CAR_Public/031015.mbx            C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

          Wednesday, October 15, 2003, Vol. 5, No. 203

                        Headlines

ALLAIRE CORPORATION: Reaches Settlement For MA Securities Suit
APARTHEID LITIGATION: No Claims Made Against Alexander Forbes
CAMPBELL SOUP: Settles For $35M Securities Fraud Suit in NJ
CHARDONNAY GOLF: Members Commence Lawsuit Over Golf Course Sale
ELECTRO SCIENTIFIC: Court Orders Securities Suits Consolidated

IMCLONE SYSTEMS: SEC Commences Amended Securities Fraud Lawsuit
ELECTRO SCIENTIFIC: Plaintiffs File Consolidated Derivative Suit
HALIFAX BUILDING: British Expats Launch Suit Over 1997 Flotation
HOLOCAUST LITIGATION: Swiss Banks To Give Limited Access To Info
IBM CORPORATION: Jury Selection Starts in Workers' Lawsuit Trial

JI CASE: MI Court to Decide on Retirees' Monthly Health Premiums
MYLAN LABORATORIES: MA Court Recalls Order Dismissing AWP Suit
NEW HAMPSHIRE: Dover City Votes To Join Suit v. MTBE Producers
NORTH CAROLINA: Embezzlement Suit Considered V. Insurance Agent
QUE INC.: Faces Models' Suit For Antitrust Violations in S.D. NY

SALVATION ARMY: Group Suspicious Towards Head of Sex Abuse Probe
TENNESSEE: Source Of Hepatitis A Outbreak Traced To Green Onions
TRANSFINANCIAL HOLDINGS: Asks KS Court To Dismiss Part of Suit
UST LIQUIDATING: Trial in Suit V. Veeder-Root Sale Set May 2004
ZALE CORPORATION: Preliminary Approval Given to Suit Settlement

ZALE CORPORATION: CA Court Grants Final Approval to Settlement

                  Meetings, Conferences & Seminars

* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
* Online Teleconferences


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

ALSTOM SA: Holzer Holzer Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
CHECK POINT: Holzer Holzer Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
EMERSON RADIO: Ademi O'Reilly Commences Securities Suit in NJ
MIDWAY GAMES: Federman & Sherwood Lodges Stock Suit in S.D. NY
MIDWAY GAMES: Lasky & Rifkind Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY

POLAROID CORPORATION: Shapiro Haber Lodges Stock Lawsuit in MA
POLAROID CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Suit in NY
POLAROID CORPORATION: Holzer Holzer Lodge Stock Suit in S.D. NY
SPORTSLINE.COM: Brodsky & Smith Files Securities Suit in S.D. FL
STRONG FINANCIAL: Ademi O'Reilly Launches Securities Suit in WI

                          *********

ALLAIRE CORPORATION: Reaches Settlement For MA Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fairness hearing for the settlement of the securities class
action filed on behalf of all purchasers of Allaire Corporation
common stock (Nasdaq:ALLR) between December 7, 1999 and
September 18, 2000, inclusive, is set for December 1,2003 in the
United States District Court for Massachusetts.

Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and
an Order of the court, a hearing will be held before the
Honorable William G. Young, United States District Judge on
December 1, 2003 at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 18 of the United
States Courthouse, One Courthouse Way, Boston, Massachusetts
02210, to determine whether:

     (1) a class should be finally certified for settlement
         purposes;

     (2) a proposed settlement of the Action for $12,026,000,
         plus interest, is fair, reasonable and adequate and
         should be approved by the Court;

     (3) an Order and Final Judgment should be entered
         dismissing all claims against the Defendants with
         prejudice, and without costs;

     (4) a proposed Plan of Allocation of the settlement fund
         should be approved; and

     (5) to award attorneys' fees and expenses requested by
         Plaintiffs' Counsel.

For more information, contact Dennis Johnson of Johnson &
Perkinson by Mail: 1690 Williston Road, South Burlington, VT
05403 by Phone: (802) 862-0030 or contact Brad Friedman of
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP by Mail: One
Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, NY 10119 by Phone: (212) 594-5300
or contact Michael Jaffe of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman &
Herz LLP by Mail: 270 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016 or by
Phone: (212) 545-4600.


APARTHEID LITIGATION: No Claims Made Against Alexander Forbes
-------------------------------------------------------------
Financial services firm Alexander Forbes said they have no
knowledge of any claims made against it over alleged fraud
during the apartheid era, the Mail and Guardian reports.

An earlier Agence France-Presse report stated that flamboyant
American lawyer Ed Fagan plans to file a new class action in New
York State Court over companies that allegedly defrauded South
African workers during the apartheid era.  The suit intends to
name the firm, Union Carbide and the Dow Chemical Company as
defendants, and will be allegedly filed on behalf of workers who
deposited money into pension, health, life, unemployment and
retirement funds and never received a cent back from these
companies, an earlier Class Action Reporter story (October
14,2003) states.

The Company received a communication regarding this suit
yesterday.  In a statement, the Company revealed that the
communication demanded information from them relating to an
unspecific potential claim against various parties.  "No claim
for payment of any amount has been made against Alexander
Forbes," the company said in a statement.

Lawyer for the claimants John Ngcebetsha told AFP that the
lawsuit was a "new claim" and was not related to the claims for
apartheid victims earlier filed by Ed Fagan.  Mr. Fagan was also
the lawyer who successfully led a lawsuit against Swiss banks on
behalf of Holocaust victims.

Mr. Fagan has also filed or announced plans to file other suits
against Swiss and US banks, pharmaceutical conglomerates, car
manufacturers, food giant Nestl‚ and mining companies De Beers
and Anglo American, among others, on the grounds that they
allegedly benefited under the apartheid regime, the Mail and
Guardian reports.


CAMPBELL SOUP: Settles For $35M Securities Fraud Suit in NJ
-----------------------------------------------------------
Campbell Soup Co. settled for $35 million the consolidated
securities class action filed against it and two of its former
executives in the United States District Court for the District
of New Jersey.

The suit alleges, among other things, that the company and the
former executives misrepresented the company's financial
condition between September 8, 1997 and January 8, 1999, by
failing to disclose alleged shipping and revenue recognition
practices in connection with the sale of certain company
products at the end of the company's fiscal quarters in
violation of Section 10 (b) and 20 (a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder.

On February 6, 2003, the company announced it had reached an
agreement in principle to settle this case.  The district
court's order approving the settlement was issued on May 22,
2003 and became effective June 23, 2003.  Pursuant to the
court's order, all claims have been dismissed and the litigation
has been terminated in exchange for a payment of $35 million,
which was made in June 2003.  The full amount of the payment was
covered by insurance.  The settlement does not constitute an
admission of fault or liability by the company or any other
defendant.


CHARDONNAY GOLF: Members Commence Lawsuit Over Golf Course Sale
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Chardonnay Golf Club faces a class action filed by more than
50 of its high-paying members in the Napa Superior Court in
California, after the club started rebuilding its 18-hole Club
Shakespeare course, the NapaNet Daily News reports.

Members filed the suit after the Club sold the golf course to a
Japanese company to make way for the construction of a new
course called Eagle Vines.  The course is currently being built
alongside the club and is scheduled to open in May 2004.

The members claimed that their memberships in the south county
club pay for continuing use of the course.  In 1989, the club
sold membership packages, stating that members are entitled to
the use of Club Shakespeare, which has since then scaled down
its facilities to include three nine-hole courses.

The members alleged the club breached its contract with them and
seek the restoration of their rights to use the golf course.
"We joined under the condition that the Shakespeare course would
be our private, 18-hole course," Seifo Togo, who said he paid
more than $30,000 for a 30-year membership at the club and also
pays monthly dues told NapaNet Daily News.  "We paid good money
for it and we feel we should have had a say when (the club) sold
the holes."

The club allegedly also failed to inform members at least one
year ahead of the sale of the holes, a provision stated in the
agreement.  A copy of a membership agreement the club submitted
in court papers states Chardonnay "reserves the right to
discontinue operation of any or all the club facilities to sell,
lease, or otherwise dispose of the club facilities in any
manner."

Jack Barry, the CEO, president and managing partner of the
Chardonnay Golf Club, along with his San Francisco-based lawyer,
Douglas Drayton, refused to comment on litigation, NapaNet Daily
News reports.  Several club members and their Napa-based
attorney, Michael Murphy, said they would not comment on the
case at this juncture.


ELECTRO SCIENTIFIC: Court Orders Securities Suits Consolidated
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the District of Oregon
ordered plaintiffs to file an amended consolidated securities
class action against Electro Scientific Industries, Inc. and
current and/or former officers and directors:

     (1) David F. Bolender,

     (2) James T. Dooley, and

     (3) Joseph L. Reinhart

Several complaints were filed on behalf of a purported class of
persons who purchased the Company's common stock between
September 17, 2002 and at the latest April 15, 2003.  The
complaints assert causes of action (and seek unspecified
damages) for alleged violations of Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, as well as Section 20(a) of the Act.

In particular, the complaints allege that the defendants were
involved in making false and misleading statements during the
putative class period about ESI's business, prospects, and
operations, all of which resulted in artificially inflating
ESI's stock price.

The complaints have been consolidated under the name "In re
Electro Scientific Industries, Inc. Securities Litigation, Case
No. CV 03-404-HA."  Lead plaintiffs and lead counsel for
plaintiffs have been appointed.  Plaintiffs' consolidated class
action complaint is due to be filed on October 10, 2003.

The consolidated class action complaint had not been filed and
discovery had not yet commenced when this report was filed.  The
Company is in the early stages of its assessment of the possible
outcomes of this litigation.   The Company expects, however,
that the litigation will be costly and will to some degree
divert management's attention from daily operations.


IMCLONE SYSTEMS: SEC Commences Amended Securities Fraud Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a second amended
complaint against ImClone Systems, Inc., naming relatives of
former CEO Samuel Waksal as defendants.

The suit named Jack Waksal, Samuel Waksal's father, as a
defendant and Patti Waksal, Samuel Waksal's sister, as a relief
defendant.  The Commission charges, among other things, that in
late December 2001, Sam Waksal, the then CEO of ImClone Systems,
Inc. (IMCL), tipped his father, Jack Waksal, with the
disappointing news about ImClone, that the United States Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) was expected to soon issue a
decision rejecting for review ImClone's pending application to
market its cancer treatment, Erbitux.

Before this news became public, Jack Waksal sold his own ImClone
stock and ImClone stock owned by Patti Waksal, who is Jack
Waksal's daughter and Sam Waksal's sister.  The Commission's
second amended complaint alleges that both Sam Waksal and Jack
Waksal violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and
Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange
Act) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder and that Sam Waksal also violated
Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 16a-3 thereunder.

Specifically, the Commission's complaint alleges as follows:

     (1) On the evening of December 26, 2001, Sam Waksal learned
         that on December 28, 2001, the FDA was expected to
         issue a Refusal to File (RTF) letter to ImClone
         rejecting consideration of its Biologics Licensing
         Application for Erbitux;

     (2) Also starting that evening, December 26, and through
         December 28, Sam Waksal himself tried to sell 79,797
         shares of ImClone stock worth nearly $5 million.  He
         was unable to do so only because two different broker-
         dealers would not execute his orders;

     (3) On the evening of December 26, Sam Waksal called Jack
         Waksal to alert him that ImClone would be receiving the
         bad news about the RTF letter;

     (4) Before the market opened the next morning, December 27,
         Sam Waksal called his daughter Aliza and directed her
         to sell all of her ImClone stock.  Sam Waksal was
         Aliza's sole means of support and controlled her bank
         and brokerage accounts;

     (5) As soon as the market opened the next morning, December
         27, Jack Waksal sold almost $7 million of ImClone
         stock.  Jack Waksal continued to sell ImClone stock on
         December 28 and also sold ImClone stock in Patti
         Waksal's account.  In total, Jack Waksal sold more than
         $8 million of ImClone stock over the next two days;

     (6) On December 28, Sam Waksal purchased 210 ImClone put
         option contracts through a Swiss brokerage account;

     (7) As expected, the FDA faxed ImClone the RTF letter at
         about 4 pm on December 28, 2001.  At 6 pm that day,
         ImClone publicly announced the FDA decision.  By the
         close of trading on December 31, the next trading day,
         ImClone's stock price had dropped 16%, from $55.25 to
         $46.46;

     (8) By selling before the announcement that ImClone had
         received an RTF letter from the FDA, Sam Waksal, Jack
         Waksal and Patti Waksal illegally avoided trading
         losses and Sam Waksal received illegal options trading
         profits;

     (9) Sam Waksal failed to file the required documents
         disclosing his purchase of ImClone put option contracts
         on December 28.

The Commission originally filed insider-trading charges against
Sam Waksal on June 12, 2002, in the US District Court for the
Southern District of New York.  On March 11, 2003, the
Commission filed an amended complaint against Sam Waksal
charging additional insider trading and failure to publicly
disclose securities transactions.

At that time, without admitting or denying the related
allegations, Sam Waksal consented to the entry of a partial
final judgment in the Commission's action concerning his own
attempted sale of ImClone stock in late December 2001, his
options transactions on December 28, 2001, and the sale of
ImClone stock in Aliza's brokerage account.

Sam Waksal consented to permanent injunctions from future
violations of 17(a) of the Securities Act and Sections 10(b) and
16(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 10b-5 and 16a-3 thereunder;
disgorgement of  $804,367 representing the losses avoided by the
sales of ImClone stock in Aliza's account, plus prejudgment
interest, and Sam Waksal's profits from the options transactions
he engaged in on December 28, 2001, plus prejudgment interest;
and an officer and director bar.

In its second amended complaint the Commission seeks to resolve
the remaining issues in the case, including Sam Waksal's and
Jack Waksal's liability for Jack Waksal's sales of ImClone stock
on December 27 and 28, 2001, and civil penalties concerning the
totality of the Commission's allegations against Sam Waksal and
Jack Waksal.

The suit is styled "SEC v. Samuel D.Waksal and Jack Waksal,
Defendants, and Patti Waksal, Relief Defendants, 02-CIV-4407,"
filed in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York.  (LR-18408)


ELECTRO SCIENTIFIC: Plaintiffs File Consolidated Derivative Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs filed a consolidated shareholder derivative complaint
against Electro Scientific Industries, Inc. (as a nominal
defendant) and certain current and/or former of its directors in
the Circuit Court of Oregon in Washington County.

The complaint, styled In Re Electro Scientific Industries, Inc.
Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. C 031067 CV, alleges that
certain defendants breached fiduciary duties to the Company and
were unjustly enriched.  The complaint seeks an unspecified
amount of monetary damages and seeks various equitable remedies,
including a constructive trust on the proceeds received by the
defendants from trading ESI common stock.

As filed, the complaint is derivative in nature and does not
seek monetary damages from, or the imposition of equitable
remedies on, the Company.  A special litigation committee of our
board of directors, with the assistance of independent legal
counsel, is conducting an investigation relating to the
allegations asserted in the complaints and intends to seek a
stay of the action pending the completion of the committee's
investigation.


HALIFAX BUILDING: British Expats Launch Suit Over 1997 Flotation
----------------------------------------------------------------
Halifax Bank of Scotland (HBOS) faces a class action filed in an
American court on behalf of British expatriates who were
wrongfully denied windfall shares in the 1997 flotation of
Halifax Building Society, the Weekly Telegraph reports.

The suit alleges "thousands were wrongly deprived of the right
to share in the proceeds of a savings institution they were
members of" and "were tricked into voting for, or not opposing,
conversion."

Stephen Alexander, partner of Class Law solicitors, law firm for
the plaintiffs, told the Weekly Telegraph, "A US court can award
punitive damages as well as compensation.  That could triple the
possible payout."

Brian Hazlehurst of the United Halifax Victims group (Unhav)
told the Telegraph the suit was on behalf of members living in
the USA at the time.  Mr. Hazlehurst estimated the members of
the class to be about 12,500 and allege that they are entitled
to about GBP54 million in compensation.  He added that
worldwide, 55,000 expatriates were wrongfully denied at least
GBP240 million worth of shares.

He told The Telegraph, "This year alone, HBOS also settled out
of court with at least 35 other Unhav members.  Yet only a
handful of claims were settled from 1997 to 2002.  And in many
cases the Halifax strongly contested cases in the county and
small claims courts."

Halifax Bank of Scotland (HBOS), successor group to the Halifax,
told the Telegraph it would "vigorously" defend the case.  An
HBOS spokesman said: "We will defend the case vigorously.  We
believe it is procedurally flawed and without merit.  There is
no right to take action in the USA as the conversion of the
Halifax conformed to UK law."


HOLOCAUST LITIGATION: Swiss Banks To Give Limited Access To Info
----------------------------------------------------------------
Swiss banks involved in the global settlement of a class action
filed on behalf of Holocaust victims who lost their accounts
with banks during the Nazi era agreed to give investigators for
the fund limited access to information on millions of accounts,
the New York Times reports.

Holocaust victims and their relatives filed the class action,
styled "In re Holocaust Victim Assets Litigation, case number
CV-96-4849," in the US District Court of the Eastern District of
New York.  The suit sought to recover the money deposited in
banks for safekeeping before or during World War II.  The
plaintiffs alleged that the banks refused to release the money
after the war, saying they needed to provide detailed account
information or death certificates from Nazi concentration camps,
which were impossible to obtain.

In 1998, Swiss banks Credit Suisse and UBS signed a global
accord between Jewish plaintiff groups and Swiss banks Credit
Suisse and UBS.  Under the settlement, $800 million will go to
those who made the deposits or their heirs.  The remaining funds
were to compensate Holocaust survivors who had other claims, not
related to personal deposits.

Earlier, court-appointed Special Master for the fund Judah
Gribetz released a report, filed in the United States District
Court in Brooklyn, New York, stating that Swiss bank secrecy
could deprive victims and their heirs of their fair share in the
fund.

The report said that $485 million has been distributed so far,
but only $131.5 million has gone to those who had deposited the
money in Swiss banks or their relatives.  "Lack of full access
to existing documentation and the unavailability of other data
has interfered with the claims process," Mr. Gribetz wrote in
the report, according to an earlier Class Action Reporter story
(October 10, 2003).

Chief lawyer Burt Neuborne disclosed the agreement with the
banks in a court filing, saying that the new development could
break what court officials have called a frustrating logjam.

"It will enable us to find new accounts," the lawyer, Burt
Neuborne, told the Times.  "And it will enable us to determine
if we should continue to press for further access."

Mr. Neuborne also said that the agreement was important in
determining how successful the settlement would be in returning
lost deposits to Holocaust victims.  The Swiss banks have so far
released information on only 36,000 accounts.

However, lawyer for the Swiss banks Roger M. Witten reacted to
Mr. Neuborne's comments, saying the banks had merely
"cooperatively reached an agreement" to permit specific efforts
to match claims against the 4.1 million accounts that they had
long ago promised in principle, the New York Times reports.  He
added the agreement was reached before Mr. Gribetz's report was
submitted.  He also said Mr. Gribetz was wrong in flatly
asserting that the banks had records dealing with 4.1 million
Holocaust-era accounts.


IBM CORPORATION: Jury Selection Starts in Workers' Lawsuit Trial
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jury selection is scheduled to begin in the first major case
that puts the computer manufacturing industry in the spotlight
for allegedly concealing knowledge of harmful working conditions
in its early clean rooms, the Mercury News reports.

The suit, filed by former IBM workers Alida Hernandez and James
Moore, who contend they got cancer from systemic chemical
poisoning, after being exposed to hazardous chemicals in the
disk-drive-manufacturing clean room in the company's Cottle Road
Plant in San Jose, is the first of its kind to go to trial.

"This is, by far, the largest case of its kind,'' said Ted
Smith, executive director of the Silicon Valley Toxics
Coalition.  "IBM was one of the first companies in this
business, so they were, frankly, making a lot of the early
mistakes."

This case and about 250 other lawsuits filed against IBM,
primarily in New York and Vermont, where Big Blue has
semiconductor-manufacturing plants, and in Minnesota, will be
the first to possibly determine if many of the industry's
pioneering researchers and assembly line workers - many of whom
had direct contact with hazardous chemicals such as arsenic,
Freon, acetone, benzene and others - were guinea pigs for a
burgeoning industry.

"If you were exposed to something that takes 30 years to fester,
you might not have a clue until many years later,'' said Bill
Meyer, a co-founder of the Chelsie Group, a San Jose-based
worker-safety advocacy group.

IBM's cases are the first to go to trial, but they are not the
only ones pending against the electronics industry.  National
Semiconductor of Santa Clara also has been sued by employees who
allege they got cancer from working in National's chip-making
plants.  That case, which was filed 3 « years ago and is now a
class action, is in the discovery phase.

IBM says it has done nothing wrong, and has argued that the
cases should be heard by the Workers Compensation Board.  It
also stressed that there is no legal or scientific evidence to
prove direct causality.  Last week, it asked the 6th District
Court of Appeal to rule on whether there was enough evidence to
try the cases of Ms. Hernandez, who has breast cancer, and Ms.
Moore, who has non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

To win the case, the plaintiffs must prove that IBM knew that
its workers were suffering from chemical poisoning and concealed
that fact from them.  "To prove that fraudulent claim, you have
to prove the plaintiff has an occupational disease, then you
have to prove that the employer knew that he had the
occupational disease, and that the employer received a diagnosis
of the occupational disease, and that the employer concealed the
disease from the employee,'' said Raphael Metzger of the Metzger
Law Group in Long Beach.

A tall order for the plaintiffs, attorneys said. And already
their case has caught a snag.  In pre-trial hearings this week,
the judge granted IBM's motion to exclude its "corporate
mortality file," a database of death records of 30,000 employees
over a 30-year period.  Earlier the plaintiffs had this document
analyzed by Boston University School of Public Health
epidemiologist Richard Clapp, who wrote in a declaration that
IBM employees were "dying disproportionately of cancer at a much
younger age" than the general population.

IBM contended that the plaintiffs' use of these records, plus an
epidemiologist's analysis of them, does not follow any
scientific method.   "It doesn't show any relation between
chemicals and disease," said IBM spokesman Bill O'Leary.

IBM is represented by Jones Day, the firm that represented R.J.
Reynolds Tobacco in the smoking-related class actions.  The
trial is expected to last for at least two months.  If IBM
loses, it would set a precedent for the other cases filed
against it, and could open the floodgates for other similar
lawsuits.


JI CASE: MI Court to Decide on Retirees' Monthly Health Premiums
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court in Michigan will decide by
October 30 whether to temporary stop JI Case and Case
Corporation from collecting the $501 monthly health-insurance
premiums from 5,000 of its former retirees and spouses, The
Dispatch reports.

The United Auto Workers (UAW) filed the class action in October
2002 against the Company and El Paso Corporation.  The UAW later
withdrew from the suit and the retirees took on the suit.  The
suit argues that the retirees were guaranteed lifetime, no-cost
health-insurance benefits.

Retirees, including 600 to 800 in the Quad-Cities, who left the
company before July 1994 sued to restore their no-cost insurance
for life, which they say the company promised them when they
retired.  The suit names as defendants El Paso Tennessee
Pipeline Co. and Case LLC, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of
CNH Global Inc.  Since a series of mergers, El Paso Corporation,
formerly El Paso Natural Gas of Houston, Texas, is governing the
agreement with the retirees.

"From all the evidence I've gathered, prior to 1993, there was
never any question that this was a lifetime benefit," Roger L.
McClow, the retiree's attorney from Southfield, Michigan told
the Dispatch.  "We're trying to enforce that obligation for the
retirees."

However, a 1993 agreement between Tenneco and the UAW stated
that there would be a cap on retirees' medical premiums and
agreed retirees would pay costs beyond that cap, CNH Global
spokesman Jeff Walsh told the Dispatch.  He declined further
comment.

Judge Patrick Dugan will decide on a motion for a preliminary
injunction to resume full no-cost health insurance temporarily
to retirees while the lawsuit goes through the courts.  If the
injunction is rejected, retirees can expect to continue rising
premium costs as the lawsuit proceeds.  Local retirees told the
Dispatch they just learned their premiums will jump to $561 a
month on January 1.


MYLAN LABORATORIES: MA Court Recalls Order Dismissing AWP Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court in Boston, Massachusetts
unexpectedly recalled an order dismissing the class action filed
against Mylan Laboratories, Inc. a week after it granted the
motion, the Pittsburgh Business News reports.  The suit charges
the Company and other pharmaceutical firms with improperly
reporting "average wholesale price" information about generic
drugs, leading agencies to overpay for the medicines.

The Company contended that the plaintiffs failed to show any
specific wrongdoing on its part and asked for the suit's
dismissal.  The judge agreed and dismissed the suit last week.
The judge pulled her order this week, apparently due to a
scheduling conflict, the Company told the Business News.

"It appears as if this action was taken by the judge on her own
initiative because she became aware of a scheduling
inconsistency relating to one of her previous orders," Mylan's
vice chairman and chief executive officer, Robert Coury, told
the Business News.

He added that as far as Mylan is aware, no party to the lawsuit
has objected to the order dismissing the company from the case
or asked the judge to reconsider her order.  "We are hopeful,"
Mr. Coury said, "that we will be in the same place when the
scheduling issue is resolved."


NEW HAMPSHIRE: Dover City Votes To Join Suit v. MTBE Producers
--------------------------------------------------------------
The city of Dover, New Hampshire agreed to join a class action
against manufacturers of methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE),
which caused the city's Church Street wells to be closed off in
the early 1990s, the Town Online reports.

The Church street wells provided drinking water for 60 to 65
residents in the Town Square, Karl Warnick, town water operator
and superintendent of buildings, told the Town Online.  When the
wells were closed, those residents lost their water source,
causing the town to build a 12-inch line down Springdale Avenue.
For ten years, the city also purchased water from Springdale
Farms Water Supply Trust, before the Dover Water Co. started
supplying the square's drinking water.

Last week, selectmen decided to join the suit.  There will be no
cost for the town for this suit since the lawyers would be paid
from the proceeds, Town Administrator David Ramsay told Town
Online.  The lawsuit "would also protect us against any upcoming
problems," he said.

Board Chairman Tobe Deutschmann told Town Online he saw no
drawbacks to joining the action other than a dislike for damage
lawsuits.  "We have real damages here in Dover. I think we would
be amiss if we did not attempt to recover any losses," he said.
"A lot of damage suits were not on merit, but this one has one
because we lost our well."


NORTH CAROLINA: Embezzlement Suit Considered V. Insurance Agent
---------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyers are considering a class action against businessman
Anthony Wayne Allen of Fayetteville, North Carolina, who was
charged Monday with embezzlement by an insurance agent,
Fayetteville Online reports.

Mr. Allen was arrested after six people sued him, alleging the
money they invested with him, amounting to a total of about $2
million, was lost or unaccounted for.  Two of the suits also
named Calvin Deans, identified as an account supervisor who
worked for Mr. Allen, as defendant.

Mr. Allen is the publisher of a local edition of Fifty Plus
magazine, which is aimed at retirees, and is the the chief
executive officer of Client Relations, an estate-planning firm.
He also owns the A.W. Allen Insurance Group, Inc., which he
formed two weeks after he voluntarily surrendered his insurance
license.

In a hearing in North Carolina Superior Court, Judge Jack Hooks
issued a preliminary injunction against him, which forbid Mr.
Allen from investing any money on behalf of his clients and from
destroying any related documents.

Ronnie Mitchell, a lawyer representing four of the plaintiffs,
told Fayetteville Online the injunction applies to money and
documents relating to all of Mr. Allen's clients, not just those
named in the lawsuits that have already been filed.

Mr. Allen was accompanied by lawmen to the Cumberland County Law
Enforcement Center on Monday night.  Bail was set at $1 million.
Walking to the jail from the sheriff's office, Mr. Allen did not
respond to questions.

Mr. Mitchell also stated that the District Attorney's Office,
the U.S. Attorney's Office, the US Securities and Exchange
Commission and the State Bureau of Investigation are
investigating.

In an October 8 letter, an SEC lawyer told Mr. Allen that the
agency was beginning an "informal, nonpublic inquiry" into
Client Relations.  The letter asks Allen to provide the SEC with
documents and correspondence "on a voluntary basis."

"This matter is a fact-finding inquiry," the letter says,
Fayetteville Online reports.  "The staff is trying to determine
whether there have been any violations of the federal securities
laws."


QUE INC.: Faces Models' Suit For Antitrust Violations in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Que, Inc. faces a class action, styled "Amanda Masters, et al v.
Wilhelmina Model Agency, et al, Case No. 02-CV-4911 (HB)," filed
in the United States District Court, Southern District of New
York.

The Plaintiffs seek to maintain this as a class action under
Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.  The plaintiffs
allege a per se restraint of trade or commerce in violation of
the Sherman Antitrust Act, forfeiture and disgorgement of all
fees paid to defendants received as a result of its alleged
wrongful conduct, punitive and exemplary damages and accounting
of all costs and expenses, pre-judgment and post-judgment
interest, reasonable attorneys fees and costs and such other
relief as the Court deems appropriate.

The Company was served with a Summons and Amended Complaint and
has filed a Motion for Summary Judgment that is currently
pending.  At this stage of the litigation, the Company cannot
estimate the range of the potential loss, if any, in the event
it is unsuccessful in the defense of this action.


SALVATION ARMY: Group Suspicious Towards Head of Sex Abuse Probe
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Salvation Army Abuse Survivors, a group planning to sue the
Salvation Army for sexual abuse, have refused to deal with the
religious charity's independent watchdog, claiming a "conflict
of interest," stuff.co.nz reports.

The Salvation Army has commissioned an inquiry into charges of
sexual abuse, allegedly to have taken place at its former
children's home.  The charity appointed former Children's
Commissioner Roger McClay to be the investigation's independent
monitor.

However, Salvation Army Abuse Survivors spokeswoman Jan Lowe
told stuff.co.nz that Mr. McClay faced a conflict of interest as
he was working for the Salvation Army, yet expected to make
impartial and independent judgments on its inquiry.  "We are
mistrustful of having any dealings with him because he's
perceived by people in the group as being part of the Salvation
Army team," Ms Lowe said.

Mr. McClay told stuff.co.nz he was surprised by the group's
attitude and that his employer will not influence his decisions.
His pay rate had not yet been finalized.  "For five-and-a-half
years I was paid by the Government (as Children's Commissioner)
and when I needed to I told them where to get off," he said.

Salvation Army spokesman Alistair Herring told stuff.co.nz Mr.
McClay was appointed because of his "faultless credibility".
"Payment does not in any way mean his independence is being
compromised and it would be a judgment on his integrity to
suggest that," Mr. Herring said.


TENNESSEE: Source Of Hepatitis A Outbreak Traced To Green Onions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Green onions at an O'Charley's restaurant in west Knoxville,
Tennessee, appear to be the source of the Hepatitis A outbreak
that infected 70 people last month, the Associated Press
Newswires reports.  A preliminary report released recently by
the Knox County Health Department and the Atlanta-based Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention also said there was no
definitive link in the Knoxville cases with the more than 140
others in Georgia and North Carolina.

Investigators initially thought an infected food handler and
poor hygiene at the west Knoxville restaurant passed the virus.
County health director Mark Jones has cautioned that possibility
should not be ruled out, although the outbreak seems to be
linked to the green onions.

A handful of multimillion dollar lawsuits have been filed in
Knox County Circuit Court against the O'Charley's restaurant
chain, including a proposed class action.

The CDC and officials with the Food and Drug Administration are
continuing their investigation and said it may be several weeks
before a final report is issued.

Dr. Rose DeVasia, a CDC epidemiologist assigned to Tennessee,
said that the restaurant's employees were not at fault for the
infection, since green onions are multi-layered and difficult to
wash.  "I think that they (the employees) did everything they
could," added Dr. DeVasia.

The 70 people including, seven O'Charley's employees, became ill
in September after eating at the restaurant in August.  "While
we are confident that we did everything we could do to prevent
illness in people exposed to the cases in September, we cannot
be complacent and assume that there will be no further spread in
the community," said Dr. Stephanie Hall of the Knox County
Health Department.

Symptoms of Hepatitis A, a nonfatal infection, are mild fever,
loss of appetite, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, dark urine and
jaundice, usually appearing two to six weeks after exposure.

The proposed consumers' class action on behalf of Jacques Tinus
VanNiekirk against O'Charley's Inc. was filed in the Knox County
Circuit Court of the Eastern District of Tennessee.   Plaintiff
in this action is represented by Paul T. Gillenwater of
Gillenwater Nichol & Associates.


TRANSFINANCIAL HOLDINGS: Asks KS Court To Dismiss Part of Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Transfinancial Holdings, Inc. asked the United States District
Court in Kansas to dismiss the class action filed against it and
its directors.

The suit was initially filed in Delaware Chancery Court for
Newcastle County on January 12, 2000, seeking declaratory,
injunctive and other relief relating to a proposed management
buyout of the Company.  The suit alleged that the directors of
the Company:

     (1) failed to seek bidders for the Company's subsidiary,
         Crouse,

     (2) failed to seek bidders for its subsidiary, UPAC,

     (3) failed to actively solicit offers for the Company,

     (4) imposed arbitrary time constraints on those making
         offers and

     (5) favored a management buyout group's proposal and failed
         to obtain approval of the Company's shareholders for
         the sale of certain Crouse assets.

The suit sought certification as a class action.  The proposed
management buyout was terminated on February 18, 2000.  The
plaintiff filed an amended class action on August 9, 2000,
seeking damages in excess of $4.50 per share for the alleged
breaches of fiduciary duties.  A motion to dismiss a second
amended complaint was filed.  The lawsuit was dismissed on or
about November 1, 2002 with stipulation that it could be re-
filed in the United States District Court, District of Kansas,
in Kansas City, Kansas.

On February 28, 2003, the lawsuit was re-filed in the United
State District Court, District of Kansas in Kansas City, Kansas.
The Company has filed a motion to dismiss a portion of this
lawsuit and intends of vigorously defend.  Directors who are
defendants in this case are entitled to indemnity from the
Company.  The Company believes this suit will not have a
material adverse effect on the financial condition, liquidity or
results of operations of the Company.


UST LIQUIDATING: Trial in Suit V. Veeder-Root Sale Set May 2004
---------------------------------------------------------------
Trial in the class action filed against UST Liquidating
Corporation and certain other parties on behalf of certain
common shareholders of the Company is set for May 2004 in
California State Court.

The suit alleges that the Company and other parties breached
their fiduciary duty to the Company's s common shareholders in
connection with the Veeder-Root sale.  The plaintiffs also filed
a derivative claim alleging corporate waste.

In August 2000, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary
injunction, which was denied in a court hearing held on
September 18, 2000.  The Company and certain other parties
subsequently filed a demurrer to plaintiffs' complaint
contending that plaintiffs failed to state a valid cause of
action, which was granted in October 2000.

The plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal regarding the demurrer
and voluntarily dismissed the derivative claim alleging
corporate waste.  The briefing on the appeal was completed and
an oral argument was heard before the California Court of
Appeals on October 26, 2001.  On November 21, 2001, the
California Court of Appeals reversed the trial court with
respect to the demurrer and ruled that the plaintiffs could
assert a personal, non-derivative claim.

The case is currently in the discovery phase.  The Company
intends to continue to contest the case; however, it is too
early at this time to determine the ultimate outcome of this
matter and the extent of the Company's exposure.


ZALE CORPORATION: Preliminary Approval Given to Suit Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------
Preliminary approval has been granted to the settlement proposed
by Zale Corporation to two class actions filed against it in
Alabama and Texas courts.

On November 3, 1999, a plaintiff amended a complaint filed in
the Circuit Court for Colbert County, State of Alabama to
commence a class action against the Company and:

     (1) Jewelers National Bank,

     (2) Zale Indemnity Company,

     (3) Zale Life Insurance Company,

     (4) Jewelers Financial Services,

     (5) Jewel Re-Insurance, Ltd. and

     (6) certain employees of the Company

On July 21, 2000, the same plaintiff commenced a purported class
action in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Texas, Texarkana Division against the Company and:

     (i) Jewelers National Bank,

    (ii) Zale Indemnity Company,

   (iii) Zale Life Insurance Company,

    (iv) Jewel Re-Insurance, Ltd. and

     (v) certain employees of the Company

Both purported class actions concern allegations that the
defendants marketed credit insurance to customers in violation
of state statutory and common laws and federal anti-racketeering
laws.

During the first quarter of fiscal year 2003, the Company
reached an agreement with counsel for the plaintiff to settle
the actions.  Final approval is expected to occur in late
November 2003.


ZALE CORPORATION: CA Court Grants Final Approval to Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles granted
final approval to the settlement of a class action filed against
Zale Corporation and Zale Delaware, Inc. on behalf of current
and former salaried store managers and assistant store managers
of the Company in California.

The complaint alleges that these individuals were entitled to
overtime pay and should not have been classified as exempt
employees under California law.  During the third quarter of
fiscal year 2003, the Company reached an agreement with counsel
for the plaintiff to settle the action.



                  Meetings, Conferences & Seminars


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

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 6-7, 2003
WHITE COLLAR FRAUD, INDUSTRIAL INJURIES,
PHARMACEUTICALS & NURSING HOMES
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

November 19-20, 2003
LITIGATION AND RESOLUTION OF CLASS ACTIONS
Glasser Legal Works
New York City
Contact: mbaron@glasserlegalworks.com; 800-308-1700x111

December 3-4, 2003
LITIGATION AND RESOLUTION OF CLASS ACTIONS
Glasser Legal Works
San Francisco
Contact: mbaron@glasserlegalworks.com; 800-308-1700x111

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 8-9, 2003
D&O LIABILITY INSURANCE
American Conference Institute
San Francisco
Contact: 1-888-224-2480; http://www.americanconference.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, 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

December 11-13, 2003
EMERGING SECURITIES LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Kierland Resort & Spa, Scottsdale
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 14-16, 2003
DRUG AND MEDICAL DEVICE LITIGATION
American Conference Institute
The Plaza Hotel, New York City
Contact: 1-888-224-2480; http://www.americanconference.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

January 26-27, 2004
WATER CONTAMINATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Pasadena CA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

January 29, 2004
OBESITY CLAIMS
American Conference Institute
Washington
Contact: 1-888-224-2480; http://www.americanconference.com

January 29-30, 2004
TOP 10 INSURANCE ISSUES CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Philadephia Marriott, PA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

February 02, 2004
EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES LIABILITY INSURANCE
American Conference Institute
New York City
Contact: 1-888-224-2480; http://www.americanconference.com

February 12, 2004
BAYCOL LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Four Seasons Hotel, Houston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

February 13, 2004
PPA LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Four Seasons Hotel, Houston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

February 23-24, 2004
ASBESTOS LITIGATION 101
Mealey Publications
The Westin, Philadephia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

February 23-24, 2004
FUNDAMENTALS OF REINSURANCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Boston Common, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

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

TBA
FASTFOOD INDUSTRY LIABILITY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com



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

October 06-30, 2003
DAMAGES IN TEXAS INSURANCE LITIGATION:
EVALUATING, PLEADING, AND PROVING
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

October 06-30, 2003
NBI PRESENTS "EMERGING ISSUES IN CALIFORNIA
INDOOR AIR QUALITY AND TOXIC MOLD LITIGATION
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

October 06-30, 2003
NBI PRESENTS "LITIGATING THE CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT IN FLORIDA
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.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


ALSTOM SA: Holzer Holzer Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Holzer Holzer & Cannon, LLC initiated today a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York on behalf of all purchasers of the American
Depositary Receipts (ADRs) of Alstom SA (NYSE:ALS) between May
26, 1999 and June 29, 2003, inclusive who purchased such shares
on the New York Stock Exchange; and all purchasers of the
securities of Alstom between May 26, 1999 and June 29, 2003,
inclusive who live in the United States and who were damaged
thereby.

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.  Throughout the class period, as alleged
in the complaint, defendants issued numerous positive statements
concerning the growth and financial performance of its
transportation subsidiary.

The complaint alleges that these statements were materially
false and misleading because they failed to disclose and/or
misrepresented the following adverse facts, among others:

     (1) that the Company had failed to recognize costs incurred
         in a rolling-stock supply railcar contract at its
         transportation unit in anticipation of shifting the
         costs to other contracts;

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

     (3) that as a result of the foregoing, the value of the
         Company's losses was materially understated at all
         relevant times and the value of the Company's margins
         was materially overstated at all relevant times.

The complaint alleges that on June 30, 2003, before the US
market opened for trading, Alstom announced that it is
"conducting an internal review assisted by external accountants
and lawyers following receipt of letters earlier this month
alleging accounting improprieties on a railcar contract being
executed at the Hornell, New York facility of ALSTOM
Transportation Inc. (ATI), a US subsidiary of the Company."

As part of the review, the complaint alleges, the Company
"identified that losses have been significantly understated in
ATI's accounts, in substantial part due to accounting
improprieties by the understatement of actual costs incurred,
including by the non-recognition of costs incurred in
anticipation of shifting them to other contracts, and by the
understatement of forecast costs to completion."

As a result, the Company announced that it would record an
additional net after tax charge of 51 million euros ($58
million) for the year ended March 31, 2003.

For more details, contact Michael I. Fistel, Jr. by Mail: Holzer
Holzer & Cannon, LLC; 1117 Perimeter Center West, Suite E-107,
Atlanta, Georgia 30338 by Phone: (888) 508-6832 or by E-mail:
mfistel@holzerlaw.com.


CHECK POINT: Holzer Holzer Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
Holzer Holzer & Cannon, LLC initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York on behalf of purchasers of Check Point Software
Technologies Ltd. (Nasdaq:CHKP) publicly traded securities
during the period between July 10, 2001 and April 4, 2002,
inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder.  Throughout the class period, as alleged
in the complaint, defendants issued numerous statements
concerning Check Point's revenue growth, product and marketing
initiatives, and increasing revenues and profits while failing
to disclose that demand for the Company's products was
materially declining.

The complaint alleges that when this information was belatedly
disclosed to the market on April 4, 2002, shares of Check Point
fell over 24% on extremely heavy trading volume.

For more details, contact Michael I. Fistel, Jr. by Mail: 1117
Perimeter Center West, Suite E-107, Atlanta, Georgia 30338 by
Phone: (888) 508-6832l by E-mail: mfistel@holzerlaw.com or visit
the firm's Website: http://www.holzerlaw.com


EMERSON RADIO: Ademi O'Reilly Commences Securities Suit in NJ
-------------------------------------------------------------
Ademi & O'Reilly, LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on
behalf of purchasers of Emerson Radio Corporation (AMEX:MSN)
publicly traded securities during the period between January 29,
2003 and August 12, 2003, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder, by issuing numerous positive statements
throughout the Class Period regarding the Company's growth and
demand for the Company's products.

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

     (1) that Emerson customers were deferring and foregoing
         purchases of product and reducing inventory levels as
         they shifted to just-in-time stocking;

     (2) that since at least March 2003, the outbreak of severe
         acute respiratory syndrome in Asia was dramatically
         reducing Emerson's product demand and supply;

     (3) that Emerson was planning to, and did, discontinue
         Mary-Kate and Ashley and Nascar brands and business;
         and

     (4) that based on the foregoing, Emerson had no reasonable
         basis to project "significant" and "strong" growth and
         revenues for fiscal 2004.

On August 12, 2003, the last day of the Class Period, Emerson
shocked the investing public when it released its financial and
operational results for the first quarter of fiscal 2004, ended
June 30, 2003, announcing, among others, a 44.3% revenue decline
in its consumer electronics segment.  In response to this
announcement, shares of Emerson stock fell more than 49% on
August 12, 2003, on heavy trading volume.

For more information, contact Guri Ademi by Phone:
1-888-551-9944 or by E-mail: gademi@ademilaw.com.



MIDWAY GAMES: Federman & Sherwood Lodges Stock Suit in S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------
Federman & Sherwood initiated a securities class action on
behalf of shareholders of Midway Games, Inc. (NYSE: MWY) for the
class period from December 11, 2001 through July 30, 2003, in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York.

The lawsuit alleges that Midway issued false and misleading
representations thereby causing Midway shares to trade at
artificially inflated levels.  Further, on July 29, 2003, Midway
announced that David F. Zucker had succeeded Neil D. Nicastro as
Chief Executive Officer and President of Midway Games, Inc.,
which was a shock to the markets, causing already depressed
shares to slide downwards more than 28%, or $0.97 a share,
closing at $2.42 on July 20, 2003.

For more details, contact William B. Federman by Mail: FEDERMAN
& SHERWOOD, 120 N. Robinson, Suite 2720, Oklahoma City, OK 73102
by Phone: (405) 235-1560 by Fax: (405) 239-2112 or by E-mail:
wfederman@aol.com


MIDWAY GAMES: Lasky & Rifkind Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
Lasky & Rifkind, Ltd. initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois, on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise
acquired publicly traded securities of Midway Games (NYSE:MWY)
between December 11, 2001 to July 30, 2003, inclusive.  The
lawsuit was filed against Midway and certain officers and
directors.

The complaint alleges that Defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market between December 11, and July
30, 2003.  Specifically, the complaint alleges the statements
were false and misleading because they failed to disclose and
misrepresented the following material adverse facts which were
known to the defendants or recklessly disregarded by them:

     (1) that the Company was experiencing material disruptions
         in its internal studios such that it would be unable to
         meet the expected release dates for its major new game
         titles;

     (2) that the Company's inability to develop new game titles
         in a timely manner was negatively impacting its ability
         to increase revenues and earnings;

     (3) that the company was experiencing decreased consumer
         demand for its released products.

The class period begins on December 11, 2001, when Midway filed
with the SEC, on Form S-3/A, a registration statement containing
alleged misrepresentations with respect to the Company's
offering of 4.5 million shares of common stock.  On July 29,
2003, the Company announced its results for the third quarter
ended March 31, 2003.

Shocking the market, Midway disclosed it generated a mere $5
million, failing to meet its own guidance estimates of $7
million to $11 million.  The revenue decline was attributed to
the delay in the release of a number of titles and decreasing
consumer demand for its existing titles.  The Company also
announced that its CEO Neil D. Nicastro was being succeeded by
David F. Zucker.  In response to the news Midway's shares slid
downwards more than 28% or $0.97 per share, to close at
$2.42 per share on July 30, 2003.

For more details, contact Leigh Lasky by Phone: (800) 321-0476
or visit the firm's Website: http://www.laskyrifkind.com


POLAROID CORPORATION: Shapiro Haber Lodges Stock Lawsuit in MA
--------------------------------------------------------------
Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts on behalf of all persons who purchased the common
stock of Polaroid Corporation (Other OTC:PRDCQ.PK) between
January 26, 2000 and August 16, 2001, inclusive.

The plaintiff in the action is Stephen J. Morgan, a substantial
Polaroid shareholder who has been active in working for
shareholder interests in the Polaroid bankruptcy proceeding now
pending in the United States Bankruptcy Court in Delaware.

The defendants in the case are:

     (1) KPMG LLP, Polaroid's auditors during the class period;

     (2) Gary T. DiCamillo, Polaroid's Chairman and CEO;

     (3) Carl L. Lueders,

     (4) Judith G. Boynton,

     (5) William K. Flaherty, who formerly served as Vice
         Presidents and Chief Financial Officer of Polaroid; and

     (6) Donald M. Halsted, Polaroid's former Vice President and
         Controller.

The Complaint alleges that the defendants violated sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making
numerous materially false and misleading statements during the
class period, including statements in quarterly and annual
reports filed with the SEC.

The Complaint alleges that, as appears from a recent Report
issued by an Examiner appointed by the Bankruptcy Court, all the
defendants knew or should have known that Polaroid's financial
condition was materially worse than the defendants represented
to the investing public.

The Complaint also alleges that by issuing unqualified audit
opinions regarding Polaroid's financial statements and financial
condition during the class period and by failing to issue a
"going concern" qualification, KPMG violated the Federal
securities laws.  The suit alleges that as the result of the
defendants' statements, the price of Polaroid's common stock was
artificially inflated during the class period.

For more details, contact Thomas V. Urmy, Jr., Thomas G.
Shapiro, Esq. or Alyssa Petroff, paralegal by Mail: 75 State
Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02109 by Phone: (800-287-8119), by
Fax: 617-439-0134 or by E-mail: cases@shulaw.com.


POLAROID CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Suit in NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities
class action in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of
Polaroid Corporation (OTC Pink Sheets:PRDCQ) publicly traded
securities during the period between January 26, 2000 and August
9, 2001, inclusive.

The action, numbered 03 CV 7499, is pending in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York against
defendants:

     (1) KPMG LLP (KPMG),

     (2) Polaroid Chairman and CEO Gary DiCamillo,

     (3) Polaroid CFO Carl Leuders,

     (4) Polaroid Controller Donald Halsted and

     (5) Judith G. Boynton, who served as Polaroid's Executive
         Vice President and Chief Financial Officer from the
         beginning of the Class Period until January 2001.

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 materially false and
misleading statements with respect to Polaroid's financial
condition.  The Company's auditor, defendant KPMG, also issued
unqualified audit opinions regarding the Company's financial
statements during the Class Period.

As was recently disclosed in a report issued by Perry M.
Mandarino, a Court-appointed Examiner in the Polaroid bankruptcy
proceeding, defendants' statements issued throughout the Class
Period were materially false and misleading because defendants
knew or should have known that the Company's financial condition
had significantly deteriorated and was much worse than was being
represented to the public.

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


POLAROID CORPORATION: Holzer Holzer Lodge Stock Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
Holzer Holzer & Cannon, LLC initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Southern District
of New York on behalf of purchasers of Polaroid Corporation
(Pink Sheets:PRDCQ) publicly traded securities during the
period between January 26, 2000 and August 9, 2001, 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 statements and
filing quarterly and annual reports with the SEC describing the
Company's financial performance.

The complaint alleges that the Company's auditor, defendant
KPMG, also issued unqualified audit opinions regarding the
Company's financial statements during the Class Period.  The
complaint further alleges that as was recently disclosed in a
Report issued by Perry M. Mandarino, the Court-appointed
Examiner in the Polaroid bankruptcy proceeding, defendants'
statements issued throughout the Class Period were materially
false and misleading because defendants knew or should have
known that the Company's financial condition had significantly
deteriorated and was much more severe than was being represented
to the public.

For more details, contact Michael I. Fistel, Jr. by Mail: 1117
Perimeter Center West, Suite E-107, Atlanta, Georgia 30338 by
Phone: (888) 508-6832 or by E-mail: mfistel@holzerlaw.com


SPORTSLINE.COM: Brodsky & Smith Files Securities Suit in S.D. FL
----------------------------------------------------------------
Brodsky & Smith, LLC initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of
Florida on behalf of shareholders who purchased the common stock
and other securities of SportsLine.com, Inc. (Nasdaq:SPLN),
between May 15, 2001 and September 25, 2003 inclusive.

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 SportsLine.com
securities.  The Complaint further alleges, among other claims,
that SportsLine.com misrepresented or failed to advise investors
that the Company's MVP.com store was failing to make a profit.

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


STRONG FINANCIAL: Ademi O'Reilly Launches Securities Suit in WI
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ademi & O'Reilly, LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Wisconsin on September 10, 2003, on behalf of purchasers of the
securities of the Strong Funds family of funds owned and
operated by Strong Financial Corporation, and its subsidiaries
and affiliates, between October 1, 1998 and July 3, 2003,
inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, the Securities Act of 1933 and the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940.

The Funds, and the symbols for the respective Funds named below,
are as follows:


     (1) Strong Advisor Bond Fund (SVBDX, SADBX, SABCX, SIBNX,
         F008W1, SBDIX)

     (2) Strong Advisor Municipal Bond Fund (SAMAX, SMBBX,
         F00BH8)

     (3) Strong Advisor Municipal Select Fund (SMUIX, STAEX,
         F005LZ, F005M9)

     (4) Strong Advisor Short Duration Bond A Fund (STSDX,
         SSDKX, SSHCX, STGBX)

     (5) Strong Advisor Common Stock Fund (SCSAX, SCSKX, STSAX,
         STCSX)

     (6) Strong Advisor Endeavor Large Cap Fund (STALX, F008GO)

     (7) Strong Advisor Focus Fund (F005MO, F005M7, F005LT)

     (8) Strong Advisor International Core Fund (F008GQ, F008GR,
         F008GS)

     (9) Strong Advisor Large Company Core Fund (SLGAX, F00AO2,
         F00AO3, SLCKX)

    (10) Strong Advisor Mid-Cap Growth Fund (F005LQ, F005M1,
         F005LO, SMDCX)

    (11) Strong Advisor Small Cap Value Fund (SMVAX, SMVBX,
         SMVCX, SSMVX)

    (12) Strong Advisor Strategic Income Fund (SASAX, F005L7,
         SASCX)

    (13) Strong Advisor Technology Fund (SASCX, F005LM, F005LM)

    (14) Strong Advisor U.S. Small/Mid Cap Growth Fund (F009D0,
         F009D1)

    (15) Strong Advisor U.S. Value (F005M2, F005M5, F005MA,
         SEQKX, SEQIX)

    (16) Strong Advisor Utilities and Energy Fund (SUEAX,
         F00AED, F00AEE, F009D5)

    (17) Strong All Cap Value Fund (F009D5)

    (18) Strong Asia Pacific Fund (SASPX)

    (19) Strong Balanced Fund (STAAX)

    (20) Strong Blue Chip Fund (SBCHX)

    (21) Strong Discovery Fund (STDIX)

    (22) Strong Dividend Income Fund (SDVIX, F008VY)

    (23) Strong Dow 30 Value Fund (SDOWX)

    (24) Strong Endeavor Fund (SENDX)

    (25) Strong Energy Fund (SENGX)

    (26) Strong Enterprise Fund (SENAX, F04ANX, SENTX, SEPKX)

    (27) Strong Growth & Income Fund (SGNAX, SGNIX, SGRIX,
         SGIKX)

    (28) Strong Growth 20 Fund (SGTWX, SGRTX, SGRAX, F00B67,
         SGRNX)

    (29) Strong Growth Fund (SGROX, SGRKX)

    (30) Strong Index 500 Fund (SINEX)

    (31) Strong Large Cap Core Fund (SLCRX)

    (32) Strong Large Cap Growth Fund (STRFX)

    (33) Strong Large Company Growth Fund (SLGIX, F04ANY)

    (34) Strong Mid Cap Disciplined Fund (SMCDX)

    (35) Strong Multi-Cap Value Fund (SMTVX)

    (36) Strong Opportunity Fund (SOPVX, SOPFX, F00AH2)

    (37) Strong Overseas Fund (F00B4I, SOVRX)

    (38) Strong Small Company Value Fund (F009D3)

    (39) Strong Technology 100 Fund (STEKX)

    (40) Strong U.S. Emerging Growth Fund (SEMRX)

    (41) Strong Value Fund (STVAX)

    (42) Strong Life Stages - Aggressive Portfolio Fund (SAGGX)

    (43) Strong Life Stages - Conservative Portfolio Fund
         (SCONX)

    (44) Strong Life Stages - Moderate Portfolio Fund (SMDPX)

    (45) Strong Corporate Bond Fund (SCBDX, SCBNX, STCBX)

    (46) Strong Corporate Income Fund (SCORX)

    (47) Strong High-Yield Bond Fund (SHBAX, SHYYX, STHYX)

    (48) Strong Government Securities Fund (SGVDX, F00B66,
         SGVIX, STVSX)

    (49) Strong High-Yield Municipal Bond Fund (SHYLX)

    (50) Strong Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund (SIMBX)

    (51) Strong Municipal Bond Fund (SXFIX)

    (52) Strong Minnesota Tax-Free Fund (F00B64, F00B65, F00B63)

    (53) Strong Wisconsin Tax-Free Fund (F0068K)

    (54) Strong Short-Term High-Yield Municipal Bond Fund
         (SSHMX, SSTHX, STHBX)

    (55) Strong Short-Term Municipal Bond Fund (F00B62, STSMX)

    (56) Strong Short-Term Income Fund (F00B1K)

    (57) Strong Short-Term Bond Fund (SSTVX, SSHIX, SSTBX)

    (58) Strong Ultra Short-Term Income Fund (SADAX, SADIX,
         STADX)

    (59) Strong Ultra Short-Term Municipal Income Fund (SMAVX,
         SMAIX, SMUAX)

    (60) Strong Florida Municipal Money Market Fund (SLFXX)

    (61) Strong Heritage Money Fund (SHMXX)

    (62) Strong Money Market Fund (SMNXX)

    (63) Strong Municipal Money Market Fund (SXFXX)

    (64) Strong Tax-Free Money Fund (STMXX)

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 11 and
15 of the Securities Act of 1933; Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder; and Section 206 of the Investment Advisers Act of
1940.

The Complaint charges that, throughout the Class Period,
defendants failed to disclose that they improperly allowed
certain hedge funds, such as Canary, to engage in the "timing"
of their transactions in the Funds' securities.  Timing is
excessive, arbitrage trading undertaken to turn a quick profit.
Timing injures ordinary mutual fund investors -- who are not
allowed to engage in such practices -- and is acknowledged as an
improper practice by the Funds.

In return for receiving extra fees from Canary and other favored
investors, Strong Financial Corporation and its subsidiaries
allowed and facilitated Canary's timing activities, to the
detriment of class members, who paid, dollar for dollar, for
Canary's improper profits.  These practices were undisclosed in
the prospectuses of the Funds, which falsely represented that
the Funds actively police against timing.

For more information, contact Guri Ademi by Phone:
1-888-551-9944 or by E-mail: gademi@ademilaw.com.



                        *********

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

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

                        *********


S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Trenton, New Jersey, and
Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C.  Enid Sterling, Roberto
Amor, 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  * * *