CAR_Public/030701.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
               Tuesday, July 1, 2003, Vol. 5, No. 128

                           Headlines                            

ALL-STATE INDEMNITY: Faces Personal Injury Policyholders Lawsuit
ATLANTIC DATA: Investors Commence Securities Lawsuit in MA Court
BAYER AG: Reaches More Out-0f-Court Settlements Over Baycol Drug
CALIFORNIA: High Court Rejects Sacramento Appeal on Access Suit
HAWAII: Private School Sued For Denying Admission Based on Race

INDIAN FUNDS: Judge "Pessimistic" About Indian Trust Reform Plan
INDIANA: State's High Court Upholds Sex Offender Registry Law
INFONET SERVICES: Asks CA Court To Dismiss Securities Fraud Suit
KAOPECTATE LITIGATION: Makers Agree To Lower Drug's Lead Levels
MONTANA: Consumer Office Investigates Company Selling Free Info

NEW YORK: Judge Rejects Lawsuit Over No Child Left Behind Law
PENNSYLVANIA: Judge Dismisses All Claims Against School District
PENNSYLVANIA: Effort To End Public Defender Oversight Opposed
PRINTCAFE SOFTWARE: Faces Securities Fraud Lawsuits in W.D. PA
PSS WORLD: Asks FL Court To Dismiss Lawsuit For Securities Fraud

PSS WORLD: Trial in Securities Suit Set October 2004 in M.D. FL
PSS WORLD: Enters Mediation To Settle Overtime Wage Suits in FL
TACO BELL: Worker Diagnosed with Hepatitis, Vaccination Urged

                    New Securities Fraud Cases

ADMINISTAFF INC.: Rabin Murray Commences Securities Suit in TX
BLUE RHINO: Johnson & Perkinson Files Securities Suit in C.D. CA
CENTRAL PARKING: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Suit in TN
CREDIT SUISSE: Weiss & Yourman Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY
CREE INC.: Bernard Gross Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in M.D. NC

CRYO-CELL INTERNATIONAL: Weiss & Yourman Files Stock Suit in FL
DAISYTEK INTERNATIONAL: Wechsler Harwood Files TX Stock Lawsuit
DIVINE INC.: Pomerantz Haudek Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. IL
EUNIVERSE INC.: Rabin Murray Lodges Securities Suit in C.D. CA
INTERMUNE INC.: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. CA

LABORATORY CORPORATION: Cauley Geller Lodges NC Securities Suit
LABORATORY CORPORATION: Charles Piven Files Stock Lawsuit in NC
LABORATORY CORPORATION: Schiffrin & Barroway Files NC Stock Suit
PRINTCAFE SOFTWARE: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Suit in PA
RECOTON CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Suit in FL

STOCKWALK INC.: Zimmerman Reed Launches Securities Lawsuit in MN

                           *********

ALL-STATE INDEMNITY: Faces Personal Injury Policyholders Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Forizs & Dogali filed a class action against
Allstate Indemnity Company and Deerbrook Insurance Company on
behalf of Allstate's and Deerbrook's Florida personal injury
protection (PIP) policyholders.  The named plaintiff, Premier
Open MRI, is a Jacksonville imaging center.  The defendants are
Illinois-based insurers who do business nationwide.  The class
plaintiffs are insureds of Allstate and Deerbrook who suffered
automobile accidents and received magnetic resonance imaging
(MRI) tests pursuant to orders of their treating physicians.

The suit alleges that Allstate and Deerbrook have been
systematically and routinely denying payment for MRIs under the
PIP policies, contrary to the policies and Florida law.  They
assert that since sometime in 2002 Allstate and Deerbrook have
been improperly second-guessing the medical need for MRIs, even
though the MRIs were ordered by treating physicians and even
though Allstate and Deerbrook are not licensed to practice
medicine.

Andy Dogali, attorney for the plaintiff, estimates that the
number of insureds whose claims have been wrongfully denied
numbers in the thousands.  "Premier's experience with Allstate
is typical of the average imaging center in the State of
Florida," Mr. Dogali stated.  "Applying that experience through
more than a couple hundred imaging centers around the state,
there are probably several thousand Florida policyholders who
have received MRIs and then had Allstate and Deerbrook
wrongfully refuse payment".

The claim is substantial, as MRIs typically cost more than one
thousand dollars each.  The complaint seeks injunctive relief
and damages for breach of contract.

For more details, contact Andy Dogali by Mail: Forizs & Dogali,
PL 4301 Anchor Plaza Parkway, Suite 300, Tampa FL by Phone:
813-289-0700 by E-mail: adogali@forizs-dogali.com or visit the
firm's Website: http://www.forizs-dogali.com


ATLANTIC DATA: Investors Commence Securities Lawsuit in MA Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
Atlantic Data Services, Inc. and each of its directors were
served with a class action in Massachusetts State court by two
of the Company's stockholders on behalf of all other
stockholders of the Company.

The complaint alleges, among other things, that the Company and
its directors have breached or may have breached fiduciary
duties owed to the Company's stockholders in connection with its
May 5, 2003 announcement that the Company had received from
certain of its directors and stockholders a preliminary
expression of interest to engage in a going private transaction.


BAYER AG: Reaches More Out-0f-Court Settlements Over Baycol Drug
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bayer AG announced that it has reached more than 1,000 out-of-
court settlements over its cholesterol drug Baycol (also known
as Lipobay), the Associated Press reports.  

The Company has paid out a total of $343 million without
admitting liability.  The Company recalled Baycol in August
2001, after it was linked to about 100 deaths worldwide and a
rare muscle-wasting syndrome called rhabdomyolysis.  

Spokesman Michael Diehl told AP that the Company has already
settled about 1,042 cases.  As of last month, the company had
paid $240 million for 785 settlements.  On June 10, it posted on
its Web site that it had settled 888 cases but didn't provide a
sum.  

The Company also faces shareholder suits in the United States
from people seeking damages for declines in the company's share
price caused by Baycol.


CALIFORNIA: High Court Rejects Sacramento Appeal on Access Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Supreme Court rejected an appeal by the City
of Sacramento of a ruling that ordered the city to make all
public sidewalks accessible to disabled Americans under a
federal anti-discrimination law, Reuters reports.

A class action, filed on behalf of the city's wheelchair-bound
and vision-impaired citizens, cited claims under the disability
law and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which authorizes funding
of certain services for the disabled.

The suit asserted that the city should modify and even rebuild
its sidewalks and modify such obstacles as benches, fire
hydrants, newspaper racks, mailboxes, trees and utility, traffic
signal and telephone poles.  The city should also get rid of
roots and other protruding objects and to make sure sidewalks
were level, the suit stated.

A federal court ruled in favor of the city, but an appeals court
ruled that the city sidewalks were covered by the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990 and therefore have to be accessible.  
Sacramento appealed this decision, arguing it imposed a
"staggering" financial burden on thousands of state and local
governments.

The US Justice Department urged the high court to reject the
city's appeal, arguing that the law covered public sidewalks,
Reuters reports.

If sidewalks qualified as a public program, activity or service,
then roads, bridges, buildings and other forms of physical
infrastructure owned by state or municipal governments would be
covered too, the city's lawyers told Reuters.  A number of
cities, the US Conference of Mayors and the National League of
Cities supported Sacramento's appeal, saying huge amounts of
money would have to be spent on construction and alterations.


HAWAII: Private School Sued For Denying Admission Based on Race
---------------------------------------------------------------
A student filed a suit against Kamehameha Schools in the United
States District Court in Hawaii for denying his admission,
allegedly because he isn't Hawaiian, the Associated Press
reports.

The suit alleges the school violated federal civil rights law by
denying the student admission on the basis of race. The student
applied twice to Kamehameha Schools, but was placed on a waiting
list although the admissions office considered him a competitive
applicant, his attorneys, John Goemans told AP. If the student
was of Hawaiian ancestry, he would have been admitted, the
lawsuit said.

Atty. Goemans compared Kamehameha's admission policy to
segregation in the South during the 1960s.  "Like Gov. George
Wallace of Alabama, the trustees of Kamehameha Schools are
standing in the schoolhouse door to prevent the admission of
qualified children simply because they have the wrong skin color
and bloodline," Mr. Goemans said.

A Kamehameha Schools official dismissed the student's charge.  
"Kamehameha believes that its admissions policy is consistent
with applicable law," Constance Lau, chairwoman of Kamehameha's
board of trustees told AP.  "We intend to vigorously defend our
policy of giving preference to applicants of Hawaiian ancestry,
and we are confident that we will prevail."

School officials said that the student body is made up of almost
5,000 Hawaiian and part-Hawaiian students from kindergarten
through 12th grade statewide.  They also said that non-Hawaiians
are admitted if there are openings, after Hawaiians who meet the
criteria have been offered admission.

This policy was instituted to educate Hawaiian children,
bringing about more social justice and equality, Pohai Ryan of
Kamehameha Schools Alumni Association's Oahu chapter told AP.  
"Our people are not there yet, all the social data will show you
that," she said. "Until all Hawaiians are educated, no one can
justify changing it."


INDIAN FUNDS: Judge "Pessimistic" About Indian Trust Reform Plan
----------------------------------------------------------------
US District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth, in Washington, DC,
said he is "very pessimistic" about the Interior Department's
plan to reform the trust for American Indians, during a hearing
about the Department's new reform plan, according to a report by
Associated Press Newswires.

Judge Lamberth wondered whether the plan will work any better
than the government's previous one.  Judge Lamberth had ruled in
1999, that the government had failed in its obligation to manage
the individual trust accounts of hundreds of thousands of
Indians.  Judge Lamberth currently is overseeing a class action
to determine how to reconcile the accounts and manage the
system.

Judge Lamberth interrupted testimony of Tulsan Ross Swimmer, who
recently became special trustee in charge of managing Indian
accounts.  He wanted to question whether the government will
have a new plan every time it gets a new Secretary of the
Interior.

"Where does this end?" said Judge Lamberth.

Mr. Swimmer said the Interior Department is asking Congress for
"a substantial increase" in money to implement the new plan.

The lawsuit before Judge Lamberth is in its seventh year.  It
concerns the individual trust accounts held by Indians across
the country, accounts which the government established in the
late 19th century to hold money earned from oil and gas leases,
as well as leases for grazing, mining, timber harvesting and
other revenues generated from the lands owned by the Indians.

Elouis Cobell, a member of the Blackfeet Tribe in Montana, and
other Indians filed a class action in 1996, claiming gross
mismanagement of the royalties received and of the trust
accounts themselves had cost Indians billions of dollars.  The
Indians claim more than 500,000 accounts are at issue, although
the government puts the number closer to 300,000.

Attorneys for Ms. Cobell, and other Indians as well, want Judge
Lamberth to take the trust fund out of government control and
give it to a private receiver.  Meanwhile, the government is
trying to convince Judge Lamberth it can manage the system.

The Interior Department says the new plan is a major
reorganization to increase accountability and efficiency in the
trust fund system.  The Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Office
of Special Trustee have been holding briefings at BIA offices
across the country to explain the plan.

Mr. Swimmer, a former head of the BIA and once chief of the
Cherokee Nation, has described the plan as calling for more
personalized attention from the government to trust fund account
holders.  The new plan, he said, also requires more training of
government employees and more focus from workers who might have
had duties not related to the accounts.


INDIANA: State's High Court Upholds Sex Offender Registry Law
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Indiana Supreme Court recently upheld the constitutionality
of Indiana's sex offender registry law, including the posting of
addresses and pictures of convicted sex offenders on the
Internet, the Associated Press Newswires reports.  The Indiana
Civil Liberties Union had appealed a class action to the court
arguing the sex offender registry law is unconstitutional.

The Indiana Civil Liberties Union (ICLU) had originally brought
a class action on behalf of a man, known only as "John Doe" in
court papers, who was convicted several years ago of fondling a
minor.

Although the US Supreme Court, in March, had ruled unanimously
that photos of convicted sex offenders could be posted on the
Internet, in a Connecticut case, the ICLU argued that the
Indiana Constitution provides more privacy protection than does
the US Constitution, including rights regarding a reputation.

The ICLU contended that Indiana's sex offender registry law
would harm the reputation of all past offenders by deeming them
forever dangerous, without any legal recourse to show they are
not and should no longer be on the registry.

At a hearing before the High Court last month, lawyers for the
state argued that the registry, including the photos of the
former offenders, met constitutional muster because it helps
protect the public.

In its ruling the Indiana Supreme Court said, "even if Doe could
prove that he is not likely to be currently dangerous, the
Legislature has decided that the registry information of all sex
offenders, currently dangerous or not, must be publicly
disclosed."

In January, the High Court had issued a stay preventing the
sheriffs from implementing the law while the appeal was
pending.  Attorney General Steven Carter said that the ruling
clears the way for county sheriffs to upgrade the registry and
make it accessible to the public once more.


INFONET SERVICES: Asks CA Court To Dismiss Securities Fraud Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Infonet Services Corporation asked the United States District
Court for the Central District of California to dismiss the
consolidated securities class action filed against it on behalf
of public investors who purchased the Company's securities
during the period from December 16, 1999 through August 7, 2001.  
The suit also names as defendants:

     (1) Jose A. Collazo, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman,

     (2) Akbar H. Firdosy, Chief Financial Officer,

     (3) Douglas Campbell,

     (4) Eric M. de Jong,

     (5) Morgan Ekberg,

     (6) Masao Kojima,

     (7) Joseph Nancoz,

     (8) Rafael Sagrario,

     (9) KDDI Corporation,

    (10) KPN Telecom,

    (11) Swisscom AG,

    (12) Telefonica International Holding B.V.,

    (13) Telia AB,

    (14) Telstra Corporation Ltd,

    (15) Merrill Lynch & Co.,

    (16) Warburg Dillon Read LLC,

    (17) ABN AMRO Inc.,

    (18) Goldman Sachs & Co.,

    (19) Lehman Brothers, Inc. and

    (20) Salomon Smith Barney Inc.   

The consolidated suit alleges that defendants made
misrepresentations and omissions regarding the AUCS channel in
the Company's Form S-1 registration statement and the
accompanying prospectus for our initial public offering of Class
B common stock and in other statements and reports during the
class period.

The plaintiffs assert counts against the Company and its
officers and directors for violations of Sections 11, 12 and 15
of the Securities Act of 1933 and violations of Section 20(a)
and 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder.  

The plaintiffs have requested a judgment determining that the
lawsuit is a proper class action, awarding compensatory damages
and/or rescission, awarding costs of the lawsuit and awarding
any other relief.  All of the defendants have filed motions to
dismiss the Consolidated Class Action Complaint, which are set
for hearing on July 21, 2003.  


KAOPECTATE LITIGATION: Makers Agree To Lower Drug's Lead Levels
---------------------------------------------------------------
Makers of the anti-diarrhea medicine Kaopectate entered a
settlement with the state of California to slash its lead
levels, the Associated Press reports.  The medicine's older
formula - still sold in caplet form - contains 25 micrograms of
lead in every adult dose, or 50 times the level at which
California requires a warning label.

Pharmacia, the maker of Kaopectate, said in a written statement
that its product "has been used safely and effectively for close
to 50 years," and that it entered into the settlement "in the
interest of avoiding costly and unnecessary litigation," AP
reports.

The state, under Attorney General William Lockyer, sued in 2001
over the drug's lead levels.  The Company began reformulating
Kaopectate, removing 80 percent of the lead from Kaopectate
liquid, now sold in an hourglass-shaped bottle with a label that
boasts it as "new and improved."  Kaopectate caplets have not
yet been reformulated.

A substance called attapulgite clay is the key ingredient in
Kaopectate.  The Company agreed to completely remove
attapulgite, which contains large amounts of lead and replace it
with bizmuth subsalicylate, found in the competing product
Pepto-Bismol.  

San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer approved the
settlement, under which the Company agreed to pay $1 million in
civil penalties under the settlement.  The Company will end up
paying much less if it moves quickly to remove as much as 95
percent of the lead from Kaopectate, the nation's largest-
selling diarrhea remedy.

Environmentalists, consumer groups and state Attorney General
Bill Lockyer hailed the settlement as a victory for children,
who can suffer brain damage even from low levels of lead.  
"Hundreds of thousands of consumers in California and across the
country, including pregnant women and children, ingested
Kaopectate and generic versions for years without knowing the
product contained enough lead to pose a health risk," Atty. Gen.
Lockyer told AP.


MONTANA: Consumer Office Investigates Company Selling Free Info
---------------------------------------------------------------
Montana's Office of Consumer Protection started a probe of a
company attempting to sell program applications and information
regarding the state's Children's Health Insurance Program
(CHIP), information that's already free, state officials said,
Montanaforum.com reports.

A company with a Great Falls mailing address is trying to sell
information for $14.95 when the information is free at many
Montana locations.  The state's CHIP program serves low-income
parents who do not have health coverage for their children.

"People do not need to pay for this information," said Mary
Noel, who oversees CHIP for the Montana Department of Public
Health and Human Services told Montanaforum.com.  "In fact, the
information received for $14.95 is the same information we have
available on our Web site."

The Company has advertised in two Montana newspapers, boasting
of "no-cost insurance for children" under the name Children's
Health Coverage Advisers.  The advertisement also lists a toll-
free telephone number.

A newspaper reporter who called the number was directed by a
taped voice to send $14.95 to the address listed in the
advertisement in order to receive information, the
Montanaforum.com reports.  No live person was available to
comment.

In a letter to the state's Consumer Protection Office, Mr. Noel
wrote that she was "dismayed" that someone may be taking
advantage of low-income families who already are financially
stressed.  In addition to being available via the Internet, the
state's free CHIP information also is accessible from the state
CHIP office in Helena by calling, toll-free, 1-(877) 543-7669.


NEW YORK: Judge Rejects Lawsuit Over No Child Left Behind Law
-------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Judge John Koeltl threw out a class action brought by
New York City parents trying to move their children out of bad
schools into better ones, the New York Daily News reports.

Judge Koeltl ruled that the parents had no legal standing, under
the No Child Left Behind law, to sue the Education Department of
New York City to make the city transfer or tutor students as
required by that federal law.

Instead, it is up to federal officials to make sure school
districts comply with the 2002 law, requiring them to let
students in failing schools transfer to better schools or get
free tutoring after class, the judge said in his ruling.  The
class action brought by two Harlem mothers, became the first
lawsuit of its kind in the nation.

Parents' attorney, Charles King, said he would appeal the
decision.  Lisa Grumet, the lawyer representing Mayor Bloomberg
and the Education Department, said the city was still reviewing
the decision last night.  A US Education Department source said
the government could force school districts to comply by
threatening to withhold federal aid - $600 million in New York
City's case.


PENNSYLVANIA: Judge Dismisses All Claims Against School District
----------------------------------------------------------------
Senior US District Court Judge Maurice Cohill Jr. has ended more
than three decades of court battles in a landmark segregation
case, when he released the Woodland Hills School District from
judicial oversight, the Pittsburg Post-Gazette reports.  

Judge Cohill said, in a 21-page opinion, that the district has
complied "in good faith" with the requirements he has imposed
and he has concluded that "the vestiges of past discrimination
have been remedied."

The ruling means, among other things, that the 32-year-old case
is over and that the claims that led to it are dismissed.  The
order follows upon Judge Cohill's July 2000 ruling that largely
removed the district from federal oversight.  The judge said
then that Woodland Hills had met most of the requirements the
court imposed after the district was created in 1981, in the
wake of a 10-year battle over race discrimination.

In his July 2000 ruling, Judge Cohill did not set the district
entirely free; he kept in place oversight provisions for
curriculum, assessment and instruction.  Last year, school
district and state officials asked the judge to declare Woodland
Hills "unitary," or independent, and Judge Cohill held a hearing
on the issue last month.

The Woodland Hills case originated in 1971, when parents of
black students complained that the state had created a racially
segregated district when it formed the General Braddock District
to serve Braddock, Rankin and North Braddock, all areas of
Pittsburg.  Part of the parents' class action said the General
Braddock District had been created as a "dual system" of
inferior education for blacks.  Ten years later, the then-
presiding federal judge, Judge Gerald Weber, ordered creation
of the Woodland Hills District, which merged General Braddock
with the predominantly white districts of Churchill Area,
Edgewood, Swissvale and Turtle Creek.

The new district was placed under federal supervision and has
remained so ever since.  In 1999, school officials asked that
supervision be lifted, which led to Judge Cohill's 2000
decision.  The main point of contention at that time was the
math curriculum.  The judge, in 2000, said the district had to
get rid of a dual system of teaching math, in which many more
black students than white ones ended up in lower-level courses.  

Judge Colhill then ordered the district to create one math
curriculum for everyone.  The district said in court papers that
that has been done.  Judge Colhill agreed and the result was his
21-page decision terminating the judicial oversight.

Although lawyers for the original plaintiffs argued that the
dual system was not gone and that the district continued to
"track" students into courses based on race, Judge Cohill
disagreed and sided with the school district, which claimed all
vestiges of a dual school system based on race had been
eradicated from the math curriculum.

"There is nothing to suggest that the district's approach to
this issue is in any way guided by race, or that the selection
process (for determining who is ready to take algebra before
ninth grade) is in any way arbitrary or discriminatory," said
Judge Colhill.

Since the oversight provisions for assessment and instruction in
the district, which had been continued in his 2000 ruling, were
directly related to the math curriculum, the judge said these
provisions could be lifted as well.  As part of his 21-page
opinion, he said he had looked at the district's overall
compliance to determine whether officials have shown "good
faith" in trying to abide by his orders, and found this to
be the case.

"The Woodland Hills School District is unitary in all of its
operations, facilities, programs, personnel and curricula, and
offers its education benefits equally to all students," Judge
Colhill concluded.

In his recent opinion, terminating the federal oversight, Judge
Cohill singled out for special comment Judge Weber, who was the
first presiding judge for judicial oversight of Woodland Hills,
and who died in 1989.  

"It was he who suffered the slings and arrows which all too
often accompany these types of cases," said Judge Cohill.  "His
courageous oversight, despite threats to his life, provided the
framework for the successful termination of the case which we
resolve here today."


PENNSYLVANIA: Effort To End Public Defender Oversight Opposed
-------------------------------------------------------------
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) asked that Allegheny
County be held in contempt of court for violating a consent
decree governing the public defender's office, while the county
asked a judge to lift the decree, the Associated Press Newswires
reports.

The ACLU said scores of defendants continue to complain about
the poor representation given them by the public defender's
office.  Many said their first meetings with a public defender
took place within minutes of appearing before a judge.

As part of a 1998 settlement with the ACLU, county officials
agreed in a consent decree to nearly double the number of public
defenders and almost triple support staff over four years to
improve legal representation.  The consent decree arose out of a
class action brought by the ACLU on behalf of plaintiffs who
spent 82 days in jail before being allowed to plead guilty to a
drunk driving charge.

Allegheny County Solicitor Charles McCullough said the county
has beefed up the staff and is in compliance with every part of
the consent decree.  He charged the ACLU with a financial motive
for trying to prolong the case, saying, "This case has become an
annuity for the ACLU."

The two sides have met numerous times before a mediator to
discuss staffing and procedural changes at the defender's
office, and to discuss, as well, the $200,000 in legal fees the
ACLU said it is owed for monitoring compliance.  The consent
decree will expire on December 31, if a judge rules the county
has complied.

Witold Walczak, the ACLU's legal director in Pittsburg,
acknowledged the defender's office has met or is close to
meeting staffing requirements and that the office is much better
than in 1998, especially in representation of defendants charged
with murder.  According to the ACLU, the structure of the
defender's office is flawed and top officials have failed to
monitor lawyers who do shoddy work.

The ACLU's motion seeking that Allegheny County be held in
contempt of court for violating the 1998 consent decree, claims
a number of public defenders have failed to investigate cases
within the time proscribed by the consent decree; and that
public defenders have not sought assistance of experts as
required, as well as failing to prepare for hearings.

"The right to counsel means more than just a warm body with a
law degree sitting next to you when you walk into a courtroom,"
said Mr. Walczak.  "It includes the right to an attorney who has
the time and the resources to prepare an adequate defense."

The county's petition to have oversight lifted lists the 33
points of the consent decree that have been met.  No hearing
date has been set.


PRINTCAFE SOFTWARE: Faces Securities Fraud Lawsuits in W.D. PA
--------------------------------------------------------------
Printcafe Software, Inc. faces several securities class actions
charging it with making false and misleading statements in
connection with its initial public offering and subsequent press
releases through October 22, 2002.  The suit is pending in the
United States District Court for the Western District of
Pennsylvania and also names as defendants Marc Olin, Chairman of
the Board and Chief Executive Officer, and Joseph Whang, Chief
Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer.

In a statement, the company said, "We believe the lawsuit is
completely without merit and we intend to vigorously defend
against it."

Printcafe has entered into a merger agreement with Electronics
for Imaging, Inc. (EFI) (Nasdaq: EFII) which provides for the
acquisition of Printcafe for $2.60 per share for each
outstanding Printcafe share.  The merger is expected to close
during the third quarter of 2003.  Joseph Cutts, CFO of EFI said
"Printcafe has informed us of this lawsuit, and we have not
changed our plans for the merger as a result of the filing of
this complaint."


PSS WORLD: Asks FL Court To Dismiss Lawsuit For Securities Fraud
----------------------------------------------------------------
PSS World Medical, Inc. asked the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division to
dismiss the consolidated securities class action filed against
it and certain of its current officers and directors.

The plaintiff initially alleged, for himself and for a purported
class of similarly situated stockholders who allegedly purchased
the Company's stock between December 23, 1997 and May 8, 1998
that the defendants engaged in violations of certain provisions
of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

The allegations were based upon a decline in the Company's stock
price following announcement by the Company in May 1998
regarding the Gulf South Medical Supply, Inc. merger, which
resulted in earnings below analyst's expectations.  

By order dated December 18, 2002, the court granted the
Company's motion to dismiss the plaintiff's second amended
complaint with prejudice with respect to the Section 10(b)
claims.  The plaintiffs filed their third amended complaint on
January 17, 2003 alleging claims under Sections 14(a) and 20(a)
of the Exchange Act on behalf of a putative class of all persons
who were shareholders of the Company as of March 26, 1998.

The Company moved to dismiss the third amended complaint.  
Discovery has not yet begun, pending the outcome of the motion
to dismiss.  There can be no assurance that this litigation
will be ultimately resolved on terms that are favorable to the
Company.


PSS WORLD: Trial in Securities Suit Set October 2004 in M.D. FL
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jury trial in the securities class action filed in the United
States District Court for the Middle District of Florida against
PSS World Medical, Inc. and certain present and former directors
and officers is set for October 18, 2004.

The amended complaint was filed on behalf of persons who
purchased or acquired the Company's common stock at various
times during the period between October 26, 1999 and October 3,
2000.  The amended complaint alleges, among other things,
violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and
seeks indeterminate damages.

The plaintiffs allege that the Company issued false and
misleading statements and failed to disclose material facts
concerning, among other things, the Company's financial
condition.  The plaintiffs further allege that because of the
issuance of false and misleading statements and/or failure to
disclose material facts, the price of PSS World Medical, Inc.
common stock was artificially inflated during the class period.

The court granted plaintiff's motion for class certification on
November 14, 2002.  On December 10, 2002, the court entered an
order approving plaintiff's method of notifying class members
that a class has been certified and further set a schedule of
dates for such notice.  On December 10, 2002, the court also
entered an order setting forth a schedule of dates for pre-trial
procedures and trial.  

Pursuant to that order, a jury trial in the case is scheduled
for the trial term commencing October 18, 2004.  The Company
believes that the allegations contained in the amended
complaint are without merit and intends to defend vigorously
against the claims.  There can be no assurance that this
litigation will be ultimately resolved on terms that are
favorable to the Company.  


PSS WORLD: Enters Mediation To Settle Overtime Wage Suits in FL
---------------------------------------------------------------
PSS World Medical, Inc. has entered second mediation for the
securities class action filed against it in the United States
Court for the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division,
by three of its employees.

The plaintiffs allege that the Company wrongfully classifies its
purchasers, operations leader trainees, and accounts receivable
representatives as exempt from the overtime requirements imposed
by the Fair Labor Standards Act and the California Wage Orders.  
The plaintiffs seek to recover back pay, interest, costs of
suit, declaratory and injunctive relief, and applicable
statutory penalties.

On February 21, 2003, the court conditionally allowed the case
to proceed as a collective action under the Fair Labor Standards
Act.  A total of 63 plaintiffs are now parties to the action.
Two of the three original named plaintiffs also brought, but
subsequently have settled, individual claims for gender
discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Pay Act of 1963.

The Company is vigorously defending against the claims.  Limited
discovery is underway following a mediation on May 20, 2003, in
preparation for a second mediation scheduled for August 13,
2003.  However, there can be no assurance that this litigation
will be ultimately resolved on terms that are favorable to the
Company.  


TACO BELL: Worker Diagnosed with Hepatitis, Vaccination Urged
-------------------------------------------------------------
Los Angeles County health officials urged anyone who ate at a
Taco Bell restaurant in Alhambra a few weeks ago to get
vaccinated for hepatitis A after a worker was diagnosed with the
liver disease, the Associated Press reports.

Health officials learned of the diagnosis Thursday and urged
anyone who at a restaurant on Commonwealth Avenue on June 12 or
13.  The vaccination only takes effect if received within 14
days of exposure.  Officials said the risk of contracting the
disease was low and the immune globulin vaccinations were
precautionary.

"We have no way of knowing if this person contaminated the
food," Laurene Mascola, chief of Los Angeles County's Acute
Communicable Disease Control Program told AP.

Hepatitis A symptoms include yellowing of eyes and skin, nausea,
appetite loss, vomiting, stomach cramps, dark-colored urine and
fatigue.  A call to Taco Bell headquarters in Louisville, Ky.,
on Friday was referred to the Irvine public affairs department,
whose phone was answered with a recording before business hours,
the Associated Press reports.


                    New Securities Fraud Cases

ADMINISTAFF INC.: Rabin Murray Commences Securities Suit in TX
--------------------------------------------------------------
Rabin Murray & Frank LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Texas on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or
otherwise acquired Administaff, Inc. securities (NYSE:ASF)
between April 3, 2001 to July 31, 2002, both dates inclusive.  
The Company, Paul J. Sarvadi, and Richard G. Rawson are the
named as defendants in the suit.

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 during the Class Period
defendant failed to disclose that Administaff, a personnel
management company, had inadequate and deficient pricing and
billing systems and was incorrectly calibrating pricing for
clients that experienced declines in average payroll cost per
worksite employee.

Furthermore, the Complaint alleges that defendants incorrectly
matched the price and cost for health insurance on new and
renewing client contracts.  In an attempt to maintain
Administaff's coveted status as a Fortune 500 company,
defendants allegedly improperly recognized revenue, in violation
of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, by failing to net
Administaff's worksite employee payroll costs against revenues.

On August 1, 2002, before the market opened, defendants shocked
the investing public when it announced Administaff's earnings
shortfall for its second quarter ended June 30, 2002, reporting
"a net loss and diluted net loss per share of $3.2 million and
$0.11."  In response to this, in February 2003, defendants
announced that the SEC commenced an inquiry into Administaff's
accounting practices with respect to revenue recognition.
Pursuant to the SEC inquiry, Administaff changed its accounting
policies and applied such changes retroactively.

As a result of these false and misleading statements and
omissions of material fact, the complaint alleges that the price
of Administaff securities was artificially inflated throughout
the Class Period, causing plaintiff and 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


BLUE RHINO: Johnson & Perkinson Files Securities Suit in C.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Johnson & Perkinson initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Central District of
California on behalf of purchasers of Blue Rhino Corporation
(NASDAQ:RINO) securities during the period between August 15,
2002 and February 5, 2003.

The complaint charges Blue Rhino and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934.  The complaint alleges that each of the defendants is
liable as a participant in a fraudulent scheme and course of
business that operated as a fraud or deceit on purchasers of
Blue Rhino securities by disseminating materially false and
misleading statements and/or concealing material adverse facts.  
The scheme:

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

     (2) enabled defendants to acquire over $30 million in
         assets, purchased using artificially inflated Blue
         Rhino shares, to refinance debt upon more favorable
         terms with its lenders;

     (3) allowed defendants to sell $15.79 million worth of
         Company common stock in a private placement, as well as      
         register over $23.8 million in shares of common stock
         for large shareholders that had entered into a private
         equity deal the prior year; and

     (4) caused plaintiff and other members of the Class to
         purchase Blue Rhino securities at artificially inflated
         prices.

For more details, contact James Conway by Phone: 888/459-7855 or
by E-mail: email@jpclasslaw.com


CENTRAL PARKING: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Suit in TN
--------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a securities
class action in the United States District Court for the Middle
District of Tennessee, on behalf of all persons who purchased
the securities of Central Parking Corporation (NYSE: CPC)
between November 4, 2002 and February 13, 2003, inclusive,
against the Company and certain of its officers.

The complaint alleges that throughout the class period,
defendants issued a series of false and misleading statements to
the investing public.  The defendants failed to disclose several
adverse facts, including: that the Company was unable to
sufficiently record and document its financial results due to
its inadequate internal controls.

The complaint further alleges that Central Parking was
materially understating its bad debt reserve and its accounts
payable.  Consequently, the Company's financial statements were
not prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles and were thereby materially false and misleading.

On February 14, 2003, Central Parking announced that it would be
taking a charge to increase its bad debt reserve and that it
would be taking a charge to increase its accounts payables.  
Following this announcement, the price of Central Parking common
stock decreased from $15.82 on February 13, 2003 to a close of
$12.31 on February 14, 2003, or a one-day decline of over 22%,
on over seven times normal trading volume.

For more details, contact Fred Taylor Isquith, Gustavo Bruckner,
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 Central Parking.


CREDIT SUISSE: Weiss & Yourman Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Weiss & Yourman initiated a securities class action against
Credit Suisse First Boston in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of on behalf of
purchasers of Winstar Communications, Inc. (WCIIM.PK, WCIIO.PK,
WCIIP.PK, WCIIQ.PK) between January 5, 2001 and April 5, 2001.

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 Winstar securities during the class
period at artificially inflated prices.

For more details, contact David C. Katz, Mark D. Smilow, 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


CREE INC.: Bernard Gross Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in M.D. NC
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Bernard M. Gross, PC initiated a securities
class action in the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina on behalf of purchasers of the
securities of Cree, Inc. (NasdaqNM:CREE) during the period
between January 14, 2000 through and including June 13, 2003.

The action is pending in the United States District Court,
Middle District of North Carolina, against the Company and:

    (1) Fred N. Hunter, Chairman of the Board and founder,

    (2) Cynthia B. Merrell, Chief Financial Officer and
        Treasurer,

    (3) Dolph W. Von Arx, Director, Member of the Audit,
        Compensation & Audit Committees,

    (4) Charles Swoboda, President, Chief Executive Officer,
        former Chief Operating Officer, and Director,

    (5) Walter L. Robb, Director; and

    (6) John W. Palmour, Director and Executive Vice President

The complaint charges defendants with violations of 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 Cree securities.

The complaint alleges, among other things, that on January 14,
2000, the start of the class period, Cree filed a prospectus and
registration statement in connection with the offering of
2,860,000 shares of common stock.  The "Use Of Proceeds" Section
of the prospectus failed to disclose that Cree would invest $5
million of the offering proceeds in World Theatre, Inc., a
speculative start-up company in which Eric Hunter, a brother of
the Company's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, was a
substantial shareholder.

In addition, in December 2000, Cree bought the UltraRF division
from Spectrian Corporation for approximately 908,000 shares of
Cree common stock and $30 million in cash.  Cree had entered
into a two-year supply contract with Spectrian that would
generate $58 million in revenue for Cree but Cree failed to
disclose that the Spectrian supply contract only obligated
Spectrian to purchase product from Cree if Cree were able to
sell at the best available commercial price for particular
products; otherwise, Spectrian was free to purchase from other
vendors. Despite continued losses that the UltraRF division
sustained, Cree failed to timely write down the division's
goodwill, which the Company persisted in valuing at $81.7
million.

The full extent of the Company's financial statement fraud was
not revealed until June 13, 2003. On that date, the Company
revealed that it had been sued by Eric Hunter, a substantial
Cree shareholder, and a brother of Cree Chairman, Fred Neal
Hunter.

The lawsuit revealed, among other things, that the Company had
altered corporate books and records to mislead auditors and
investors as to material facts to boost executive compensation,
filed public documents that omitted significant material facts
in connection with the Company's secondary stock offerings,
entered into an undisclosed long-term requirements contract with
C3 Corporation that required that company to accept more
shipments than demand would warrant, of silicon carbide crystals
for the manufacture of moissanite gems solely to artificially
inflate Cree's revenues and share price.  As a result of this
news, the Company's share price dropped 18.5%.

For more details, contact Susan R. Gross or Deborah R. Gross by
Mail: 1515 Locust Street, 2nd Floor, Philadelphia, PA 19102 by
Phone: 866-561-3600 (toll-free) or 215-561-3600 by E-mail:
susang@bernardmgross.com or debbie@bernardmgross.com or visit
the firm's Website: http://www.bernardmgross.com


CRYO-CELL INTERNATIONAL: Weiss & Yourman Files Stock Suit in FL
---------------------------------------------------------------
Weiss & Yourman initiated a securities class action against
Cryo-Cell International, Inc. (NASDAQ: CCELE) and certain of its
officers in the United States District Court for the Middle
District of Florida on behalf of purchasers of Cryo-Cell
securities between March 16, 1999 and May 20, 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 Cryo-Cell securities during the class
period at artificially inflated prices.

For more details, contact: David C. Katz, James E. Tullman,
and/or Mark D. Smilow, 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


DAISYTEK INTERNATIONAL: Wechsler Harwood Files TX Stock Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Wechsler Harwood LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise
acquired Daisytek International Corporation securities
(NasdaqNM:DZTK) during the period from November 9, 2001 to April
28, 2003, both dates inclusive.  The complaint names James R.
Powell, Ralph Mitchell, Peter Wharf as defendants.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 by making a series of materially false and
misleading statements concerning Daisytek's financial results
during the class period that artificially inflated the price of
Daisytek securities.

In particular, the complaint alleges that defendants improperly
accounted for uncollectible accounts receivable and vendor
rebates receivable in order to inflate the Company's financial
results.  Because of their misconduct, the Individual Defendants
were able to sell their personal holdings in the Company's stock
for over a million dollars in proceeds.

Additionally, the complaint alleges that during the class
period, the Individual Defendants permitted the Company to enter
into a $200 million credit facility, raise additional capital,
and caused Daisytek to benefit economically from their wrongful
course of conduct.

On April 28, 2003, Daisytek announced that it expected
significant losses as a result of a write-down of customer and
vendor receivables on inventory and large restructuring charges.  
Subsequently, Daisytek announced the resignation of both its
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer.

For more details, contact Craig Lowther by Mail: 488 Madison
Avenue, 8th Floor, New York, New York 10022 by Phone:
(877) 935-7400 or by E-mail: clowther@whesq.com


DIVINE INC.: Pomerantz Haudek Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. IL
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP initiated a
securities class action filed in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Eastern Division),
against four Directors and/or Officers of Divine, Inc. (Other
OTC:DVINQ.PK), on behalf of investors who, during the period
between November 12, 2001 and February 18, 2003, inclusive
either purchased or otherwise acquired Divine common stock, or
exchanged Viant Corporation common stock for Divine shares in
the merger of Viant and Divine, which was completed on or about
September 27, 2002.  The suit names as defendants:

     (1) Andrew J. Filipowski,

     (2) Michael P. Cullinane,

     (3) Alexander Szlam, and

     (4) Jude M. Sullivan

The suit alleges the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing a series
of material misrepresentations to the market, which served to
artificially inflate the price of Divine securities.  It is
alleged that as Divine's cash position deteriorated in late
2002, defendants caused Divine to cannibalize one of its
acquisitions, RoweCom.

In the 4th Q of 2002, defendants caused RoweCom to collect and
transfer to Divine $65 million in pre-payments from RoweCom's
customers and to divert at least $73.7 million in funds from
RoweCom's accounts to Divine between April 2002 and December
2002.  As a result, RoweCom was forced into bankruptcy in
January 2003 and its estate filed a fraudulent transfer action
against Divine at the same time in the bankruptcy proceeding.

As alleged in the complaint, defendants failed to disclose and
misrepresented that:

     (i) by purchasing income streams 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;

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

   (iii) 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 conduct.

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."

As a result, Divine advised that it 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
this announcement, the price of Divine stock fell dramatically.

Thereafter, Divine was forced to seek protection under the
federal bankruptcy statutes and according to its bankruptcy
filings, the Company then had only approximately $25 million in
cash left on hand.  On March 4, 2003, the Nasdaq Stock Market
delisted Divine's stock and defendants disclosed that a federal
grand jury was investigating Divine's receipt of the $65 million
in pre-payments.

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


EUNIVERSE INC.: Rabin Murray Lodges Securities Suit in C.D. CA
--------------------------------------------------------------
Rabin Murray & Frank LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the Central District of
California, on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased
or otherwise acquired eUniversie Inc. securities (NasdaqSC:EUNI)
between July 31, 2002 through May 5, 2003, both dates inclusive.  
The suit names as defendants the Company and:

     (1) Brad D. Greenspan, and

     (2) Joseph L. Varraveto

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 (SEC).  In
particular, the complaint alleges that during the class period
defendants failed to disclose and/or misrepresented that the
Company had materially overstated its revenues by incorrectly
processing transactions through the Company's accounting system.  

On May 6, 2003, before the market opened, defendants shocked the
investing public when it announced that it would restate its
financial statements for the second and third quarters, and
possibly the first quarter, of fiscal 2003, and that investors
should not rely on eUniverse's previously issued financial
statements pending the restatement.  Following the announcement,
the Nasdaq Small Cap market halted trading of eUniverse stock.

The Company later announced that the SEC had commenced an
inquiry into the restatement, and that a Director on the
Company's Audit Committee had resigned.  As a result of these
false and misleading statements and omissions of material fact,
the Complaint alleges that the price of eUniverse securities was
artificially inflated throughout the class period, causing
plaintiff and 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


INTERMUNE INC.: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
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 InterMune,
Inc. (NasdaqNM:ITMN) between January 6, 2003 and June 11, 2003,
inclusive.  The case is pending in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California against the
Company and its Chief Executive Officer.

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


LABORATORY CORPORATION: Cauley Geller Lodges NC Securities Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Rudman, LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, on behalf of purchasers of
Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings (NYSE: LH) publicly
traded securities during the period between February 13, 2002
and October 3, 2002, inclusive.

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 February 13,
2002 to October 3, 2002.  

The complaint alleges that by the start of the class period
LabCorp was being adversely impacted by a host of undisclosed
negative trends, which were causing the Company to experience
declining revenues and earnings.  In particular the complaint
alleges that LabCorp failed to disclose and/or misrepresented
the following adverse facts, among others:

     (1) that LabCorp was currently experiencing a material
         decline in growth rates for routine/core testing
         volumes;

     (2) that LabCorp's marketing and relationship management
         staff were inadequate and could not effectively compete
         with local and regional clinical laboratory services;

     (3) that the service levels, including price, turnaround
         time and quality of service, of the Company's remote
         testing facilities including the Company's STAT
         laboratories and patient care facilities, among others,
         were inadequate and could not effectively compete with
         local and regional clinical laboratory services;

     (4) that the types of clinical laboratory services
         available through the Company's remote testing
         facilities were limited and could not effectively
         compete with local and regional clinical laboratory
         services; and

     (5) based on the foregoing, defendants' opinions,
         projections and forecasts concerning the Company and
         its operations were lacking in a reasonable basis at
         all times.

Rather than disclose the truth about the Company's weakening
condition and jeopardize its ability to complete acquisitions,
defendants issued a series of materially false and misleading
statements to the market in order to inflate the price of
LabCorp common stock and enable the Company to use its stock as
currency for a material acquisition.  In addition, prior to the
disclosure of the true facts about the Company, LabCorp insiders
sold more than $29 million of their personally-held LabCorp
common stock to the unsuspecting public.

The truth about LabCorp was partially revealed, when on October
3, 2002, defendants announced that LabCorp failed to meet
revenue and earnings guidance for the third quarter ended
September 30, 2002, as well as the remainder of 2002, due to a
revenue shortfall, primarily, in the South and Southeast regions
of the US stemming from a material loss of routine/core testing
volumes among independent physicians.

Subsequently, on October 4, 2002, Mr. MacMahon admitted that
defendants were aware that the Company was losing sales to local
and regional labs and had attempted, unsuccessfully, to "remedy
the problem" as early as May 2002.  Following these
announcements, the price of LabCorp common shares collapsed,
losing over 34% of their value in one day of trading to close at
$21.68 per share on October 4, 2002, and falling over 58% from
the class period high of $51.98 per share reached on or about
May 10, 2002.

For more details, contact Samuel H. Rudman, David A. Rosenfeld,
Jackie Addison, Heather Gann or Candace Randle by Mail: P.O. Box
25438, Little Rock, AR 72221-5438 by Phone: 1-888-551-9944 by
Fax: 1-501-312-8505 or by E-mail: info@cauleygeller.com


LABORATORY CORPORATION: Charles Piven Files Stock Lawsuit in NC
---------------------------------------------------------------
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 Laboratory
Corporation of America Holdings (NYSE:LH) between February 13,
2002 and October 3, 2002, inclusive.  The case is pending in the
United States District Court for the Middle District of North
Carolina against the Company 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 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


LABORATORY CORPORATION: Schiffrin & Barroway Files NC Stock Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the Middle District of
North Carolina on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock
of Laboratory Corporation Of America Holdings (NYSE:LH) from
February 13, 2002 through October 3, 2002, inclusive.

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 February 13,
2002 to October 3, 2002.

The complaint alleges that by the start of the class period
LabCorp was being adversely impacted by a host of undisclosed
negative trends, which were causing the Company to experience
declining revenues and earnings.  In particular the complaint
alleges that LabCorp failed to disclose and/or misrepresented
the following adverse facts, among others:

     (1) that LabCorp was currently experiencing a material
         decline in growth rates for routine/core testing
         volumes;

     (2) that LabCorp's marketing and relationship management
         staff were inadequate and could not effectively compete
         with local and regional clinical laboratory services;

     (3) that the service levels, including price, turnaround
         time and quality of service, of the Company's remote
         testing facilities including the Company's STAT
         laboratories and patient care facilities, among others,
         were inadequate and could not effectively compete with  
         local and regional clinical laboratory services;

     (4) that the types of clinical laboratory services
         available through the Company's remote testing
         facilities were limited and could not effectively
         compete with local and regional clinical laboratory
         services; and

     (5) based on the foregoing, defendants' opinions,
         projections and forecasts concerning the Company and
         its operations were lacking in a reasonable basis at
         all times.

Rather than disclose the truth about the Company's weakening
condition and jeopardize its ability to complete acquisitions,
defendants issued a series of materially false and misleading
statements to the market in order to inflate the price of
LabCorp common stock and enable the Company to use its stock as
currency for a material acquisition.

In addition, prior to the disclosure of the facts about the
Company, LabCorp insiders sold more than $29 million of their
personally held LabCorp common stock to the unsuspecting public.

The truth about LabCorp was partially revealed, when on October
3, 2002, defendants announced that LabCorp failed to meet
revenue and earnings guidance for the third quarter ended
September 30, 2002, as well as the remainder of 2002, due to a
revenue shortfall, primarily, in the South and Southeast regions
of the U.S. stemming from a material loss of routine/core
testing volumes among independent physicians.

Subsequently, on October 4, 2002, Mr. MacMahon admitted that
defendants were aware that the Company was losing sales to local
and regional labs and had attempted, unsuccessfully, to ``remedy
the problem'' as early as May 2002.  

Following these announcements, the price of LabCorp common stock
collapsed, losing over 34% of their value in one day of trading
to close at $21.68 per share on October 4, 2002, and falling
over 58% from the Class Period high of $51.98 per share reached
on or about May 10, 2002.

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


PRINTCAFE SOFTWARE: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Suit in PA
--------------------------------------------------------------
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 Printcafe
Software, Inc. (NasdaqNM:PCAF) between June 18, 2002 and October
22, 2002, inclusive.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Pennsylvania.  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


RECOTON CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Suit in FL
---------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities
class action on behalf of purchasers of the securities of
Recoton Corporation (NasdaqNM:RCOTQ) between November 15, 1999
through August 19, 2002, inclusive who have been damaged
thereby.  The action is pending in the United States District
Court for the Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division,
against:

     (1) Arnold Kezsbom,

     (2) Robert L. Borchardt,

     (3) Stuart Mont, and

     (4) Tracy Clark

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 November 15, 1999 and
August 19, 2002, thereby artificially inflating the price of
Recoton securities.

During the class period, the Company issued statements that
failed to disclose the following adverse facts, among others:

     (i) that a "strategic plan," which was required by its
         creditors, was not implemented to improve efficiencies,
         increase future profitability, improve cash flow, and
         increase return on assets;

    (ii) that company executives received bonuses prior to
         meeting corporate financial goals contrary to the
         Company's statements that Recoton was moving to a more
         "incentive-based method of compensation;"

   (iii) that the Company's reported financial results that were
         in violation of generally accepted accounting
         principles (GAAP) because of material inventory
         overstatements, and improper revenue recognition
         tactics.

On August 19, 2002, the Company revealed that it had granted
additional price concessions to customers "on products
previously purchased."  On news of this, shares of Recoton stock
fell 15% to close at $1.76 per share, a far cry from the Class
Period high of over $20 per share.

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: Recotonlcase@milbergNY.com or visit
the firm's Website: http://www.milberg.com


STOCKWALK INC.: Zimmerman Reed Launches Securities Lawsuit in MN
----------------------------------------------------------------
Zimmerman Reed PLLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the District of Minnesota on
behalf of persons who purchased the common stock of Stockwalk on
the open market from May 8, 2001 through September 25, 2001.  At
the time, the stock was trading on the Nasdaq Exchange under the
symbol STOK.  It has now been de-listed.

The shareholder bringing the lawsuit is a resident of Faribault,
Minnesota who purchased Stockwalk securities during the class
period on the open market.  The complaint alleges that certain
former officers of Stockwalk issued materially false statements
and omitted material facts concerning Stockwalk's financial
condition during the class period.

Generally, defendants represented that Stockwalk's internal
controls were sufficiently adequate to permit the issuance of a
report on the company's financials statements for the period
ending March 31, 2001, that the company was not in violation of
certain net capital requirements and that the company was not at
risk with respect to its stock lending activities.

The complaint alleges that purchasers of Stockwalk securities
were unaware that a significant activity that the company was
engaged in was stock lending.  The complaint also asserts that
Defendant Ernst & Young lacked independence in conducting its
auditing and accounting activities, was negligent in performing
its services and should have objected to the issuance in June
and July 2001, of its prior, unqualified opinion on the March
31, 2001 financial statements.

For more details, contact Robert C. Moilanen or Carolyn G.
Anderson by Phone: 800-755-0098 or 612-341-0400

                          *********

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  * * *