CAR_Public/031017.mbx            C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

           Friday, October 17, 2003, Vol. 5, No. 205

                        Headlines

BREAST IMPLANTS: FDA Advisers Want More Data on Breast Implants
CISCO SYSTEMS: Reaches Huawei Settlement To End Legal Dispute
CLAYTON HOMES: Shareholder Launches Securities Suit in DE Court
CLAYTON HOMES: Investors Lodge Securities, Derivative Suit in TN
COMMUNICATIONS AND ENTERTAINMENT: Settling CA Investors Lawsuit

CRYO-CELL INTERNATIONAL: Shareholders Launch Stock Suits in FL
EAGLE PICHER: Plaintiffs File Amended Environmental Suit in CO
FORD MOTOR: Jury Awards $27 Million in Damages To Injured Boy
HALLIBURTON: Legal Problems Commence As Lower Earnings Forecast
HONDA POWER: Recalls Walk-Behind Lawnmowers For Injury Hazard

IMCLONE SYSTEMS: SEC Commences Amended Securities Fraud Lawsuit
JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS: Settle Hotel Employees' Sex Bias Lawsuit
JOHN WILEY: Recalls Candle And Soap Making Book For Burn Hazard
MORGAN STANLEY: Anticipating SEC To Commence Securities Action
NATIONAL WESTERN: Announces Preliminary Pact with Purchasers

NEW YORK: Court Grants Class Certification To Strip Search Suit
OHIO: Prison Inmates File Lawsuit Over Poor Medical, Dental Care
PAT & OSCAR'S: Lawsuit Possible Due To E. Coli Outbreak in CA
PIP/USA INC.: Consumers Commence TX Suit Over Implant Products
PIP/USA INC.: Faces Five Consumer Fraud Suits in IL State Courts

PIP.AMERICA: Faces Three Securities Fraud Lawsuits in FL Court
POLY IMPLANTS: Faces Unfair Competition Suit in CA State Court
RURAL/METRO CORPORATION: Final Hearing Set For December 9, 2003
RURAL/METRO CORPORATION: AZ Court To Rule on Dismissal of Suit
TALARIAN CORPORATION: Agrees To Settle NY Securities Fraud Suit

TEXAS: Group Launches Lawsuit Over Republican Map Redistricting
TIBCO SOFTWARE: Reaches Agreement To Settle NY Securities Suit

                     Asbestos Alert

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Possible Cause of Worker's Death
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Groups Push for Better Health Facilities
ASBESTOS ALERT: Asbestos Company to Pay School's Clean-Up Bill
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ameron Continues to Face Asbestos Suits
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Harsco Expounds on its Asbestos Liabilities

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Compensation Far from Done
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: RPM International Lodges Suit V. Insurers
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Scapa To Pay $3.5M After Unexpected Ruling

                 New Securities Fraud Cases

CHECK POINT: Goodkind Labaton Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY
CHECK POINT: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
EMERSON RADIO: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Securities Suit in NJ
SPORTSLINE.COM: Emerson Poynter Launches Securities Suit in FL
STRONG FINANCIAL: Emerson Poynter Lodges Securities Suit in NY

VERTEX PHARMACEUTICALS: Brodsky & Smith Lodges Stock Suit in MA


                       *********


BREAST IMPLANTS: FDA Advisers Want More Data on Breast Implants
---------------------------------------------------------------
Advisers for the United States Food and Drug Administration are
flabbergasted at the lack of data relating to silicone-gel
implants, eleven years after safety fears forced a near-ban of
the implants, the Associated Press reports.

The FDA is considering whether to lift a ban on silicone gel
breast implants produced by Inamed Corporation.  The agency held
a two-day meeting for its scientific advisers to analyze all the
evidence and the panel is due to make recommendations on
Wednesday.

After 16 hours of testimony and debate, the advisers discovered
that research by the FDA and others suggest implants really
start breaking and leaking seven years after women receive them,
but Inamed hasn't tracked women's health for nearly that long.

"A decade has passed and we sat here today talking about two-
and three-year data.  I'm flabbergasted," Dr. Thomas Whalen of
the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, the advisory panel's
chairman told AP.

"It simply boggles the mind," agreed fellow panelist Nancy
Dubler, a bioethicist at Albert Einstein College of Medicine -
who also asked why Inamed hadn't solved the problem by making
implants more durable in the last decade, AP reports.

Several women testified before the panel, with different views.
Some of them urged the FDA to allow them to make the choice,
arguing that silicone implants are more natural feeling than
saline implants, which aren't perfect either.  However, dozens
of other women testified that the implants caused them pain and
disfigurement, often after they've had the implants for a decade
or more.

The advisers also questioned why Inamed hadn't tracked women
long enough to prove just how big a problem those complaints
are.  The Company said the implants have been exonerated,
stating studies that show little evidence the implants cause
major diseases like cancer or lupus.

However, the FDA worries that rare diseases aren't settled, and
that subsets of women - especially the small proportion who have
silicone leaking through scar tissue into the breast or beyond -
might be more vulnerable to painful conditions like
fibromyalgia, AP reports.

Advisers were also torn on how to settle the concerns - or if
women should be able to choose silicone implants knowing there
are still unanswered questions, AP states.

"I believe in the right to choose," said FDA panelist Dr.
Benjamin Anderson, a University of Washington cancer surgeon.
But he stressed if that's ultimately the decision, women will
need some basic guidelines on how often to check for leaks and
when to remove old implants - information also still up for
debate, AP reports.


CISCO SYSTEMS: Reaches Huawei Settlement To End Legal Dispute
-------------------------------------------------------------
In a joint statement, Huawei Technology Co., Ltd. And Cisco
Systems Inc. said they have signed an agreement in a move seen
to end a legal dispute stemming from Cisco's claims that Huawei
allegedly copied its intellectual property illegally, AFX News
reports.

As part of the agreement Huawei has voluntarily made changes to
certain router and switch products in order to address Cisco's
concerns, and that they have agreed on a process for reviewing
these changes, the statement read.  Furthermore, the statement
said that the legal action would be dropped subject to the full
implementation of Cisco's demands and the completion of the
independent review to ensure that these have been carried out.

"Under the terms of the agreement, Huawei will continue to abide
by the terms of the Preliminary Injunction Order," it said.
Huawei's key joint venture partner 3Com, which intervened in the
lawsuit, also agreed to the process outlined in the agreement,
they added.  All other terms of the agreement are confidential.

Cisco filed the lawsuit in a Texas court in January alleging
that Huawei unlawfully copied and misappropriated Cisco's IOS
software, including its source code as well as copied Cisco
documentation and other copyrighted materials, and infringed
numerous Cisco patents.


CLAYTON HOMES: Shareholder Launches Securities Suit in DE Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
Clayton Homes, Inc. faces a class action filed by Mark Blosser,
an alleged Company shareholder, in the Delaware Chancery Court
in New Castle County.  The suit also names as defendants
directors:

     (1) James L. Clayton,

     (2) B. Joe Clayton,

     (3) Kevin T. Clayton,

     (4) Dan W. Evins,

     (5) Wilma H. Jordan,

     (6) Thomas N. McAdams and

     (7) C. Warren Neel

The complaint alleges that the individual defendants breached
their fiduciary duties to the shareholders of Clayton Homes by
agreeing to the merger.  The complaint seeks:

     (i) a declaration that the action is properly maintainable
         as a class action,

    (ii) an injunction prohibiting the completion of the merger,

   (iii) if the merger is completed, rescission of the merger
         agreement or damages,

    (iv) a declaration that the merger agreement is null and
         void, and

     (v) costs


CLAYTON HOMES: Investors Lodge Securities, Derivative Suit in TN
----------------------------------------------------------------
Clayton Homes, Inc. faces a putative class action and
shareholders' derivative lawsuit filed by Denver Area Meat
Cutters and Employers Pension Plan in the Circuit Court for
Blount County, Tennessee.  The suit also named as defendants
directors:

     (1) James L. Clayton,

     (2) Kevin T. Clayton,

     (3) C. Warren Neel,

     (4) B. Joe Clayton,

     (5) Steven G. Davis,

     (6) Dan W. Evins,

     (7) Wilma H. Jordan and

     (8) Thomas N. McAdams.

The complaint alleges that the individual defendants breached
their fiduciary duties to the shareholders of Clayton Homes by
agreeing to the merger.  The complaint seeks:

     (i) a declaration that the action is properly maintainable
         as a class action,

    (ii) a declaration that the individual defendants breached
         their fiduciary duties by agreeing to the merger,

   (iii) a declaration that the individual defendants bear the
         burden of showing the entire fairness of the merger,
         and that they cannot meet that burden,

    (iv) damages,

     (v) disgorgement of any benefits improperly received by the
         individual defendants, and

    (vi) costs


COMMUNICATIONS AND ENTERTAINMENT: Settling CA Investors Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Communications and Entertainment Corporation is attempting to
settle with two defendants in a class action, styled "Diane
Pfannebecker v. Norman Muller, Communications and Entertainment
Corporation, Jay Behling, Jeffrey S. Konvitz, Tom Smith, Jerry
Silva, David Mortman, Price Waterhouse & Co., Todman & Co., and
Renato Tomacruz," filed in the California State Court.

A similar suit, entitled "Dennis Blewitt v. Norman Muller, Jerry
Minsky, Dorian Industries, Inc. and Communications and
Entertainment Corporation," was initially filed, seeking damages
in connection with the Company's treatment in its financial
statements of the disposition of its subsidiary, Double Helix
Films, Inc. in June 1991.  The complaint seeks unspecified
damages on behalf of all persons who purchased shares of the
Company's common stock from and after June 1992.

Following the filing of the Pfannebecker action, the first
action was dismissed by stipulation in May 1997. The Company
filed a motion to dismiss the complaint in the second action and
after a hearing on the motion in July 1997, the court dismissed
the federal securities law claims as being time-barred by the
applicable statute of limitations, and dismissed the state
securities law claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

The Ninth Circuit upheld the lower court's dismissal of this
action on appeal.  The case was re-filed in California state
court in August 1998.  The court granted motions to dismiss two
of the complaints filed by the plaintiff, whereupon a third
complaint was filed.  More recently, a fourth amended complaint
has been filed adding claims that the defendants, including the
Company, violated provisions of the California Securities Laws.
There was no trial date set in this matter.

In a related action, Thomas Smith and Norman Muller, former
directors of the Company and co-defendants in the Pfannebecker
matter, filed an action against the Company in the Los Angeles
Superior Court seeking indemnification from the Company in
connection with their status as defendants in the Pfannebecker
matter.  The Company intends to defend this action on the
grounds that Mr. Muller and Mr. Smith committed wrongful acts as
directors of the Company and failed to comply with various
fiduciary obligations to the Company.

The Company has met on several occasions, through its legal
counsel, to discuss and answer certain attempts at settlement.
Due to the nature and complications of this suit, matters have
generally been very slow to receive response to.  In June 2002,
the plaintiff, along with the defendants and their counsel,
attended a hearing on the merits of the Class Action Status.

The Judge ruled in favor of the defendants in that there were no
grounds to continue this case as a class action.  Subsequently,
the Company was able to receive a dismissal of this case.  The
Company, at the same time, entered into settlement discussions
with respect to any claims of indemnification and settled
outstanding possible claims and potential cross claims to all
remaining co-defendants for a nominal amount of money, with the
exception of Mr. Muller and Mr. Smith.

The Company attempted to further clarify its stand on its
position with Mr. Muller and Mr. Smith as earlier noted,
however; these attempts were unsuccessful for the Company.  The
Company attempted also to discuss settlement activity, and these
settlement discussions did fail.  The Company was not able to
provide an amicable solution to this matter of indemnification
and reimbursement of expense (claimed to be in excess of
$350,000) and posed its defense against Mr. Muller and Mr.
Smith, knowing that the end result could be an entry of judgment
in favor of Mr. Muller and Mr. Smith.  A judgment, if awarded,
would contain all collection rights and remedies available to
the judgment holder.

In April 2003, the California Court upheld the indemnification
claim for Mr. Muller and Mr. Smith and declared a judgment
against the Company in the amount of $360,000, which was
promptly filed in California and domesticated in New York and in
Texas as well.

The Company met with Mr. Muller and Mr. Smith on April 21 and
sought settlement discussions with them.  In a subsequent
conversation on May 6, Mr. Muller and Mr. Smith refused the
opportunity to continue settlement discussions.  Mr. Muller and
Mr. Smith notified the Company that an additional $100,000 was
owed against the same claim.  This increased amount was being
sought (and later was granted) as an addition to the judgment as
well.

Should the Company not be able to resolve this issue by either
making full payment or entering into an amicable and affordable
settlement arrangement, then the Company would be severely
hampered in its ability to adequately manage the operations.
The Company would expect to experience continued business
interruption, collection efforts, garnishments, and defending
this situation without a resolve will take a substantial amount
of the Company's time and resources.

The Company will need to seek alternate means of capitalization
in order to meet not only its operating payments but also
possible payments in settlement.  There are certain remedies in
the Company's attempts to perhaps confront the judgment and
render the judgment unenforceable.  These include, but may not
me limited to, future possible discoveries, which may or may not
be determined as acts of wrongful or criminal intent against the
Company, fraudulent actions or similar wrongful activities.
Presently there are numerous activities surrounding this issue,
such as depositions, claims and collection activities.


CRYO-CELL INTERNATIONAL: Shareholders Launch Stock Suits in FL
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cryo-Cell International, Inc. faces ten securities class actions
filed in the United States District Court for the Middle
District of Florida on behalf of persons who purchased the
Company's common stock between March 16,1999 and May 20,2003.
The suit also names as defendants certain of the Company's
current and former officers and directors and two accounting
firms who previously audited the Company's financial statements.

All ten complaints allege violations of federal securities laws,
including improper recognition of revenue in the financial
statements presented in certain public reports of the Company.
Specifically, the suit alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market between March 16, 1999 and May
20, 2003, thereby artificially inflating the price of Cryo Cell
securities.


EAGLE PICHER: Plaintiffs File Amended Environmental Suit in CO
--------------------------------------------------------------
Eagle Picher, Technologies faces an amended class action filed
in Colorado federal court on behalf of approximately 3,000
homeowners.  The suit also names as defendant a company with a
facility adjacent to the Company's facility in Colorado Springs,
Colorado seeking property damages, testing and remediation costs
and punitive damages arising out of chlorinated solvents and
nitrates in the groundwater alleged to arise out of activities
at our facility and the adjacent facility.

This lawsuit seeks unspecified damages to provide for
remediation of the groundwater contamination as well as
unspecified punitive damages.  The owner of the adjacent
facility, which is upgradient from the Company's facility, is
operating a remediation system aimed at chlorinated solvents in
the groundwater originating from its facility under a compliance
order on consent with the Colorado Department of Public Health
and Environment (CDPHE).  The adjacent facility is operating a
remediation system for nitrates in the groundwater originating
from its facility, also under a compliance order on consent with
CDPHE.

The Company does not believe that nitrates in groundwater
materially affect any of the properties related to the
plaintiffs in the suit.  Neither the United States Environmental
Protection Agency nor the CDPHE has ever required it to
undertake a cleanup for chlorinated solvents, the Company
asserted in a disclosure to the Securities and Exchange
Commission.  The Company intends to contest these lawsuits
vigorously and does not believe that these lawsuits will
result in a material adverse effect on our financial position,
results of operation or cash flows.


FORD MOTOR: Jury Awards $27 Million in Damages To Injured Boy
-------------------------------------------------------------
A jury recommended awarding more than $27 million Tuesday to
Johann Karlsson, who was paralyzed in 1996 collision, after
finding Ford Motor Co. liable for a defective seat belt design,
AP Newswire reports.

Johann, then 5, was in a rear-center seat equipped with a lap
belt when the Ford Windstar he was riding in was hit by a 29,000
lb. roll of steel that fell from a truck that collided with
another hauler.  Everyone else in the vehicle was wearing lap
and shoulder seat belts, said plaintiff's attorney Tom Girardi.

Ford could not challenge the claim that the seat belt was
defective because of a ruling by a judge after the carmaker
allegedly failed to turn over important documents.  Ford
attorney Frank Kelly said the company did not hide evidence and
said Johann did not have his seat belt on properly.  "This
accident is a tragic reminder that seat belts can protect
passengers only when they are used properly," a representative
from the company said.

The Karlsson family received settlements of about $12 million in
2000 and 2001 from three trucking companies involved in the
accident.

A judge must sign off on the jury's recommendation.


HALLIBURTON: Legal Problems Commence As Lower Earnings Forecast
---------------------------------------------------------------
Halliburton, an oilfield services company, announced recently
that it expects to generate earnings of 27 cents per share for
the third quarter, down from its previous estimate of 32 cents,
Lloyd's List reports.  The Houston company attributed the
revision to lower-than-expected operating results from joint
ventures and a significant increase in legal fees recorded in
the third quarter.

The company has been under legal assault on several fronts over
the past year.  Last month, a federal court in Dallas, dismissed
a lawsuit against the company and Vic-president Richard Cheney,
its former chief executive, which alleged that Halliburton had
deliberately overstated revenues from various long-term
construction projects.

Judge Samuel Lindsay ruled that the anti-corruption group
Judicial Watch had failed to prove its charge that Halliburton
had overstated earnings to the tune of $445 million between 1998
and 2001, by including disputed costs in the reckoning.
Judicial Watch filed a class action against the company in July
2002.

Halliburton still must deal with the case because Judicial Watch
is considering appealing against Judge Lindsay's decision.  In a
statement at the time of the initial judgment, the group's
president, Thomas Fitton, said, "It is important that
Halliburton, which has massive government contracts, does not
get away with Enron-style accounting tricks and alleged
misdeeds."

The company also noted that it had settled 20 shareholder class
actions relating to similar charges while admitting no
wrongdoing.  In addition, the Securities and Exchange Commission
is still probing the company's practices, focusing particularly
on the issue of how it accounted for revenues on long-term
projects.


HONDA POWER: Recalls Walk-Behind Lawnmowers For Injury Hazard
-------------------------------------------------------------
Honda Power Equipment Manufacturing Inc., of Swepsonville, N.C.,
is cooperating with the US Consumer Product Safety Commission in
voluntarily recalling 30,000 units of the Honda Harmony Walk-
Behind Lawnmower following six reports of broken stop plates.
No injuries or property damage have been reported

The reports indicate that if the lawnmower strikes an object
with sufficient force, the crankshaft can bend.  Vibration
created by a bent crankshaft can eventually result in fatigue
failure of the Roto-stopTM blade brake control assembly,
allowing the cutting blade to continue rotating after the blade
control lever is released, and posing a risk of injury to
consumers.

The recalled products are Honda Harmony 21-inch, walk-behind
mowers with model numbers HRB216TXA or HRB216HXA.  The model
numbers are located on a metal plate behind the engine, just in
front of the rear discharge opening.  These black and red mowers
have "Honda Harmony" printed in white on the front.

The mowers, which were manufactured in the United States, were
sold at Power Equipment dealers and Home Depot stores nationwide
from November 2000 through June 2003 for between $700 and $760.
Honda Lawn and Garden dealers will repair these mowers by
replacing the Roto-stopTM mechanism.

For more details, contact the Company by Phone: (800) 426-7701
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday or visit the
firm's Website: http://www.hondapowerequipment.com.


IMCLONE SYSTEMS: SEC Commences Amended Securities Fraud Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a second amended
securities complaint naming relatives of former ImClone Systems,
Inc., 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)


JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS: Settle Hotel Employees' Sex Bias Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Jacksonville Jaguars paid Minneapolis security officer
Kathryn Gruenhagen $30,000 to settle a sex discrimination
complaint she lodged with the Minnesota Department of Human
Rights alleging that the Jaguars barred her from guarding their
floor at the Minneapolis Marriott Hotel on December 22, 2001,
the Jacksonville Times-Union reports.

Ms. Gruenhagen said she was told to leave "for her own
protection" by her hotel manager because the Jaguars, who were
in Minneapolis to play the Minnesota Vikings at the Metrodome,
anted only male security guards on their floor.  Marriott also
agreed to pay Mr. Gruenhagen $45,000 as part of the settlement.

Jaguars spokesman Dan Edwards confirmed the settlement but
declined to comment, the Times-Union reports.  The Jaguars have
since switched coaching staffs, firing Tom Coughlin and hiring
Jack Del Rio as his replacement.

According to the Minnesota human rights department the
settlement doesn't constitute an admission of liability or a
violation of any law, but Velma Korbel, the state's human rights
commissioner, criticized the Jaguars for the incident. "The idea
that professional football players will be distracted by the
mere presence of a hotel worker who happens to be female, and
that a woman who is simply there to do her job must be sent home
for her own protection from these athletes, is one that should
make even the most staunch NFL fans uneasy," Ms. Korbel told the
Associated Press.


JOHN WILEY: Recalls Candle And Soap Making Book For Burn Hazard
---------------------------------------------------------------
John Wiley & Sons Inc. of Hoboken, N.J., in cooperation with the
US Consumer Product Safety Commission, has voluntarily recalled
5,400 units of the "Candle and Soap Making For Dummies"
Instruction Book since the instructions in the book for making
lye combine sodium hydroxide and water in an incorrect order.
This could cause the mixture to bubble over, posing a burn
hazard to consumers.  No injuries or property damage have been
reported.

The paperback book is titled "Candle & Soap Making For Dummies."
The book's cover is black and yellow and has a photograph of
candlesticks and slices of soap.

The books, manufactured in the U.S., were sold at bookstores and
discount department stores nationwide from August 2003 through
September 2003 for about $20.

Consumers should return these books to the store where purchased
for a full refund.

For consumer questions about this product, contact John Wiley &
Sons toll-free at (877) 762-2974 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. ET
Monday through Friday or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.wiley.com.


MORGAN STANLEY: Anticipating SEC To Commence Securities Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
Morgan Stanley, the second-largest securities firm by capital in
the US, said Securities and Exchange Commission staff has
recommended legal action against it over its failure to disclose
incentives related to mutual fund sales, Bloomberg News reports.

The firm also disclosed in a filing with the SEC that it
received a subpoena from New York State Attorney General Eliot
Spitzer in July relating to possible late trading and market
timing of its mutual funds.  The filing said the SEC staff
recommended "enforcement action" against the firm.

Morgan Stanley spokeswoman Andrea Slattery and SEC spokesman
John Nester declined to comment beyond the filing, Bloomberg
state.

The SEC probe comes almost six months after 10 Wall Street firms
agreed to a $1.4 billion settlement over charges analysts
published misleading stock research.  Morgan Stanley's share was
$125 million.  It was fined $2 million last month by the
National Association of Securities Dealers, which claimed the
firm used forbidden incentives to sell its funds.

The SEC is considering acting against Morgan Stanley over "the
company's alleged failure to disclose the sources, types and
amounts of compensation received by it from investment companies
selling their products," the filing said.

Morgan Stanley received the SEC's notice on September 23, the
filing said.  Brian McNiff, a spokesman for Secretary of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Galvin, which is seeking a
fine for Morgan Stanley because of its mutual fund trading
practices, declined to comment.  The NASD's penalty was the
biggest it has imposed in a case involving mutual fund abuses.
The NASD is a self-regulatory agency that oversees the brokerage
industry.


NATIONAL WESTERN:  Announces Preliminary Pact with Purchasers
-------------------------------------------------------------
National Western Life Insurance Company (Nasdaq: NWLIA) reached
in principle a settlement agreement with the plaintiff who filed
a class action against the Company in the state of Michigan on
behalf of a nationwide class of purchasers who challenged the
bonus interest rate paid by National Western on certain annuity
products.

The settlement agreement, which is subject to preliminary and
final court approval, will provide a maximum settlement fund of
approximately $9.7 million, which will be charged against the
Company's operating results for the quarter ended September 30,
2003, which are scheduled to be reported on November 7, 2003.

National Western denies liability for the claims asserted by the
plaintiff on behalf of the class.

National Western Life Insurance Company is a stock life
insurance company with assets in excess of $4.7 billion and
stockholders' equity of $647.7 million, including other
comprehensive income, as of June 30, 2003.

For more Investor Relations information, contact: Brian M.
Pribyl, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial & Administrative
Officer and Treasurer by Phone: (512) 719-2493


NEW YORK: Court Grants Class Certification To Strip Search Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
A case filed against the city of New York in 2001 on behalf of
20 individuals, who allege they were arrested and illegally
strip-search without proper cause, was elevated by a federal
judge last week to that of class action to enjoin anyone who
believes they were illegally searched since 1998 in Brooklyn's
Central Booking to participate in the lawsuit, NY1News reports.

"I think it's a good start and it's still a long way to go to
changing the system to make it more humane," said plaintiff
Michael Spinner.

According to the lawsuit, all 20 plaintiffs were arrested for
misdemeanors or non-criminal offenses that were eventually
dismissed.  They claim that officers took them to Brooklyn
Central Booking and forced them to strip out in the open without
probable cause for a search.

Plaintiff Aleksandra Jargilo, a public school teacher, still
gets teary eyed when she recalls what happened. "The memories
are haunting me every single day and night.  I felt like not
being a human, that my rights were violated . It was worst than
a prostitute.  I felt like I had to expose my body for nothing.
For things that I never did."

"I stripped myself and they were laughing at me," said plaintiff
Paul Brumaire.  "I felt so humiliated about all this, like they
bring me down to the lowest common denominator."

"If this happened to a prisoner this would be unlawful," said
lawyer Michael Hueston.  "These people have never even been
convicted of anything and they're being treated like this."

In addition to the illegal strip searches claim, plaintiffs say
the conditions at Central Booking are deplorable.  "I've been to
a lot of bad places before, but this was the ultimate," said
plaintiff Francis Becht.  "The toilets is a commode, it had two
sides on it and no privacy.  There were a lot of feces in it and
around it."

"Cockroaches, mice and the place was so filthy and the bathroom
was black, smelled. I spent about 15 hours standing," said Mr.
Brumaire.

Brooklyn is not the first borough to be slapped with this kind
of lawsuit.  The Giuliani administration agreed to pay as much
as $50 million to settle a class action on behalf of thousands
of people who were illegally strip searched for minor offenses
in Manhattan and Queens.

A separate lawsuit was filed on the facility's conditions.  The
city said it won't comment on any pending litigation.


OHIO: Prison Inmates File Lawsuit Over Poor Medical, Dental Care
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Prison Reform Advocacy Center, based in Cincinnati, filed a
lawsuit in federal court against the state's prison system,
which includes the Mansfield Correctional and Richland
Correctional Institutions, on behalf of three inmates who allege
that Ohio prisoners receive inadequate medical and dental care
because state officials are deliberately indifferent to the
their needs, AP Newswire reports.

The state's prisons have failed to provide proper emergency care
to critically ill inmates who later died and have hired
incompetent medical providers with disciplinary problems and
criminal backgrounds, the lawsuit alleges.

It claims that prisoners suffer from medical- and dental-
staffing shortages; delays in tests and referrals to
specialists, and use of less effective and cheaper drugs and
procedures.  Plaintiffs' lawyers asked US District Judge Sandra
Beckwith to make the lawsuit a class action that would represent
all Ohio inmates who have had similar problems.

Prison officials and their lawyers had not seen the lawsuit
Wednesday and could not comment, JoEllen Culp, a spokeswoman for
the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, told AP.

Gov. Bob Taft has ordered a review of the state's medical care
in prisons following reports of wrongful deaths, inadequate care
and questionable doctors from an investigation by The Columbus
Dispatch and WBNS-TV.

Ohio has 44,621 prisoners in 33 prisons, including two that are
privately operated for the state.


PAT & OSCAR'S: Lawsuit Possible Due To E. Coli Outbreak in CA
-------------------------------------------------------------
A lawsuit was filed in San Diego Tuesday by attorney Patrick N.
Keegan, against the operators of the Pat and Oscar's restaurant
chain over an E. coli outbreak in San Diego and Orange counties,
the SanDiego Channel.com reports.

The suit, which attorneys will try to have certified as a class
action, alleges the chain served contaminated lettuce, resulting
in dozens of infections and a number of hospitalizations.  The
defendants "failed to adequately clean, prepare and test their
salad food products for safety," thereby exposing consumers to
bacteria, the suit says, according to the Los Angeles Times.

The lawsuit, filed on behalf of what Mr. Keegan told The Times
was the "hundreds, maybe thousands" of diners who ordered salads
at the restaurants since September 20, seeks refunds for the
meals, unspecified damages for those who got sick and assurances
that new procedures are in place to prevent it from happening
again.

Named in the lawsuit are Sherman Oaks-based Worldwide Restaurant
Concepts Inc., which operates Pat and Oscar's; Gold Coast
Produce, a company with offices in Oxnard and Port Hueneme that
allegedly packaged the bad lettuce; and Family Tree Produce of
Anaheim, which allegedly distributed it.

According to San Diego County's Health and Human Resources
Agency, 34 cases of E. coli were reported as of Friday
afternoon.  The E. coli bacterial infection, whose symptoms
include severe abdominal cramping, bloody diarrhea, vomiting and
nausea, can be fatal if left untreated.

Last week Pat and Oscar's announced it would pay the medical
bills of any customer who fell ill as a result of eating
infected food at its restaurants.


PIP/USA INC.: Consumers Commence TX Suit Over Implant Products
--------------------------------------------------------------
PIP/USA, Inc. faces a class action, styled "Marsha Dicken etc.
et al. v. PIP/USA, Inc. etc. et al., Case No. 2003-05588," filed
in July 2003 in the District Court of Harris County, Texas.
Plaintiffs purport to sue on behalf of themselves and an alleged
class of persons allegedly similarly situated for alleged:

     (1) strict liability,

     (2) breach of express warranty,

     (3) breach of implied warranties,

     (4) violation of Section 402B of the Restatement (Second)
         of Torts,

     (5) negligence,

     (6) misrepresentations, and

     (7) violation of Texas' Deceptive Trade Practices Act with
         respect to implant products.

Plaintiffs seek unspecific compensatory damages, additional
statutory damages, interest, attorneys' fees and costs.  The
court has scheduled a pretrial conference to be held on June 18,
2004, and has specified that a trial date will be set shortly
thereafter.


PIP/USA INC.: Faces Five Consumer Fraud Suits in IL State Courts
----------------------------------------------------------------
PIP/USA, Inc. faces five consumer fraud class actions filed in
the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois.  The suits are:

     (1) Peggy Williams v. PIP/USA, Case No. 03 CH 9654,

     (2) Jessica Fischer Schnebel, etc, et al. v. PIP/USA, Inc.,
         Case No. 03CH07239,

     (3) Dawn Marie Cooper, etc. et al. v. PIP/USA, Inc., Case
         No. 03CH11316,

     (4) Miriam Furman etc. et al. v. PIP/USA, Inc., Case No.
         03CH10832 and

     (5) Karen S. Witt etc. et al. v. PIP/USA, Inc., Case No.
         03CH12928

PIP/USA, Inc. is the former US distributor for Poly Implants
Prostheses breast implants and Poly Implants Prostheses.
Plaintiffs purport to sue on behalf of themselves and an alleged
class of persons allegedly similarly situated for unspecific
monetary damages, exemplary damages, attorneys fees and costs,
injunctive relief and damages under the Illinois Consumer Fraud
Act.


PIP.AMERICA: Faces Three Securities Fraud Lawsuits in FL Court
--------------------------------------------------------------
PIP.America (also known as III Acquisition Corporation) faces
three separated but related complaints filed by Saul Kwartin,
Steven M. Kwartin, and Robert and Nina Kwartin respectively, and
various other unnamed plaintiffs in the Circuit Court of Miami-
Dade County, Florida.  The suit also names as defendants:

     (1) PIP/USA, Inc.,

     (2) Poly Implants Prostheses, S.A.,

     (3) Jean Claude Mas, and

     (4) the Company's chairman

Plaintiffs purport to be shareholders of PIP/USA, Inc. suing
derivatively on its behalf, and seeking to rescind various
transactions between PIP.America and PIP/USA, Inc. and seek to
impose liability against PIP.America and its co-defendants for
unspecified monetary damages arising out of alleged tortuous and
other purported wrongful acts concerning alleged relationships
between plaintiffs, PIP/USA, Inc. and Poly Implants Prostheses.


POLY IMPLANTS: Faces Unfair Competition Suit in CA State Court
--------------------------------------------------------------
Poly Implants Prostheses faces a class action, styled "Salinas
I. Landers, etc. et al. v. Poly Implants Prostheses, etc. et
al., Case No. CV 030377," filed in June 2003 in the Superior
Court of San Luis Obispo County, California.

Plaintiffs purport to sue on behalf of themselves and an alleged
class of persons allegedly similarly situated for unspecific
monetary damages, exemplary damages, attorneys' fees and costs
and injunctive relief for alleged breach of express warranty and
alleged violations of California's Song-Beverly Consumer
Warranty Act and Unfair Competition Law.

The Company has filed a demurrer challenging the sufficiency of
plaintiffs' allegations. The hearing is scheduled on October 7,
2003.


RURAL/METRO CORPORATION: Final Hearing Set For December 9, 2003
---------------------------------------------------------------
Final hearing for the settlement proposed by Rural/Metro
Corporation for two class actions filed in Arizona courts is set
for December 9,2003.  The suits are:

     (1) HASKELL V. RURAL/METRO CORPORATION, ET AL., Civil
         Action No. C-328448, filed on August 25, 1998 in Pima
         County, Arizona Superior Court and

     (2) RUBLE V. RURAL/METRO CORPORATION, ET AL., CIV 98-413-
         TUC-JMR filed on September 2, 1998 in United States
         District Court for the District of Arizona.

The two lawsuits, which contained virtually identical
allegations, were brought on behalf of a class of persons who
purchased the Company's publicly traded securities including its
common stock between April 24, 1997 and June 11, 1998.  The
suits name as defendants the Company and:

     (1) Warren S. Rustand, the former Chairman of the Board and
         Chief Executive Officer of the Company,

     (2) James H. Bolin, the former Vice Chairman of the Board,
         and

     (3) Robert E. Ramsey, Jr., its former Executive Vice
         President and former Director,

Haskell v. Rural/Metro sought unspecified damages under the
Arizona Securities Act, the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act, and
under Arizona common law fraud, and also sought punitive
damages, a constructive trust, and other injunctive relief.
Ruble v. Rural/Metro sought unspecified damages under Sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended.

The complaints in both actions alleged that between April 24,
1997 and June 11, 1998 the defendants issued certain false and
misleading statements regarding certain aspects of the Company's
financial status and that these statements allegedly caused the
Company's common stock to be traded at artificially inflated
prices.  The complaints also alleged that Mr. Bolin and Mr.
Ramsey sold stock during this period, allegedly taking advantage
of inside information that the stock prices were artificially
inflated.

On April 17, 2003, Rural/Metro and the individual defendants
agreed to settle the Ruble v. Rural/Metro and Haskell v.
Rural/Metro cases with plaintiffs, subject to notice to the
class and final court approval.  Rural/Metro's primary and
excess carriers funded the settlement on June 5, 2003 by
depositing the funds in a designated escrow account and waived
any claims for reimbursement of the funds subject to final court
approval of the class action settlement.

On August 20, 2003, the plaintiffs submitted an application for
preliminary approval of the class action settlement.  On
September 3, 2003, the court signed an order granting
preliminary approval of the stipulated settlement and set forth
a schedule for the events required for final settlement
approval, including notice to the class, requests for exclusion,
written objections and responses.  The final settlement
agreement hearing is scheduled for December 9, 2003.

In the settlement agreement, the Company and the individual
defendants expressly denied all charges of liability or
wrongdoing and continued to assert that at all relevant times
they acted in good faith and in a manner they reasonably
believed to be in the best interests of the Company and its
stockholders.


RURAL/METRO CORPORATION: AZ Court To Rule on Dismissal of Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for Arizona has yet to rule on
defendant Arthur Andersen's motion to dismiss the lawsuit filed
against Rural/Metro Corporation on behalf of employee
firefighters in Maricopa County who participated in the
Company's Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP), Employee Stock
Purchase Plan (ESPP) and/or Retirement Savings Value Plan
(401(k) Plan) 401(k) plan.  The suit also names as defendants
the Company and:

     (1) Cor Clement and Jane Doe Clement,

     (2) Randall L. Harmsen and Jane Doe Harmsen,

     (3) Warren S. Rustand and Jane Doe Rustand,

     (4) James H. Bolin and Jane Doe Bolin,

     (5) Jack E. Brucker and Jane Doe Brucker,

     (6) Robert B. Hillier and Jane Doe Hillier,

     (7) John S. Banas III and Jane Doe Banas,

     (8) Louis G. Jekel and Karen Whitmer,

     (9) Mary Anne Carpenter and John Doe Carpenter,

    (10) William C. Turner and Jane Doe Turner,

    (11) Henry G. Walker and Jane Doe Walker,

    (12) Louis A. Witzeman and Jane Doe Witzeman,

    (13) John Furman and Jane Doe Furman, and

    (14) Mark Liebner and Jane Doe Liebner

The suit, styled "STEVEN A. SPRINGBORN V. RURAL/METRO
CORPORATION, ET AL., Civil Action No. CV 2002-019020," covers a
class period of July 1, 1996 through June 30, 2001.  The
plaintiffs amended the Complaint on October 17, 2002 adding
Barry Landon and Jane Doe Landon as defendants and making
certain additional allegations and claims.

The primary allegations of the complaint included violations of
various state and federal securities laws, breach of contract,
common law fraud, and mismanagement of the Plans. The plaintiffs
sought unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.

On October 30, 2002, defendant Arthur Andersen LLP removed the
action to the United States District Court, District of Arizona,
CIV-02-2183-PHX-JWS. The Company and the individual defendants
consented to this removal.  On February 21, 2003, the Company
and its current directors and officers moved to dismiss the
amended complaint, and its former directors and officers
subsequently joined in this motion.

On July 29, 2003, the court granted the motion to dismiss, which
disposed of all claims against the Company and its current and
former officers and directors.  On August 28, 2003, plaintiffs
filed a notice of appeal from the court's July 29, 2003 order to
the Ninth Circuit.


TALARIAN CORPORATION: Agrees To Settle NY Securities Fraud Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Talarian Corporation reached a settlement for the consolidated
securities class action, titled "In re Talarian Corp.
Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation, 01 Civ. 7474
(SAS)," filed against it, certain of its underwriters, and
certain of its former directors and officers, in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The suit claims that the purported improper underwriting
activities were not disclosed in the registration statement for
Talarian's IPO and seeks unspecified damages on behalf of a
purported class of persons who purchased Talarian securities
during the time period from July 20, 2000 to December 6, 2000.

On February 19, 2003, the court issued an Opinion and Order
granting the Company's motion to dismiss certain of the claims
in the complaint.  The Company conditionally accepted a
settlement proposal on June 20, 2003.  The completion of the
settlement is subject to a number of conditions, including Court
approval.

Under the settlement, the plaintiffs will dismiss and release
all claims against participating defendants in exchange for a
contingent payment guaranty by the insurance companies
collectively responsible for insuring the issuers in all the
related cases, and the assignment or surrender to the plaintiffs
of certain claims the issuer defendants may have against the
underwriters.


TEXAS: Group Launches Lawsuit Over Republican Map Redistricting
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund filed
suit in federal court Tuesday over allegations that the newly
enacted Republican congressional map dos not create enough
districts to represent Hispanic voters, the AP Newswire reports.

"The newly enacted congressional redistricting plan for Texas
does not accurately reflect Latino voting strength in the year
2003," said Nina Perales, lead attorney in the case.

At least two other legal challenges have been filed since the
legislature gave final approval to the new map on Sunday.
Democrats, who have asked to block the maps use for the 2004
election, argue that it may violate federal law and would be
disruptive as it moves more than 8.1 million Texans into new
districts.  Furthermore, they argue that the map reduces the
number of minority districts in Texas from 11 to 10.

Republicans wanted a new congressional map to reflect the
state's conservative voting trends and give the GOP the edge in
the state's congressional delegation.  Democrats, who control
the state's congressional delegation 17-15, wanted to keep
existing districts and fought the bill's passage, staging two
boycotts of the Texas Legislature.


TIBCO SOFTWARE: Reaches Agreement To Settle NY Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
TIBCO Software, Inc. agreed to settle the consolidated
securities class action filed against it, certain of its
directors and officers and certain investment bank underwriters
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York, captioned "In re TIBCO Software, Inc. Initial Public
Offering Securities Litigation, 01 Civ. 6110 (SAS)."

This is one of the number of cases challenging underwriting
practices in the initial public offerings (IPOs) of more than
300 companies.  These cases have been coordinated for pretrial
proceedings as "In re Initial Public Offering Securities
Litigation, 21 MC 92 (SAS)."

Plaintiffs generally allege that certain underwriters engaged in
undisclosed and improper underwriting activities, namely the
receipt of excessive brokerage commissions and customer
agreements regarding post-offering purchases of stock in
exchange for allocations of IPO shares.  Plaintiffs also allege
that various investment bank securities analysts issued false
and misleading analyst reports.

The complaint against the Company claims that the purported
improper underwriting activities were not disclosed in the
registration statements for the Company's IPO and secondary
public offering and seeks unspecified damages on behalf of a
purported class of persons who purchased the Company's
securities or sold put options during the time period from July
13, 1999 to December 6, 2000.

On February 19, 2003, the court issued an opinion and order
denying the Company's motion to dismiss certain of the claims in
the complaint.  A settlement proposal was conditionally accepted
by the Company on June 20, 2003.  The completion of the
settlement is subject to a number of conditions, including Court
approval.

Under the settlement, the plaintiffs will dismiss and release
all claims against participating defendants in exchange for a
contingent payment guaranty by the insurance companies
collectively responsible for insuring the issuers in all the
related cases, and the assignment or surrender to the plaintiffs
of certain claims the issuer defendants may have against the
underwriters.


                     Asbestos Alert


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Possible Cause of Worker's Death
--------------------------------------------------------------
Carlton Buchanan, 71, succumbed to mesothelioma on August 28, 40
years after having been exposed to asbestos dust.  Jacqueline
Buchanan, Buchanan's widow who had worked at the same company,
said her husband worked for five years in the late 1960s
spraying asbestos sheets.

She said that they met there but she didn't recall him ever
wearing protective clothing.  She said her husband had never
been ill in his life until developing a cough last year, which
he could not shake off.

He had visited his doctor and had been prescribed cough medicine
and inhalers, but nothing had worked and he was sent for a chest
X- ray, which revealed fluid and 'frightening' damage to his
left lung.  Tests at Harefield Hospital in March had confirmed
malignant mesothelioma.

She further said her husband had been awarded compensation for
the industrial disease, but added, "No amount of compensation
makes up for losing your husband,"

East Berks coroner Peter Bedford told her one fibre of asbestos
could lodge in the lung and give no symptoms for years and
years.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Groups Push for Better Health Facilities
-------------------------------------------------------------
Various power industry groups have joined forces with community
support groups to demand better health facilities and support
for people suffering from asbestos-related diseases, according
to a report from ABC Regional Online.

The Gippsland Trades and Labor Council has written to the
Victorian Government saying there are insufficient medical and
associated facilities, despite the high prevalence of the
diseases among power industry workers.

Luke Vandermeulen from the Construction, Forestry, Mining and
Energy Union says the unions and the support groups have come
together in the hope of forcing some action from the Government,
said the report.

"The GARDS (Gippsland Asbestos and Related Diseases Support)
group is going to be involved, the LADS (Latrobe Asbestos
Disease Support) group is going to be involved, the medical
profession will be involved and I think also the legal
profession will be involved in pushing the Government towards a
decent response to a major issue in the Latrobe Valley, which is
asbestos," he said.

"I think that's going to be the way of the future...that all the
groups get together and push as one, because it's a common issue
and we need to have a common push to a solution," he continued.


ASBESTOS ALERT: Asbestos Company to Pay School's Clean-Up Bill
--------------------------------------------------------------
Southfield School For Girls in Kettering, forced to close after
an asbestos scare and moved to Kettering Leisure Village and
other sited, eyes millions of pounds damages from contractors
who disturbed asbestos dust while replacing ceiling tiles over
the summer.

Temporary classrooms will be set up this month and the staff
hopes to return to the main building by the start of the summer
term.  According to a Kettering Today report, Headteacher
Christine Pinder said, "Our case is extremely strong and the
county council needs to know that the bill won't fall on the
taxpayers of Northamptonshire . It is all very tense and
difficult but we know right is on our side."

"We have made estimates of the cost but it is very hard in lots
of ways to say what they will be," she continued.
"Decontamination does come with a bill and there are still lots
of unknowns, what with the cost of the temporary accommodation
and the refurbishment . I hope it will not be tens of millions
but it is hard to know.  It could be in the 5m to 10m area but
it is very hard to estimate.  Just the basic work and our
temporary accommodation will run into an awful lot of money."

"I also hope this does not take a matter of years, for
everyone's sake, but these things have to be taken steadily and
there is a case to build," she continued.  The head teacher
confirmed that the contractor was not a Kettering firm, but
declined to name the company.

She said, "As far as the students are concerned, when we move
back into the buildings at Easter everything will be done
properly and safe, and that is reassuring for the parents."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ameron Continues to Face Asbestos Suits
------------------------------------------------------------
Ameron International Corporation reports that as of August 31,
the Company was a defendant in asbestos-related cases involving
17,487 claimants.

The company reports that the number of asbestos claimants rose
from 17,426 claimants as at May 31.  For the quarter ended
August 31, 2003, there were new claims involving 123 claimants,
dismissals involving 59 claimants, judgments in favor of the
Company involving 3 claimants and no settlements.

Net costs paid by the Company for the quarter ended Aug. 31 for
litigating asbestos-related claims were less than $100,
according to the company's latest regulatory filing.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Harsco Expounds on its Asbestos Liabilities
----------------------------------------------------------------
Harsco Corporation reports that it is still one of the many
defendants, around 90 or more in most cases, in legal asbestos-
related cases.

According to its latest regulatory filing, the Company believes
that the claims against it are without merit since it has never
been a producer, manufacturer or processor of asbestos fibers.
Any component within a product of the Company which might be
alleged to cause asbestos exposure would have been purchased
from a supplier.

Based on scientific evidence, the Company believes that its
products have never presented any harmful airborne asbestos
exposure, and moreover, the type of asbestos contained in any
component that was used in those products is protectively
encapsulated in other materials and is not associated with the
types of injuries alleged.

Finally, in almost all of the complaints and depositions to
date, the plaintiffs have failed to identify any contact that
they have had with any products of the Company that might
include an asbestos containing component.

As of June 30, the Company has obtained dismissal by
stipulation, or summary judgment prior to trial, in all cases
that have proceeded to trial (around 663 dismissals). The
Company has not paid any amounts in settlement of these cases,
with the exception of two settlements totaling less than $10,000
paid by the insurance company prior to 1998. The Company's
insurance carrier has paid all legal costs and expenses to date.

The Company has liability insurance coverage available under
various primary and excess policies that the Company believes
will be available if necessary to substantially cover any
liability that might ultimately be incurred on these claims.

As of June 30, there were around 38,740 open personal injury
claims of which around 3,330 were filed in the quarter ended
June 30. Around 25,950 of these cases are filed in the New York
State court for New York County.  Almost all of these complaints
contain a standard claim for damages of $20,000,000 or
$25,000,000 against the around 90 defendants, regardless of the
individual's alleged medical condition, and without identifying
any product of the Company.

Approximately 12,490 of these cases are filed in the state
courts of various counties in Mississippi. Almost all of these
complaints contain a standard claim for an unstated amount of
damages against the numerous defendants (typically 240 to 270),
without identifying any product of the Company.

The other claims totaling approximately 300 are filed in various
counties in a number of state courts, and in U.S. Federal
District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and the
complaints assert lesser amounts than the New York County cases
or do not state any amount claimed.

According to the filing, the Company expects that a substantial
majority of the 25,950 claims against it in New York County will
be placed on the Deferred Docket. Also, in the fourth quarter of
2002, Mississippi enacted tort reform legislation that made
changes in the law favorable to the Company's defense, which
will apply to all cases filed on or after January 1, 2003. The
majority of the around 12,490 claims pending against the Company
in Mississippi were filed in the fourth quarter of 2002, in
advance of this more restrictive legislation taking effect.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Asbestos Compensation Far from Done
--------------------------------------------------------
Asbestos Defendant Companies and insurer groups have yet to
reach legally responsible for asbestos injuries have yet to
reach agreement on financing a $108 billion trust fund to
compensate victims, an insurance industry spokesman said.

According to Bloomberg News, the stalled talks, convened last
week by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), diminish
prospects for Senate passage this year of legislation to set up
the fund and end lawsuits that have forced more than 60 U.S.
companies into bankruptcy, an analyst said.

"The prospects are bordering on nothing," said Matthew Carletti,
an insurance analyst at Fox-Pitt Kelton Inc., in Hartford, Conn.

Frist, seeking to revive a bill that was passed by a Senate
panel in July, called together representatives of manufacturers
such as Chicago-based USG Corp. and W.R. Grace & Co. and
insurers such as Hartford Financial Services Group Inc, said the
report.

"There is no agreement," said Gary Karr, a spokesman for the
American Insurance Association.

Insurers on Friday responded to Frist's proposal for financing
the trust fund, and Frist must now decide where he "is going to
go next," Karr said. The spokesman declined to say what insurers
told Frist.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: RPM International Lodges Suit V. Insurers
--------------------------------------------------------------
RPM International Inc. reports that as of August 31 it has
listed a total of 2,131 active asbestos cases, according to the
company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission.

The company said that it had dismissed or settled 131 cases for
a total of $7.7 million as of August 31 and that it had $136.9
million of its reserve remaining for pending asbestos cases that
have progressed to a stage where the cost to dispose of the
cases can be estimated reasonably.  The company said it believes
that the reserve will be enough to cover its subsidiaries'
asbestos-related cash flow requirements through fiscal year
2006.

The company further discloses that it filed a lawsuit in Federal
Court on July 3 against several of its third-party insurance
carriers for declaratory judgment, breach of contract and bad
faith with respect to coverage of its asbestos liabilities.

RPM's Bondex International Inc. subsidiary is involved in many
asbestos-related lawsuits filed primarily in various
state courts in the past two decades.

The rate that plaintiffs filed asbestos-related cases against
Bondex rose in the last few months of 2002 and the first three
quarters of 2003 resulting in the depletion of the third-party
insurance coverage in the first fiscal quarter.

RPM's third-party insurers historically have paid 90% of the
indemnity and defense costs associated with its asbestos
litigation.  RPM says it has reserved its rights with respect to
its various third-party insurers' claims of exhaustion, and in
late 2002 began reviewing its known insurance policies to
determine if other insurance limits may be available to cover
its asbestos liabilities.

During the last seven months, new state liability laws were
enacted in three states where more than 80% of the claims
against Bondex are pending, according to the quarterly report.
The changes generally provide for liability to be determined on
a "proportional cause" basis, thereby limiting Bondex's
responsibility to only its share of the alleged asbestos
exposure, the filing said.

The ultimate impact of the new laws are difficult to predict
because their full influence on legal settlement values isn't
expected to be significantly visible until the latter part of
fiscal 2004, RPM said.

RPM, via its units, makes industrial coatings, sealants and
adhesives used in waterproofing, floor maintenance and wall
finishing.  Around the same time last year, the company noted a
total of 2,154 asbestos-related cases.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Scapa To Pay $3.5M After Unexpected Ruling
---------------------------------------------------------------
Scapa Group PLC reports that it is named as a defendant in an
asbestos-related lawsuit in the US claiming damages of
$3,500,000.  The plaintiffs allege that the Scapa Group is
liable for personal injury arising from asbestos exposure.  Last
week, a jury in Baltimore, Maryland ruled to return an award of
up to $3,500,000 against Scapa Dryer Fabrics Inc.

Scapa asserts that it intends to defend itself againts the
"wholly unexpected" judgment.  The company also maintains that
insurance to cover this claim remains fully intact.  All
previous cases against the company have either been won or
dismissed.

"We will continue to defend vigorously all other outstanding
claims," the Company stated.  The UK-based company has another
case at trial in Louisiana, where a ruling is not expected until
later this year.


                   New Securities Fraud Cases


CHECK POINT: Goodkind Labaton Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP initiated a securities
class action in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, on behalf of persons who
purchased or otherwise acquired publicly traded securities of
Check Point Software Technologies, Ltd. (NASDAQ:CHKP) between
July 10, 2001 and April 4, 2002, inclusive.  The lawsuit was
filed against Check Point and certain officers of the Company.

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 false and misleading
statements concerning the Company's business.  Specifically, the
complaint alleges that 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.

When this information was belatedly disclosed to the market on
April 4, 2002, shares of Check Point fell more than 24% on
extremely heavy trading volume.

For more details, contact Henry Young by Phone: 800-321-0476 or
by E-mail: investorrelations@glrslaw.com



CHECK POINT: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York, on behalf of all persons who purchased
securities of Check Point Software Technologies, Ltd.
(Nasdaq:CHKP) between July 10, 2001 and April 4, 2002,
inclusive, against Check Point and certain officers and
directors of the Company.

During the Class Period, Defendants made public statements
regarding Check Point's increasing profits and revenue growth,
and various product marketing initiatives.  The complaint
alleges that these statements were issued despite the fact that
demand for Check Point's products was in sharp decline.

The complaint also alleges that several Individual Defendants
engaged in significant insider selling during the Class Period,
selling approximately 228,000 shares and realizing $8.8 million
in illegal proceeds.

On April 4, 2002, the truth was revealed.  Check Point announced
a revenue shortfall of approximately $15 million for the first
quarter 2002, and lowered its revenue and earnings guidance by
approximately 10% for fiscal year 2002.  The Company further
disclosed that a number of its customers had delayed purchase
decisions and/or reduced the dollar amount of their purchases.

Market reaction to Check Point's announcement was swift and
severe.  Check Point shares dropped over 19% in heavy trading,
closing at $22.07 on April 4, 2002.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave, Suite 202 Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004-2808, by Phone:
888-643-6735 or 610-660-8000, by Fax: 610-660-8080, by E-mail:
Mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182.


EMERSON RADIO: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Securities Suit in NJ
----------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Emerson Radio
Corporation (AMEX:MSN) from January 29, 2003 through 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 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


SPORTSLINE.COM: Emerson Poynter Launches Securities Suit in FL
--------------------------------------------------------------
Emerson Poynter LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of
Florida against defendants Kenneth W. Sanders, Michael Levy, and
Sportsline.com Inc. on behalf of purchasers of the common stock
of Sportsline.com Inc. (NASDAQ:SPLN) during the period between
May 15, 2001 and September 25, 2003 inclusive.

The complaint charges Sportsline, Sanders, and Levy with
violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The
complaint alleges that defendants issued a series of false and
misleading statements regarding Sportsline's:

     (1) advertising base and its ability to mitigate overall
         diminished media spending;

     (2) ability to reach positive EBITDA in the fourth quarter
         of 2002;

     (3) successful integration of its fantasy products and
         their positive impact on the Company's overall growth
         and presence in the Internet sports media industry; and

     (4) ability to increase the Company's value through the
         acquisition of the MVP.com store.

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

      (i) the Company's fantasy sports business was not as
          significant a revenue source as the Company portrayed
          it to be;

    (ii) revenue derived from advertising sales was diminishing
         and CBS was contributing significantly less advertising
         revenue than disclosed;

   (iii) a positive EBITDA could only be achieved by hiding
         expenses and improperly classifying discontinued
         operations; and

    (iv) MVP.com's assets did not yield promised value. As a
         result of the defendants' false and misleading
         statements, Sportsline's stock traded at inflated
         prices during the Class Period, increasing to as high
         as $3.85 on November 27, 2001.

On September 26, 2003, Sportsline shocked the market by
revealing that the Company was reducing its previous revenue and
earnings forecasts for the third quarter and full year 2003 and
that it is restating its reported financial results for the past
two and a half years.  In response to the Company's devastating
news concerning the financial restatements, Sportsline's stock
price plummeted by more than 30% on volumes of about eight times
the daily average.

For questions regarding this motion, contact Emerson Poynter LLP
by Mail: Investor Relations Department, 830 Apollo Lane,
Houston, Texas 77058 by Phone: (800) 663-9817 or by E-mail:
shareholder@emersonfirm.com



STRONG FINANCIAL: Emerson Poynter Lodges Securities Suit in NY
--------------------------------------------------------------
Emerson Poynter LLP initiated a securities class action in
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York, case number 03-CV-7438, on behalf of all persons or
entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Strong Advisor
Common Stock Fund (Nasdaq:SCSKX, STSAX, STCSX), Strong Advisor
Small Cap Value Fund (Nasdaq:SMVBX, SMVCX, SSMVX) and other
Strong Funds owned and operated by Strong Financial Corporation,
and its subsidiaries and affiliates, between October 1, 1998 and
July 3, 2003, inclusive.

The complaint names Strong Financial Corporation, Strong Capital
Management, Inc., and each of the Funds' registrants and
issuers, Edward J. Stern, Canary Capital Partners, LLC, Canary
Investment Management, LLC, Canary Capital Partners, Ltd, each
of the Funds, and John Does 1-100.

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.

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)

For more details, contact John G. Emerson or Scott E. Poynter by
Phone: 1 (800) 663-9817 by Fax: (281) 488-8867 or by E-mail:
shareholder@emersonfirm.com


VERTEX PHARMACEUTICALS: Brodsky & Smith Lodges Stock Suit in MA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Brodsky & Smith, LLC initiated a securities class action on
behalf of shareholders who purchased the common stock and other
securities of Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NasdaqNM:VRTX),
between March 27, 2000 and September 24, 2001 inclusive.  The
lawsuit was filed against the Company and certain of its
officers and directors in the United States District Court for
the District of Massachusetts.

Vertex is a global biotechnology company focused on the
discovery, development and commercialization of breakthrough
drugs for serious diseases.  The complaint alleges that the
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 Vertex
securities.

The complaint further alleges, among other claims, that Vertex
concealed critical information regarding the development of a
new drug through its VX-745 program.

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


                       *********

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

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

                        *********


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

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