CAR_Public/030806.mbx            C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
            Wednesday, August 6, 2003, Vol. 5, No. 154

                        Headlines                            


ATLANTA FALCONS: Owner Labels Sex Bias Lawsuit As "Unjustified"
CALIFORNIA: Gov. Davis Seeks Delay of October 7 Recall Elections
CERNER CORPORATION: Shareholders Lodge Stock Lawsuits in W.D. MO
COMCAST CORPORATION: Moves For Dismissal of At Home Stock Suits
CORONET INDUSTRIES: Erin Brockovich, Firm Probes Health Charges

DYNEGY INC.: Two Former Executives To Appear in Houston Court
ENERGY CLUB: Recalls Nutty Fruit Mix Due To Undeclared Sulfites
EVERLASTING DISTRIBUTORS: Recalls Ricoa For Undeclared Peanuts
FIDELITY NATIONAL: Consumers Lodge Antitrust Lawsuit in CA Court
FIDELITY NATIONAL: Shareholders File Suit Over FNIS Merger in DE

FOG CUTTER: Enters Mediation of Lawsuits Over CCL Receivership
FTD INC.: Settles Consolidated Securities Suit For $10.7 Million
IBM CORPORATION: IL Court Pension Ruling To Affect Other Firms
LEHMAN BROTHERS: Not Liable To Return Monies First Alliance Paid
MANOR DELICATESSEN: Recalls Potato Salad For Possible Listeria

MEDCO HEALTH: NJ Court Approves $42.5M Consumer Suit Settlement
MODELING AGENCIES: Justice Dept Probes Model Antitrust Charges
MOTOROLA INC.: Shareholders Launch Lawsuit Over Telsim Financing
MOTOROLA INC.: Pension Plan Members Launch ERISA Suit in N.D. IL
NETZERO INC.: Enters Settlement For Securities Fraud Suits in NY

PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS: Settles Bonuses Suit For $1.8 Million
PUBLIC SERVICE: Asks NJ Court To Dismiss Lawsuit Over Gas Meters
QUINTEK TECHNOLOGIES: SEC Files Securities Complaint in C.D. CA
TALX CORPORATION: Asks MO Court to Dismiss Securities Fraud Suit
TOBACCO LITIGATION: Louisiana Trial To Resume When Jury Returns

TRAVACALM: Australians To Launch Lawsuit Over Adverse Reactions
UNITED ONLINE: Reaches Settlement in CA Consumer Fraud Lawsuit
UNITED ONLINE: Discovery Proceeds in Consumer Fraud Suit in NY

               Meetings, Conferences & Seminars

* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
* Online Teleconferences

                   
                New Securities Fraud Cases

CATALINA MARKETING: Schiffrin & Barroway Files FL Stock Lawsuit
CATALINA MARKETING: Cauley Geller Lodges Securities Suit in FL
IMPATH INC.: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S. D. NY
IMPATH INC.: Brodsky & Smith Launches Securities Suit in S.D. NY
IMPATH INC.: Abbey Gardy Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY

IMPATH INC.: Cohen Milstein Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
QUEST SOFTWARE: Lasky & Rifkind Files Securities Suit in C.D. CA



                        *********


ATLANTA FALCONS: Owner Labels Sex Bias Lawsuit As "Unjustified"
---------------------------------------------------------------
Atlanta Falcons owner Arthur Blank labeled as "totally
unjustified" the allegations of sexual harassment in a suit
filed by the team's former vice president Carol Faubert in
Georgia federal court, the Associated Press reports.

Ms. Faubert, 53, alleges that she was fired in February for
speaking out against the treatment of women in the organization.  
She claimed Mr. Blank condoned a work climate in which female
employees were treated as "sex objects," and fired her for
objecting to Mr. Blank's refusal to hire women with young
children and his decision to prohibit certain employees from
earning overtime.

"It's sad that we have to take time to deal with this," Mr.
Blank told AP.  "But to me that's a lot less painful than having
these statements being made about us and our organization and
about me and others that are complete distortions and
fabrications."

Mr. Blank further stated that Ms. Faubert promised to drop the
suit if she were paid $5 million.  "My answer is that, as a
matter of principle, I'm not going to do something like that .
We have nothing to hide, and we'll be happy to talk about all
the truths and just deal with it."

Mr. Blank was the co-founder and former CEO of Home Depot.  
In 1994, seven California women filed against the world's
largest home improvement retailer for gender discrimination,
saying Home Depot denied women promotions because of their
gender.  The two sides reached a settlement in which Home Depot
paid $104.5 million.  Mr. Blank said there was no correlation
between that suit and this current one.


CALIFORNIA: Gov. Davis Seeks Delay of October 7 Recall Elections
----------------------------------------------------------------
Embattled California Governor Gray Davis is attempting to delay
the October 7 recall ballot, saying an October vote on whether
to unseat him would be unfair to millions of California voters,
Reuters reports.

A lawsuit filed in California Supreme Court alleges that there
were older voting machines and fewer polling places to operate
for the special ballot in October, which would disenfranchise
millions of California voters.  The suit also states that a
special election would be costly, and seeks the postponement of
the recall to March, when the presidential primary takes place.  

Gov. Davis could benefit from a March election date, because a
presidential primary vote would attract more Democrats who would
be more likely to keep him in office.  However, if the court
refuses the appeal, it would wreck havoc on Gov. Davis'
popularity, which suffered highly after the state encountered
fiscal woes.

"The courts have many, many times intervened in an election
situation and delayed an election when it was apparent that an
election wasn't going to be held fairly," lawyer Michael Kahn,
who filed the lawsuit for Davis told Reuters.

"It's the latest sign of desperation of the Davis camp," Chris
Wysocki, spokesman for Rescue California, a Republican-backed
group that spearheaded the recall drive told Reuters.  "They're
doing everything they can to delay this process."

Worried Democrats say that if the recall succeeds, they might
consider fielding an alternative candidate before the Saturday
filing deadline.  US Senator Barbara Boxer told Reuters, "My
view is you can't shut the door on that . I don't think you
should ever shut the door on another strategy. We have a very
deep bench."

"I have great confidence that the people of this state are fair-
minded and will make a good judgment as to whether I have 63
days left to serve as governor or three and a half years," Gov.
Davis told Reuters.

Four recall-related cases are pending before the state Supreme
Court.  So far, no case has slowed the recall process.


CERNER CORPORATION: Shareholders Lodge Stock Lawsuits in W.D. MO
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cerner Corporation faces several securities class actions filed
in the United States District Court, Western District of
Missouri after a decline in Company's stock price following
the Company's announcement on April3, 2003 that it would not
meet revenue and earnings estimates for the first quarter of
2003.

In general, the lawsuits allege that, during various class
periods commencing as early as July 17, 2002 and ending April 2,
2003, the Company and individual named defendants misrepresented
or failed to disclose certain factors, which they allege
impacted the Company's business and anticipated revenue and
earnings, all allegedly in violation of Sections10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
thereunder.

Given that the lawsuits have only recently been filed, the
Company cannot currently predict the outcome of the litigation
or the amount of any potential loss if its defense is
unsuccessful.  However, it believes that all the claims in the
lawsuits are without merit.


COMCAST CORPORATION: Moves For Dismissal of At Home Stock Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Comcast Corporation moved for the dismissal of several class
actions filed against it as a result of alleged conduct of the
Company with respect to its investment in and distribution
relationship with At Home Corporation.  At Home was a provider
of high-speed Internet access and content services which filed
for bankruptcy protection in September 2001.

Several class actions were filed against the Company, Brian L.
Roberts (the Company's President and Chief Executive Officer and
a director), AT&T (the former controlling shareholder of At Home
and also a former distributor of the At Home service) and other
corporate and individual defendants in the Superior Court of San
Mateo County, California.  The suits allege breaches of
fiduciary duty on the part of the Company and the other
defendants in connection with transactions agreed to in March
2000 among At Home, the Company, AT&T and Cox Communications,
Inc.  Cox is also an investor in At Home and a former
distributor of the At Home service

Several class actions were filed against Comcast Cable
Communications, Inc., AT&T and others in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging
securities law violations and common law fraud in connection
with disclosures made by At Home in 2001.

Another lawsuit was brought in the United States District Court
for the District of Delaware in the name of At Home by certain
At Home bondholders against the Company, Brian L. Roberts, Cox
and others, alleging breaches of fiduciary duty relating to the
March 2000 transactions and seeking recovery of alleged short-
swing profits of at least $600 million pursuant to Section 16(b)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 purported to have arisen
in connection with certain transactions relating to At Home
stock effected pursuant to the March 2000 agreements.

The actions in San Mateo County, California have been stayed by
the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of
California, the court in which At Home filed for bankruptcy, as
violating the automatic bankruptcy stay.  In the Southern
District of New York actions, the court ordered the actions
consolidated into a single action.  


CORONET INDUSTRIES: Erin Brockovich, Firm Probes Health Charges
---------------------------------------------------------------
Erin Bockovich-Ellis, the feisty former file clerk whose
investigation of a California polluter rocketed her to national
fame, is now investigating Coronet Industries, and the health
complaints of residents living near it, the Tampa Tribune
reports.

Ms. Brockovich-Ellis, who has been portrayed on the big screen
by Julia Roberts and lauded by environmentalists across the
country, and lawyer Ed Masry have expressed a "serious interest"
in the case, after hearing news reports about health complaints
and listening to a concerned mother or a child with
disabilities.

Shannon Franco contacted Mr. Masry's lawfirm, Masry and Vititoe,
about a rare developmental delay experienced by her 2 1/2-year-
old son, Nicholas, who has difficulty communicating.  He had
been in and out of the hospital for tests three times, but
doctors have not been able to pin down a diagnosis.  Ms. Franco,
a biologist, told the Tampa Tribune she "knows how things that
are in the air and water can affect health."

Mr. Masry told her to send him The Tampa Tribune's articles
about Coronet, and to retrieve some documents from the local
regulatory agencies.  The levels of toxins on Coronet's property
concerned him, namely "heavy metals, inorganic salts, alpha
radiation and mercury," he told the Tribune.

Mr. Masry said it was too early to tell how the lawsuits could
be pursued, but said it was possible that property damages could
be handled on a class-action basis, and health concerns could be
handled individually.

Health officials have also began testing private wells at homes
near Coronet to determine whether there is a link between the
plant and residents' health problems.  Mr. Masry said the
investigation is in its embryonic stages.  The firm is due to
meet with residents, representatives of states health and
environmental agencies and the Hillsborough County Environmental
Protection Commission to discuss residents' concerns on August
19 at Marshall Middle School.

Coronet Industries is a 100- year-old phosphate processing plant
that has been the subject of a federal public health assessment,
the target of a local and federal criminal investigation, and is
in violation of air and water permits with local regulatory
agencies.


DYNEGY INC.: Two Former Executives To Appear in Houston Court
-------------------------------------------------------------
Two former Dynegy, Inc. executives charged with fraud are set to
appear before United States District Judge Sim Lake, to be re-
arraigned over charges of financial fraud, the Associated Press
reports.

Gene Shannon Foster, 44, and Helen Christine Sharkey, 31, are
set to appear over charges that they booked debt as cash flow in
2001 in a deal dubbed "Project Alpha" to represent the Company
as more financially healthy.  A third former Dynegy executive,
Jamie Olis, 37, faced the same charges but will not appear in
court.

Under "Project Alpha," the executives forged a deal to buy
natural gas from a partnership, ABG Gas Supply LLC, at a $300
million discount, resell the gas at market prices and record the
$300 million as cash flow on Dynegy's books.

A June 13 indictment against the trio alleges they promised full
repayment to banks backing ABG, so the money was a loan and
should have been booked as debt.  The indictment said further
the executives hid the secret payback agreement from outside
auditors and others at Dynegy.  The Company also wrongly booked
a related $79 million tax benefit, the indictment alleged.

The three executives earlier pleaded innocent to three counts
each of wire fraud and one count each of securities fraud, mail
fraud and conspiracy to commit securities and mail fraud.

A spokeswoman for US Attorney Michael Shelby in Houston, Kesha
Handy, would not discuss the Dynegy case, but said typically a
re-arraignment is scheduled for a change of plea, the Associated
Press reports.  Attorneys for all three did not immediately
return telephone calls from The Associated Press for comment
Tuesday.


ENERGY CLUB: Recalls Nutty Fruit Mix Due To Undeclared Sulfites
---------------------------------------------------------------
Energy Club, Inc. of Pacoima, California is recalling its Nutty
Fruit Mix product because it may contain undeclared sulfites.  
People who have an allergy or severe sensitivity to sulfites run
the risk of serious or life-threatening allergic reaction is
they consume these products.

Nutty Fruit Mix was distributed nation-wide throughout the
continental United States and may have been purchased by
consumers in various retail establishments.  The product can be
identified by its bright yellow and orange header cards with the
Energy Club logo visible on the lower portion of the front
panel.  The header card is attached to a see-through cellophane
bag clearly displaying the product.

No illnesses have been confirmed to date.  The recall was
initiated after it was discovered that the Nutty Fruit Mix
product containing sulfites was distributed in packaging that
did not reveal the presence of the sulfites.  Production has
been suspended until the company is certain that the problem has
been corrected.

Consumers who have purchased Energy Club, Inc. Nutty Fruit Mix
are urged to return it to the place of purchase for a full
refund.  Consumers with questions may contact the company by
Phone: 818-834-8222.


EVERLASTING DISTRIBUTORS: Recalls Ricoa For Undeclared Peanuts
--------------------------------------------------------------
Everlasting Distributors, Inc. is recalling 4 oz. boxes of Ricoa
Curly Tops Milk Chocolate because they may contain undeclared
peanuts.  People who have allergies to peanuts run the risk of
serious or life-threatening allergic reactions if they consume
this product.

The recalled Ricoa Curly Tops are packaged in a cardboard box
with UPC# 480004021116.  Curly Tops were sold in New Jersey and
New York.

The recall was initiated after routine sampling by New York
State Department of Agriculture and Markets food inspectors
revealed that the peanut-containing product was distributed in
packaging that did not reveal the presence of peanuts on the
labels.  No illnesses have been reported to date in connection
with this problem.

Consumers who are allergic to peanuts and have purchased 4 oz.
packages of Ricoa Curly Tops Milk Chocolate are urged to return
them to the place of purchase.  Consumers with questions may
contact the company by Phone: 1-888-783-8080.


FIDELITY NATIONAL: Consumers Lodge Antitrust Lawsuit in CA Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fidelity National Financial, Inc. faces two class actions filed
in the Los Angeles County Superior Court naming as defendants
the Company and Chicago Title.

The complaints seek class action status and allege that the
companies together with other title companies have conspired to
fix the price of title products in violation of state and anti-
trust statutes.  The Company believes the lawsuits are without
merit.


FIDELITY NATIONAL: Shareholders File Suit Over FNIS Merger in DE
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fidelity National Financial, Inc. faces three class actions
filed in Delaware Chancery Court in connection with the
Company's acquisition of Fidelity National Information Services,
Inc. (FNIS).

The suit alleges breach of FNIS' fiduciary duties.  These
actions have recently been consolidated.  FNIS has retained
counsel to represent them and the named members of their board
of directors, three of whom are also directors of the Company.  
The Company and FNIS believe the lawsuits are without merit.


FOG CUTTER: Enters Mediation of Lawsuits Over CCL Receivership
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fog Cutter Capital Group, Inc. is engaged in mediation in the
civil class actions filed against it, its subsidiary Fog Cap
L.P. (formerly known as Wilshire Real Estate Partnership L.P.),
its Chief Executive Officer, Andrew Wiederhorn, and former
president, Lawrence Mendelsohn.

The suits relate to the receivership of Capital Consultants,
L.L.C. (CCL).  The CCL Suits named multiple defendants in
addition to the Company and its executives.  In addition, the
claimants filed claims against a number of additional parties
regarding the same alleged losses, including a number of
professional advisors to named defendants.  The suits are:

     (1) TOM HAZZARD, ET AL., V. CCL, ET AL., US District Court
         of Oregon, Civil No. CV 00-1338-HU (filed September 29,
         2000);

     (2) MARK EIDEM, ET AL., V. TRUSTEES UNITED ASSN. UNION
         LOCAL 290, ET AL., U.S. District Court of Oregon, Civil
         No. CV 00-1446-HA (filed October 26, 2000);

     (3) NANCY SCHULTZ, ET AL., V. GARY KIRKLAND, ET AL., U.S.
         District Court of Oregon, Civil No. CV 00-1377-HA
         (filed October 10, 2000);

     (4) LARRY MILLER, ET AL., V. LEE CLINTON, ET AL., U.S.
         District Court of Oregon, Civil No. CV00-1317-HA (filed
         September 26, 2000);

     (5) SALVATORE J. CHILIA, ET AL., V. CCL, ET AL., U.S.
         District Court of Oregon, Civil No. CV 00-1633 JE
         (filed November 29, 2000); and

     (6) MADOLE V. CAPITAL CONSULTANTS ET. AL., U.S. District
         Court of Oregon, Civil No. CV 00-1600-HU (filed
         December 1, 2000)

In the HAZZARD, CHILIA and MADOLE cases, the trustees of several
Taft-Hartley trusts filed suit against CCL and several
individuals and organizations CCL did business with (including
the Company, Mr. Wiederhorn and Mr. Mendelsohn).  In the EIDEM,
SCHULTZ and MILLER cases, the trustees who were plaintiffs in
HAZZARD were in turn named as defendants in class action suits
filed by beneficiaries of the Taft-Hartley trusts on which they
served as plaintiff-trustees.  In the cases in which the
trustees were defendants, they filed third-party complaints
against several parties, including the Company, Mr. Wiederhorn
and Mr. Mendelsohn.

In addition, a group of investors that are not Taft-Hartley
trusts filed a similar complaint against the same defendants, as
well as other individuals not named in the prior complaints, in
the case of AMERICAN FUNERAL & CEMETERY TRUST SERVICES ET. AL. v
CAPITAL CONSULTANTS ET. AL., U.S. District Court of Oregon,
Civil No. 01-00609-HU (filed April 28, 2001).

The CCL Lawsuits were all virtually identical and included
claims against the Company, Mr. Wiederhorn and Mr. Mendelsohn
alleging:

     (i) breaches of fiduciary duties under the Employee
         Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA);

    (ii) knowing participation in a fiduciary breach under
         ERISA;

   (iii) knowing participation in a prohibited transaction under
         ERISA;

    (iv) knowing transfer of trust assets under ERISA;

     (v) negligence;

    (vi) common law claim for breach of fiduciary duty;

   (vii) tortious interference with contract;

  (viii) conversion;

    (ix) constructive trust, restitution and unjust enrichment;

     (x) fraud;

    (xi) state securities law claims; and

   (xii) breach of contract

The CCL Lawsuits also alleged claims against Mr. Wiederhorn and
Mr. Mendelsohn of tortious interference with business
relationships between the Taft-Hartley trusts and CCL, as well
as violations of the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt
Organization provisions of the Organized Crime Control Act of
1970, 18 U.S.C. Section 1961-1965 (RICO).

The claimants in the CCL Lawsuits claimed total losses by the
various plaintiffs against all defendants in the range of $400
million.  Approximately $160 million of this amount arises from
losses on investments, which plaintiffs alleged related to Mr.
Wiederhorn and Mr. Mendelsohn and companies with which they were
affiliated, for which plaintiffs alleged the Company shares some
unspecified portion of the liability.  Additional damages were
claimed for prejudgment interest dating from the date each
investment under securities law claims under which plaintiffs
are seeking rescission remedies.

The RICO claims include additional claims for triple damages and
the tort claims include claims for punitive damages.  Attorneys'
fees were also sought under the ERISA, RICO and securities law
claims.  The claimants did not describe with any specificity the
proportion or share of losses which they claim were attributable
to the Company or its executives, as compared to the other
parties and other potential defendants.

The overall remedies sought against all defendants included
claims for broad relief under the remedial provisions of ERISA,
such as rescission of transactions and the imposition of a
constructive trust over any trust assets which plaintiffs
claimed were obtained in violation of ERISA.  Certain of the
claims against the Company appeared to be covered by releases
that were given by CCL to the Company and Mr. Wiederhorn and Mr.
Mendelsohn.  

The claimants' suits sought to rescind the transactions in which
the releases were granted.  The claimants also seek common law
remedies such as damages and punitive damages.  However, certain
of these common law claims may be preempted by ERISA.

CCL was placed in receivership by the Department of Labor and
the Securities and Exchange Commission in the cases of SEC V.
CAPITAL CONSULTANTS, L.L.C., et. al., U.S. District Court of
Oregon, Case No. 00-1290-KI, and HERMAN V. CAPITAL CONSULTANTS,
L.L.C., et. al., U.S. District Court of Oregon, Case No. 001291-
KI.

When the receivership order was entered, the court stayed other
proceedings against CCL for several weeks.  Once the stay was
partially lifted, the parties deferred discovery and delayed the
filing of any answers or legal challenges to the sufficiency of
the pleadings in order to facilitate a confidential global
mediation process.  

US Circuit Court Judge Edward Leavy of the Ninth Circuit Court
of Appeals was selected as the mediator.  Discovery and motion
practice was stayed pending the outcome of the mediation,
excepting only a limited amount of document production by all of
the parties to the litigation.


FTD INC.: Settles Consolidated Securities Suit For $10.7 Million
----------------------------------------------------------------
Flowers and florist services provider FTD, Inc. reached a $10.7
million settlement for the consolidated securities class action
filed over its 2002 FTD.com merger, Reuters reports.

Under the settlement, the Company will issue $10.7 million of
shares of its class A common stock to the class members, and
take a related $11 million charge in its fiscal fourth quarter.  
The Company did not admit to any wrongdoing on their part, or
verified the suit's claims, under the agreement.

"The company and the other defendants have denied, and continue
to deny, that they have committed any violation of federal
securities or other laws," it said in a written statement.  The
Company expects a court to determine soon whether it would
approve the settlement.


IBM CORPORATION: IL Court Pension Ruling To Affect Other Firms
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of
Illinois' ruling against IBM Corporation over the way it changed
its traditional pension plan could affect hundreds of other
companies who changed their plans in a similar manner, the New
York times reports.

In 1995, the Company switched to a hybrid plan called a pension
equity plan, and in 1999 it converted to what is called a cash-
balance plan.  That type combines some features of traditional
pensions, which provide a defined benefit at retirement, with
other features of 401(k) retirement plans.  

A class action was then filed on behalf of approximately 140,000
current and former employees who alleged that the Company's
pension plan discriminates against older employees and that the
pension plan was adjusted twice since 1995 in a way that was
unfair to older members, an earlier Class Action Reporter story
states.

Judge Patrick Murphy ruled that the Company discriminated
against the class because the changes would leave them with
smaller benefits at retirement than younger workers would have
when they eventually retired.  

The Company plans to appeal.  Judge Murphy's ruling only dealt
with liability, but the court would tackle the question on how
to tackle the issue of how the employees would be compensated.  
This issue is delicate because market forces have magnified
pension costs to all companies, including IBM.

"All cash-balance plans would be viewed as age discriminatory"
if the ruling is upheld on appeal, David M. Speier, senior
consulting actuary with Watson Wyatt, a consulting firm that has
helped IBM and other companies make changes to their pension
plans told the New York Times.

The corporate world had hoped that disputes over cash-balance
pensions would be resolved this year by regulations being
written by the Internal Revenue Service.  "The court's decision
is in sharp tension with the Treasury's regulatory position," J.
Mark Iwry, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a
former benefits tax counsel at the Treasury Department told the
Times.

An IBM spokeswoman told the Times the company planned an
immediate appeal.  She said it was not clear whether an appeal
could be granted before Judge Murphy addressed the question of
compensation.   "We stand by our plan and believe it does not
discriminate on the basis of age," said the spokeswoman, Kendra
Collins.  "Under the court's interpretation of the law, every
cash-balance plan is illegal."


LEHMAN BROTHERS: Not Liable To Return Monies First Alliance Paid
----------------------------------------------------------------
A federal judge ruled recently against a claim that could have
left Lehman Brothers Holdings liable for more than $80 million
in a bankruptcy proceedings related to First Alliance, a now
defunct home-equity lender, the Dow Jones International News
reports.   

The order handed down by US District Judge David Carter in
California, denied a claim sought by the bankruptcy trustee
liquidating the assets of First Alliance Corporation, an Irvine,
California lender that had received financial backing from
Lehman.  

In 2000, First Alliance filed for Chapter 11 protection under
the federal bankruptcy code.  A class action pursued by 4,500
borrowers of subprime First Alliance loans accused both First
Alliance and Lehman of fraud.  The borrowers alleged fraudulent
loan practices at First Alliance.  In June 2003, a federal jury
found that Lehman had substantially assisted the alleged fraud
at First Alliance, holding Lehman responsible for 10 percent of
a $50.9 million damage verdict.  Lehman has not decided whether
to appeal that jury finding.

The case decided more recently, involving the claim made against
Lehman by the bankruptcy trustee liquidating First Alliance
assets.  The claim by the trustee is related to the class action
described above in that the bankruptcy relied upon the finding
of fraud against Lehman to support his claim that Lehman should
make repayment of about $83 million in loans plus interest that
Lehman has been paid in stages as one of First Alliance's
creditors.  The trustee contended that Lehman should return the
money because of its role in the alleged fraud.

Although Judge Carter found that Lehman's financing of First
Alliance constituted significant, active and knowing
participation by Lehman in the First Alliance fraud, he did not
find that participation sufficient to trigger repayment of the
monies paid by First Alliances for loans made by Lehman to the
now defunct company.

Judge Carter said in his ruling that Lehman's activities were
not a contributing factor that brought about the bankruptcy of
First Alliance.  Judge Carter also said the court does not
condone Lehman's activities, but its conduct does not
demonstrate gross or egregious misconduct that shocks the
conscience of the court, even when placed against the heightened
and rarely-met standard for the subordination of non-insider,
non-fiduciary claims.

Larry Gabriel, an attorney for the bankruptcy trustee, said he
was disappointed by Judge Carter's decision; in fact, he said he
could not understand it, since the court said Lehman had aided
and abetted the fraud; a finding also made by the court in the
borrowers' class-action lawsuit.


MANOR DELICATESSEN: Recalls Potato Salad For Possible Listeria
--------------------------------------------------------------
New York Agriculture Commissioner Nathan L. Rudgers today warned
consumers not to eat "Potato Salad" purchased from Manor
Delicatessen Inc., due to listeria contamination.

The "Potato Salad" was sold from an uncoded bulk display at the
store's deli department.  Manor Delicatessen Inc. is voluntarily
recalling the product.  The "Potato Salad" was sold in the
Woodhaven section of Queens, New York.

The problem was discovered as a result of routine sampling by
New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets food
inspectors.  Production of the product has been suspended while
the company investigates the source of the problem.

Listeria is a common organism found in nature.  It can cause
serious complications for pregnant women, such as still birth.  
Other problems can manifest in people with compromised immune
systems.  Listeria can also cause serious flu-like symptoms in
healthy individuals.  No illnesses have been reported to date in
connection with this problem.

Consumers who have purchased this product should return it to
the place of purchase or discard it.


MEDCO HEALTH: NJ Court Approves $42.5M Consumer Suit Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court in New Jersey granted
preliminary approval to a $42.5 million agreement proposed by
Medco Health Solutions to settle several class actions charging
the Company with overcharging clients, the Associated Press
reports.

The Company handles prescription drug benefits for more than 62
million Americans.  The suit alleges that Medco favored more
expensive drugs made by its parent, Merck & Co., Inc. over those
made by competitors instead of helping clients get discounted
drugs.

Federal Judge Charles Brieant approved the settlement, which
provides for cash compensation of $42.5 million for plaintiffs,
part of which represents the price difference between Merck
drugs provided to health plan members and equivalent, less-
expensive drugs made by competitors.  The Company will also be
required to change its operations so its clients will find its
business practices easier to understand.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs declined to comment, the Associated
Press reports.  "We're confident that our clients will agree
that this settlement represents a pragmatic business approach
that allows us to remain focused on their needs," Medco's
president and chief executive, David B. Snow Jr., said in a
statement.

Lawyers for both sides now will notify Medco's clients of the
proposed settlement, telling them how to participate, opt out or
comment on the case.  A December 11 hearing is scheduled for
final approval of the settlement.


MODELING AGENCIES: Justice Dept Probes Model Antitrust Charges
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyers with the United States Justice Department's antitrust
division are investigating several modeling agencies, including
Elite Model Management and Ford Models, Inc. over charges that
they fixed models' commission rates, Reuters reports.

Last month, the United States District Court in New York granted
class action status to a lawsuit charging the agencies with
fixing models' commission rates at 20 percent, which is twice
the 10 percent allowed by state law for employment agencies.  
The Companies allegedly conspired to evade state pricing
regulations by calling themselves model management companies.

The suit further alleged that price-fixing in the industry
stretches back to the 1970s.  They contend the agencies used a
trade association called the International Model Management
Association as a clearinghouse to discuss rates and other
competitive terms.

Representatives of Elite and Ford were not immediately available
for comment, Reuters states.  They and other agencies named in
the class action case have denied wrongdoing.

The Justice Department has conducted interviews in connection
with antitrust complaints, sources involved in the case told
Reuters.  A spokeswoman for the department declined to comment
on the case or whether department was investigating.

According to an article in Monday's edition of the Wall Street
Journal, the model agencies filed briefs with the court arguing
that the modeling business is intensely competitive and that all
their meetings were legal and proper.


MOTOROLA INC.: Shareholders Launch Lawsuit Over Telsim Financing
----------------------------------------------------------------
Motorola, Inc. faces several class actions filed on behalf of
purchasers of the Company's common stock from February 3, 2000
through May 14, 2001, seeking an unspecified amount of damages.

The first suit was filed against the former chief financial
officer of Motorola on December 24, 2002 in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging
breach of fiduciary duty and violations of Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5.

The plaintiffs claim the price of Motorola's stock was
artificially inflated by a failure to disclose vendor financing
to Telsim Mobil Telekomunikasyon Hizmetleri A.S. (Telsim) in
connection with the sale of telecommunications equipment by
Motorola.

Eighteen additional putative class action complaints have been
filed in federal court, including the Southern District of
California, the Southern District of New York and the Northern
District of Illinois, alleging the same or similar violations of
the federal securities laws arising out of the failure to
disclose vendor financing in connection with the sale of
equipment to Telsim, but naming additional defendants, including
Motorola, Inc, as well as CEO Chris Galvin and former COO Robert
Growney.

A lead plaintiff has been selected for the Illinois and New York
cases, and that is the State of New Jersey on behalf of the
Department of Treasury, Division of Investment.  The Company
expects that all of the complaints will be consolidated into one
case, most likely in either Illinois or New York.  Following the
consolidation, a new complaint will be filed and the defendants'
time to answer or otherwise plead will be extended to a time
mutually agreed upon.


MOTOROLA INC.: Pension Plan Members Launch ERISA Suit in N.D. IL
----------------------------------------------------------------
Motorola, Inc. faces a purported civil class action filed in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois.  The suit also names as defendants the Company's
former Chief Financial Officer, its former Vice President and
Director of Benefits and other as yet unnamed individual
defendants who either were members of administrative committees
or committees of the Motorola Board of Directors with oversight
authority for the Motorola 401(k)/profit sharing plan.

The suit alleges various breaches of fiduciary duty to plan
participants who invested in the Motorola Stock Fund option
under the plan, in violation of the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act (ERISA).

Among other things, plaintiff claims that defendants failed to
disclose to participants that Motorola's contract with Telsim
required "risky" vendor financing and that in failing to do so,
defendants improperly continued to offer a Motorola Stock Fund
as an investment option under the plan, they acted in their own
interest rather than the interest of the plan participants and
they over-allocated assets into Motorola common stock and failed
to diversify plan investments adequately, thereby subjecting
plan participants to undue financial risk.  Plaintiff proposes a
class period of May 16, 2000 through the present and seeks an
unspecified amount of damages and equitable relief.


NETZERO INC.: Enters Settlement For Securities Fraud Suits in NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Netzero, Inc. entered a memorandum of understanding to settle a
consolidated securities class action filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York against it,
certain of its officers and directors, and the underwriters of
its initial public offering, Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.,
BancBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc. and Salomon Smith Barney,
Inc.

The complaint alleges that the prospectus through which NetZero
conducted its initial public offering in September 1999 was
materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose,
among other things, that:

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

     (2) the underwriters had entered into agreements with
         customers whereby the underwriters agreed to allocate
         NetZero shares to those customers in the offering in
         exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase
         additional NetZero shares in the aftermarket at pre-
         determined prices.

Plaintiffs are seeking injunctive relief and damages.  
Additional lawsuits setting forth substantially similar
allegations were also served against NetZero on behalf of
additional plaintiffs in April and May 2001.  

The case against NetZero was consolidated with approximately 300
other suits filed against more than 300 issuers that conducted
their initial public offerings between 1998 and 2000, their
underwriters and an unspecified number of their individual
corporate officers and directors.

Counsel for the plaintiffs, the issuers and the insurers for the
issuers have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding
regarding a proposed settlement in the consolidated suit, which
is subject to court approval and other conditions.


PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS: Settles Bonuses Suit For $1.8 Million
-------------------------------------------------------------
PricewaterhouseCoopers Consulting agreed to settle for $1.8
million a class action filed in the Washington D.C. Superior
Court on behalf of recent college graduates who were told they
were hired by the firm, the Washington Post reports.  Later,
when they moved to Washington D.C., the Company told them their
job was cancelled.

Lead plaintiff Megan Secrest graduated from Penn State in 2001,
and moved to Washington, D.C., after she was offered a $52,000
per year job and a $7,000 signing bonus.  After the firm told
her the job was cancelled, she filed a suit.

Ms. Secrest found the other members of the class through a
congratulatory group email the Company sent to the newly hired.  
A number of the plaintiffs had contacted the Company on their
own to ask for reimbursement for moving costs after they
relocated in anticipation of getting a job, Woodley Osborne,
attorney for the plaintiffs, told the Post.  Although the
employment contracts were "at-will" and could be terminated
without penalty, the group's lawyers argued that the signing
bonus was a contract that must be honored.


Under the settlement, each plaintiff will receive about 90
percent of the signing bonus promised by the Company, Mr.
Osborne continued.  The bonuses ranged from $3,000 to $7,000.  
Attorneys for the class will receive $363,000.

"I'm proud because we showed that even a big company should have
to honor their commitments," Ms. Secrest, who after six months
of unemployment found a federal job paying $40,000 a year, told
the Post.  "It isn't really about the money. It's about making
them keep their promises."

"We deny the merits of the suit and entered into a settlement to
avoid the costs, burdens and disruptions of protracted
litigation," David Silber, a PwC spokesman told the Post.


PUBLIC SERVICE: Asks NJ Court To Dismiss Lawsuit Over Gas Meters
----------------------------------------------------------------
Public Service Electric & Gas Co., Inc. asked Burlington County,
New Jersey court to dismiss a class action demanding that the
Company move or protect all gas meters located within 36 inches
of a driveway, parking space and/or garage opening and seeking
damages.

The suit was commenced after a Mount Laurel, New Jersey woman's
car skidded on the ice and severed her gas line, on February 24.  
The subsequent explosion and fire destroyed three homes and
damaged two others in the housing complex.  The driver was not
injured, an earlier Class Action Reporter story states.

The utility has also asked the Board of Public Utilities (BPU)
to intervene because it has specific knowledge of the issues
involved.  The Company cannot predict the outcome of this matter
or any potential cost to move or protect such gas meters.


QUINTEK TECHNOLOGIES: SEC Files Securities Complaint in C.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a complaint in the
US District Court for the Central District of California against
Quintek Technologies, Inc., Thomas W. Sims, and PanaMed
Corporation.

The Commission's complaint alleges that between October 2001 and
March 2002, Sims, who was then the president of both companies,
wrote or reviewed five press releases issued by Quintek or
PanaMed as well as memoranda and other materials disseminated to
investors in a private offering of PanaMed stock.   

The complaint further alleges that the releases and offering
materials contained false and misleading statements concerning,
among other things, a large order for Quintek's product, testing
of PanaMed's product, and revenue projections for PanaMed.  

Moreover, the complaint alleges that both companies failed to
timely file numerous mandatory periodic reports with the
Commission and that PanaMed has failed to file its most recent
annual report.
     
The complaint seeks to permanently enjoin all of the defendants
from further violations of Sections 10(b) and 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) and Rules 10b-5,
13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder, and, additionally, to permanently
enjoin Sims and PanaMed from further violations of Section 17(a)
of the Securities Act of 1933.

Quintek, without admitting or denying the allegations in the
Commission's complaint, has consented to an order of permanent
injunction against future violations of Sections 10(b) and 13(a)
of the Exchange Act and Rules 10b-5, 13a-1 and 13a-13
thereunder.  Mr. Sims, without admitting or denying the
allegations in the Commission's complaint, has consented to an
order permanently enjoining him from future violations of the
foregoing provisions, as well as Section 17(a) of the Securities
Act.  Sims has also consented to an order imposing a five-year
officer and director bar, a five-year penny stock bar, and a
$25,000 civil money penalty.
     
     
TALX CORPORATION: Asks MO Court to Dismiss Securities Fraud Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Talx Corporation asked the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Missouri to dismiss a consolidated amended
securities class action filed against it and:

     (1) William W. Canfield,

     (2) Craig N. Cohen,

     (3) Richard F. Ford,

     (4) Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated and

     (5) A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc.

The case was originally brought on behalf of all persons who
purchased or otherwise acquired shares of the Company's common
stock between July 18, 2001 and October 1, 2001, including
as part of the secondary offering.  The complaint alleges, among
other things, that certain statements in the registration
statement and prospectus for the Secondary Offering, as well as
other statements made by the Company and/or the individual
defendants during the putative class period, were materially
false and misleading because they allegedly did not properly
account for certain software and inventory, did not reflect
certain write-offs, and did not accurately disclose certain
business prospects.

The complaint alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder against the Company and the Individual Defendants,
violations of Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 against
the Company, the Individual Defendants and the underwriters, and
violation of Section 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 against
Mr. Canfield.

On May 20, 2002, the Company and the individual defendants filed
a motion to dismiss the consolidated suit, and the underwriter
defendants filed a separate motion to dismiss.  On March 31,
2003, the court granted defendants' motion in part, dismissing
plaintiffs' claims under Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and
Rule 10b-5 thereunder, without prejudice.  The court granted
plaintiffs sixty additional days to file an amended consolidated
complaint, and defendants sixty days thereafter to respond to
the amended complaint.

On May 29, 2003, plaintiffs filed an amended consolidated
complaint, adding allegations pertaining to the Company's
December 2002 restatement of financials and expanding the
putative class period to include all persons who purchased or
otherwise acquired shares of the Company's common stock between
April 25, 2001 and November 14, 2002.

The amended complaint alleges, among other things, that certain
statements in the registration statement and prospectus for its
August 2001 secondary common stock offering, as well as other
statements made by the Company and/or the Individual Defendants
during the amended putative class period, were materially false
and misleading because the Company:

     (i) capitalized instead of expensed $1.6 million related to
         a patent technology license agreement executed in March
         2001;

    (ii) expensed approximately $158,000 in bonus payments to
         executive officers in the first quarter of fiscal 2002
         instead of the fourth fiscal quarter of 2001;

   (iii) improperly recognized revenue and expenses during the
         amended putative class period; and

    (iv) miscalculated diluted earnings per share during the
         amended putative class period.

The amended complaint also alleged, as did the original
complaint, that the Company did not properly account for certain
software and inventory, did not reflect certain write-offs, and
did not accurately disclose certain business prospects.  

On July 30, 2003, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the
amended complaint.  The Company intends to defend vigorously
against the plaintiffs' claims.  However, due to the inherent
uncertainties of litigation, it cannot accurately predict the
ultimate outcome of the litigation.  An unfavorable outcome
could have a material adverse impact on its business, financial
condition and results of operations.


TOBACCO LITIGATION: Louisiana Trial To Resume When Jury Returns
---------------------------------------------------------------
At least a few weeks will pass before attorneys return to a
Louisiana court to let a jury consider a stop-smoking program
that the jury earlier, in phase one of the trial of a class
action, decided the smokers should have.  The smokers had asked
for a stop-smoking program paid for by Big Tobacco.  About three
weeks will be needed to get the jury back to court, the
Associated Press Newswires reports.

Russ Herman, an attorney who represents the class of smokers and
former smokers in the class-action suit, said he expected
lawyers to hear from State District Judge Richard Ganucheau
within the next week about starting the second phase of the
trial.

A third phase of the trial, before Judge Ganucheau, will be held
later if the jury decides anyone is entitled to the cessation
programs.  The tobacco industry says people smoke for individual
reasons, and can quit or not quit for individual reasons;
therefore, contend the lawyers of Big Tobacco, the issue should
not be decided on a class action basis.

Mr. Herman has said he envisions smoking cessation clinics at
Louisiana hospitals with counselors for those smokers who want
to give up tobacco.  There has been no estimate of what that
kind of program might cost the industry.  However, the industry
said that 90 percent of its potential cost disappeared when the
jury rejected the medical monitoring, for which the plaintiffs
asked in their lawsuit.


TRAVACALM: Australians To Launch Lawsuit Over Adverse Reactions
---------------------------------------------------------------
More than 200 Australians intend to file a class action, after
suffering adverse reactions to travel sickness tablet Travacalm,
the Herald Sun reports.

Travacalm was recalled after reports surfaced that it caused
caused people to hallucinate and try to jump off boats and
planes.  Pan Pharmaceuticals immediately instituted a massive
recall after the reports were revealed.

A federal drug watchdog group revealed more Australians suffered
adverse reactions than previously thought.  The group reportedly
received reports of 124 people who suffered from several
reactions including hallucinations and blurred vision, in the
first five months of this year.  24 of the 124 people needed
hospital treatment.

Reactions lasted up to several days in some cases, it said.  
Tests found some tablets contained doses of a key ingredient
that were up to seven times higher than the quantity stated, the
Herald Sun reports.  The bulletin says the first five reports of
adverse reactions to the over-the-counter travel sickness tablet
were received in one week in January.  It confirmed the
reactions were caused by overdoses of a key ingredient,
hyoscine.

"The reports described combinations of hallucinations,
confusion, ataxia (a loss of muscle co-ordination) and blurred
vision," the report says.  "It was recognized that hyoscine
poisoning would account for this pattern of reactions."

Kerry O'Shea, a spokeswoman for law firm Maurice Blackburn
Cashman, told the Sun 200 Australians who claimed to have
suffered adverse events after using Travacalm had registered for
a class action.  However, she said the case was on hold pending
a decision by the TGA on criminal charges.

Therapeutic Goods Administration spokeswoman Kay McNiece told
the Sun the criminal investigation was continuing.  She said
investigations into whether any other Pan products had caused
"adverse events" were also continuing, and no serious cases had
yet been found.


UNITED ONLINE: Reaches Settlement in CA Consumer Fraud Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
United Online, Inc. reached a settlement in a consumer class
action filed in the Los Angeles County Superior Court for the
State of California against it and its subsidiaries NetZero and
Juno.

Plaintiffs allege that the defendants used marketing and
promotional materials to mislead or deceive the alleged class
members regarding their billable Internet services.  Plaintiffs
are seeking injunctive relief, restitution, disgorgement of
profits, the establishment of a constructive trust and
attorneys' fees.  The parties have entered into a settlement
agreement in this case which is subject to final approval by the
court.


UNITED ONLINE: Discovery Proceeds in Consumer Fraud Suit in NY
--------------------------------------------------------------
United Online, Inc.'s internet service provider Juno faces a
class action filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York
for the County of New York, alleging unjust enrichment, unfair
and deceptive business practices and breach of contract.  
Specifically, plaintiff alleges that Juno was unjustly enriched
and deceived consumers by:

     (1) advertising "free" Internet access services and
         limiting the usage of heavier users of the service, and

     (2) advertising a free trial month for its premium service
         and not disclosing that the free month begins when the
         software is requested, rather than when it is first
         used, resulting in users receiving less than one month
         of free use.

Plaintiff is seeking damages, injunctive relief and attorneys'
fees.  Discovery is ongoing and no trial date has been set.


               Meetings, Conferences & Seminars


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

August 14, 2003
FEN-PHEN GLOBAL SETTLEMENT AND TRIAL UPDATE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Bonaventure Hotel, Los Angeles
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com


August 26-27, 2003
THE ANNUAL MANAGING MOLD LIABILITIES CONFERENCE
FROM CONSTRUCTION THROUGH TRIAL
Bridgeport Continuing Education
Contact: http://www.reconferences.com;818-505-1490

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

September 8-10, 2003
NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL ASBESTOS LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Chicago
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 11-12, 2003
MASS TORT LITIGATION TOOLS FOR PARALEGALS
Mealey Publications
The Westin Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 15-16, 2003  
SECURITIES LITIGATION & ENFORCEMENT 2003
Practising Law Institute
PLI New York Center
Contact: 800-260-4PLI; info@pli.edu.

September 18-19, 2003
REINSURANCE SUMMIT
Mealey Publications
The Westin Hotel, Chicago
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 19-21, 2003
THE 20TH TOBACCO PRODUCTS LIABILITY PROJECT CONFERENCE
Northeastern University School of Law
Contact: scuri@tplp.org

September 22-23, 2003
BAD FAITH CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 26, 2003
MANAGING ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS
Bridgeport Continuing Education
Los Angeles
Contact: 818-505-1490

September 29-30, 2003
PRACTICAL SKILLS SERIES: TOXIC TORT LITIGATION
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

September 29-30, 2003
CONSUMER FINANCE CLASS ACTIONS
American Conference Institute
New York City
Contact: 1-888-224-2480; http://www.americanconference.com  

October 2-3, 2003
SECURITIES LITIGATION & ENFORCEMENT 2003
Practising Law Institute
PLI New York Center
Contact: 800-260-4PLI; info@pli.edu.

October 8-9, 2003
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
American Conference Institute
New York City
Contact: 1-888-224-2480; http://www.americanconference.com  

October 13, 2003
MASS TORT LITIGATION TOOLS FOR PARALEGALS
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Atlanta
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

October 13-14, 2003
SILICA LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Atlanta
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

October 15, 2003
LEXISNEXIS PRESENTS WALL STREET FORUM:
PHARMACEUTICAL & MEDICAL DEVICE INDUSTRY LITIGATION
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton New York, Battery Park
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

October 16-17, 2003
LEAD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Westin Copley Plaza, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

October 20, 2003
FUNDAMENTALS OF INSURANCE COVERAGE LAW
Mealey Publications
The Westin Chicago River North
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

October 21, 2003
FUNDAMENTALS OF REINSURANCE AND INSOLVENCY
Mealey Publications
The Westin Chicago River North
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

October 23 - 24, 2003
THE SECOND INTERNATIONAL ADVANCED FORUM ON RUN-OFF AND
COMMUTATIONS
American Conference Institute
New York Marriott East Side
Contact: 1-888-224-2480; http://www.americanconference.com  

October 24, 2003
7TH ANNUAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON CLASS ACTIONS
American Bar Association
San Francisco, CA
Contact: 800-285-2221; abacle@abanet.org

October 27-28, 2003
INSURANCE COVERAGE DISPUTES CONCERNING CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS
Mealey Publications
The Westin Chicago River North
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

November 6-7, 2003
SECURITIES, DRUGS & ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION
MassTortsMadePerfect.Com
Ritz Carlton, New Orleans, Louisiana
Contact: 1-800-320-2227; register@masstortsmadeperfect.com

November 7, 2003
7TH ANNUAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON CLASS ACTIONS
American Bar Association
Washington, DC
Contact: 800-285-2221; abacle@abanet.org

November 10-11, 2003
FEN-PHEN LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Four Seasons Hotel, Houston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

November 13-14, 2003
MASS TORT LITIGATION TOOLS FOR PARALEGALS
Mealey Publications
The Westin Bonaventure Hotel, Los Angeles
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

November 13-14, 2003
ASBESTOS LITIGATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY
ALI-ABA
New Orleans
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

November 17, 2003
WATER CONTAMINATION LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Pasadena
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 17-18, 2003
INSURANCE ALLOCATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Golf Resort, Naples, FL
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 18, 2003
MEDICAL MONITORING CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 18, 2003
DAUBERT CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 8-9, 2003
ASBESTOS PREMISES LIABILITY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Fairmont Hotel, San Francisco
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 8-9, 2003
CALIFORNIA SECTION 17200 CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Fairmont Hotel, San Francisco
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 11-13, 2003
CONSTRUCTION DEFECT AND MOLD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton, Lake Las Vegas, Las Vegas
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 11-13, 2003
EMERGING SECURITIES LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Emerging Securities Litigation Conference
Mealey Publications
The Westin Kierland Resort & Spa, Scottsdale
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 12, 2003
MOLD LITIGATION 101 CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton, Lake Las Vegas, Las Vegas
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

January 22-23, 2004
ENVIRONMENTAL AND TOXIC TORT MATTERS: ADVANCED CIVIL LITIGATION
ALI-ABA
Orlando (Walt Disney World)
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

March 18-19, 2004
SECURITIES, DRUGS & ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION
MassTortsMadePerfect.Com
The Fairmont, San Francisco, California
Contact: 1-800-320-2227; register@masstortsmadeperfect.com
    
April 14-17, 2004
INSURANCE INSOLVENCY AND REINSURANCE ROUNDTABLE
Mealey Publications
The Scottsdale Princess, Scottsdale, AZ
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 10 & 11, 2004
SECURITIES, DRUGS & ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION
MassTortsMadePerfect.Com
Atlantis, Paradise Island, Bahamas
Contact: 1-800-320-2227; register@masstortsmadeperfect.com

TBA
FAIR LABOR STANDARDS CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

TBA
AIRLINE BANKRUPTCY LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com




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

August 05-31, 2003
DAMAGES IN TEXAS INSURANCE LITIGATION:
EVALUATING, PLEADING, AND PROVING
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

August 05-31, 2003
NBI PRESENTS "EMERGING ISSUES IN CALIFORNIA
INDOOR AIR QUALITY AND TOXIC MOLD LITIGATION
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

August 05-31, 2003
NBI PRESENTS "LITIGATING THE CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT IN FLORIDA
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

September 16, 2003
AORTIC ANEURYSM DEVICE LITIGATION
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

ADVERSARIAL PROCEEDINGS IN ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCIES
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Online Streaming Video
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCY - PANEL OF CREDITORS COMMITTEE MEMBERS
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Online Streaming Video
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

EXPERT WITNESS ADMISSIBILITY IN MOLD CASES
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Online Streaming Video
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

INTRODUCTION TO CLASS ACTIONS AND LARGE RECOVERIES
Big Class Action
Contact: seminars@bigclassaction.com

NON-TRADITIONAL DEFENDANTS IN ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

PAXIL LITIGATION
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS INVOLVING BAYCOL
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

RECOVERIES
Big Class Action
Contact: seminars@bigclassaction.com

SELECTION OF MOLD LITIGATION EXPERTS: WHO YOU NEED ON YOUR TEAM
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

SHOULD I FILE A CLASS ACTION?
LawCommerce.Com / Law Education Institute
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

THE EFFECTS OF ASBESTOS ON THE PULMONARY SYSTEM
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

THE STATE OF ASBESTOS LITIGATION: JUDICIAL PANEL DISCUSSION
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

TRYING AN ASBESTOS CASE
LawCommerce.Com
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

THE IMPACT OF LORILLAR ON STATE AND LOCAL REGULATION OF TOBACCO
SALES
AND ADVERSTISING
American Bar Association
Contact: 800-285-2221; abacle@abanet.org

________________________________________________________________
The Meetings, Conferences and Seminars column appears in the
Class Action Reporter each Wednesday.  Submissions via e-mail to
carconf@beard.com are encouraged.

                   
                New Securities Fraud Cases


CATALINA MARKETING: Schiffrin & Barroway Files FL Stock Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the Middle District of
Florida on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of
Catalina Marketing Corporation (NYSE:POS) from January 17, 2002
through June 30, 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 numerous positive statements
concerning the Company's ability to grow its revenues and
earnings at a rapid pace and the strong demand that existed for
the Company's products, especially at its Health Resource
division.

In truth and in fact, however, the Company was experiencing a
slowdown in its revenue growth because its pharmaceutical
clients had curtailed their spending on promotional items, such
as the Company's newsletters, and retail pharmacies had become
more cautious about participating in the Company's advertising
programs and had reduced their distribution of the Company's
health newsletters.

When these facts were belatedly disclosed by the Company on
October 1, 2002, the price of Catalina common stock fell from
$27.97 per share to close at $17.90 per share -- a drop of 36% -
- on extremely heavy trading volume.

For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz or Stuart L. Berman by
Mail: Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by
Phone: 1-888-299-7706 (toll free) or 1-610-667-7706 or by E-
mail: info@sbclasslaw.com


CATALINA MARKETING: Cauley Geller Lodges Securities Suit in FL
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Rudman, LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Middle
District of Florida, on behalf of purchasers of Catalina
Marketing Corporation (NYSE: POS) publicly traded securities
during the period between April 18, 2002 and October 1, 2002,
inclusive.

The lawsuit 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 numerous positive statements
concerning the Company's ability to grow its revenues and
earnings at a rapid pace and the strong demand that existed for
the Company's products, especially at its Health Resource
division.

In truth and in fact, however, the Company was experiencing a
slowdown in its revenue growth because its pharmaceutical
clients had curtailed their spending on promotional items, such
as the Company's newsletters, and retail pharmacies had become
more cautious about participating in the Company's advertising
programs and had reduced their distribution of the Company's
health newsletters.

When these facts were belatedly disclosed by the Company on
October 1, 2002, the price of Catalina common stock fell from
$27.97 per share to close at $17.90 per share -- a drop of 36% -
- on extremely heavy trading volume.

For more details, contact Samuel H. Rudman, David A. Rosenfeld,
Jackie Addison or Heather Gann 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


IMPATH INC.: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S. D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities
class action on behalf of purchasers of the securities of
IMPATH, Inc. (NasdaqNM: IMPH) between April 25, 2001 and July
29, 2003, inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The action is pending in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York, against the Company and:

     (1) Carter Eckert,

     (2) James Agnello,

     (3) David Cammarata,

     (4) Richard P. Adelson, and

     (5) Anu D. Saad

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 April 25, 2001 and July
29, 2003.  The complaint alleges that IMPATH's quarterly press
releases and SEC filings were materially false and misleading
because they failed to disclose that the Company had materially
overstated its accounts receivables and improperly capitalized a
material asset, thereby artificially inflating the Company's
reported Class Period results and financial condition.

On July 30, 2003, before the open regular trading, IMPATH issued
a press release announcing that its audit committee had begun an
investigation into possible "accounting irregularities" by the
Company and that the Company believes it has overstated its
accounts receivable had been improperly capitalizing its
GeneBank asset.  As a result of these developments, IMPATH
warned that a restatement of previously filed financial reports
was "likely," and that the Company has advised its creditors
that its financial reports "may have been inaccurate as a result
of these issues."

In response to this announcement, the NASDAQ Stock Market halted
trading in the Company's common stock and announced that the
stock will not resume trading until IMPATH provides NASDAQ with
additional information.

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


IMPATH INC.: Brodsky & Smith Launches Securities Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law offices of Brodsky & Smith, LLC initiated a securities
class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased the common
stock and other securities of Impath, Inc. (NasdaqNM:IMPH),
between February 21, 2001 and July 29, 2003 inclusive.  The
class action was filed against the Company and certain of its
officers and directors in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of New York.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated federal
securities laws by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market during the class period,
thereby artificially inflating the price of Impath securities.

Specifically, the Company's financial statements published
during the Class Period were not prepared in accordance with
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.  On July 30, 2003, the
Company issued a press release announcing that an investigation
had been initiated into possible accounting irregularities
involving accounts receivables which Impath believes have been
materially overstated and will likely require restatement.  As a
result, shares of Impath were halted from trading.

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


IMPATH INC.: Abbey Gardy Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Abbey Gardy, LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York on behalf of all persons who purchased securities of
IMPATH, Inc. (NasdaqNM:IMPH) between February 24, 2000 and July
29, 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 during the Class Period thereby
artificially inflating the price of IMPATH securities.

On July 30, 2003, IMPATH shocked the market when it issued a
press release announcing that it had initiated an investigation
into possible accounting irregularities involving accounts
receivable which the Company believes have been materially
overstated and will likely require restatement.  Following this
announcement, shares of IMPATH common stock were halted from
trading.

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


IMPATH INC.: Cohen Milstein Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, PLLC initiated a securities
class action on behalf of its client and those who purchased or
otherwise acquired the common stock of Impath Inc. (Nasdaq:IMPH)
and certain of its current or former officers and directors for
the period from February 21, 2001 through July 29, 2003 in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York.

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 numerous positive statements
throughout the Class Period regarding the Company's financial
performance.

As alleged in the complaint, these statements were each
materially false and misleading when made as they failed to
disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse facts
which were then known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by
them:

     (1) that the Company was failing to timely record an
         impairment in the value of its accounts receivables and
         as a result, the Company's reported financial results
         were artificially inflated throughout the Class Period;

     (2) that the Company was failing to properly account for
         its GeneBank(TM) asset, thereby overstating its
         reported financial results; and

     (3) as a result of the foregoing, the Company's financial
         statements published during the Class Period were not
         prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted
         Accounting Principles and were therefore materially
         false and misleading.

On July 30, 2003, Impath shocked the market when it issued a
press release announcing that it had initiated an investigation
into possible accounting irregularities involving accounts
receivables which the Company believes have been materially
overstated and will likely require restatement.  Following this
announcement, shares of Impath common stock were halted from
trading.

For more details, contact Steven J. Toll, or Lisa Polk by Mail:
1100 New York Avenue, N.W. West Tower - Suite 500, Washington,
DC 20005 by Phone: 888/240-0775 or 202/408-4600 by E-mail:
stoll@cmht.com or lpolk@cmht.com  


QUEST SOFTWARE: Lasky & Rifkind Files Securities Suit in C.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Lasky & Rifkind, Ltd. initiated a securities class action filed
in the United States District Court for the Central District of
California, on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise
acquired publicly traded securities of Quest Software, Inc.
(Nasdaq:QSFT) between April 30, 2002 and July 23, 2003,
inclusive.

The lawsuit was filed against Quest Software and certain
officers of the Company.  The complaint alleges that throughout
the Class Period, Quest Software issued false and misleading
statements concerning the Company's earnings, income and Company
assets.  Specifically, the complaint alleges that the defendants
failed to disclose or misrepresented that the Company deferred
revenue and fixed the asset balances of its foreign subsidiaries
and that the Company lacked adequate internal controls to
ascertain its true financial condition.

For more details, contact Leigh Lasky by Phone: 800-321-0476


                        *********

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  * * *