's officers and
directors in the United States District Court for the District
of Massachusetts, alleging violations of the federal securities
laws.

The suit was filed on behalf of a putative class defined as
those who purchased Company stock between December 7,1999 and
September 18, 2000, and names as defendants the Company and:

     (1) Joseph J. Allaire,

     (2) Jeremy Allaire,

     (3) David A. Gerth, and

     (4) David J. Orfao

The defendants allegedly violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5.  The
plaintiffs are seeking damages, interest, and attorneys' fees
and costs.  

The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the suit.  On September
25, 2001, the court ruled that the complaint did not comply with
the pleading standards imposed by the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995, and permitted plaintiffs to file
an amended complaint in accordance with specific requirements
imposed by the court.  Plaintiffs then filed an amended
complaint on November 30, 2001, which asserted similar claims.

On June 19, 2002, the court denied defendants' motion to dismiss
the amended complaint, and thereafter set a trial date for the
class action for November 2003.  The parties commenced discovery
and thereafter mediated their dispute before a United States
Magistrate Judge.

On May 21, 2003, the parties executed a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) that sets forth the basic terms of a
settlement whereby the plaintiffs agree to dismiss the suit and
provide a broad release of all claims arising out of their
purchase, sale or holding of Allaire stock in exchange for a
payment of $12.0 million.  The MOU calls for the parties to
negotiate additional terms to be set forth in a stipulation of
settlement.  The parties' settlement is expressly contingent on
Court approval, which may be withheld or, if provided, may be
subject to an appeal to, or reversal by, an appellate court.


BAYER AG: Reaches Out-of-Court Settlements For 888 Baycol Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pharmaceutical giant Bayer AG settled 888 lawsuits over
cholesterol drug Baycol out of court, an increase over 785 at
the time of its May update, Reuters reports.  On its website,
the Company stated however, that the number of Baycol-related
cases pending against it had increased to 9,400 from 8,800 in
May.

Baycol was withdrawn from the market in August 2001, after it
was linked to over 100 deaths.  The Company revealed in May that
it had spent $240 million on settling the 785 cases then, but
did not say on Tuesday how much more it had spent since then.  

"The settlement figure is not surprising, and the company is now
more than half-way towards settling the estimated 1,600 serious
cases," WestLB Panmure analyst Andreas Theisen told Reuters.  
"We're somewhat surprised with the growth in cases filed, though
this is not really a worry yet."

Mr. Theisen also said he was watching attempts to get certain
suits against the Company in the United States to be certified
as a class action.  "We expect to hear on the class action in
the next couple of weeks and that is clearly the more important
event," he said.

Bayer said earlier this month it had settled all individual
Baycol lawsuits due for hearing in June, Reuters states.  It
said then it expected the next cases to be heard in Oregon and
Mississippi in the beginning of July.


CRAYFISH CO.: Reaches Agreement To Settle Securities Suit in NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
Crayfish Co., Ltd. (Nasdaq: CRFH; MOTHERS: 4747) reached an
agreement to settle the consolidated class actions pending
against the Company in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York.  Suits were filed against the
Company and:

     (1) Isao Matsushima, the Company's CEO,

     (2) Morgan Stanley Dean Witter,

     (3) Nomura Securities International Inc.,

     (4) Merrill Lynch & Co., and

     (5) Hikari Tsushin, Inc.

The complaints included allegations that, during the course of
its March 8, 2000 public offering of American Depositary Shares,
the Company violated US securities law by making inaccurate and
misleading statements.  The complaints included related
allegations against the other defendants based on US securities
law.  Eleven class actions were initially filed.  On September
26, 2001, the court entered an order consolidating all eleven
actions and appointed lead plaintiff and lead counsel for the
plaintiffs.  On June 4, 2002, the court entered an order
appointing a new lead plaintiff and new counsel for the
plaintiffs.  A consolidated amended class action complaint was
served and filed on July 19, 2002.

The Company negotiated with the plaintiffs and has received a
copy of a memorandum of understanding regarding the class
actions, signed by all parties to the litigation, from its
litigation counsel on the morning of June 7, 2003 (Japan Time).

The defendants in the class actions, Crayfish, Hikari Tsushin,
Inc., and Isao Matsushima, the Company's CEO at the time of the
Company's public offering, have reached a settlement agreement
with the plaintiffs to settle all pending class actions for
US$9,000,000.  This settlement will not become final until
approved by the court.  

The Company has entered into this settlement agreement solely to
avoid any further cost, burden or uncertainty from the class
actions, and has not acknowledged any claims alleged by the
plaintiffs.  Out of US$9,000,000, US$6,625,000 will be paid by
the Company.  The Company expects to expense the settlement
payment in the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003.


CREDIT CARDS: Merchants May Get Lump Sum In Debit Card Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The nation's retailers may receive money from the settlement of
a lawsuit involving debit cards from Visa USA and MasterCard
International sooner than they expected, according to agreements
announced recently, The New York Times reports.

The original settlement plans, disclosed in April, called for
payment of $3 billion over 10 years, but the retailers are
allowed to look for a financial institution that would pay or
raise the money immediately in exchange for the rights to the
payments over the next decade, lawyers said.  

The lump sum would be less than $3 billion, however, to reflect
the greater value of receiving all of the money at once.  In
addition, Visa and MasterCard have agreed to make their
databases of debit card transactions available, allowing
retailers to determine exactly how much each merchant is owed.

The agreements, filed in US District Court in Brooklyn, New York
for preliminary approval, otherwise repeat or expand on
provisions made public when Visa and MasterCard agreed to settle
with the retailers in April.

The settlements stemmed from a class action filed in 1996, by
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Sears, Roebuck & Company and a handful of
other larger retailers, which contended that Visa and MasterCard
had violated antitrust laws by forcing merchants to accept their
debit cards if they wanted to accept their credit cards.

Debit card transactions that are routed through Visa's or
MasterCard's networks typically cost merchants 10 times what
transactions routed through competing networks do.  Under the
terms of the settlements, made just as the case was about to go
to trial, Visa and MasterCard agreed to no longer require
merchants to accept both types of cards, and their networks will
lower the fees they charge merchants for debit card transactions
beginning in August.

"At the end of the day, these changes in market structure will
drive the use of debit cards up," said Craig Peckham, an analyst
with Jefferies & Company, a brokerage firm in New York.

Banks that issue Visa and MasterCard debit cards may lose
considerable income as a result of the settlement, Mr. Peckham
said.  In 2002, debit transactions handled by Visa and Master-
Card earned banks $4.76 billion in revenue.

Visa and MasterCard predicted that few retailers would refuse
their debit cards, especially after receiving price breaks and
the settlements.  "We don't believe they want to lose the
sales," said Noah Hanft, MasterCard's general counsel.

Lloyd Constantine, a lawyer for the retailers, estimated that
the average merchant would receive a few hundred dollars under
the settlement and that the lump-sum payouts would save the
retailers close to $100 million in administrative costs that
would otherwise reduce the amount of the settlement.

The agreement that Visa signed also spells out how the company's
debit cards will be reissued to make them distinct from its
credit cards, allowing merchants to identify them more easily
and to reject them if they choose.  MasterCard has yet to decide
how it will restyle its debit cards.

Final approval of the agreements is expected in September, Mr.
Constantine said.


CREDIT CARDS: Merchants Commence Suit For RICO Violations in NC
---------------------------------------------------------------
Several credit card firms face a class action charging them with
failing to take appropriate measures to address fraud in card-
not-present transactions, in the United States District Court in
North Carolina.  The suit, filed by class action firm the
Triangle Law Center PLLC, names as defendants:

     (1) Visa USA,

     (2) MasterCard International,

     (3) American Express Co. and

     (4) Discover Financial Services Inc. and

     (5) their member card-issuing banks and merchant acquirers

The suit further states that the firms charged merchants
excessive transactional and penalty fees. The suit represents
all web, catalog and telephone merchants, Triangle says, the
Internet Retailer states.

The suit further alleges the firms never disclosed many of the
fees to its merchants during contracting, but were only stated
in unpublished rules and regulations set by the card companies.  
In cases of cyber fraud, the card companies' policies leave
direct merchants with no effective means of opposing the
imposition of penalties that the companies debit from merchant
accounts. The suit makes allegations under the Racketeering and
Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) and other laws on business
practices.  

Last month a similar suit was filed against MasterCard by
payments processor Paycom Billing Services Inc., alleging that
the credit card giant charges unfair penalties against web
merchants for fraudulent transactions and chargebacks.  
Mastercard has denied the allegations in the suit.

MasterCard says it just received notification of the suit today
and will have no comment until it has a chance to review the
allegations.  Visa, AmEx and Discover did not return calls
seeking comment, the Internet Retailer states.


EL PASO: Largest Shareholder Suggests Replacement of Directors
--------------------------------------------------------------
Oscar Wyatt Jr., one of the largest shareholders of energy
company El Paso Corporation, as well as its most vocal critic,
took out a full-page ad recently in the Sunday editions of the
Houston Chronicle, telling El Paso's shareholders that the 2001
stock deal by which Mr. Wyatt sold his energy company Coastal
Corporation to El Paso, did not turn out well because of later
"ill-advised" decisions by El Paso's board and management, the
Associated Press Newswires reports.  He apologized to the former
Coastal shareholders for the current state of affairs and urged
the investors to vote to oust El Paso's 12 directors and replace
them with a new slate.

This incident is but the latest chapter in the increasingly
heated contest between the incumbent board and dissident
shareholders vying for control of Houston-based El Paso.  Mr.
Wyatt holds about five million shares of El Paso stock after El
Paso's acquisition of Coastal in 2001.  Mr. Wyatt is financing
one-third of Selim K. Zilkha's $5.9 million effort to remove El
Paso's directors in favor of a new lineup of nine when
shareholders vote at their annual meeting June 17.  Mr. Zilkha
is El Paso's largest individual shareholder, with 8.9 million
shares.  El Paso expects to spend $10 million soliciting votes.

For more than a year, Oscar Wyatt, 78, has been a vocal critic
of El Paso's leadership as the company scrambled to sell assets
and cut costs to counteract falling stock and junk credit
ratings in the post-Enron era of skittish investors and
increased scrutiny.

The ad is in the form of a letter from Mr. Wyatt to former
Coastal shareholders now holding El Paso stock, and it echoes
criticisms previously launched by Mr. Wyatt, who is the lead
plaintiff in a shareholder class action accusing El Paso of
violating federal securities laws.

"The Zilkha board possesses the sound judgment and business
acumen to solve El Paso's many problems and, just as important,
can hit the ground running," Mr. Wyatt's ad in the Houston
Chronicle said, referring to the slate of candidates Mr. Wyatt,
Mr. Zilkha and their followers are proposing and supporting to
replace the current directors.


KENTUCKY: Louisville Diocese Reaches Agreement for Abuse Suits
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Diocese of Louisville, Kentucky reached a settlement with
representatives of 243 plaintiffs in lawsuits alleging child
sexual abuse by priests, teachers and others connected to the
church, the Courier Journal reports.

The suits charged the diocese with covering up sexual abuse
during the past 50 years by dozens of priests and others
associated with the diocese.  The diocese has denied the
charges.  

Earlier this year, Judge James M. Shake of the Jefferson Circuit
Court approved mediation and granted class status solely for the
purpose of reaching an agreement.  242 plaintiffs joined the
talks.  One opted out, six have settled and the rest filed
lawsuits after the deadline for signing up for the talks, the
Journal states.  

Details of the settlement were not revealed, the Journal stated.


MCDATA CORPORATION: NY Court Dismisses in Part Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York dismissed in part the consolidated securities class
action filed against McDATA Corporation, two of its current
officers and one former officer. The

The suit generally alleges, among other things, that the
registration statements and prospectus filed with the SEC by
such companies were materially false and misleading because they
failed to disclose:

     (1) that certain underwriters had solicited and received
         excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain
         investors in exchange for which the underwriters
         allocated to those investors material portions of
         shares in connection with the initial public offerings;
         and

     (2) that certain of the underwriters had entered into
         agreements with customers whereby the underwriters
         agreed to allocate initial public offering shares in
         exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase
         additional company shares in the aftermarket at pre-
         determined prices.

The complaints relating to the Company allege claims against it,
two of its current officers, one of its former officers and
Credit Suisse First Boston, or CSFB, the lead underwriter for
its August 9, 2000 initial public offering, under Sections 11
and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Securities Act.

In September 2002, plaintiffs' counsel in the above-mentioned
lawsuits offered to individual defendants of many of the public
companies being sued the opportunity to enter into a Reservation
of Rights and Tolling Agreement that would dismiss without
prejudice and without costs all claims against such persons if
the company itself had entity coverage insurance.  Under the
Reservation of Rights and Tolling Agreement the plaintiffs are
required to dismiss the claims against such individuals.

On February 19, 2003, the court entered a ruling on the pending
motions to dismiss that dismissed some, but not all, of the
plaintiff's claims against the Company.


MILBERG WEISS: Break-up Will Create Smaller, Competing Firms   
-------------------------------------------------------------
High-profile class action law firm Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes &
Lerach is splitting up, attorneys for the firms announced
Tuesday, the Houston Chronicle reports.  The legal powerhouse
has been around from 35 years and employs about 200 lawyers in
shareholder suits and other litigation.

Attorneys at the firm said that the break-up has long been
coming and will not affect the representation of its
shareholders, especially in suits against Enron or Dynegy in
anyway.  It will, in a matter of months, likely regroup as
competing law firms.

"We're a big, high-profile firm handling big, high-profile
cases," William Lerach, the San Diego, Calif.-based firm partner
who heads both the Enron and Dynegy efforts told the Chronicle.  
"It's a difficult size, and we're restructuring."

Mr. Lerach said he and the other lawyers on the Enron and Dynegy
cases will stay with those lawsuits.  He added he hopes that the
resulting smaller firms will be "friendly" competitors, and
emphasized that the reorganization had nothing to do with the
investigation by a Los Angeles grand jury to determine whether
the law firm paid people to become plaintiffs in class actions.

In February 2002, when Houston-based US District Judge Melinda
Harmon appointed University of California and Milberg Weiss as
lead plaintiffs and counsel in the Enron shareholder suit, she
mentioned the investigation and dismissed it as "unproven
allegations of solicitation of clients by payment and higher
fees," the Houston Chronicle stated.

Trey Davis, director of special projects for the University of
California, the lead plaintiff in both the Enron and Dynegy
lawsuits, told the Chronicle the law firm split "will have no
effect on our cases."  He said they anticipate no change in
legal representation.


NORDSTROM INC.: Participates in Mediation For CA Antitrust Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Nordstrom, Inc. is engaged in mediation with plaintiffs in the
consolidated class action filed in the Superior Court of
California, Marin County.  The suit names the Company, other
department store and specialty retailers and a number of
manufacturers of cosmetics and fragrances.

Plaintiffs' amended complaint alleges that the retail price of
the "prestige" cosmetics sold in department and specialty stores
was collusively controlled by the retailer and manufacturer
defendants in violation of the Cartwright Act and the California
Unfair Competition Act.

Plaintiffs seek treble damages and restitution in an unspecified
amount, attorneys' fees and prejudgment interest, on behalf of a
class of all California residents who purchased cosmetics and
fragrances for personal use from any of the defendants during
the period four years prior to the filing of the amended
complaint.  

Defendants, including the Company, have answered the amended
complaint denying the allegations.  The defendants have produced
documents and responded to plaintiffs' other discovery requests,
including providing witnesses for depositions.  Plaintiffs have
not yet moved for class certification.  The California state
court has set a status conference for June 2003.


PAXIL: UK Health Dept Warns Against Using Paxil to Treat Youth   
--------------------------------------------------------------
Britain's Department of Health warned against giving children
and adolescents the antidepressant Paxil, also called Seroxat
outside the United States and made by British-based
GlaxoSmithKline, the Associated Press reports.

The drug is not licensed for use in children and teenagers
anywhere in the world but some doctors give it to treat
depression, based on their own judgment.  New research shows
that the risk of suicidal thoughts and self-harm is higher in
youngsters taking the drug.  The new research, provided to
Britain's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency by
GlaxoSmithKline, does not apply to adults, officials said.

The evidence provided by the Company from nine studies based on
more than 1,000 youngsters, shows there is an increase in the
rate of self-harm and potentially suicidal behavior in those
under 18 taking Paxil.  GlaxoSmithKline spokesman David Mawdsley
revealed the rate of a collection of emotional side-effects,
ranging from mood swings and increased crying, to suicidal
thoughts and self-harm, was twice as high in the Paxil group as
in those taking a fake pill.  A total of 3.2 percent of patients
on Paxil had the emotional side-effects, compared with 1.5
percent of those taking the dummy pill, AP reports.

"It has become clear that the benefits of Seroxat in children
for the treatment of depressive illness do not outweigh these
risks," the government said in a statement. "Young people under
18 years currently taking Seroxat for depression should consult
their doctor."

Alasdair Breckenridge, chairman of the regulatory agency, said
the benefits for adults of taking Seroxat for depression were
well known.

"It is important that patients who are benefiting from Seroxat
should not be alarmed by the announcement and should continue
their treatment," he said.


SLAVE REPARATIONS: Lawyers Find 104-Year-Old Witness To Slavery
---------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyers in the suits seeking reparations for African-American
descendants of slaves say they have a 104-year-old man who says
that he and his children were enslaved throughout much of the
20th century and even in the 1960s rights movement,
FortWayne.com reports.  The man reportedly lives in Louisiana.

Lawyers, however, have refused to identify the man and gave only
sketchy details of the man's life, thus doubts remain about how
he served as a slave, years after slavery was abolished.  
Lawyers in the suit say the man's testimony could give their
lawsuit critical, firsthand evidence of slavery in America.

However Chicago Federal Judge Charles Norgle, Sr. refused the
lawyer's request for approval to take the man's deposition to
ensure his account doesn't die with him.  He put off a decision
until after the plaintiffs file a consolidated complaint.  The
judge gave them another week to file the complaint, not until
August as the lawyers sought, FortWayne.com reports.

Lawyers gave several reasons for the secrecy about the man.  
Lawyer Diane Sammons of New Jersey, suggested the family was
afraid to break away from the slave masters because of repeated
rapes and other physical abuses.  Lionel Jean-Baptiste, an
Evanston, Ill., attorney who is playing a key role in the
lawsuit, said the man is concerned that his testimony in the
case could endanger his and his family's safety.  Saying the man
has the "normal infirmities" of someone more than a century old,
the lawyers sought approval to immediately take his deposition
to preserve his testimony before he dies, FortWayne.com reports.

Several class actions were filed last year in several states,
seeking reparations for millions of African-American slave
descendants and alleging business and industry illicitly
profited from slavery.  The cases were consolidated in Chicago
in front of Judge Norgle.

Lawyers said an independent historian, described as a
genealogist, had discovered the 104-year-old former slave.  
After multiple visits with him over one to two weeks, lawyers in
the lawsuit were able to put together a statement on the man's
behalf.  They asked Judge Norgle to keep it sealed indefinitely.


UNITED STATES: Court Rules Direct Evidence Of Bias Not Needed
-------------------------------------------------------------
In a ruling that could increase the number of employment-
discrimination lawsuits, the Supreme Court said an employee does
not need direct evidence of bias in order to be entitled to
bring a lawsuit against an employer, the Wall Street Journal
reports.

The High Court's unanimous ruling resolves a split among US
appeal courts, making it easier for workers who believe they
have been discriminated against on the basis of race, color,
religion, gender or national origin to file suit.  "It will now
be easier to get to a jury trial," said Mark Theodore, a lawyer
who specializes in labor and employment issues for law firm
Proskauer Rose, which was not involved in the case.

The discrimination case has been followed closely by civil-
rights activists, because direct proof often is difficult to
find, since discrimination can occur in subtle ways.

The case involves Catherine Costa, the only female employed as a
warehouse worker and heavy-equipment operator at Park Place
Entertainment Corporation's Caesars Palace Hotel & Casino in
Las Vegas.  Ms. Costa had a history of disciplinary actions
against her related to disputes with workers, and was fired
after a physical fight with another worker; the other worker
received a five-day suspension.

Ms. Costa sued, claiming sex discrimination and sexual
harassment under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.  A US
District Court in Nevada allowed the gender-discrimination case
to go to the jury.  At issue in the case is whether Ms. Costa
needed to show direct or circumstantial evidence of sex
discrimination to get her case to the jury.  In other words, did
the company discriminate against her, or theoretically, would
its action have been the same if Ms. Costa were a man?

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco
ruled that Ms. Costa may establish her case through "a
preponderance" of either direct or circumstantial evidence.  The
Supreme Court stepped in at this point, because appeals courts
have been split on this issue.

In a 1989 case, the justices had not provided clear guidance.   
Four justices in 1989 held that if a plaintiff proves her gender
played a "motivating" part in a company's decision, the burden
is on the company to defend against the charge.  A concurring
opinion written by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said the person
filing the lawsuit must show "direct evidence."

Congress, in 1991, passed a law to try to clear up the
confusion.  In the recent decision, the Supreme Court had its
first opportunity to consider the law's affect on juries in such
cases.  Writing for the court, Justice Clarence Thomas said that
if Congress intended to require a standard of direct evidence,
it would have said so.  Justice Thomas said that Congress's
"failure to do so is significant, for Congress has been
unequivocal when imposing heightened proof requirements in other
circumstances."

This time, Justice O'Connor wrote a separate, concurring
opinion, saying she agreed with her colleagues.


VITAMIN FIRMS: MA Court Approves $850T Antitrust Suit Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
Massachusetts state court granted preliminary approval to the
US$850,000 settlement of an antitrust class action filed against
four vitamin producers:

     (1) Dupont,

     (2) ConAgra Foods, Inc.,

     (3) Bioproducts, Inc. and

     (4) Chinook Group, Ltd.

Last year, 10 other major producers of bulk vitamins settled the
suits against them, providing more than $22 million for
Massachusetts charities.  The suit alleges that more than 40
companies engaged in a widespread international conspiracy over
a 10-year period to fix prices and allocate markets for the bulk
vitamins that are used in many processed products, including
milk, cereals, juices and pet foods, the Associated Press
reports.

Ellis & Rapacki LLP, the law firm representing the plaintiffs,
said all of the companies had small shares of the bulk vitamin
market, and the settlement money will go to Massachusetts
charities for food and nutrition programs.  

A DuPont spokesman confirmed the company agreed to a preliminary
approval for a settlement, but couldn't comment further, AP
states.  A ConAgra representative wasn't immediately available.


                     New Securities Fraud Cases


ALLOU HEALTHCARE: Abbey Gardy Lodges Securities Suit in E.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
Abbey Gardy, LLP 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 securities of Allou
Healthcare, Inc., formerly Allou Health & Beauty Care, Inc.
(AMEX:ALU) publicly traded securities during the period between
July 3, 2002 and April 9, 2003, inclusive.

The complaint names as defendants certain officers and directors
of Allou and its auditors, KPMG LLP.  The complaint alleges that
defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by
issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market
during the class period thereby artificially inflating the price
of Allou securities.

Those materially false and misleading statements concerning the
Company's financial results include allegations:

     (1) that Allou was materially overstating its accounts
         receivables by approximately $80 million and its
         inventory by approximately $35 million, thereby
         overstating Allou's revenue and earnings; and

     (2) as a result of the foregoing, Allou's financial
         statements were not prepared in accordance with GAAP
         and were therefore materially false and misleading.

For more details, contact Damon Williams or Nancy Kaboolian by
Phone: 800-889-3701 or 212-889-3700 by E-mail:
dwilliam@abbeygardy.com or nkaboolian@abbeygardy.com


CORNERSTONE PROPANE: Abbey Gardy Launches Securities Suit in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Abbey Gardy, LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
California on behalf of a class of all persons who purchased
securities of CornerStone Propane Partners LP (Other
OTC:CNPP.PK) between November 2, 1999 and February 11, 2003
inclusive.  The complaint names as the Company and:

     (1) Keith Baxter,

     (2) Richard Nye,

     (3) Ronald J. Goedde and

     (4) Curtis Solsvig, III

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

More specifically, the complaint alleges that during the Class
Period, defendants reported false and misleading financial
results and made false statements concerning CornerStone's
financial status and business condition, and failed to disclose:

     (1) that CornerStone had been systematically concealing
         that it was overpaying for acquisitions made as early
         as 1997 by improperly misallocating portions of the
         purchase price of physical assets which should have
         been allocated to goodwill;

     (2) that it was materially overstating its earnings before
         interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, its net
         income and its earnings per unit; and

     (3) that CornerStone lacked adequate internal controls and
         was therefore unable to ascertain or report the true
         financial condition of the Partnership.

On February 11, 2003, the Partnership revealed in its 8-K filed
with SEC that it had to restate its financial results for fiscal
years 2000 and 2001 due to the Partnership's knowledge of known
errors in reporting its financial results for fiscal years 2000
and 2001.  In response to this announcement, the price of
CornerStone securities declined precipitously.

For more details, contact Damon Williams or Nancy Kaboolian by
Phone: (212) 889-3700 or 800-889-3701, or by E-mail:
dwilliams@abbeygardy.com or nkaboolian@abbeygardy.com


CREDIT SUISSE: Chitwood & Harley Lodges Securities Lawsuit in NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chitwood & Harley, LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York, on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise
acquired Winstar Communications, Inc., (WCII), between January
5, 2001, and April 5, 2001, inclusive.  The suit is brought
against Credit Suisse First Boston.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated section 10(b) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder by the Securities and Exchange Commission.  In
particular, the complaint alleges that defendants:

     (1) issued and maintained a ``Buy'' recommendation on
         Winstar securities without any rational economic basis;

     (2) failed to disclose that they were issuing and
         maintaining these recommendations to obtain investment
         banking business; and

     (3) concealed significant, material conflicts of interest
         that prevented them from providing independent and
         objective analysis.

The complaint alleges that as a result of these false and
misleading statements and omissions of material fact, the price
of Winstar securities was artificially inflated throughout the
class period causing plaintiff and the other members of the
class to suffer damages.

For more details, contact Jennifer Morris by Mail: 1230
Peachtree Street, Suite 2300, Atlanta, Georgia 30309 by Phone:
(888) 873-3999 or (404) 873-3900 or by E-mail: jlm@classlaw.com


CREDIT SUISSE: Rabin Murray Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Rabin, Murray & Frank LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or
otherwise acquired Winstar Communications, Inc. securities
(WCII) between January 5, 2001 and April 5, 2001, both dates
inclusive.  Credit Suisse First Boston is the named as defendant
in the complaint.

The complaint alleges that defendant violated section 10(b) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder by the Securities and Exchange Commission.  In
particular, the complaint alleges that defendants:

     (1) issued and maintained a "Buy" recommendation on Winstar
         securities without any rational economic basis;

     (2) failed to disclose that they were issuing and
         maintaining these recommendations to obtain investment
         banking business; and

     (3) concealed significant, material conflicts of interest
         that prevented them from providing independent and
         objective analysis.

The complaint alleges that as a result of these false and
misleading statements and omissions of material fact, the price
of Winstar securities was artificially inflated throughout the
class period causing plaintiff and the other members of the
class to suffer damages.

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


CRYO-CELL INTERNATIONAL: Brodsky & Smith Lodges Stock Suit in FL
----------------------------------------------------------------
Brodsky & Smith, LLC initiated a securities class action on
behalf of shareholders who purchased the common stock and other
securities of CRYO-CELL International, Inc. (NasdaqSC:CCELE)
between, March 16, 1999 through May 20, 2003, inclusive.  The
class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District
Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated federal
securities laws by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market during the class period,
thereby artificially inflating the price of CRYO-CELL
securities.  On April 15, 2003, the Company issued a press
release stating that it may be necessary to restate its
financial results for fiscal years 2001 and 2002 because of
improper recognition of revenue.  On May 20, 2003, the Company
issued another press release regarding the continued assessment
of certain revenue recognition accounting policies.  On this
news, CRYO-CELL shares fell 14%.

For more details, contact Marc L. Ackerman or Evan J. Smith by
Mail: Two Bala Plaza, Suite 602, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, by
Phone: 877-LEGAL-90 or by E-mail: clients@brodsky-smith.com


DAISYTEK INTERNATIONAL: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Stock Suit in TX
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a securities
class action in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, on behalf of all
persons who purchased the securities of Daisytek International
Corporation (Nasdaq: DZTK) between November 9, 2001 and April
28, 2003, inclusive, against certain officers of the Company.

Similar actions have been filed in the Eastern District of Texas
near the Company's headquarters, but based upon Daisytek's
recent bankruptcy filing, Wolf Haldenstein filed an action
solely against certain officers of the Company in the Northern
District of Texas.

Plaintiff alleges violations of the federal securities laws
stemming from defendants' issuance of false and misleading
statements about Daisytek's business, operating performance and
prospects.  In particular, defendants were improperly accounting
for uncollectible customer accounts receivables and vendor
rebates receivables in order to increase Daisytek's financial
results.

The complaint alleges that defendants obtained vital financing
to the Company, pursuant to Daisytek's favorable results which
were reported to the investing public.  The Company consequently
divulged it would record "significant" write-downs of customer
and vendor receivables and inventory and large restructuring
changes.  Following this news, the Company's stock decreased to
$0.53.  The Company consequently announced the resignations of
its CEO and its CFO.

For more details, contact Fred Taylor Isquith, Gregory Nespole,
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 Daisytek.


DAISYTEK INTERNATIONAL: Chitwood & Harley Files Stock Suit in TX
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chitwood & Harley initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas,
Dallas Division, on behalf of all purchasers of securities of
Daisytek International Corporation (NasdaqNM:DZTK) between
November 9, 2001 and April 28, 2003, inclusive.

Plaintiff alleges violations of the federal securities laws
stemming from defendants' issuance of false and misleading
statements about Daisytek's business, operating performance and
prospects.  In particular, defendants were improperly accounting
for uncollectible customer accounts receivables and vendor
rebates receivables in order to increase Daisytek's financial
results.

The complaint alleges that defendants obtained vital financing
to the Company, pursuant to Daisytek's favorable results which
were reported to the investing public.  The Company consequently
divulged it would record "significant" write-downs of customer
and vendor receivables and inventory and large restructuring
changes.  Following this news, the Company's stock decreased to
$0.53.  The Company consequently announced the resignations of
its CEO and its CFO.

For more details, contact Jennifer Morris by Mail: 1230
Peachtree Street, Suite 2300, Atlanta, Georgia 30309 by Phone:
(888) 873-3999 or (404) 873-3900 or by E-mail: jlm@classlaw.com


DAISYTEK INTERNATIONAL: Emerson Poynter Lodges Stock Suit in TX
---------------------------------------------------------------
Emerson Poynter LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas,
Dallas Division, on behalf of purchasers of Daisytek
International Corporation (NasdaqNM:DZTK) publicly traded
securities during the period between November 9, 2001 and April
28, 2003, inclusive.

Other similar actions are filed in the Eastern District of Texas
near the Company's headquarters, but based upon Disytek's recent
bankruptcy filing Emerson Poynter LLP filed an action solely
against certain officers and directors of the Company in federal
court in Dallas.

The complaint charges Daisytek and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934.  To that end, the complaint further alleges that the
defendants were improperly accounting for uncollectible customer
accounts receivables and vendor rebates receivables to inflate
the Company's financial results and its stock price.

For more details, contact John G. Emerson or Scott E. Poynter by
Mail: 1509 Louisiana, Suites C & D, Little Rock, AR by Phone: 1-
800-663-9817 or by E-mail: shareholder@emersonfirm.com


DIVINE INC.: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Lawsuit in N.D. IL
---------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities
class action in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division on behalf of
purchasers of divine inc. (OTC Pink Sheets:DVINQ) publicly
traded securities during the period between November 12, 2001
and February 18, 2003.

The complaint charges certain of divine's officers and directors
with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The
complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal
securities laws by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market between Nov. 12, 2001 and Feb.
18, 2003, and thereby artificially inflated the prices of divine
securities.

Throughout the class period, the complaint alleges, defendants
failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material
adverse facts:

     (1) by purchasing the income streams of companies divine
         acquired with artificially inflated stock, defendants
         were building a financial house of cards that would
         crumble once the pool of willing investors and
         acquisition targets willing to sell to divine on the
         terms divine's management sought dried up;

     (2) by collecting $65 million in prepayments from the
         customers of its wholly owned subsidiary, RoweCom Inc.,
         in late 2002 with no intention of completing their
         sales and by diverting over $73 million in cash from
         RoweCom's accounts to divine, defendants were
         destroying the Company's largest source of revenue and
         subjecting the Company to great potential civil and
         criminal liability; and

     (3) by operating the Company and its subsidiaries without
         adequate financial and internal controls, defendants
         lacked a reasonable basis to project profitability and
         to report accurate financial results and caused the
         Company to engage in criminal misconduct.

On February 18, 2003, divine announced that "despite efforts
over the past several months to minimize operating expenses and
various liabilities," its board of directors had determined to
"seek alternatives to protect the value and viability of its
operations."  Defendants advised that divine had engaged
Broadview International LLC as advisors to assist in exploring
strategic options, which could include asset divestitures,
comparable transactions, and/or the filing of a voluntary
petition under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code.

As a result of the defendants' false statements, divine's stock
price traded at inflated levels during the class period,
increasing to as high as $23 on January 8, 2002.  The Company's
stock now trades at $0.02 per share.

For more details, contact William Lerach by Phone: 800/449-4900
by E-mail: wsl@milberg.com


eUNIVERSE INC.: Faruqi & Faruqi Files Securities Suit in C.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Faruqi & Faruqi LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Central District of
California on behalf of all purchasers of eUniverse Inc.
(NasdaqSC:EUNI) securities between July 30, 2002 and May 5,
2003, inclusive.

The complaint charges defendants with violations of federal
securities laws by, among other things, issuing a series of
materially false and misleading press releases concerning
eUniverse's financial results and business prospects.  
Specifically, the complaint alleges that eUniverse failed to
disclose that:

     (1) the Company had materially overstated its net income
         and earnings per share;

     (2) that the Company lacked adequate internal controls; and

     (3) that as a result, the value of the Company's net income
         and financial results were materially overstated
         throughout the class period.

On May 6, 2003, however, eUniverse shocked the market by
announcing that it would restate its financial results for the
second and third quarters of the year ended March 31, 2003 and
possibly for the first quarter of Fiscal 2003.  Following this
announcement, the NASDAQ halted trading in the Company's
securities.  Additionally, on May 8, 2003, eUniverse announced
that the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
had begun an informal inquiry into the announced restatement.

For more details, contact Anthony Vozzolo by Mail: 320 East 39th
Street, New York, NY 10016 by Phone: (877) 247-4292 or
(212) 983-9330 or by E-mail: Avozzolo@faruqilaw.com


FEDERAL HOME: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities
class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted,
exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of Federal Home
Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) (NYSE:FRE) between
January 27, 2003 and June 9, 2003, inclusive.  The case is
pending in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York against defendant Freddie Mac and certain
of its executive officers.

The action charges that defendants violated federal securities
laws by issuing a series of materially false and misleading
statements to the market throughout the class period which
statements had the effect of artificially inflating the market
price of the Company's securities.

For more details, contact Charles J. Piven, PA by Mail: The
World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525,
Baltimore, Maryland 21202, by Phone: 410-986-0036 or by E-mail:
hoffman@pivenlaw.com


FEDERAL HOME: Brian Felgoise Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise, PC initiated a securities
class action on behalf of shareholders who acquired Federal Home
Loan Mortgage Corporation (NYSE:FRE) securities between January
27, 2003 and June 9, 2003, inclusive.  The case is pending in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York, against the Company and certain key officers and
directors.

The action charges that defendants violated the federal
securities laws by issuing a series of materially false and
misleading statements to the market throughout the class period
which statements had the effect of artificially inflating the
market price of the Company's securities.

For more details, contact Brian M. Felgoise by Mail: 261 Old
York Road, Suite 423, Jenkintown, Pennsylvania, 19046, by Phone:
215-886-1900 or by E-mail: FelgoiseLaw@aol.com


FEDERAL HOME: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities
class action on behalf of purchasers of the securities of
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (NYSE: FRE) between
January 27, 2003 and June 9, 2003, inclusive.  The action,
numbered 03-CV-4170, is pending in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York against Freddie Mac
and:

    (1) David Glenn (COO until June 9, 2003),

    (2) Vaughn Clarke (CFO until June 9, 2003) and

    (3) Leland C. Brendsel (CEO and Chairman until June 9, 2003)

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 January 27, 2003
and June 9, 2003.  

According to the complaint, the Company's class period earnings
announcement was materially false and misleading because it
failed to disclose that the Company lacked adequate internal
accounting controls and personnel expertise, failed to follow
accounting rules that require derivative securities to be marked
to market, "smoothed out its earnings" using accounting
techniques to lower results in good times and lift results when
business conditions deteriorated and provided investigators with
doctored records to conceal their improper accounting
techniques.

For more details, contact Steven G. Schulman by Phone:
800/320-5081 by E-mail: freddiemaccomplaint@milbergNY.com or
visit the firm's Website: http://www.milberg.com


J. JILL: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in MA Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities
class action on behalf of purchasers of the securities of J.
Jill Group, Inc., (NASDAQ: JILL) between February 12, 2002 and
December 4, 2002, inclusive and who suffered damages thereby.  
The action, numbered 03CV11100, is pending in the United States
District Court for the District of Massachusetts against the
Company, Gordon R. Cooke (President, CEO, Chairman) and Olga L.
Conley (CFO).

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 material
misrepresentations to the market between February 12, 2002 and
December 4, 2002, thereby artificially inflating the price of J.
Jill securities.  The complaint alleges that defendants failed
to disclose the following facts:

     (1) that the Company was accumulating a large amount of
         products whose value was diminishing.  These products
         would have to be discounted in promotional campaigns
         which would cause the Company to experience declining
         financial results;

     (2) that the Company's same-store sales growth, a figure
         that is important to investors in retailing stocks but
         which was not disclosed by the Company during the class
         period, was declining;

     (3) that the Company was not collecting taxes in certain
         states where it made internet sales; and

     (4) as a result of the foregoing, the earnings projections
         and positive statements about the Company by defendants
         were lacking in a reasonable basis and therefore
         materially false and misleading.

On December 5, 2002, J. Jill shocked the market by announcing
that it was revising downward its projections for the fourth
quarter of 2002: The Company announced that it expected net
sales for the fourth quarter to be in the range of $102.0 to
$107.5 million and diluted earnings per share to be between
$0.25 and $0.30.  In response to this announcement, the price of
J. Jill common stock dropped from $23.01 per share on December
4, 2002 to a close of $16.52 per share on December 5, 2002.

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


J. JILL: Chitwood & Harley Lodges Securities Fraud Lawsuit in MA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chitwood & Harley LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the District of Massachusettes,
against J. Jill Group, Inc. (NasdaqNM:JILL) and certain of its
officers and directors, on behalf of purchasers of the
securities of J. Jill Group between February 12, 2002 and
December 4, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market between February 12, 2002 and
December 4, 2002, thereby artificially inflating the price of J.
Jill Group securities.  

The complaint alleges that defendants issued a series of
materially false and misleading statements concerning the
Company's operations and financial results.  In particular, the
complaint alleges that defendants' statements were materially
false and misleading because defendants failed to disclose and
misrepresented:

     (1) that the Company's same-store sales growth -- an
         operating metric that is important to investors in
         retailing stocks -- was declining during the class
         period as demand for the Company's products weakened;

     (2) that the Company was amassing a material amount of
         product that was of diminishing value and would have to
         be discounted in promotional campaigns, thereby causing
         the Company to experience declining financial results;

     (3) that the Company was not collecting taxes in certain
         States where it made Internet sales and also had a
         retail store.  As a result, the Company was exposed to
         the heightened risk that it would be subject to
         regulatory scrutiny; and

     (4) as a result of the foregoing, defendants' earnings
         projections and positive statements about the Company
         were lacking in a reasonable basis and were therefore
         materially false and misleading.

On December 5, 2002, prior to the open of the market, J. Jill
Group shocked the market by announcing that it was revising its
earnings for the fourth quarter of 2002.  The Company reported
that it expected fourth quarter diluted earnings per share to
range between $0.25 and $0.30.  

In response to this announcement, the price of J. Jill common
stock declined from $23.01 per share to $16.52 per share, a
decline of 28%, on extremely heavy volume.  Prior to the end of
the class period, J. Jill insiders sold more than $17 million of
their personally-held stock to the unsuspecting public.

For more details, contact Jennifer Morris by Mail: 1230
Peachtree Street, Suite 2300, Atlanta Georga 30309 by Phone:
1-888-873-3999 (toll-free) ext. 6883, by E-mail:
jlm@classlaw.com.


RECOTON CORPORATION: Brodsky & Smith Files Securities Suit in FL
----------------------------------------------------------------
Brodsky & Smith, LLC initiated a securities class action on
behalf of shareholders who purchased the common stock and other
securities of Recoton Corporation (Other OTC:RCOTQ.PK) between
November 15, 1999 and August 19, 2002, inclusive.  The class
action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for
the Middle District of Florida, against former officers and
directors of the Company.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated federal
securities laws by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market during the class period,
thereby artificially inflating the price of Recoton securities.
Specifically, the Complaint alleges, inter alia, that defendants
materially overstated revenue during the class period and failed
to timely take material write-downs of inventory.

For more details, contact Marc L. Ackerman or Evan J. Smith by
Mail: Two Bala Plaza, Suite 602, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, by
Phone: 877-LEGAL-90 or by E-mail: clients@brodsky-smith.com


                              *********

A list of Meetings, Conferences and Seminars appears in each
Wednesday's edition of the Class Action Reporter. Submissions
via e-mail to carconf@beard.com are encouraged.

Each Friday's edition of the CAR includes a section featuring
news on asbestos-related litigation and profiles of target
asbestos defendants that, according to independent researches,
collectively face billions of dollars in asbestos-related
liabilities.  The Asbestos Defendant Profiles is backed by an
online database created to respond to custom searches. Go to
http://litigationdatasource.com/asbestos_defendant_profiles.html

                        *********


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  * * *