CAR_Public/030626.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
               Thursday, June 26, 2003, Vol. 5, No. 125

                           Headlines                            

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: High Court Upholds MI University's Program
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: President Bush Praises "Race-Neutral" Ruling
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: Big Companies Welcome High Court's Ruling
AGWAY INC.: Investors Sue Over Securities Law Violations in NJ
CABLE & WIRELESS: Canada Pension Fund Sues On Swap Transactions

CANADA: Court Says Possible Immigrants Not Barred By New Rules
CINTAS CORPORATION: Employees Sue For Living Wage Law Violations
CREDIT SUISSE: Quattrone Asks For Removal of Charges To CA Court
EVANS SYSTEMS: NY Court Finds Trader Liable For Securities Fraud
FEDERATED DEPARTMENT: Sued For Coercing Minority Suspects To Pay

GENERAL MOTORS: To Recall Saturn L-Series Cars For Fire Hazard
H&R BLOCK: TX Court Approves $262M Refund Loans Suit Settlement
OHIO: Cincinnati To Vote On Proposal For Police Reform Agreement
TOUCH AMERICA: Judge's Disqualification Requested For Bias
TORONTO STAR: Superior Court Throws Out $2.7 Billion Libel Claim


                    New Securities Fraud Cases

ADMINISTAFF INC.: Charles Piven Launches Securities Suit in TX
DIVINE INC.: Kirby McInerney Lodges Securities Suit in C.D. CA
DIVINE INC.: Weiss & Yourman Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. IL
FIFTH THIRD: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. OH
FISCHER IMAGING: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in CO

FLEMING COMPANIES: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in E.D. TX
GAINSCO INC.: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. FL
GOLDMAN SACHS: Pomerantz Haudek Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY
GUIDANT CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in IN
J. JILL: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MA Court

KING PHARMACEUTICALS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in TN
LEHMAN BROTHERS: Kaplan Fox Launches Securities Suit in S.D. NY
LEHMAN BROTHERS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY
LEHMAN BROTHERS: Kaplan Fox Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY
PARAMETRIC TECHNOLOGY: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in MA

PEC SOLUTIONS: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Fraud Suit in VA
PHARMACIA CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in NJ
PROVIDENT FINANCIAL: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in GA
SARA LEE: Pomerantz Haudek Lodges Securities Lawsuit in N.D. IL
SEARS ROEBUCK: Spector Roseman Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. IL

                         *********

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: High Court Upholds MI University's Program
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Supreme Court voted 5-4 to uphold an
affirmative action program at the University of Michigan's law
school, the Associated Press reports. In its ruling, the court
stated that the nation depends in part on educated leaders who
respect and understand those who do not look like them.

However, the court also voted 6-3 to strike down a separate
point system used by the University of Michigan's undergraduate
school, saying race cannot be the only factor.  It ruled that
racial quotas are unconstitutional, but there are other ways
that race can be taken into account.

The ruling means that race-conscious policies in place in
institutions as diverse as military academies and women's
studies courses will probably remain in force.  Writing for the
majority in the 5-4 ruling upholding an affirmative action
program at the University of Michigan's law school, Justice
Sandra Day O'Connor said the value of diverse classrooms extends
far beyond the campus, AP states.

"This court has long recognized that 'education is the very
foundation of good citizenship'," Judge O'Connor wrote, quoting
from the landmark Brown v. Board of Education ruling of nearly
50 years ago.  

"For this reason, the diffusion of knowledge and opportunity
through public institutions of higher education must be
accessible to all individuals regardless of race or ethnicity,"
Judge O'Connor wrote.  "Effective participation by members of
all racial and ethnic groups in the civic life of our nation is
essential if the dream of one nation, indivisible, is to be
realized."

Judge O'Connor voted to uphold the affirmative action program
along with the court's more liberal justices. Chief Justice
William H. Rehnquist wrote the majority opinion in the 6-3 case
finding.  Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence
Thomas and Stephen Breyer joined the decision, while Justices
John Paul Stevens, David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg
dissented.

The high court said the undergraduate school's admissions policy
is not the way to promote racial diversity in universities.  
"The university's policy, which automatically distributes 20
points, or one-fifth of the points needed to guarantee
admission, to every single underrepresented minority applicant
solely because of race, is not narrowly tailored to achieve the
interest in educational diversity," that Michigan claimed
justified the policy, Judge Rehnquist wrote, according to an AP
report.

University of Michigan President Mary Sue Coleman welcomed the
decision, stating "A majority of the court has firmly endorsed
the principle of diversity . This is a resounding affirmation
that will be heard across the land from our college classrooms
to our corporate boardrooms.'

While the decision only addresses admission at public, tax-
supported institutions, the court expects the decision to have a
great effect on private colleges and universities, on government
decision-making and on the business world.

Opponents of affirmative action had hoped the Supreme Court
would use this opportunity to ban most consideration of race in
any government decisions, AP reports.  The court is far more
conservative than in 1978, when it last ruled on affirmative
action in higher education admissions, and the justices have put
heavy conditions on government affirmative action in other
arenas over the past decade.


AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: President Bush Praises "Race-Neutral" Ruling
----------------------------------------------------------------
President George W. Bush praised the United States Supreme
Court's decision to uphold the University of Michigan's law
school's affirmative action program, saying that the ruling
shoed that the nation's colleges and universities are obliged to
pursue "race-neutral approaches" as they try to achieve the goal
of diversity among students, the Associated Press reports.

"I applaud the Supreme Court for recognizing the value of
diversity on our nation's campuses," President Bush said in a
written statement Monday, according to AP.  "Diversity is one of
America's greatest strengths. Today's decisions seek a careful
balance between the goal of campus diversity and the fundamental
principle of equal treatment under the law.

"My administration will continue to promote policies that expand
educational opportunities for Americans from all racial, ethnic
and economic backgrounds," he said.  "There are innovative and
proven ways for colleges and universities to reflect our
diversity without using racial quotas.  The court has made clear
that colleges and universities must engage in a serious, good
faith consideration of workable race-neutral alternatives.  I
agree that we must look first to these race-neutral approaches
to make campuses more welcoming for all students.

"Race is a reality in American life," the president added, AP
states.  "Yet like the court, I look forward to the day when
America will truly be a colorblind society.  My administration
will continue to work toward this important goal."


AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: Big Companies Welcome High Court's Ruling
-------------------------------------------------------------
Several large corporations generally hailed the United States
Supreme Court's mixed rulings on the University of Michigan's
affirmative action program, stating that anything that promotes
a more diverse work place is good for business, the Associated
Press states.

Voting 5-4, the court upheld the University of Michigan law
school's affirmative action program, saying that its law program
gives race less prominence in the admissions process.  However,
it voted 6-3 to strike down the university's undergraduate
policy, saying that its racial quotas are unconstitutional, but
there are other ways that race can be taken into account.
  
Dozens of big companies supported the University of Michigan,
saying such programs help produce better workers of all races
and ethnic backgrounds.

"General Motors' position has consistently been that diversity
of background, thought and experience is essential to the
education process," Rod Gillum, vice president for corporate
responsibility and diversity at Detroit-based GM, the world's
largest automaker, told AP.  "Efforts by universities to create
a diverse student body from which corporations can recruit
should be supported."

The other Fortune 500 companies that supported the policy were
Microsoft, American Airlines, Procter & Gamble, Eastman Kodak
and PepsiCo.

Chuck Mulloy, spokesman for Santa Clara, Calif.-based Intel
Corporation, told AP the chip-making giant didn't take a
specific position on Michigan's policies but was gratified the
court ruled that race should be among the factors considered for
admissions.

"We're in a sector that has a high requirement for advanced
science and math education programs, and anything that enlarges
the pool of talent in that area is good for companies like
Intel," Mr. Mulloy said.

Like many companies, New York-based Pfizer Corporation filed a
friend-of-the-court brief in the case supporting affirmative
action, spokesman Bryant Haskins told AP.  "We're pleased the
court considered the views of companies like ours in making its
decision," Mr. Haskins said.


AGWAY INC.: Investors Sue Over Securities Law Violations in NJ
--------------------------------------------------------------
Agway, Inc. faces a securities class action filed by eight of
its investors in the New Jersey Supreme Court in Onondaga County
on behalf of purchasers of the Company's subordinated money
market securities between September 21,2000 and September 30,
2002, the Post Standard reports.  The suit names as defendants:

     (1) Donald Cardarelli, former Agway chief executive
         officer;

     (2) Peter J. O'Neill, Agway's chief financial officer; and

     (3) PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

The Company can't be sued while it's under Chapter 11 bankruptcy
protection, so the lawsuit seeks damages from the two
individuals and the accounting firm, instead.  The suit claims
the defendants failed to disclose critical information about
Agway's financial distress.

The defendants allegedly are responsible under the Securities
Act for "false and misleading" registration statements filed
with the US Securities and Exchange Commission pertaining to
Agway's fiscal health.

"We think their financial records weren't properly disclosed,
and the true state of affairs was covered up," Robert Harwood of
the Wechsler Harwood law firm said.  "Had they been told the
truth, these investors could have rethought their investment
strategy and altered it accordingly."

Agway Inc. officials are confident it will be vindicated in
court, Stephen Hoefer, speaking for the cooperative, told the
Post Standard.  "We are confident that management made all the
appropriate financial disclosures," Mr. Hoefer said. "Management
has been proactive in making its disclosures to the public."

Atty. Harwood said if granted class-action status, the
plaintiffs would include the hundreds of money-market
certificate holders who are unsecured creditors in the
bankruptcy case.  The plaintiffs named in the case are Barbara
E. Pew, John Pew Jr., Harold and Donna Pew, H. Nancy Hann, Julia
Hudasky, Kathleen Prickett and Miriam Prickett.  Barbara E. Pew
is listed in the complaint as the largest investor, purchasing
certificates worth $506,000 on Nov. 1, 2000.


CABLE & WIRELESS: Canada Pension Fund Sues On Swap Transactions
---------------------------------------------------------------
Cable & Wireless faces a class action filed by a leading
Canadian pension fund, charging it with misleading investors by
"engaging in sham capacity swap transactions," The Times Online
reports.

The Ontario Teachers Pension Plan filed the suit, saying the
Company inflated its revenues through fraudulent exchanges of
network capacity.  The Company allegedly failed to disclose a
GBP1.5 billion tax-related obligation and GBP1.3 billion lease
commitments, thus misrepresenting the amount of cash available
to it.

The suit was filed last month in Virginia, Canada, following
several American class actions filed after the Company almost
collapsed late last year.  The fund filed the suit on behalf of
all aggrieved investors who bought C&W shares between August
1999 and December 2002.

The suit primarily relates to the fact that the Company was a
counterparty to improper exchanges of network capacity, with US
network operators, Qwest and Global Crossing, between 1999 and
2001.  The Company allegedly swapped "unneeded IRUs (long-term
capacity leases) in a deceptive attempt to meet their periodic
earnings estimates."

The suit draws heavily from a US congressional inquiry held last
autumn into the activities of Qwest and Global Crossing, the
Times reports.  It cites the testimony at that inquiry of
Patrick Joggerst, a former Global Crossing executive, who said
his former employer "upscoped" swap transactions so it and the
counterparty could increase their respective revenues. He told
Congress: "Typically that happened a couple of times that I can
recall at the end of the quarter, particularly with FLAG
(telecom) and Cable & Wireless".

The Ontario fund also alleges that "according to a former Cable
& Wireless US financial manager", who is unnamed, that the US
unit "reported all `swap' revenue to Cable & Wireless's
corporate office, but kept a second set of books to track them
separately in order to be able to differentiate `real' revenue
from sham revenue."

Cable & Wireless, however, has maintained that any capacity it
acquired had a genuine economic benefit and was properly
accounted for, the Times states. Last year it made no sales of
capacity to companies from whom it bought capacity, but in 2002
and 2001 such sales amounted to o163 million and o248 million
respectively.


CANADA: Court Says Possible Immigrants Not Barred By New Rules
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Federal Court of Canada has ruled that Ottawa cannot bar any
of the 300,000 prospective immigrants from Canada using the new,
strict rules imposed after they had applied to come to Canada,
The Globe and Mail reports.

The recently released judgment says the government cannot reject
these applications until the court rules on a class action
challenging the new selection criteria.  This decision gives
hope to 300,000 skilled workers, entrepreneurs and their
families who want to immigrate to Canada and already have waited
years for their applications to be processed.

A class action seeking $400 million in damages has been brought
on their behalf, arguing that the retroactive application of the
new immigration law is unfair.  The 300,000 immigrants applied
under guidelines in use before January 2002, when the new strict
law went into effect.  They fall into the category of backlog
cases.

The ruling orders the government to provide written notice to
the hundreds of thousands of people in the backlog.  Most are
from India and China, but the balance come from dozens of
different countries.  The government is ordered to advise
applicants about the class action and the damages lawyers are
seeking on their behalf.

Many backlog applicants would qualify under the old rules, which
stressed education, age, language ability and Canada's labor
market needs.  The new rules favor those with firm job offers
and are so strict that even a single person with fluent English
and a PhD would fail to qualify.

A spokeswoman for Citizenship and Immigration Canada said it
would comply with the order.

"We will take a careful look at the order and evaluate its
implications," said spokeswoman Susan Scarlet.  "For those
people who do not meet the new criteria, we will hold off
refusing them until the lawsuit is resolved."

"The government will have to sit on these files for,
potentially, years, because the courts will take years to decide
the case," predicted Lorne Waldman, one of the attorneys arguing
the class action with Toronto immigration lawyers Daniel Miller
and Ronald Foerster.

"The government came up with retroactivity rules to get rid of
the backlog with a minimum of fuss because they cannot handle
the workload," said Ben Trister, past president of the Canadian
Bar Association's immigrant section.  "Now, the judge's decision
has leveled the playing field.  It may encourage the parties to
come together and reach a common-sense decision and avoid
litigation."

The new rules were part of the government's new Immigration Act,
which became law in June 2002. The decision to apply the new
rules retroactively was announced six months earlier.  
Initially, the government believed only 30,000 people were in
the backlog.


CINTAS CORPORATION: Employees Sue For Living Wage Law Violations
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cintas Corporation faces a potential class action filed by two
of its employees in the Alameda County Superior Court in
California, charging the Company with violating the city's
living-wage law, the Daily Review reports.

Employees Francisca Amaral and Nelva Hernandez, both production
workers at the Company facility in San Leandro, accuse the
Company of not paying them enough or giving them enough days
off.  The suit also alleges the employer is violating its
contract with the city of Hayward, in which the company agrees
to abide by the city's 1999 law.  The Company provides laundry
services to the city.

The Living-Wage Law is adjusted annually for the cost of living
and requires wages of $8.93 per hour with health benefits and
$10.32 per hour without benefits.  It also requires that workers
be granted at least 12 days off per year, the Daily Review
states.

No one at Cintas corporate offices in South San Francisco would
comment on the lawsuit.  The company's spokeswoman in Ohio could
not be reached Monday for comment, the Daily Review states.  Ms.
Amaral and Ms. Hernandez are the only listed plaintiffs in the
case, although the lawsuit seeks class action status.

Hayward's living-wage law states that employees have the right
to file an action against an employer for minimum compensation.  
If the city chooses to look into the situation with Cintas and
finds it is in violation of the law, it either will mandate
compliance or drop the company's service, City Manager Jesus
Armas said.


CREDIT SUISSE: Quattrone Asks For Removal of Charges To CA Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
Former Credit Suisse First Boston investment banker Frank
Quattrone asked a New York court to transfer obstruction of
justice charges against him to San Francisco, California, the
Associated Press reports.

New York's US attorney James Comey charged Mr. Quattrone last
month, asserting that Mr. Quattrone attempted to block several
investigations in December 2000 over how Credit Suisse handled
hot initial public stock offerings.  Mr. Quattrone allegedly
tried to obstruct the probe, by sending an e-mail to his
colleagues, asking them to "clean up" their internal IPO files,
some of which contained relevant information.

Defense lawyer John Keker told the court most of the alleged
crimes occurred at Quattrone's former post in Palo Alto, where
he headed technology investment banking for Credit Suisse First
Boston, and that defendants have the right to be tried in the
jurisdiction of the alleged wrongdoing, AP reports.

Mr. Quattrone has said he is innocent and that the e-mail was
not intended to thwart investigations, partly because it wasn't
his job to decide when the firm's file-cleanup rules were in
effect.  His lawyers say there's no evidence Mr. Quattrone knew
specifically what files investigators were seeking, and he did
not believe his employees were targets of the probes.


EVANS SYSTEMS: NY Court Finds Trader Liable For Securities Fraud
----------------------------------------------------------------
United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
Judge Nancy F. Atlas found Harris Dempsey "Butch" Ballow liable
for manipulating the market for the stock of Evans Systems,
Inc., a Texas corporation.  

Judge Atlas granted the United States Securities and Exchange
Commission's (SEC) motion for summary judgment against Mr.
Ballow, specifically finding that Mr. Ballow violated Section
17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, by
executing at least eight fraudulent "wash sales" and "matched
orders" in Company stock between August 1998 and April 1999.

Wash sales are securities transactions involving no change in
the beneficial ownership of a security.  Matched orders are
orders placed for the purchase or sale of a security that are
entered with the knowledge that corresponding orders of
substantially the same size, at substantially the same time and
price, have been or will be entered by the same or different
persons for the sale/purchase of a security.  

These transactions, Judge Atlas further found, had no purpose
other than to deceive the market about the true trading activity
of, and constituted a knowing and intentional scheme to
manipulate the market for Company stock.   As a consequence of
Mr. Ballow's fraudulent acts, Judge Atlas ordered him to pay a
civil fine of $880,000.  Judge Atlas also issued a permanent
injunction against Mr. Ballow preventing him from violating the
securities laws in the future.   The Commission's case against   
defendants Christopher Harless and Murry "Max" Shepherd is still
pending.  


FEDERATED DEPARTMENT: Sued For Coercing Minority Suspects To Pay
----------------------------------------------------------------
A lawsuit filed recently by a Bronx, New York legal secretary,
who is African-American, charges that Federated Department
Stores, Inc. systematically coerces payments from minority
shoplifting suspects, The Cincinnati Post reports.

The lawsuit claims that, in some instances, shoplifter who were
never criminally charged were bullied into opening Macy's charge
accounts to make the payments, according to documents filed in
US District Court in New York.  The lawsuit says the practice is
so regimented that Macy's management holds in-house conference
calls pressuring security managers to collect more money from
detainees.

"This is a shameful fee-generating scheme put on the backs of
blacks and Latino people and it is wrong," said Ken Thompson,
the plaintiffs' attorney, who is seeking class-action status for
the lawsuit.  Mr. Thompson is a former assistant US attorney who
prosecuted police officers in the New York case of Abner Louima,
who was abused by police.

Ms. Sharon-Simmons-Thomas, the lead plaintiff, said she had
received a letter demanding $239 two days after the security
guards detained her, December 17, 2002, for more than an hour as
a suspected shoplifter at the Herald Square Macy's in New York
City.  She was never charged, but claims she was singled out
because of her race.

Ms. Simmons-Thomas and other plaintiffs are seeking $500 million
in compensatory and punitive damages in the lawsuit.  The class
action names Federated, both Macy's East and West divisions, its
data processing arm Federated Systems Group, as well as chief
executive Terry Lundgren and several other executives as
defendants.

While less than 25 percent of its shoppers at the Manhattan
store are racial minorities, suspected shoplifters are 92
percent Black, Latino, Asian or other minorities, according to
court documents.

Two weeks after the original lawsuit was filed, plaintiffs'
attorney filed an amended lawsuit naming two Hispanic teen-age
girls as new plaintiffs, who say they were detained but not
charged with shoplifting.  The amended complaint says their
parents received several letters demanding hundreds of dollars
in payments.  The lawsuit contends the two girls did sign
statements confessing to shoplifting, but did so under pressure
from security officials who refused to let them call their
parents.


GENERAL MOTORS: To Recall Saturn L-Series Cars For Fire Hazard
--------------------------------------------------------------
General Motors Corporation is recalling about 254,000 model year
2000-03 Saturn L-Series cars over a fire hazard allegedly caused
by its 2.2-liter engines, the Associated Press reports.  About
240,000 of the vehicles are in the United States and 14,000 are
in Canada.

Some of these vehicles might misfire, which will cause a failure
in the exhaust system.  If the initial condition is not fixed,
further damaged might be done to the brakes, fuel system or
other components.  Continued driving of the vehicle might result
in a car fire, GM told AP.  The Company has heard seven reports
of fires, but no serious injuries or fatalities.

The Company will replace the ignition module and spark plugs and
plans to being notifying owners of the vehicles next month and
instruct them to bring the cars to Saturn dealers.  Also, on
2002-03 models, GM said mechanics will reprogram the powertrain
control module.  The repairs will be done at no charge to the
customer.

GM told AP if there is a problem the driver will notice that the
vehicle may be hard to start, that the overall power of the
engine is reduced and that there is a change in idle.  The
"Service Engine Soon" light also would be flashing.  Owners
should contact their Saturn dealers if they notice the problem.


H&R BLOCK: TX Court Approves $262M Refund Loans Suit Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------
Kleberg County, Texas court approved a $262 million settlement
for one of the several class actions filed against tax
preparation firm H&R Block, Inc. over its "refund anticipation"
loans, the Associated Press reports.

The suit alleged that the Company failed to disclose the true
costs of the short-term "refund anticipation" loans, thus
misleading its clients.  These loans were offered to customers
awaiting income tax refunds.  The suit alleges that the loans
victimize low-income households, immigrants and financially
unsophisticated taxpayers who aren't adequately informed about
the high interest rates.

The Company has denied the charges and is defending against 12
lawsuits.  The company has offered to settle four of those
suits, Company spokesman Linda McDougall told AP.

Under terms of the settlement, the Company will give $26 million
in cash to 700,000 Texas customers, along with coupons
redeemable over five years for Block services and products.  
Block also agreed to pay $49 million in legal fees, although $26
million of that total is expected to be refunded to clients, AP
reports.

Judge Manuel Banales in Kleberg County, Texas, called the
settlement "fair and reasonable."  Judge Banales rejected
arguments that attorneys involved in the suit would receive too
much money.


OHIO: Cincinnati To Vote On Proposal For Police Reform Agreement
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cincinnati's City Council will vote next week on a proposal to
borrow up to $4.83 million to help pay for the settlement of the
16 cases that earlier had been combined into a class-action
racial-profiling lawsuit against Cincinnati police in March
2001, The Cincinnati Post reports.

A year of negotiations followed that resulted in a collaborative
agreement for police reform.  Making an effort to settle the
individual claims that made up the class action was among the
provisions of the settlement.

Although budget staffers had said the amount requested would be
$4.6 million, the actual report to Council is seeking some
$230,000 more to help pay for the extra money city
administrators said is needed to cover interest and the cost to
issue short-term bonds.  Republicans on the Council, who had
voted against the police reform settlement, were angered by the
timing of the Council's vote for the settlement.

"This is something that those who voted for it knew we would
have to pay for," said Pat DeWine, one of the Republican members
present when the proposal for the bond issue was presented. " I
think we ought to tell people now how we are going to pay for it
(the police reform settlement), before Election Day."

Mayor Charles Luken, who had urged Council members to approve
the police reform settlement, said, "Usually, we don't do things
around here based on Election Day," said the Mayor.

When the City Manager outlined the settlement for Council last
month, she pledged that any cost needed to help pay the expense
of the police reform settlement would not affect services to
residents.


TOUCH AMERICA: Judge's Disqualification Requested For Bias
----------------------------------------------------------
Touch America Holdings Inc. is asking for the disqualification
of District Judge Thomas McKittrick from hearing a securities
class action filed against it, claiming the judge is biased
against them, the Montana Tracker News reports.

The Company, along with Montana Power, is accused of improperly
dismantling Montana Power without the shareholders' knowledge or
consent.  This allegedly caused Touch America's share price to
fall from $65 a share to less than 10 cents before the Company
filed for bankruptcy protection last week.

Missoula lawyer Randy Cox filed the formal disqualification
motion was filed late last week in the District Court in Butte.  
Mr. Cox said in a sworn affidavit, that Judge McKittrick granted
several motions filed by the plaintiffs without giving Touch
America and its co-defendants an adequate opportunity to
respond.  He also said that Judge McKittrick has made biased
statements from the bench, including one in which he called what
happened with Montana Power Co. and Touch America "a benchmark
for how not to do it."

Judge McKittrick, of Great Falls, told the Associated Press it
would be inappropriate for him to comment on the move to have
him disqualified.  Frank Morrison, an attorney representing the
shareholders, said the action appeared to be an attempt to delay
the case.

"It does not appear from the papers that they filed that Judge
McKittrick has any conflict or that they have any basis for
disqualifying him," Mr. Morrison said.


TORONTO STAR: Superior Court Throws Out $2.7 Billion Libel Claim
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Toronto Superior Court of Justice dismissed a $2.7 billion
class action charging the Toronto Star Daily Newspapers, Ltd. of
libel for publishing a series of articles stating that the
Toronto Police treated blacks more harshly than their white
counterparts, the Toronto Star reports.  

The Toronto Police Association filed the suit over the Star's
Race and Crime series, which relied upon an analysis of Toronto
police data from 1996 to 2002.  Mr. Justice Maurice Cullity
threw out the lawsuit before it reached trial.

Justice Cully rejected arguments by Toronto Police Association
lawyer Tim Danson that the series was capable of libeling "every
single member" of the Toronto Police Service.  The series
allegedly released a "firestorm of allegations" that disgraced,
humiliated and embarrassed every member of the police service.

However, Star lawyer Alison Woodbury countered by saying that a
defamation lawsuit can only be based on a personal injury to an
individual and can't be based on damages suffered by a group.  
Judge Cullity, in his decision, states, "The whole thrust of the
articles is that the evidence suggests that racial profiling
occurs and that steps must be taken to identify the causes and
remove them."

"In my judgment, the allegedly defamatory comments and
innuendoes in the article cannot reasonably be understood as
intended to apply to every officer in the TPS (Toronto Police
Service)," the judge continues.  "This conclusion destroys the
foundation of the plaintiffs' cause of action as their claim to
have been libeled - as pleaded and supported by their counsel's
submissions - depends upon a finding to the contrary."

The judge rejected that argument that all of the 7,200 members
of the Toronto Police Service were labeled racist, the Star
reports.  "The articles cannot, in my opinion, reasonably be
understood to state or suggest that every, or any particular,
member of the service has participated in the impugned practices
or has exhibited racist attitudes," the decision states.

"They are directed at the police force as an organization and
they rely on statistical data to support an inference that, for
whatever reason, discrimination has occurred.  The focus is on
the TPS as an important and powerful institution in our society
and no allegations are made against every - or any particular -
member," the decision further said, according to the Star.


                    New Securities Fraud Cases


ADMINISTAFF INC.: Charles Piven Launches Securities Suit in TX
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven initiated a securities class
action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted,
exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of Administaff,
Inc. (NYSE:ASF) between April 3, 2001 through July 31, 2002,
inclusive.  The case is pending in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division,
against the Company and certain of its officers and directors.

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 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


DIVINE INC.: Kirby McInerney Lodges Securities Suit in C.D. CA
--------------------------------------------------------------
Kirby McInerney & Squire, LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Central
District of California on behalf of all purchasers of Divine,
Inc. (Other OTC:DVINQ.PK) common stock during the period from
November 12, 2001 through February 18, 2003, inclusive.

The action charges Divine and certain of its senior officers
with violations of Sections 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The alleged violations stem
from the dissemination of false and misleading statements, which
had the effect - during the class period -- of artificially
inflating the price of Divine's shares.

Throughout the class period, defendants issued a series of
material misrepresentations to the market, which served to
artificially inflate the price of Divine securities.  As alleged
in the Complaint, defendants failed to disclose and
misrepresented the following material adverse facts:

     (1) Divine was engaged in a scheme of inflating its
         revenues by approximately $65 million by instructing
         employees of its wholly-owned subsidiary, RoweCom, to
         offer discounts to library customers that paid cash in
         advance -- months before payments were due to
         publishers -- even though Divine had no plan to pay its
         obligations to publishers;

     (2) Divine was fraudulently diverting nearly $74 million
         from RoweCom's operations;

     (3) Divine lacked adequate financial and internal controls
         with respect to its RoweCom operations; and

     (4) as a result of the foregoing, Divine lacked a
         reasonable basis to project profitability by year-end
         or an ability to maintain its operations without
         bankruptcy protections.

Additionally, as alleged in the Complaint, Divine filed a
Registration Statement on Form S-4 in connection with its
acquisition of Viant Corporation, on June 19, 2002. That
Registration Statement was false and misleading as it
incorporated by reference Divine's materially false and
misleading financial results, as previously reported on Forms
10-K and 10-Q with the SEC.  During the class period, Divine
completed its acquisition of Viant, among other acquisitions,
using its artificially inflated common stock as currency.

On February 18, 2003, the close of the Class Period, Divine
announced that ``despite efforts over the past several months to
minimize operating expenses and various liabilities, its board
of directors has determined that it must seek alternatives to
protect the value and viability of its operations.  As a result,
Divine has engaged Broadview International LLC as advisors to
assist in exploring strategic options, which may include asset
divestitures, comparable transactions, and/or the filing of a
voluntary petition under Chapter 11 of the United States
Bankruptcy Code.''  In response to this announcement, the price
of Divine stock declined precipitously.

For more details, contact Ira M. Press or Elaine Mui by Mail:
830 Third Avenue, 10th Floor, New York, New York 10022 by Phone:  
(212) 317-2300 or (888) 529-4787 or by E-Mail: emui@kmslaw.com


DIVINE INC.: Weiss & Yourman Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. IL
--------------------------------------------------------------
Weiss & Yourman lodges securities class action against certain
officers of Divine, Inc. (OTC:DVINQ.PK) in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on behalf
of purchasers of Divine securities between November 12, 2001 and
February 14, 2003.

The complaint charges defendants with violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  It alleges that defendants
issued materially false and misleading statements, which
resulted in plaintiffs purchasing Divine securities during the
class period at artificially inflated prices.

For more details, contact Mark D. Smilow, David C. Katz, or
James E. Tullman by Mail: The French Building, 551 Fifth Avenue,
Suite 1600, New York, New York 10176 by Phone: 888/593-4771 or
212/682-3025 or by E-mail: info@wynyc.com


FIFTH THIRD: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. OH
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Ohio, Western Division, on behalf of purchasers of
the securities of Fifth Third Bancorp (Nasdaq: FITB) between
September 21, 2001 to January 31, 2003 inclusive who have been
damaged thereby.  The action, is pending against the Company,
George A. Schaefer, Jr. (CEO and President), Neal E. Arnold
(CFO) and David J. DeBrunner (Controller).

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 21,
2001 to January 31, 2003.

The complaint alleges, among other things, that Fifth Third
issued press releases and filed financial reports with the SEC
representing that the Company had successfully and seamlessly
integrated a large corporate acquisition (Old Kent) into its
operations. It also 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 (and other) merger(s) seriously strained the Company's
infrastructure, causing deficiencies in its internal controls
and other business-critical systems.  The alleged motive in this
action was the Company's plan to acquire a Tennessee-based bank
using Fifth Third stock as currency.

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, according to the complaint, 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.  
According to the complaint, the Company continued to insist,
falsely, that its controls were adequate.  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 closing price on
November 14, 2002 close of $62.53, the day that Fifth Third
first revealed that it was being investigated by banking
regulators and the SEC.

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      


FISCHER IMAGING: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in CO
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of
Colorado, on behalf of purchasers of Fischer Imaging Corporation
(Nasdaq: FIMG) publicly traded securities during the period
between February 14, 2001 and April 1, 2003, inclusive.

The complaint charges Fischer Imaging with a violation of
Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder and certain of its officers and directors
with a violation of Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act.  During the class period, the defendants issued and/or
failed to correct false and misleading financial statements and
press releases concerning the Company's publicly reported
revenues and earnings directed to the investing public.

On April 1, 2003, Fischer Imaging announced in a press release
that based on a review being conducted by the Company in
conjunction with Ernst & Young LLP, the Company would delay the
filing of its annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2002.  Based on the Fischer's preliminary findings,
the Company believes it will be necessary to restate its
financial statements for the first three quarters of 2002 and
the years ended December 31, 2001 and 2000.  The news shocked
the market and investor reaction was severe.  The value of the
Company's common stock plummeted by 18.36% in one day of
trading, from a close of $5.39 on April 1, 2003 to a closing
price $4.40 on April 2, 2003.

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       


FLEMING COMPANIES: Marc Henzel Lodges 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 on behalf of purchasers of Fleming Companies,
Inc. (NYSE: FLM) securities in connection with Fleming's June
17, 2002 public offering.

The complaint charges Fleming's officers, directors and its
underwriters and auditors with violations of the Securities Act
of 1933.  Fleming was the largest U.S. distributor of consumer
package goods in the wholesale grocery industry, where it
operated a network of "multi-tier" distribution centers
throughout the United States and western Canada.

The complaint alleges that in connection with the Offering,
Fleming issued 9.2 million shares of common stock at $19.40 per
share and $200 million in Notes. The Fleming Securities were
sold pursuant to a Registration Statement and Prospectus, as
amended which contained false and misleading statements of
material fact and omitted to state material facts necessary in
order to make the statements made therein not misleading.

The Registration Statement materially misstated the Company's
financial results of operation by, among other things, including
financial statements that misrepresented and/or omitted the true
facts, including:

     (1) That Fleming was taking unauthorized deductions on
         invoices received from vendors which reduced
         recognition of expenses associated with the cost of
         goods sold and understated accounts payable;

     (2) That Fleming had lengthened the amortization period for
         long-term assets by increasing the capitalization rate
         for interest costs and by lowering the allowance for
         credit losses, in violation of GAAP.

The Registration Statement also represented that Fleming's
retail operations were profitable at a time when the Company
was, in fact, losing money on its retail business and was in the
process of divesting itself of those operations.  As a result of
these misrepresentations, the Fleming Securities were inflated
in connection with the Offering, and plaintiff and other persons
who purchased the Fleming Securities in the Offering paid
inflated prices and were damaged thereby.

On July 30, 2002, less than two months after defendants sold
more than $378 million worth of the Fleming Securities to the
public, Fleming issued a release announcing that, contrary to
the prior positive statements contained in the Registration
Statement, defendants were in fact evaluating strategic
alternatives for dealing with the Company's money-losing retail
operations.  Recently, Fleming filed for protection under the
Bankruptcy Code.

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      


GAINSCO INC.: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. FL
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Florida, on behalf of purchasers of
Gainsco, Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board: GNAC) publicly traded
securities during the period between November 17, 1999 and
February 7, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that during the class period, defendants
issued false and misleading statements to the marketplace that
artificially inflated the price of Gainsco's shares.  
Specifically, on November 17, 1999, Gainsco, an insurance
holding company, announced that it would acquire Tri-State,
Ltd.'s privately-owned insurance operation which specialized in
nonstandard passenger automobile insurance.

According to CEO Anderson, the Tri-State acquisition marked the
Company's expansion of its passenger auto insurance business
that began with Gainsco's earlier purchase of Miami-based
Lalande Group.  Anderson also told the public that the Company
would integrate Tri- State's business with Lalande Group's
underwriting and claims systems "to maximize service and cost
efficiency."  The transaction was expected to be "minimally
accretive to earnings in 2000."

The Company's second-quarter Form 10-Q, filed in August 2000,
stated that Gainsco had paid $1.15 million to Tri-State's former
owners "based on a conversion goal and specific profitability
targets," and falsely lulled the investment community into
believing that Tri-State was profitable, when in fact it was
not.  Gainsco continued to issue highly positive statements
throughout 2000 and 2001 and assured the public that it was
resolved to "maintain a strong, disciplined balance sheet."

On August 9, 2001, however, the Company announced that it was
selling the agency operations of Tri-State and would take a $5.1
million write off from its original $6.0 million investment in
Tri-State.  This, however, was only a partial disclosure of Tri-
State's problems and led investors to believe the worst was
behind the Company.  

On August 14, 2001, the Company announced that it would sell
Tri- State to its president, Herb Hill, for $900,000.  On
February 7, 2002, the end of the class period, Gainsco announced
that it would "discontinue writing commercial lines insurance
business due to adverse claims development and unprofitable
results." Gainsco's stock declined substantially on the news.

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      


GOLDMAN SACHS: Pomerantz Haudek Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP initiated a
securities class action against Goldman Sachs & Co. (NYSE:GS)
and its Senior Technology Analyst Matthew Janiga on behalf of
shareholders who purchased the common stock of Exodus
Communications, Inc. during the period from July 1, 1999 through
June 30, 2001, inclusive.  The suit is pending in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The lawsuit alleges that defendants issued false and misleading
analyst reports on Exodus in a bid to win or maintain lucrative
banking and advisory work from the Company.  As a result of
defendants' false and misleading statements, the market price of
Exodus common stock was artificially inflated, maintained or
stabilized during the class period.

For more details, contact Andrew G. Tolan by Phone:
(888) 476-6529 / (888) 4-POMLAW or by E-mail: agtolan@pomlaw.com


GUIDANT CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in IN
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of
Indiana on behalf of all persons who purchased or acquired
Guidant Corporation (NYSE: GDT) securities between August 17,
2001 and June 12, 2003, 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 August 17, 2001 and
June 12, 2003, thereby artificially inflating the price of
Guidant securities.

The complaint alleges that the Company's ANCURE ENDOGRAFT System
(used to prevent an aneurysm in the heart's main artery from
rupturing) was not safe and that it was the cause of over 2,600
incidents that included 12 deaths; the Company failed to notify
the FDA regarding the over 2,600 incidents that included 12
deaths resulting from the defective ANCURE ENDOGRAFT System; and
the Company engaged in fraudulent sales of the ANCURE ENDOGRAFT
System.

On June 12, 2003, the Company agreed to plead guilty to federal
charges and to pay $92.4 million for misleading regulators about
12 deaths and serious injuries linked to the ANCURE ENDOGRAFT
System.

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      


J. JILL: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in MA Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of
J. Jill Group, Inc. (NasdaqNM: JILL) from February 12, 2002
through 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 -- a
         operating metric that is important to investors in
         retailing stocks but which was not highlighted by the
         Company during the Class Period -- was declining as
         demand for the Company's products weakened;

     (2) that the Company was amassing a material amount of
         product which 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 expects 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 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      


KING PHARMACEUTICALS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in TN
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Tennessee, Northeastern Division at Greeneville, on
behalf of purchasers of King Pharmaceuticals (NYSE: KG) publicly
traded securities during the period between February 16, 2000
and March 10, 2003, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities & Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing
materially false and misleading statements during the class
period and violated sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of
1933 by issuing a materially false and misleading Registration
Statement and Prospectus in connection with the Company's
acquisition of Jones Pharma, Inc.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants issued
statements regarding the Company's financial performance and
future prospects and the strong demand for its branded
pharmaceutical products, notably Altace and Levoxyl.  Moreover,
the complaint alleges that the Company failed to disclose that
certain of its rebate and pricing practices subjected it to
heightened governmental scrutiny.

As alleged in the complaint, these statements were each
materially false and misleading when made as they misrepresented
and/or omitted the following adverse facts which then existed
and disclosure of which was necessary to make the statements
made not false and/or misleading, including:

     (1) that the Company's rebate practices and "best price"
         lists subjected it to heightened regulatory scrutiny as
         governmental agencies increased their activity in this
         area;

     (2) that the Company had understated the level of generic
         competition for Levoxyl; and

     (3) that the Company had engaged in questionable sales to
         VitaRx and Prison Health Services during 1999 and 2000.

On March 11, 2003, King Pharmaceuticals shocked the market when
it revealed that it was subject to an SEC investigation for,
among other things:

     (i) the sales of its products to VitaRx and Prison Health
         Services during 1999 and 2000;

    (ii) its "bestprice" lists;

   (iii) all documents related to the pricing of its
         pharmaceutical products to any governmental Medicaid
         agency during 1999; and

    (iv) the accrual and payment of rebates on Altace from 2000
         to the present.

In response to this announcement, the price of King
Pharmaceuticals common stock declined precipitously, falling
from $15.90 per share to $12.17 per share.

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      


LEHMAN BROTHERS: Kaplan Fox Launches Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP initiated a securities class action
against Lehman Brothers, Inc. 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 the
common stock of RSL Communications, Ltd. (OTC: RSLCF) between
July 1, 1999 and September 30, 2000, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that during the class period the defendant
issued to the investing public false and misleading analyst
reports on RSL in a bid to win or maintain lucrative banking and
advisory work from the Company.  During the class period, Lehman
maintained its highest rating a ("1-Buy" "1-Strong Buy"), on RSL
stock, despite the fact that the stock fell to $4 per share in
August 2000.

As a result of defendant's false and misleading statements, the
market price of RSL common stock was artificially inflated,
maintained or stabilized during the class period, to the injury
of plaintiff and the other class members who purchased the stock
at the time relying on the integrity of the market price of the
stock.

On or about April 28, 2003, the SEC issued a complaint charging
Lehman with violating numerous rules of conduct of the National
Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (NASD) and the New York
Stock Exchange, Inc. (NYSE), by issuing false and misleading
analyst reports on numerous companies, including RSL.  The
complaint describes the influence and control exerted by
Lehman's investment bankers on its supposedly independent
research analysts, and details how positive ratings and research
reports on RSL issued by Defendant to the public were contrary
to Defendant's more negative assessments of the Company's true
value and prospects.

For more details, contact Frederic S. Fox, Donald R. Hall by
Mail: 805 Third Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10022 by Phone:
(800) 290-1952 or (212) 687-1980 by Fax: (212) 687-7714 or by E-
mail: mail@kaplanfox.com


LEHMAN BROTHERS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York, against Lehman Brothers Inc. and its
senior technology analyst, Michael E. Stanek on behalf of
investors who purchased the common stock of RealNetworks, Inc.
(NasdaqNM: RNWK) during the period from July 1, 1999 through
June 30, 2001, 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 analyst reports on RealNetworks, a global
provider of software products and services for internet media
delivery, in a bid to win or maintain lucrative banking and
advisory work from the Company.  As a result of defendants'
false and misleading statements, the market price of
RealNetworks common stock was artificially inflated, maintained
or stabilized during the class period.

On or about April 28, 2003, the United States Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a complaint charging Lehman
with violating numerous rules of conduct of the National
Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (NASD) and the New York
Stock Exchange, Inc. (NYSE), by issuing false and misleading
analyst reports on numerous companies, including RealNetworks.

The complaint describes the influence and control exerted by
Lehman's investment bankers on its supposedly independent
research analysts, and details how positive ratings and research
reports on RealNetworks issued by defendants to the public were
contrary to defendants' more negative assessments of the
Company's true value and prospects.  Lehman eventually settled
these charges for the payment of $50 million.

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      


LEHMAN BROTHERS: Kaplan Fox Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP initiated a securities class action
against Lehman Brothers, Inc. and Michael E. Stanek, 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 the common stock of RealNetworks, Inc.
(Nasdaq:RNWK) between July 1, 1999 and June 30, 2001, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants issued false and
misleading analyst reports to the investing public on
RealNetworks, a global provider of software products and
services for internet media delivery, in a bid to win or
maintain lucrative banking and advisory work from the Company.

From July 1999 through June 2001, Lehman maintained its highest
rating on RealNetworks stock, despite the fact that the stock
lost approximately 90% of its value, falling from a high of
$78.59 per share in February 2000 to a low of $7.06 in April
2001.  As a result of defendants' false and misleading
statements, the market price of RealNetworks common stock was
artificially inflated, maintained or stabilized during the class
period, to the injury of plaintiff and the other Class members
who purchased the stock at the time relying on the integrity of
the market price of the stock.

For more details, contact Frederic S. Fox or Donald R. Hall by
Mail: 805 Third Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10022 by Phone:
(800) 290-1952 or (212) 687-1980 by Fax: (212) 687-7714 or by E-
mail: mail@kaplanfox.com


PARAMETRIC TECHNOLOGY: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in MA
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts, on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock
of Parametric Technology Corporation (Nasdaq: PMTC) from October
19, 1999 through December 31, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint charges that the 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 October 19, 1999 and
December 31, 2002, thereby artificially inflating the price of
Parametric common stock.

Throughout the class period, as alleged in the Complaint,
defendants issued numerous statements and filed quarterly and
annual reports with the SEC which described the Company's
increasing revenues and financial performance.  The complaint
alleges that these statements were materially false and
misleading because they failed to disclose and/or misrepresented
the following adverse facts, among others:

     (1) that since fiscal 1999, in violation of Generally
         Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and its own
         revenue recognition policies, the Company had
         cumulatively overstated its previously recognized
         maintenance revenue from its service contracts by
         approximately $33.4 million;

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

     (3) that as a result, the value of the Company's income and
         financial results were materially overstated at all
         relevant times.

On December 31, 2002, after the close of regular trading,
Parametric shocked the market by announcing that it had
identified "$20 to $25 million of previously recognized
maintenance revenue which should have been deferred and
recognized in fiscal 2003 and later periods."

Accordingly, the Company announced, it "expects to report a
corresponding reduction in maintenance revenue in prior periods,
primarily in fiscal year 2002."  The next day of trading, on
January 2, 2003, shares of Parametric closed at $2.19 per share,
after hitting an intraday low of $1.95, as compared with a Class
Period high of $32.88 per share, reached on December 16, 1999.
Subsequent disclosures revealed that the Company would be
restating its financial results from fiscal year 1999 through
fiscal year 2002 because a cumulative total of $33.4 million in
maintenance revenue had improperly been reported as revenue
during that time.

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      


PEC SOLUTIONS: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Fraud Suit in VA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia on behalf of all purchasers of the common
stock of PEC Solutions Inc. (NasdaqNM: PECS) from October 22,
2002 through March 14, 2003, inclusive.

Throughout the class period, as alleged in the complaint,
defendants issued a series of materially false and misleading
statements concerning the Company's business, operations and
prospects.  The complaint alleges that these statements were
materially false and misleading when made as they failed to
disclose and misrepresented the following adverse facts, among
others:

     (1) that the Company was experiencing declining demand for
         its products and services as the failure of Congress to
         approve a budget for 2003 was causing governmental
         agencies to delay projects;

     (2) that the Company was experiencing material problems
         with certain of its biometric identification contracts
         and would not be generating the revenue that it had
         anticipated from those contracts; and

     (3) as a result of the foregoing, the Company was
         materially overstating the strength of its pipeline of
         projects and its prospects.

On March 14, 2003, after the close of the market, as alleged in
the complaint, PEC Solutions shocked the market when it issued a
press release announcing that it was revising its guidance for
the first quarter 2003 and for the year ending December 31,
2003.  

In response to this announcement, the price of PEC Solutions
common stock declined precipitously falling from $15.80 per
share to $9.81 per share, a decline of more than 37%, on
extremely heavy trading volume.  During the class period, prior
to the disclosure of the true facts, the Individual Defendants
and other PEC Solutions insiders sold their personally-held
shares of PEC Solutions common stock to the unsuspecting public
reaping proceeds of more than $13 million

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      


PHARMACIA CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in NJ
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of
New Jersey on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of
Pharmacia Corporation (NYSE: PHA) from April 17, 2000 through
August 22, 2001, inclusive.

The complaint charges Pharmacia Corporation and certain of its
officers and directors with violations of the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934.  Specifically, the complaint alleges that
Pharmacia marketed Celebrex as a new type of drug that, unlike
aspirin or ibuprofen, retarded pain and inflammation without the
adverse side effects of ulcers or gastrointestinal bleeding.

During the class period, Pharmacia and its partner Pfizer, who
funded the study, trumpeted the results of the ``Celecoxib Long-
term Arthritis Safety Study'' -- a clinical study to compare the
gastrointestinal problems of patients who used Celebrex to those
of patients who used other Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs
(NSAIDs) -- which found that Celebrex caused fewer
gastrointestinal problems than traditional drugs, such as
ibuprofen.

Given all the hype surrounding the CLASS study, the Journal of
the American Medical Association (JAMA) published a study by the
Company that showed that Celebrex caused fewer gastrointestinal
problems than traditional drugs.  Unbeknownst, however, to JAMA,
the study was flawed because the Company manipulated the results
in such a way to show that Celebrex was safer for the stomach
and digestive tract than conventional drugs by not including in
the final analysis all of the data collected through the entire
duration of the study, which concluded opposite to the Company's
findings.

During the class period, the Company failed to make adequate
disclosures concerning this study and used this fallacious study
in their continuing efforts to have the Food and Drug
Administration remove the warning label from Celebrex.  During
the class period, the Company continued to misrepresent that
Celebrex was just as likely to cause ulcers like older, cheaper
medicines until an August 22, 2001 report in The Wall Street
Journal shed light on the Company's fallacious
misrepresentations.

On August 22, 2001, The Wall Street Journal reported that
reviews, conducted by researchers from the Cleveland Clinic, of
clinical trials for the arthritis drug Celebrex indicated that
the medication might carry an increased risk for cardiovascular
events.  They concluded that heart-attack rates with Celebrex
were high enough to be a concern.  The researchers concluded:
"Given the remarkable exposure and popularity of this new class
of medications, we believe that it is mandatory to conduct a
trial specifically assessing cardiovascular risk and benefit of
these agents.  Until then, we urge caution in prescribing these
agents to patients at risk for cardiovascular morbidity."

Study author Dr. Eric Topol commented in the article that the
results are a "cautionary flag that seems to say something is
going on that needs further exploration."  On this news,
Pharmacia's stock dropped below $40 per share.

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      


PROVIDENT FINANCIAL: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in GA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Georgia, on behalf of all persons who purchased
securities of Provident Financial Group (Nasdaq: PFGI) between
January 17, 1997 and March 5, 2003, inclusive, and who were
injured thereby.

Provident Financial Group Inc.'s earnings restatement is one for
the record books - its six years worth of revisions is the
longest continuous string of amendments in memory for a U.S.
company.  However, if history is any indication, Provident's
problems are only just beginning.

The company's stock lost 20% on Wednesday, the day of the
announcement by the Cincinnati banking company, but a study from
New York University's Stern School of Business finds that the
stocks of companies that announce restatements drop for three
straight sessions on average.

"Earnings restatements rewrite a company's history," generally
in an unflattering way, said Min Wu of NYU's Department of
Accounting, Taxation and Business Law, who conducted the study
in conjunction with Softrax, whose software helps companies
tally revenue.  When companies restate earnings, and
particularly when that's accompanied by a warning about future
earnings - as was the case with Provident - there are usually
reverberations, Ms. Wu said.  "Analysts' downgrades, class-
action lawsuits and management shuffles are not uncommon and
they cast a shadow over the firms, quite often for a long time."

Provident launched a quick offensive in an effort to restore its
credibility, said Christopher Carey, the company's executive
vice president and chief financial officer.  "We acted as soon
as we found out and have been talking to people all day
emphasizing this was totally inadvertent on our part and would
never had been done if we had known differently," Mr. Carey told
Dow Jones Newswires.  "At some point we expect to go out and
tell people face-to-face exactly why it happened and exactly why
it won't happen again."

However, he acknowledged Provident "has certainly experienced a
big setback."  Provident has plenty of company in revising its
financial reports.  Restatements appear as commonly today as
increases in profit expectations did in the late 1990s.
Restatements have spiked further since the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
was passed in July.

The law calls for stringent reporting by companies and requires
executives to certify results.  Consider how times have already
changed.  From 1994 through 1997, just 220 public companies
restated earnings.  Over the next four years - 1998 to 2001 -
that number quadrupled to roughly 900, according to Ms. Wu's
research.  This year there have already been dozens of
restatements, with one of the most high- profile being Royal
Ahold NV (AHO), which said last month it would restate $500
million of earnings going back two years.

Six years "is very, very unusual," said Joe Cooper of Thomson
Financial/ First Call, who said he could not recall a longer
string than the 24 quarters that Provident's move will
encompass.  Provident "voluntarily" made its disclosure like
three-fourths of companies do, according to Wu's research, and
that can be a plus for retaining investor credibility.  The bank
holding company has since notified the Federal Reserve and the
Securities and Exchange Commission of the errors and said it
expects to file its 10-K report, with the correct data, on time
- another positive, Mr. Wu said.

Provident is also in the majority of companies that give the
amount of the restatement on the day they announce the
development, Mr. Wu said. The other one- third do not, with the
data coming as soon as two days after and as late as one and a
half years. The average is one to two months, she added.
Provident's restatement totaled $70.3 million over the six
years, and the company said it was able to pin down the numbers
immediately after recognizing the deals involved nine leases
that were posted as off-balance-sheet transactions and shouldn't
have been.

By keeping these transactions off the balance sheet, the company
"gave the appearance it had more capital and higher income,"
said Wilson Smith, banking analyst at Cohen Brothers in
Philadelphia. "That's something that could hang over their head
for a while, but be mitigated by the proactive steps they're
discussing."

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      


SARA LEE: Pomerantz Haudek Lodges Securities Lawsuit in N.D. IL
----------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP initiated a
securities class against Sara Lee Corporation (NYSE:SLE), the
Company's Chief Executive Officer and the Company's Chief
Financial Officer, on behalf of investors who purchased the
securities of Sara Lee during the period between August 1, 2002
and April 24, 2003, inclusive.  The suit was filed in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

The lawsuit charges that defendants issued false and misleading
statements concerning the Company's business operations and
financial performance which caused Sara Lee's stock price to
become artificially inflated.  In particular, the complaint
alleges that defendants failed to disclose that:

     (1) despite a "Reshaping program" designed to improve the
         Company's competitive structure, Sara Lee was burdened
         with numerous poorly performing businesses, and did not
         have "the right mix of businesses" in that several
         material businesses were "not growing" or were "in
         significant decline;"

     (2) the Company's underperforming businesses were causing
         the Company to experience declining results and, as a
         result, Sara Lee would not be growing at the rates
         represented to the market;

     (3) due to a lack of proper internal controls, Sara Lee
         failed to recognize or identify those businesses or
         brands among its portfolio of companies that would need
         to be "run dramatically differently in the future;" and

     (4) based on the foregoing, Sara Lee lacked any reasonable
         basis upon which to project that it would experience  
         "double-digit operating income increases" for fiscal
         2003 among its ``five lines of business'' or have
         diluted EPS for fiscal 2003 in the range of $1.54 to
         $1.60.

On April 24, 2003, Sara Lee issued a press release announcing
its financial results for the Third Quarter, the period ending
March 31, 2002.  The Company announced that it was reducing
earnings for fiscal 2003 to $1.50 to $1.52 per share,
significantly below consensus expectations of $1.59.

For more details, contact Andrew G. Tolan by Phone:
(888) 476-6529 ((888) 4-POMLAW) or by E-mail: agtolan@pomlaw.com


SEARS ROEBUCK: Spector Roseman Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. IL
----------------------------------------------------------------
Spector, Roseman & Kodroff, PC initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois, on behalf of purchasers of the 7%
Subordinated Notes issued by Sears Roebuck Acceptance
Corporation. (NYSE:SRJ) between June 21, 2002 and October 17,
2002, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that Sears Acceptance Corporation and
certain of Sears' officers and directors, violated Sections
10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder, and Sections 11, 12(a) and 15 of the
Securities Act of 1933, by issuing a series of materially false
and misleading statements to the market.  These alleged
misstatements had the effect of artificially inflating the price
of the 7% Notes.

According to the complaint, defendants, throughout the class
period, represented that the earnings of Sears, the corporate
parent of Sears Acceptance, were growing strongly, driven by
Sears' Credit and Financial Products segment and that Sears
would achieve earnings growth of 22% in 2002 over 2001.  In
addition, SEC reports filed both Sears and Sears Acceptance
during the class period reported that provisions by Sears for
uncollectible accounts and in, its 2001 annual report
represented that such reserves were ``adequate.''

These, and other statements detailed in the Complaint, were
allegedly false and misleading because, according to the
Complaint, they did not disclose that Sears' risk for
uncollectible accounts had increased materially throughout the
Class Period and, in addition, that Sears was under-reserving
for its uncollectible accounts which inflated its earnings and
balance sheet.  

On October 17, 2002, Sears reported in a press release that it
will grow its 2002 earnings by 15%, rather than the 22% it
reaffirmed as recently as ten days previously, because of a
``$222 million increase in the domestic provision for
uncollectible accounts.''  In addition, according to the press
release, earnings for the third quarter were 26% less than the
previous year.  In reaction to the press release, the price of
the 7% Notes fell 8.6%, from an October 16, 2002 close of $24.05
per share to an October 17, 2002 close of $21.99 per share -- on
extremely heavy trading volume.

For more details, contact Robert M. Roseman by Phone:
888-844-5862 or by E-mail: classaction@srk-law.com or visit the
firm's Website: http://www.srk-law.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  * * *