CAR_Public/040108.mbx            C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
             Thursday, January 8, 2004, Vol. 6, No. 5

                        Headlines                            

AGRO SUN: NY Agriculture Dept Warns Agasint Sundried Tomatoes
ARIBA INC.: Reaches Settlement For Securities Fraud Suit in NY
ARIBA INC.: CA Court To Hear Motion To Dismiss Securities Suit
BCE: Ontario Court Dismisses Two $1 Billion Shareholder Lawsuits
BIOVAIL CORPORATION: Boston Firm Aims For Lead Plaintiff Status

BLUE CROSS/ BLUE SHIELD: Faces Suit By Doctors' Advocacy Group
BRAVO SUPERMARKET: Recalls Store-Made Chicken Salad For Listeria
CAMPBELL SOUP: Regulators Warn Division over Clam Chowder Soup
CAPE CRAFTSMEN: Recalls 800 Tree Candleholders For Fire Hazard
CATHOLIC CHURCH: 800 Church Abuse Lawsuits Filed In California

CATHOLIC CHURCH: Audit Shows Church Complying With Abuse Policy
COMPUTER SCIENCES: Plaintiffs File Amended Overtime Suit in CA
COSTCO WHOLESALE: Faces Two Overtime Wage Lawsuits in CA Court
EPHEDRA: Bush Government Bans Sale, Warns Consumers Of Dangers
FREEHOLD: Day Laborers Launch Lawsuit Over Muster Zone's Closing

FRESH DEL MONTE: Faces Antitrust Suits Over Marketing, Monopoly
GEMSTAR-TV GUIDE: SEC Reveals Securities Fraud Charges V. Execs
IOWA: Amputee Soldier Protests Refusal of Entrance To Night Club
LACTALIS USA: Recalls Brie Cheese Due To Listeria Contamination
MARTHA STEWART: Trial in Securities Suit Commences Jury Search

NEVADA: Washoe County Property Owners Angry Over Tax Appraisals
NEW YORK: City Agrees To Pay $3 Million Over Man Shot 41 Times
ONLINE POWER: CO Court Enters Final Judgment V. Former Executive
PNC FINANCIAL: Shareholders Told To Wait Till Litigation Settled
SUN LIFE: Disabled Father Files Suit For Deducted Child Benefits

TYCO INTERNATIONAL: NY Court Allows Magazine Article as Evidence
VERIZON WIRELESS: Agrees To Pay Fee Lawsuit Settlement
WAL-MART: Czechs, Illegal Workers To Join Lawsuit, Says Lawyer

                  New Securities Fraud Cases     

AEROSONIC CORPORATION: Goodkind Labaton Files Stock Suit in FL
AMERICAN PHYSICIANS: Charles Piven Files Securities Suit in MI
BIOPURE CORPORATION: Stull Stull Files Securities Suit in MA
CENTRAL PARKING: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in M.D. TN
DYNACQ HEALTHCARE: Brodsky & Smith Launches TX Securities Suit

DYNACQ HEALTHCARE: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Suit in TX
DYNACQ HEALTHCARE: Lasky & Rifkind Launches TX Securities Suit
NASDAQ: Landskroner Grieco Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
NETWORK ENGINE: Goodkind Labaton Launches Securities Suit in MA
NETWORK ENGINES: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in MA Court

PARMALAT FINANZIARIA: Charles Piven Files Securities Suit in NY
PARMALAT FINANZIARIA: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Suit in NY
PMA CAPITAL: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. PA
QUEST SOFTWARE: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit In C.D. CA
TITAN PHARMACEUTICALS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in CA

VAN DER MOOLEN: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Suit in S.D. NY


                        *********


AGRO SUN: NY Agriculture Dept Warns Agasint Sundried Tomatoes
-------------------------------------------------------------
New York Agriculture Commissioner Nathan L. Rudgers warned
sulfite allergic consumers and asthmatics to avoid consuming
"Agro Sun Brand Sundried Tomatoes" due to the presence of
undeclared sulfites in the product.

"Agro Sun Brand Sundried Tomatoes" are being recalled by Suhad
Food Corp., 223 Dyckman Street, New York, New York 10034. The
product is packaged in a 3 ounce, clear ridged, plastic
container that is uncoded.  It was sold in the New York City
metropolitan area.

Routine sampling by New York State Department of Agriculture and
Markets food inspectors revealed that the product contained high
levels of sulfites, which were not declared on the label.  
Sulfites can cause deadly reactions in asthmatics and others
suffering sulfite allergies.  No illnesses have been reported to
date.

Consumers who have purchased "Agro Sun Brand Sundried Tomatoes"
should return them to the place of purchase.


ARIBA INC.: Reaches Settlement For Securities Fraud Suit in NY
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ariba, Inc. reached a settlement for the consolidated securities
class action filed in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York against it, certain of its former
officers and directors and three of the underwriters of its
initial public offering.

The suit, filed on behalf of purchasers of the Company's common
stock in the period from June 23, 1999, the date of its initial
public offering, to December 6, 2000, makes certain claims under
the federal securities laws, including Sections 11 and 15 of the
Securities Act and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act,
relating to our initial public offering.  The consolidated suit
is styled "In re Ariba, Inc. Securities Litigation, 01 CIV
2359."

On August 9, 2001, that consolidated action was further
consolidated before a single judge with cases brought against
additional issuers (who numbered in excess of 300) and their
underwriters that made similar allegations regarding the initial
public offerings of those issuers.  The latter consolidation was
for purposes of pretrial motions and discovery only.

On February 14, 2002, the parties signed and filed a stipulation
dismissing the consolidated action without prejudice against the
Company and certain individual officers and directors, which the
Court approved and entered as an order on March 1, 2002.  On
April 19, 2002, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in
which they dropped their claims against the Company and the
individual officers and directors under Sections 11 and 15 of
the Securities Act, but elected to proceed with their claims
against such defendants under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Exchange Act.  

The amended complaint alleges that the prospectus pursuant to
which shares of common stock were sold in the Company's initial
public offering, which was incorporated in a registration
statement filed with the SEC, contained certain false and
misleading statements or omissions regarding the practices of
our underwriters with respect to their allocation to their
customers of shares of common stock in the Company's initial
public offering and their receipt of commissions from those
customers related to such allocations.

The complaint further alleges that the underwriters provided
positive analyst coverage of Ariba after the initial public
offering, which had the effect of manipulating the market for
Company stock.  Plaintiffs contend that such statements and
omissions from the prospectus and the alleged market
manipulation by the underwriters through the use of analysts
caused our post-initial public offering stock price to be
artificially inflated.  The actions seek compensatory damages in
unspecified amounts as well as other relief.  

On July 15, 2002, Ariba and the officer and director defendants,
along with other issuers and their related officer and director
defendants, filed a joint motion to dismiss based on common
issues.  On November 18, 2002, during the pendency of the motion
to dismiss, the Court entered as an order a stipulation by
which all of the individual defendants were dismissed from the
case without prejudice in return for executing a tolling
agreement.

On February 19, 2003, the Court rendered its decision on the
motion to dismiss, granting a dismissal of the remaining
Section 10(b) claim against the Company without prejudice.  
Plaintiffs have indicated that they intend to file an amended
complaint.   

On June 24, 2003, a Special Litigation Committee of the Board of
Directors of the Company approved a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) reflecting a settlement in which the plaintiffs agreed to
dismiss the case against Ariba with prejudice in return for the
assignment by Ariba of claims that Ariba might have against its
underwriters.  No payment to the plaintiffs by the Company is
required under the MOU.  

There can be no assurance that the MOU will result in a formal
settlement or that the Court will approve the settlement that
the MOU sets forth.


ARIBA INC.: CA Court To Hear Motion To Dismiss Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Northern District of
California will hear Ariba, Inc.'s motion to dismiss the
consolidated securities class action filed against it and
certain of its current and former officers and directors, on
behalf of a class of purchasers of the Company's common stock in
the period from January 11, 2000 to January 15, 2003.

Several suits were initially filed, bringing claims under the
federal securities laws, specifically Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Exchange Act, relating to the Company's announcement that
it would restate certain of its consolidated financial
statements, and, in the case of two complaints, relating to its
acquisition activity and related accounting.

Specifically, these actions alleged that certain of the
Company's prior consolidated financial statements contained
false and misleading statements or omissions relating to its
failure to properly recognize expenses and other financial
items, as reflected in the then proposed restatement.  
Plaintiffs contend that such statements or omissions caused the
stock price to be artificially inflated.  Plaintiffs seek
compensatory damages as well as other relief.  

In a series of orders issued by the Court in February and March
2003, these cases were deemed related to each other and assigned
to a single judge sitting in San Jose.  On July 11, 2003,
following briefing and a hearing on related motions, the Court
entered two orders that together consolidated the related cases
for all purposes into a single action captioned "In re
Ariba, Inc. Securities Litigation, Case No. C-03-00277 JF,"
appointed a lead plaintiff, and approved the lead plaintiff's
selection of counsel.

On September 15, 2003, the lead plaintiff filed a Consolidated
Amended Complaint, which restates the allegations and claims
described above and adds a claim pursuant to Section 14(a) of
the Exchange Act, based on the allegations and claims described
above and adds a claim pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Exchange
Act, based on the allegation that the Company failed to disclose
certain payments and executive compensation items in its January
24, 2002 Proxy Statement.  On November 17, 2003, defendants
filed a motion to dismiss the action for failure to state a
claim, which is currently scheduled for Court hearing on March
29, 2004.  This case is still in its early stages.


BCE: Ontario Court Dismisses Two $1 Billion Shareholder Lawsuits
----------------------------------------------------------------
Telecom giant BCE on Tuesday said that an Ontario Superior Court
has dismissed two $1-billion lawsuits filed by two Bell Canada
International shareholders against parent firm BCE Inc. and BCI,
the Associated Press reports.

"The court dismissed both lawsuits on the grounds that the
actions abused the process of the court and disclosed no
reasonable cause of action against BCE or BCI, and ordered that
neither plaintiff may amend his statement of claim to again
bring these suits before the court," BCE said in a release.

Wilfred Shaw and Cameron Gillespie had filed suit over the
issuance of BCI common shares on February 15, 2002, as part of a
recapitalization plan and BCI's plan of arrangement, which was
approved by the court on July 17, 2002.

The shares eventually collapsed after the publicly traded
subsidiary of BCE, which invested heavily in the Brazilian and
broader South American telecom market, failed to recover and
went out of business.  In May 2003, a court dismissed an earlier
request by Mr. Shaw to have a similar lawsuit certified as a
class action.

BCI has sold most of its assets and plans to liquidate the rest
and resolve outstanding claims under court supervision.  BCE,
Canada's largest communications company, owns Bell Canada and
controls Bell Globemedia, owner of CTV, the Globe and Mail
newspaper and Internet portal Sympatico-Lycos.


BIOVAIL CORPORATION: Boston Firm Aims For Lead Plaintiff Status
---------------------------------------------------------------
Boston law firm, Scott + Scott, that launched a class action
lawsuit against Canadian drug maker Biovail Corporation in
November says former and current investors have a week left to
contact the firm and possibly gain "lead plaintiff" status, the
Associated Press news/ CP reports.

Lead plaintiffs in a class action - who represent other
shareholders claiming damages - are usually chosen on the basis
of the size of their investment in the defendant company, Neil
Rothstein, a partner with law firm, told AP.  Other current or
former Biovail shareholders during the 2002-2003 "class period"
will automatically become regular plaintiffs, he added.

The Scott + Scott suit, filed in U.S. district court for
southern New York, claims that Biovail made false and misleading
statements between May 17, 2002, and October 30, 2003, that
artificially inflated the price of its common shares.

The stock traded as high as $67.75 Cdn on the Toronto Stock
Exchange during the period. Biovail stock (TSX:BVF) traded
Tuesday at $28.86. up 21 cents, on the TSX.

The Mississauga, Ontario-based company, which is also under
scrutiny by U.S. authorities, has said class action suits filed
by several U.S. firms on behalf of shareholders are frivolous
and without merit.


BLUE CROSS/ BLUE SHIELD: Faces Suit By Doctors' Advocacy Group
--------------------------------------------------------------
North Carolina's largest advocacy group for physicians has sued
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, charging that the
company harmed doctors with unfair business practices that deny
and delay payments for medical care, Knight-Ridder / Tribune
Business News reports.

"We want Blue Cross to start playing by the rules and start
treating doctors fairly," Robert Seligson, executive director of
the N.C. Medical Society, which represents 11,000 physicians in
the state, told the Tribune Business News.

The lawsuit, which the medical society filed in Wake County
Superior Court on Monday afternoon, is similar to national legal
challenges against Aetna U.S. Healthcare, Cigna Healthcare and
other national for-profit insurers.

Last March, Aetna agreed to pay $170 million to settle a class
action by 700,000 doctors who alleged unfair business practices.  
Cigna agreed in September to spend $540 million to correct what
physicians said was a pattern of systematically denying and
delaying payments.  

The state medical society has retained the New York law firm of
Milberg Weiss, which participated in the national suits.  The
group isn't seeking financial damages for its members from
Chapel Hill-based Blue Cross.  The goal, Mr. Seligson said, is
to quickly secure meaningful changes in how the company
processes and pays claims submitted by physicians.

Blue Cross spokesman Mark Stinneford told the Tribune Business
News the company had been working with the medical society to
address its concerns when a national lawsuit filed in August
against Blue Cross plans across the country changed the playing
field.  To protect its position in the national case, Blue Cross
told the medical society it could continue only if talks were
kept confidential, an offer the group declined.  "We are the one
insurer that has been willing to talk with physicians about
these issues," Mr. Stinneford said.

In its 30-page legal complaint, the medical society contends
that Blue Cross has withheld "millions of dollars of lawful
reimbursement" from physicians in various ways, including:

     (1) Using software programs to automatically deny payment
         for medical care or substitute a lower-paid procedure
         for the billed care.

     (2) Failing to make payments within 30 days after a claim
         is received, as required by state law, and requesting
         "redundant and excessive" medical records in order to
         delay such payments.

     (3) Refusing to pay for care that was pre-authorized by
         Blue Cross via telephone or computer.

     (4) Demanding that physicians refund "overpayments" of
         claims previously paid, even when the overpayment was a
         result of an error by Blue Cross.  If the physician
         refuses to pay, refunds are automatically deducted from
         payments for current claims.

In some cases, Blue Cross has asked for refunds, often for tens
of thousands of dollars, as long as seven years after the
overpayment was made, according to the medical society.

"If you've got a number of claims (where a refund is demanded),
it would be an unpleasant surprise in terms of cash flow," Dr.
Lawrence M. Cutchin, a Tarboro internist who is the medical
society's president, told the Tribune Business News.

The medical society has been pressing Blue Cross to change its
ways for years.  In October 2002, during a hearing on Blue
Cross's now-defunct attempt to become a for-profit company,
Seligson publicly challenged the company's Chief Executive,
Robert J. Greczyn, to address physicians' concerns.  Medical
society staff met several times with Blue Cross representatives
last year and produced a preliminary framework for improvement,
but it never went beyond the draft stage.

"Just getting that little bit done took over a year, and there
just wasn't enough there," said Carol Scheele, an associate
general counsel for the medical society.

Mr. Seligson said the medical society felt obligated to press
the issue in the court because its individual members are no
match for an insurer as large and powerful as Blue Cross, the
state's largest carrier with about 2.8 million members.  Notice
of the lawsuit went out to medical society members via e-mail
late Monday.  "For a lot of our members, Blue Cross is the
biggest source of revenue," Mr. Seligson said. "Doctors are very
cautious about raising too much Cain for that reason."


BRAVO SUPERMARKET: Recalls Store-Made Chicken Salad For Listeria
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bravo Supermarket, of 2061 Bartow Avenue, Bronx, NY 10475 urged
consumers not to consume store-made chicken salad sold from the
deli due to the potential of it being contaminated with Listeria
monocytogenes, Bravo Supermarket is voluntarily recalling the
products, which were sold in their 2061 Bartow Avenue, Bronx, NY
10475 store.

The problem was discovered as a result of routine sampling
December 2nd by New York State Department of Agriculture and
Markets food inspectors. Production of the chicken salad has
been suspended while the company investigates the source of the
problem.

Listeria is a common organism found in nature. It can cause
serious complications for pregnant women, including stillbirth.
Other problems can manifest in people with compromised immune
systems and the elderly.

No illnesses have been reported to date with this problem.  
Consumers who have purchased chicken salad from this
establishment should discard it.  Consumers with questions may
contact Ramon Vargas at Bravo Supermarket 718-320-0930.


CAMPBELL SOUP: Regulators Warn Division over Clam Chowder Soup
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned a
Campbell Soup Co.'s StockPot division that its refrigerated clam
chowder soup was prepared in unsanitary conditions that could
pose a health hazard for consumers, Reuters reports.

The FDA inspected the StockPot plant in Woodinville, Washington
in September, and discovered "serious deviations" from seafood
safety regulations, like inadequate temperature and cooling time
to prevent the dangerous botulinium toxin.  The FDA requires
Campbell's StockPot unit to implement new safety and testing
standards to ensure that the refrigerated, ready-to-use clam
chowder soup is safe.

The Company responded to the FDA letter in October, and the
agency in its December letter recommended ways to implement
corrective actions.  "We may take further action if you do not
promptly correct these violations," said FDA inspectors in the
letter, Reuters reports.  "For instance, we may take further
action to seize your product(s) and/or enjoin your firm from
operating."

The company has 15 days to respond.  Campbell officials were not
immediately available to comment on Tuesday afternoon, Reuters
stated.


CAPE CRAFTSMEN: Recalls 800 Tree Candleholders For Fire Hazard
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cape Craftsman is cooperating with the U.S. Consumer Product
Safety Commission by voluntarily recalling 800 Mica Tree
Candleholders.  Flames from the tealight candle can ignite the
candleholder, posing a fire and burn hazard.

The company received one report of the rectangle-shaped
candleholder igniting after a consumer lit the tealight candle.  
No injuries have been reported.

The recalled copper and mica candleholders were sold in
rectangular and square shapes. The 8.5-inch tall, square-shaped
candleholder has a cut-out of an evergreen tree on each side.
The 10-inch tall, rectangular-shaped candleholder has cut-outs
of an evergreen tree, a star and moon on each side.

The items were sold at Coldwater Creek stores nationwide from
October 2003 through November 2003 for about $20.

For more information, consumers should contact Customer Service
toll-free at (800) 262-0040 between 6 a.m. and 3 a.m. ET or
visit the firm's Web site at www.coldwatercreek.com.


CATHOLIC CHURCH: 800 Church Abuse Lawsuits Filed In California
--------------------------------------------------------------
According to lawyers for the plaintiffs, about 800 people across
California took advantage of a 12-month window last year to file
molestation lawsuits against the Roman Catholic Church, the
Associated Press reports.  Negotiations over the claims, they
said, could yield one of the largest clergy abuse settlements in
the nation's history.

The initial estimate came as the U.S. Conference of Catholic
Bishops prepared Tuesday to announce how well its 195 dioceses
have followed the church's 2-year-old policy created in response
to the clergy sex abuse scandal.

About 500 of the cases are against the Archdiocese of Los
Angeles, the nation's largest, while another 175 are spread
among the dioceses of Orange, San Diego and San Bernardino,
attorney Ray Boucher, whose office is handling filings for 320
plaintiffs in Southern California, told AP.

Mr. Boucher has said a settlement with the Archdiocese of Los
Angeles could surpass the Archdiocese of Boston's $85 million
settlement with alleged victims, currently the largest in the
country.

In Northern California, about another 125 cases were filed.  In
some cases, the dioceses aren't yet sure of the total number of
lawsuits they face.  At least one diocese was still being served
with new lawsuits Monday, five days after the official filing
deadline of December 31.  The Diocese of Monterey sent
paralegals to several counties Monday to try to tally the
lawsuits against it, a spokesman told AP.

The Archdiocese of Los Angeles was still sorting through its
cases, officials said. "But we have a great desire to deal with
these claims in mediation and try to reach a settlement for all
claims involved," Tod Tamberg, spokesman for the archdiocese,
told AP.

The flood of litigation is the result of a California law that
took effect January 1, 2003, lifting for one year the statute of
limitations for molestation lawsuits.  Previously, alleged
victims could sue only until their 26th birthday or three years
after a time they could show they discovered they had emotional
problems linked to molestation.

Mr. Tamberg told AP many of the claims of sexual molestation
brought against the church during the past year are
"exaggerated, and some are demonstrably false."


CATHOLIC CHURCH: Audit Shows Church Complying With Abuse Policy
---------------------------------------------------------------
According to a church audit released Tuesday, nearly all of the
nation's Roman Catholic bishops are carrying out a new mandatory
policy they adopted to prevent sex abuse by priests, the
Associated Press reports.  However, critics said the study was
fundamentally flawed.

The review found 90 percent of the 195 U.S. dioceses were fully
complying with the plan, which dictates how guilty priests
should be punished and requires bishops to take steps to protect
children.  Among those considered out of compliance are the
archdioceses of New York; Anchorage, Alaska; and Omaha, Neb.

The prelates commissioned the report from the Gavin Group of
Boston, a firm led by a former FBI official, and the
investigation was overseen by Kathleen McChesney, a former top
FBI agent and head of the bishops' watchdog Office of Child and
Youth Protection.

Victim advocates said bishops had too much control of how the
audit was conducted, so it should be viewed skeptically.  The
bishops recommended whom the auditors should interview.  
According to the report, auditors were unable to view personnel
files that would verify whether bishops were complying with the
policy's ban on transferring offenders from one diocese to
another.

"This is the bishops grading themselves based on a test they
devised," Peter Isely, of the Midwest chapter of the Survivors
Network of those Abused by Priests, told AP.  "I don't think
anyone is going to be too surprised that after years of chronic
failure they are now going to tell us they have miraculously
become star performers."

Ms. McChesney defended the audit, saying investigators spoke
with people outside the church.  She told AP she was confident
the reports were accurate.


COMPUTER SCIENCES: Plaintiffs File Amended Overtime Suit in CA
--------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Sciences Corporation faces an amended overtime class
action filed in the United States District Court in Los Angeles,
California on behalf of current and former technical support
workers who install and/or maintain computer software and
hardware for the global IT conglomerate.

Law firms Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, Lewis &
Feinberg, PC, and Rudy, Exelrod & Zieff, LLP filed the suit on
behalf of current and former CSC systems administrators and
technical staff from California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine,
Massachusetts, Michigan, North Carolina, and Washington.

The suit, identified by Business Week (December 8, 2003) as a
lawsuit that "could change the tech industry," charges that the
company has a common practice of refusing to pay overtime
compensation to its technical support workers in violation of
the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and state wage and
hour laws.  The lawsuit, entitled Giannetto, et al. v. Computer
Sciences Corporation, No. CV 03-8201, is before Federal Judge
Terry J. Hatter, Jr., of the United States District Court in Los
Angeles, California.

"Following the filing of the initial complaint against CSC,
plaintiffs' counsel have been contacted by CSC workers across
the nation reporting that they too were regularly required to
work more than forty hours per week, including hours on
weeknights and weekends without overtime pay," stated Lieff
Cabraser partner James M. Finberg in a press release.  "The
amended complaint sets forth claims of many of these workers
under the laws of California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine,
Massachusetts, Michigan, North Carolina, and Washington in
addition to the FLSA."

The lawsuit charges that CSC, a Fortune 500 company, unlawfully
characterizes its technical support workers as 'exempt' in order
to deprive them of overtime pay.  CSC employs over 90,000
employees, and the proposed class includes thousands of CSC
employees throughout America.

"You cannot avoid paying overtime wages by providing a fancy
sounding title to workers who are entitled to overtime pay under
the law," stated Steven G. Zieff, a partner with Rudy, Exelrod &
Zieff.  "The lawsuit seeks to affirm the principle that computer
installation and maintenance employees, including IT staff, are
entitled to protection under federal and state overtime pay
laws."

"Workers are entitled to overtime pay unless they fall under one
of the specific legal exemptions to paying overtime, such as
computer professionals who are primarily engaged in software
development," explained Lewis & Feinberg principal Todd F.
Jackson.  "The CSC workers in the lawsuit are responsible for
installing software and maintaining computer networks, not
developing new software.  They do not qualify for the software
development exemption, or any other exemption, under wage and
hour laws."

Members of the media can obtain a copy of the amended complaint
by contacting Monica Barsetti of Lieff Cabraser at 415-956-1000
or by email at mbarsetti@lchb.com.  Current and former technical
support workers who wish to report their work experiences should
visit the website: http://www.lieffcabraser.com/cscwagessuit.htm
to learn more about the lawsuit.  The webpage allows witnesses
and claimants to contact plaintiffs' counsel.

Fopr more details, contact James M. Finberg of LIEFF, CABRASER,
HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP by Mail: 275 Battery Street, 30th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111 by Phone: (415) 956-1000 by Fax:
(415) 956-1008; or contact Todd F. Jackson of LEWIS & FEINBERG,
PC by Mail: 436 14th Street, Suite 1505, Oakland, CA 94612 by
Phone: (510) 839-6824 by Fax: (510) 839-7839; or contact Steven
G. Zieff of RUDY, EXELROD & ZIEFF, LLP by Mail: 351 California
Street, Suite 700, San Francisco, CA 94104 by Phone:
(415) 434-9800 or (800) 869-0165 or by Fax: (415) 434-0513


COSTCO WHOLESALE: Faces Two Overtime Wage Lawsuits in CA Court
--------------------------------------------------------------
Costco Wholesale Corporation faces two class actions filed on
behalf of certain present and former Costco managers in
California, in which plaintiffs allege that they have not been
properly compensated for overtime work.  The suits are styled:

     (1) "Scott M. Williams v. Costco Wholesale Corporation,"
         United States District Court (San Diego), Case No. 02-
         CV-2003 NAJ (JFS); Superior Court for the County of San
         Diego, Case No. GIC 792559;

     (2) Greg Randall v. Costco Wholesale Corporation, Superior
         Court for the County of Los Angeles, Case No. BC
         296369

Presently, claims are made under various provisions of the
California Labor Code and the California Business and
Professions Code.  Plaintiffs seek restitution/disgorgement,
compensatory damages, various statutory penalties, liquidated
damages, punitive, treble and exemplary damages, and attorneys'
fees.

In neither case has the Court determined whether the action
should proceed as a class action or, if so, the definition of
the class. The Company will fight the allegations and does not
believe that any claim, proceeding or litigation, either alone
or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on the
Company's financial position or results of its operations.


EPHEDRA: Bush Government Bans Sale, Warns Consumers Of Dangers
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Bush administration is banning the sale of ephedra early
next year, and has urged consumers to immediately stop using the
herbal stimulant, which has been linked to 155 deaths and dozens
of heart attacks and strokes, Asbury Park Press/ AP news
reports.

Although ephedra, used in some weight-loss and body-building
products, has been controversial for some time, it captured
public attention when it was blamed in part for the death of 23-
year-old Baltimore Orioles pitcher Steve Bechler in spring
training.

A lawyer for Wall-based Nutraquest Inc., which made the diet
supplement Mr. Bechler had been using, said the product was safe
if used properly.  "It has been our position all along that the
product Xenadrine RFA was safe if taken as directed by healthy
individuals," Richard H. Catalina Jr. told AP.  He declined to
comment on the ephedra ban.

Federal Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson told
AP people should stop using ephedra products immediately.

Ephedra once was hugely popular for weight loss and body
building, but it can cause life-threatening side effects even in
seemingly healthy people who use the recommended doses, because
the amphetamine-like stimulant speeds heart rate and constricts
blood vessels.

The ban isn't immediate because federal rules require certain
paperwork steps that mean the earliest it could take effect
would be March.  However, the FDA wrote 62 current and former
manufacturers yesterday that "we intend to shut you down," said
Commissioner Mark McClellan.

Nutraquest, formerly known as Cytodyne Technologies, is in
Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization proceedings.  It stopped
selling any products containing ephedra early this year because
they were no longer profitable, Mr. Catalina said.  Xenadrine
RFA-1 was the top-selling ephedra product in the country in
recent years, the company said.  In May, Nutraquest sold the
licensing and marketing rights to all Cytodyne products to a
company in Hicksville, N.Y., that had served as the contract
manufacturer for the products for years.  That Hicksville-based
company sells an ephedra-free product called Xenadrine EFX. Mr.
Catalina said a number of wrongful-death and personal-injury
lawsuits against Nutraquest, and a lawsuit in which Nutraquest
is blaming the Orioles for Mr. Bechler's death, are being
consolidated in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Trenton.

The company was ordered in May to pay $12.5 million to
California consumers when a judge in a class action ruled that
the company misled consumers by making exaggerated claims about
Xenadrine RFA-1's safety and effectiveness.  Nutraquest is
appealing the ruling.

"It's about time," Ed O'Toole, co-owner of the Vitamin Works at
Monmouth Mall in Eatontown, who has not sold any products
containing ephedra since the store opened in 1995, told AP.  
"The federal government could have and should have banned
ephedra eight or nine years ago when it became such a popular
over-the-counter product."

The medical community has known about the harmful side effects
of ephedrine, the active ingredient in ephedra, for at least 20
years, Mr. O'Toole said.  "The next step should be to crack on
the so-called ephedra-free products that contain caffeine and
other dangerous methylxanthine products," he said. "Because it's
long been known that the use of stimulants for people with
problems with energy or weight actually leads to more harm than
good."

The federal government's ban on ephedra is largely symbolic
because most big manufacturers stopped making ephedra a year
ago, O'Toole said.  What has been sold since then has been the
inventory that was produced previously, he said.

Sales already have plummeted because of publicity about the
herb's dangers, which peaked after Mr. Bechler's death in
February.  The Nutrition Business Journal estimates $500 million
worth of ephedra was sold this year, down from $1.3 billion in
2002.

Mr. O'Toole said he knew of no retailer in Monmouth and Ocean
counties that continues to sell ephedra-based products.
Consumers who continue to want the product buy it online, he
said.  "We haven't sold any (ephedra products) in about a year,"
said Irwin Fischer, a pharmacist and owner of Steven Nutrition
Center and Steven Drugs in West Long Branch.

Mr. Fischer said he stopped because of "bad publicity."  He said
ephedra products would not be dangerous if they were used as
they are supposed to be used. "People abuse things, though," he
added.

KS Fitness Center in Dover Township does not sell ephedra
products or any other supplement, said manager John Messina, who
declined to comment further.  

"We are pleased but not surprised that ephedra has become the
first supplement ever to be banned by the federal government,"
David Meiselman, the lawyer for Kiley Bechler, the widow of the
Oriole pitcher, in a prepared statement, told AP.  "...Now we
must go after the pushers of these products that poison and kill
us." Bechler is suing Nutraquest for $600 million.

The baseball player's mother, Pat Bechler, welcomed the ban.
"It won't bring Steve back, but it will help and protect other
people," she said.  Her husband, Ernie, recently urged Congress
to pass a ban, saying, "Please don't let my son die in vain."

"It's a dead product, and unfortunately it has become a dead
product over the backs of a lot of dead people when the FDA
could have acted before," Dr. Sidney Wolfe of the consumer
advocacy group Public Citizen, told AP.


FREEHOLD: Day Laborers Launch Lawsuit Over Muster Zone's Closing
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund filed a class
action, in U.S. District Court in Trenton, New Jersey against
Freehold for embarking on a "deliberate and coordinated campaign
to harass Latino day workers" who gather at a borough "muster
zone" to seek employment, the Asbury Park Press reports.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of The Committee of Workers for
Progress and Social Welfare, a newly formed group made up of
local day laborers; Monmouth County Residents for Immigrant
Rights; the National Day Laborers Organizing Network; and six of
the workers who live in the borough.

The lawsuit alleges that the borough is depriving scores of
workers of their constitutional and civil rights by closing down
the Throckmorton Street gathering site, which was established by
the borough about five years ago.  It contends 50 to 100
laborers use the site at any one time, but Mayor Michael Wilson
said there could be several hundred people assembled there.

The Borough Council decided in the fall to close the muster zone
as of Jan. 1 because the barren tract of land in front of the
Conrail tracks had become what some officials called a magnet
for illegal employment.  The council also cited an increase in
nuisance complaints in the area, such as loitering, littering
and excessive horn honking; a spike in the student population
because the zone had brought to the town immigrants who enrolled
their children in school; and a burden on municipal services.

Second Baptist Church, near the zone, has said it would open a
hiring hall for day laborers on its property starting tomorrow,
and church officials were to meet today to finalize those plans.

Cesar A. Perales, president and general counsel for the
Manhattan-based legal defense fund, said the U.S. Constitution
applies not only to citizens but anyone who sets foot on U.S.
soil.  Therefore the workers have a First Amendment right to
gather and discuss employment and a Fourteenth Amendment right
to due process under the law, he said. "It's crucial that the
harassment of the plaintiffs has to stop," Mr. Perales said
during a news conference on the federal courthouse steps.

The lawsuit cites several examples of what it contends are
harassment and intimidation by borough officials, police and
code enforcement officers.  "In short, the borough is waging its
own war on terror on these Latino day laborers," according to
court papers.

Mayor Michael Wilson, named as a defendant in the lawsuit, was
not available for comment yesterday, the Ashbury Park Press
reports.

Borough officials have said repeatedly that closing the muster
zone is not discriminatory.  They have been criticized at recent
council meetings by immigrant-rights supporters for shutting
down the site, and defended by residents who say the borough has
to control the influx of illegal immigrants because they are
overwhelming borough services without paying a fair share of
taxes.

The borough distributed fliers stating that anyone who uses the
muster zone in the new year will face a defiant trespass charge,
which could result in penalties of up to a $500 fine and 30 days
in jail. Violators will be reported to the federal Department of
Homeland Security, the flier adds.  The notices also were
distributed to Spanish-language publications in the area and in
locations in Mexico where immigrants have come from previously.

The suit questions the constitutionality of a loitering
ordinance that allows police officers to write summonses that
list no charge but "discretion of a police officer."  Two of the
plaintiffs were issued these summonses on September 6.  
Adalberto Cruz and his cousin, Everado Cruz, had just walked out
of a Broad Street convenience store with some coffee and were
headed to the muster zone when an officer stopped them and asked
for identification.  They were frisked and each given the $150
summons, according to court papers.

"We believe this is just part of the harassment that has been
going on for the past couple of years," Mr. Perales said.

Police Capt. Michael DiAiso said the summons is often used in
court to allow a disorderly person's offense to be downgraded so
that the defendant does not get a criminal record but still pays
a fine.  Mr. DiAiso denied that police harass members of the
Latino community, which is estimated to comprise more than 4,000
of the borough's nearly 11,000 residents.

The lawsuit contends "the borough's code enforcement officers
have ``raided' private homes in these Latino neighborhoods late
at night to evict alleged ``unauthorized' guests."

Henry Stryker III, borough director of code enforcement, said
that his office does respond to complaints of illegal occupancy
and other violations - a newly established complaint hot line
has produced about 25 calls so far - but that his team does not
have the power to evict people.  Mr. Stryker said the borough
created a quality-of-life enforcement team in July 2002.  It
consists of a code enforcement officer and a special police
officer who make inspections during evening hours, usually
between 5 and 9:30 p.m.  To date, the officers have written
summonses to landlords for approximately 50 overcrowding
violations.

Alejandro Abarca, 28, of Freehold has been frequenting the
muster zone for the past eight months.  He has worked for
landscapers, contractors and house painters.  This week he is
working at a car wash, even though he is a trained laboratory
technician.  Mr. Abarca got nervous when he learned that the
borough was closing the muster zone.  "It's a real disaster," he
said, noting that he sends money to the wife and infant son he
left behind in Mexico. "If I cannot be there waiting for a job,
how can I earn money?"

Mr. Abarca downplayed the borough's rationale for shutting down
the site and said the lawsuit is a way to call attention to the
plight of day laborers who rely on the zone so passing
contractors, landscapers and farmers can pick them up.
"The borough's actions are unjust and directed against a special
group," he said.

Mr. Abarca, a member of The Committee of Workers for Progress
and Social Welfare, joined members of his group and the other
immigrant-rights activists at the news conference.  He said he
is relieved that Second Baptist has agreed to operate a
temporary hiring hall from 6 to 11 a.m. Monday through Saturday.
He is grateful, but the hours are not enough, he said, noting
that he sometimes gets picked up for jobs in the early
afternoon. "It's going to help, but it's not the solution," he
said.


FRESH DEL MONTE: Faces Antitrust Suits Over Marketing, Monopoly
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fresh Del Monte Produce Inc. said in a press release that it
will fight two antitrust lawsuits alleging the produce company
monopolized, or tried to monopolize, the market for extra-sweet
pineapples, Dow Jones Business News reports.

Fresh Del Monte said the suits, filed in U.S. District Courts in
New York and Massachusetts, were brought by a wholesale
purchaser.  The suits seek class-action status.  Company
representatives weren't immediately available late Tuesday to
identify the wholesale purchaser, Dow Jones reports.

Fresh Del Monte also said all aspects of its production and
marketing of the Del Monte Gold Extra Sweet pineapple were
proper and in full compliance with the U.S. antitrust laws, and
that the allegations in the complaints are entirely without
merit.

According to an October report in The Wall Street Journal, Dole
Food Co. (DOL), Chiquita Brands International Inc. (CQB) and
others are planting thousands of acres of competing pineapples
in Central America. The Journal said Fresh Del Monte controls
70% of the fresh, whole pineapple business in the U.S., and the
worldwide market for the fruit is valued at more than $1 billion
a year. It also noted that Fresh Del Monte, which had sales of
$2.09 billion in 2002, holds a patent on the Gold pineapple.


GEMSTAR-TV GUIDE: SEC Reveals Securities Fraud Charges V. Execs
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission revealed the details of
the securities fraud charges against three former senior
executives of Gemstar-TV Guide International, Inc. - its former
co-president, its former general counsel, and the former chief
financial officer of its wholly owned subsidiary, TV Guide, Inc.  

The complaint charges that these executives participated in
Gemstar's widespread and complex scheme to inflate its licensing
and advertising revenue and to mislead investors about the
company's true financial performance.
     
The SEC's action, filed in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles,
California, amends the Commission's complaint filed against
Gemstar's former chief executive officer, Henry C. Yuen, and
former chief financial officer, Elsie M. Leung, on June 19,
2003.  The complaint seeks permanent injunctions, civil money
penalties, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains (including salaries,
bonuses and any proceeds from the sale of stock during the
fraud), and bars from service as an officer or director of a
public company.
     
The SEC's new charges name these defendants:
     
     (1) Peter C. Boylan, age 39, of Tulsa, Oklahoma.  From July
         2000 to April 1, 2002, Mr. Boylan was a co-president,
         co-chief operating officer, and member of the board of
         directors of Gemstar, and co-chairman, chief executive
         officer, and co-president of Gemstar's wholly owned
         subsidiary, TV Guide, Inc.;
     
     (2) Jonathan B. Orlick, age 46, of Chatsworth, California.  
         During the relevant period, Mr. Orlick served as
         general counsel, executive vice president, and a member
         of the board of directors of Gemstar.  He is a member
         of the Washington, D.C. and Florida bars;
     
     (3) Craig Waggy, age 44, of Tulsa, Oklahoma.  Mr. Waggy was
         the chief financial officer of TV Guide from September
         1997 to May 2002.  Mr. Waggy holds a master's degree in
         accounting and was employed at a major accounting firm
         for approximately 13 years.
     
Gemstar is a Los Angeles-based media and technology company
that, among other things, publishes TV Guide magazine and
develops, licenses, and markets an interactive program guide
(IPG) for televisions that enables consumers to navigate through
and select television programs.   During the relevant period,
Gemstar generated revenues from the IPG by licensing the
technology to third parties and selling advertising on the IPG.   

In statements to securities analysts and the investing public,
Gemstar repeatedly touted the IPG technology and IPG advertising
revenues as the company's future and as the "value driver" of
the company's stock, and downplayed expected declines in revenue
from TV Guide magazine.
     
The SEC's amended complaint alleges that, from June 1999 through
September 2002, Gemstar overstated its total revenues by at
least $248 million to meet its ambitious projections for revenue
growth from IPG licensing and advertising.  As described in the
SEC's amended complaint, Gemstar manipulated its financial
results through the following schemes.
     
     (1) Improperly reporting IPG licensing and advertising
         revenue from expired, disputed, or non-existent
         agreements;

     (2) Improperly reporting IPG advertising revenue from
         related transactions as if they were unrelated
         transactions.  Some of the related transactions
         involved either "round-trip" transactions in which
         Gemstar paid money to a third party and then received
         it back as purported IPG advertising revenue or non-
         monetary transactions in which Gemstar used IPG
         advertising to acquire other advertising or assets;

     (3) Improperly reporting revenues switched from its media
         and licensing business sectors to its IPG advertising
         sector.  Gemstar switched the revenue by structuring
         transactions unrelated to IPG advertising so that all
         or a portion of the amount to be paid to Gemstar was
         nominally and artificially designated as the purchase
         of IPG advertising;

     (4) Improperly reporting IPG advertising revenue from TV
         Guide when Gemstar had not run the advertising;

     (5) Improperly reporting IPG licensing revenue by
         recognizing the revenue from an eight-year licensing
         contract over twelve months.
     
The amended complaint alleges that Mr. Boylan participated in
Gemstar's fraudulent reporting of transactions relating to IPG
advertising.  The amended complaint alleges that Mr. Boylan
structured two transactions unrelated to IPG advertising so that
a portion of the amount to be paid to Gemstar was nominally and
artificially allocated to the sale of IPG advertising.   

The amended complaint further alleges that in press releases,
conference calls with securities analysts, and annual reports,
Mr. Boylan omitted to disclose material information regarding
the transactions.  

The amended complaint also alleges that Mr. Orlick participated
in Gemstar's fraudulent recording and disclosure of certain IPG
licensing and advertising revenue.  The amended complaint
alleges that Mr. Orlick knew, but omitted to disclose, that
Gemstar was improperly recognizing and reporting material
amounts of licensing revenue from two companies.  

The amended complaint also alleges that Mr. Orlick participated
in Gemstar's fraudulent recognition of this licensing revenue by
repeatedly signing false management representation letters to
Gemstar's auditors regarding the status of negotiations with one
of the companies.  Mr. Orlick failed to disclose material
information regarding certain of Gemstar's IPG revenue.
     
The amended complaint alleges that Mr. Waggy participated in
Gemstar's fraudulent recognition and disclosure of certain IPG
advertising revenue.  The amended complaint alleges that Mr.
Waggy participated in Gemstar's fraudulent recognition of IPG
advertising revenue from TV Guide for advertising that did not
run, from a third party that did not have the financial ability
to pay for the advertising, and from an advertising barter
transaction.  Mr. Waggy also omitted to disclose material
information regarding certain of Gemstar's IPG revenue.   

The amended complaint further alleges that Mr. Waggy
participated in Gemstar's fraudulent disclosure by preparing
annual and quarterly reports that omitted to disclose that
certain IPG advertising revenue was improperly recognized and
misrepresented that certain IPG advertising was unrelated to
Gemstar's other transactions with the advertiser.
     
The SEC's amended complaint charges Mr. Boylan, Mr. Orlick, and
Mr. Waggy with securities fraud, falsifying Gemstar's books and
records, and aiding and abetting Gemstar's reporting and record-
keeping violations of the federal securities laws.  The amended
complaint also charges Mr. Orlick with lying to Gemstar's
auditors.
     
Previously, the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles granted the
SEC's application for an order requiring Gemstar to escrow any
extraordinary payments to any of its directors, officers,
partners, controlling persons, agents, or employees pursuant to
Section 1103 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.  The Court's
order placed in escrow, subject to court supervision,
approximately $37.64 million in cash payments that Gemstar had
previously agreed to pay to Mr. Yuen and Mr. Leung.
     
The Commission's investigation into the conduct of others is
continuing.  The suit is styled "SEC v. Henry C. Yuen, et al.,
Case No. CV 03-4376 NM (MANx)."


IOWA: Amputee Soldier Protests Refusal of Entrance To Night Club
----------------------------------------------------------------
Abby Jackson, wife of Spc. Robert "B.J." Jackson, 22, who lost
his legs in an explosion last August while serving with the Iowa
Army National Guard in Iraq, says her husband was denied access
to an upscale nightclub in Clive last week because his shoes
weren't fancy enough, The Des Moines Register reports.

"Both of us told (an employee) that those were the only shoes he
can wear with his prosthetic legs," Abby Jackson told the
Register.  "I even told them he lost them in Iraq."

However, Tom Baldwin, owner of Crush, says the couple did not
explain to his bouncers that Mr. Jackson has to wear his tennis
shoes with his prosthetic legs.  The club, which calls itself a
"casually swank joint," prohibits tennis shoes and hooded sweat
shirts, Mr. Baldwin told the Register.  "We make exceptions for
people all the time . There's no reason why we would deny entry
to someone with prosthetic legs."

Mr. Baldwin was one of four nightclub owners who in 2002 paid an
undisclosed sum to Duane Pack and Michael Ward, two men who
challenged the legality of bar dress codes.  The owners of the
three bars, two of which are defunct, had to formally apologize
to blacks and pledge to treat patrons equally as part of the
settlement for the class action brought against them.

"It's certainly disappointing to see . after the passage of the
Americans with Disabilities Act, this type of treatment not only
to a person with a disability, but also a veteran," Sen. Tom
Harkin's spokewoman, Allison Dobson, told The Register.  Ms.
Dobson said the senator feels the nightclub should consider
changing its policy and apologize for the incident.

Jill Fulitano-Avery, administrator of the Iowa Division of
Persons with Disabilities said she has never heard of such a
case.  If the Jacksons' story is accurate, she said, "it sounds
outrageous; people with disabilities have the same rights as
anyone else."  Ms. Fulitano-Avery, who is also the mother of a
double amputee, said the shoes made for prosthetic legs are hard
to find and very expensive.  "I would not be surprised at all if
he only had one pair."

The night out with friends was one of the couple's first since
Mr. Jackson began learning to walk again in early November. "I
was upset," Mr. Jackson told the Register Saturday from an
airport on his way back to San Antonio where he's receiving
medical treatment.

"We all thought they were kidding," said Abby Jackson.  "He had
his cane with him and everything.  I don't even think he knew
how to react to it . He was really upset."

Mr. Jackson was wearing a pair of black suede Nike tennis shoes,
specially inclined to fit his prosthetics.  "They're actually
pretty dressy," Abby Jackson said.  "He wanted to pick a pair of
shoes that he could wear with everything."

"It was very insulting," Brandon Beveridge, a close childhood
friend of Jackson's who, along with his wife, Stephanie, was out
with the couple, told the Register.  "B.J. pulled up his pants
to show them; I remember seeing the steel."

Abby Jackson said the couple and their friends went to the
Sports Palace and Nightclub in Des Moines after leaving Crush.  
"Everybody recognized him.  They gave him a T-shirt and bought
him a drink on the house," she said.  "They told him to come
back any time. That made it a little bit easier for him."

The Jacksons said they have no desire to return to Crush.  "A
guy goes to war and loses his legs, and this is the thanks he
gets," Abby Jackson said.  She also said she had considered
talking to an attorney about what happened.

Des Moines lawyer Roxanne Conlin said the couple has a case if
they choose to pursue it.  "There is simply no excuse for this,"
said Ms. Conlin, who has represented numerous cases of
discrimination in the past.  "This violates both state and
federal law in my opinion. Iowa law forbids discrimination on
the basis of disability in public accommodations."


LACTALIS USA: Recalls Brie Cheese Due To Listeria Contamination
---------------------------------------------------------------
Lactalis USA of Turlock, CA announced today that it is recalling
1,782 cases of Brie President Soft-Ripened Cheese Double Cream
in seven-ounce gold foil wedges because it has the potential to
be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes, an organism which
can cause serious and sometimes fatal infections in young
children, frail or elderly people, and others with weakened
immune systems.  Although healthy individuals may suffer only
short-term symptoms such as high fever, severe headache,
stiffness, nausea, abdominal pain and diarrhea, listeria
infection can cause miscarriages and stillbirths among pregnant
women.

The recalled Brie President Soft-Ripened Cheese Double Cream in
seven-ounce gold foil wedges was distributed nationwide in
retail stores.  The contaminated cheese was discovered through
routine sampling and testing by the Florida State Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services.

Lactalis USA representatives report that no illnesses are known
to have occurred as a result of consumption of this product. The
product being recalled consists of seven-ounce packages bearing
the lot code "Sell by 01/10/04 307". The code is found on the
bottom of the gold foil packaging.

Consumers who possess any of the suspect packages are advised
not to consume it and are asked to return it to the store where
they purchased it. Refunds may be obtained at that time.

The Lactalis USA recall is being conducted in cooperation with
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Consumers with questions
may contact the company at 1 (800) 828-7031.


MARTHA STEWART: Trial in Securities Suit Commences Jury Search
--------------------------------------------------------------
Hundreds of New Yorkers crowded into a federal courthouse on
Tuesday where they were ordered to answer questions about
whether they could fairly decide the obstruction of justice and
securities fraud case against Martha Stewart, Reuters news
reports.

The potential jurors were greeted with security measures that
went beyond the normally tight restrictions at the imposing
federal courthouse. U.S. marshals patrolled outside, long lines
formed at the metal detectors, and court officers stood guard
outside the jury assembly room to keep out media and the public.
Once seated in red leather chairs in the assembly room,
potential jurors were given a thick questionnaire to complete,
the first step in a jury selection process that will last at
least two weeks.

Ms. Stewart, the lifestyle trend-setter who established her own
media company, is facing charges that she obstructed justice and
lied to investigators looking into her sale of stock in ImClone,
a biotech company founded by a close friend.

Opening statements are expected to occur in the last week of
January, and jurors will likely spend a lengthy five or six
weeks listening to evidence in the case.  However, an impartial
jury could be difficult to find given the publicity surrounding
the case, according to legal experts who said questionnaires are
often used in such high profile trials.

U.S. District Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum has not released
the questionnaire to the public, but the forms typically contain
straightforward questions about whether potential jurors have
developed views about the defendant and allow lawyers an early
glimpse of the jury pool.

Jeffrey Frederick, director of jury research for the National
Legal Research Group in Charlottesville, Virginia, told Reuters
lawyers like to include "open ended" questions that allow
potential panelists to express what they might have heard about
the case.  "The language they use sometimes gives an indication
of their feelings," he said.

Lawyers involved in the case will have a chance to see the
completed forms on Wednesday and must inform the court of those
jurors they want removed for cause by January 12.  Jurors that
remain in the pool will return to federal court in Manhattan on
January 20, when they will be asked to answer questions from
attorneys for the defense and government in a process known as
voir dire.  That is the first day Ms. Stewart is likely to
appear in court.  She faces criminal charges stemming from her
Dec. 27, 2001, sale of 3,928 shares of biotechnology company
ImClone Systems Inc., run by friend Samuel Waksal.  The sale
came one day before ImClone said health regulators had rejected
a key drug application, sending its shares plunging.

While not charged with insider trading by the federal
prosecutors, Ms. Stewart will have to stand trial on accusations
that she made false statements about the sale.  Ms. Stewart has
said she is not guilty of the charges, Reuters reports.


NEVADA: Washoe County Property Owners Angry Over Tax Appraisals
---------------------------------------------------------------
Caughlin Ranch residents might be next in line to join a
property tax revolt sparked by Incline Village homeowners, the
Reno Gazette-Journal reports.

Larry Winkler and his wife, Jeannie Cassinelli, whose property
assessments increased 67 percent this year, said they intend to
send a message on how to appeal Washoe County's assessed
property values this week to 1,600 home owners in Caughlin
Ranch, Juniper Hills and Juniper Terraces -exclusive
neighborhoods in the southwest Truckee Meadows.

The message will appear in a newsletter prepared by Dickson
Realty, where Ms. Cassinelli is a real estate agent.  "It's
getting to the point where you have a second mortgage on your
house for life - your tax bill," Mr. Winkler said.  "What needs
to happen is the tax law has to change."

More than 807 property value appeals have been filed with the
Washoe County Assessor's Office, a recent check found.  All but
four are from Incline Village.  This fall, the Village League to
Save Incline Assets filed a class action against the assessor,
complaining about what property owners call an arbitrary system
of rating their views of Lake Tahoe.  Another pending lawsuit
involves 16 property owners who appealed their property values
this year.

Mr. Winkler, a commercial artist who lives in Caughlin Ranch,
told the Journal he's upset the taxable value of his land has
been raised from $117,000 this year to $195,000 next year - a 67
percent increase.  He said he spent nearly two hours with three
appraisers in the assessor's office recently to get appraisal
records for his property.  "It was like going to a car dealer,"
he said.

He said he finally was given three comparable property sales
that could have been used in raising his land value.  Of the
three sales, he said, one sale was the last vacant lot in his
immediate neighborhood.  He said the buyer spent a lot of money
for it.  "That doesn't mean every lot in the neighborhood should
be valued the same way," he told the Journal.  He plans to
appeal.

Ernie McNeill, a senior appraiser in the assessor's office, said
Mr. Winkler spent about 30 to 45 minutes in the office.  He was
given a copy of the appraisal report on his property and maps
with comparable land sales.  "To my knowledge, that was
everything he asked for or needed," he told the Journal.

The Caughlin Ranch area was re-appraised this year in a once-in-
five-year cycle. Each year, one-fifth of Washoe County is
subject to an in-depth appraisal. Last year, Incline Village
property was assessed.  Deputy District Attorney Blaine
Cartlidge said the assessor's office is unfairly being made a
scapegoat for complaints over property values.

The complaints from Incline Village and now at Caughlin Ranch,
he said, "reveal nothing but frustration with a very complex tax
system and rising property values, neither of which the assessor
controls," he said.  "This is the most complicated tax system in
the country."

Ted Harris, a leader in the Incline Village tax revolt, said the
county assessor's office asked for trouble.  In tax hearings
early this year, Mr. Harris said, Mr. Cartlidge said there was
no tax revolt because only 123 Incline taxpayers filed appeals.
"They sat on their rights," Mr. Harris told the Journal, in
recalling Cartlidge's words.

"Literally, thousands of people are upset by the assessor's
methods," he said.  As for Caughlin Ranch residents, Harris
said, "We are offering advice and counsel and suggest they
follow the same procedures we use."


NEW YORK: City Agrees To Pay $3 Million Over Man Shot 41 Times
--------------------------------------------------------------
In a statement released Tuesday, New York City Corporate Counsel
Michael Cardozo, said that the city has agreed to pay $3 million
to the family of Amadou Diallo, the unarmed West African
immigrant shot to death by police nearly five years ago, the
Associated Press reports.

"The mayor, the police department and the city deeply regret
what occurred and extend their sympathies to the Diallo family,"
the statement read.  

Mr. Diallo was shot to death in the vestibule of his Bronx
apartment building on February 4, 1999, by undercover officers
who said they mistook his wallet for a gun.  The officers fired
41 shots, hitting the street vendor from Guinea 19 times and
making the killing an international symbol of police brutality.  
The officers were acquitted of state criminal charges in a
February 2000 trial that was moved to Albany because of pretrial
publicity.  The Justice Department decided not to bring federal
civil rights charges against the officers.  Mr. Diallo's
parents, Saikou and Kadiatou, had sought $81 million in their
negligence lawsuit against the city.

An attorney for the family said the Diallos are "very grateful
to finally achieve closure." "This is without a doubt the
largest settlement in New York for the wrongful death of an
unemployed man with no dependents," attorney Anthony Gair told
AP.  "It shows the city and the Bloomberg administration, unlike
the prior administration, wanted to make amends."

City lawyers earlier had argued that Mr. Diallo "caused or
contributed" to his death by assuming a "combat position" and
disregarding police commands.  Blaming Amadou for his own death
angered his mother more than the officers' acquittal, she said
in a book released last year, "My Heart Will Cross This Ocean."
"Why wasn't the scenario turned around?" she writes, AP reports.  
"He was the one standing on his doorstep, watching four men in
jeans, sneakers and hooded sweat shirts leap out of their red
car, heading straight for him. They were the ones who acted
unpredictably."

The officers said they wanted to talk to Diallo because he
resembled a suspect in a rape case, AP reports.  The shooting
set off an investigation into racial profiling, and Police
Commissioner Raymond Kelly spelled out an anti-profiling policy
in 2002.


ONLINE POWER: CO Court Enters Final Judgment V. Former Executive
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced that on
December 12, 2003, the U.S. District Court for the District of
Colorado entered a Final Judgment as to Kris M. Budinger, former
president of Online Power Supply.  The judgment settles the
Commission's claims against Mr. Budinger in a civil action filed
on January 21, 2003.

The complaint alleges that Mr. Budinger made false and
misleading statements or omitted to state material facts to
investors concerning, among other things, compensation that
OnLine paid to registered representatives, and that Mr. Budinger
misappropriated some of the proceeds from the sale of 841,000
shares of OnLine treasury stock.

The complaint further alleges that Mr. Budinger violated
Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act, Section
10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and aided
and abetted Online's violations of Sections 13(a) and
13(b)(2)(A) of the Exchange Act and Rules 12b-20, 13a-1 and 13a-
13 thereunder.
     
Mr. Budinger consented, without admitting or denying any factual
allegations in the complaint, to the entry of the Order, which
imposes an officer and director bar against him, along with a
penny stock bar.  The Order also requires Mr. Budinger to pay
disgorgement in the total amount of $106,000, but waived payment
of disgorgement and did not impose a penalty based on his
demonstrated inability to pay them.  In addition, Mr. Budinger
consented to a permanent injunction restraining and enjoining
him from violating Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the
Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5
thereunder, Sections 13(a) and 13(b)(2)(A) and Rules 12b-20,
13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder.

The suit is styled "SEC v. Online Power Supply, Inc., Larry G.
Arnold and Kris M. Budinger, Civil Action No. 03-M-0121 (OES)."


PNC FINANCIAL: Shareholders Told To Wait Till Litigation Settled
----------------------------------------------------------------
Shareholders of PNC Financial Services Group who are wondering
if they're entitled to a piece of the $90 million shareholder
restitution fund set up as part of PNC's settlement with the
government over securities fraud charges are being told to sit
tight, Knight-Ridder / Tribune Business News reports.

The Philadelphia attorney administering the fund said that he
wouldn't know who's eligible for compensation or how much
they'll get until litigation over the matter, including a class
action lawsuit, is settled.  "This may be a lengthy process,"
Louis Fryman, chairman of Fox Rothschild LLP told the Tribune
Business News.

The restitution fund was established to settle claims stemming
from accounting maneuvers PNC used to artificially inflate
profits in 2001.  PNC's stock price plunged after regulators
forced the company to reverse the moves and restate profits.  A
consolidated class action, filed in U.S. District Court in
Pittsburgh, covers purchasers of PNC stock between July 19,
2001, and July 18, 2002.  Employees with stock in PNC's 401(k)
savings plan are being represented by Independent Fiduciary
Services Inc., of Washington, D.C.

Mr. Fryman said shareholders entitled to restitution didn't have
to take any action to be included in the settlement, but that
anyone with concerns or questions could write to him at 200
Market Street, Tenth Floor, Philadelphia, PA 19103-3291.  He
also urged possible claimants to keep records of their stock
ownership.



SUN LIFE: Disabled Father Files Suit For Deducted Child Benefits
----------------------------------------------------------------
John Ruffolo of Kitchener, Ontario, filed a lawsuit against Sun
Life Assurance Co. alleging the insurer wrongfully deducted
federal child benefits from its payments to a disabled father of
two children, AP News/ CP reports.

The lawsuit is seeking court certification for a class action
suit on behalf of others whose monthly disability benefits from
Sun Life group policies have been reduced to reflect Canada
Pension Plan child benefits.

Kirk Baert of Toronto law firm Koskie Minsky said a class action
could seek an estimated $10 million in damages and another $1
million in punitive damages, plus a court order prohibiting Sun
Life from deducting CPP child benefits from monthly benefits
owed to disabled persons.

According to the claim, Mr. Ruffolo, 48, suffered brain injuries
diagnosed in November 1991 and is permanently disabled.  At that
time he had been working for manufacturer Royal Plastics Ltd. of
Woodbridge, Ontario.  He receives monthly disability benefits as
a policyholder with Sun Life worth $2,223.33 per month in March
1992.

Shortly thereafter, the claim alleges, Sun Life began
"wrongfully" deducting an amount equal to Mr. Ruffolo's CPP
benefit for his two children from his monthly entitlements "in
contravention of its terms and in breach of Sun Life's duties,"
Mr. Baert told AP.  The claim alleges Sun Life was "callous" and
"high-handed," and accuses the insurer of having "failed to meet
the minimum standards of practice required of it as a provider
of group disability insurance by making such monthly deductions
and accordingly, failing to pay the disabled person's legitimate
claims."

The current maximum CPP child benefit to a disabled contributor
is $192.68 per month.  According to the claim, Sun Life "failed
to act in good faith and to deal with Mr. Ruffolo in a fair and
reasonable manner, contrary to the duties it owed of the utmost
good faith."

Calls to Sun Life were not immediately returned, AP reports.


TYCO INTERNATIONAL: NY Court Allows Magazine Article as Evidence
----------------------------------------------------------------
New York Judge Michael Obus allowed a May 2001 BusinessWeek
article on Tyco International Ltd. to be admitted into evidence
in the corporate larceny trial against former top executives L.
Dennis Kozlowski and Mark Swartz, the Associated Press reports.

Mr. Kozlowski and former Tyco Chief Financial Officer Mark
Swartz are standing trial in State Supreme Court in New York on
charges of corporate larceny.  The two executives allegedly
stole $600 million of company money and used it to fund a lavish
lifestyle, an earlier Class Action Reporter story (December
10,2003) states.

The New York District Attorney's office and the federal
Securities and Exchange Commission discovered that Mr. Kozlowski
bought a 15,000-square foot home in Boca Raton, Florida using a
$19 million loan from the Company that was later forgiven.  
Additionally, Mr. Kozlowski allegedly charged a $2 million
birthday party for his second wife on Sardinia to the Company,
an earlier Class Action Reporter story (October 9,2003) states.  
Mr. Swartz, on the other had, allegedly used Tyco millions for
personal investments and real estate speculation, and took out
millions of improper bonuses and loans, which he did not repay.

Prosecutors have been trying to get this article into evidence,
because it allegedly showed that Mr. Kozlowski willfully
disseminated false or misleading statements about the company
and its financial management.

William C. Symonds, author of the article, has been subpoenaed
in the suit, but he is fighting it.  Last month, an attorney for
the publication argued that Mr. Symonds shouldn't be forced to
testify and is protected from doing so under New York's shield
law if the scope of questioning goes beyond attesting to the
accuracy of Mr. Kozlowski's quotes.  The judge hasn't ruled on
whether Mr. Symonds will have to testify.

Judge Obus said that he would allow a portion of the article
that was disseminated internally at the Bermuda conglomerate
through an in-house newsletter.  The excerpt will be discussed
as part of the expected testimony of a Tyco internal
communications employee, AP reports.

Meanwhile, Jennifer Burns, the third member of a Tyco group that
managed the personal finances of Kozlowski and Swartz, took the
stand Tuesday, AP states.  Ms. Burns testified that she agreed
to serve as trustee for a trust that was purchasing apartments
at 1 Central Park West in New York on behalf of Swartz without
having full knowledge of what her responsibilities as trustee
were.  She added that Kathy McRae, her boss in executive
treasury at Tyco, told her that Mr. Swartz wanted to avoid
publicity in the matter and needed someone else to be the named
trustee.  "He did not want it all over the newspapers before the
transaction went through," she said.


VERIZON WIRELESS: Agrees To Pay Fee Lawsuit Settlement
------------------------------------------------------
Verizon Wireless agreed to give most of its current and former
customers credits and vouchers worth from $30 to $45 to settle a
class action lawsuit accusing the nation's biggest mobile phone
carrier of improper billing and failing to fully disclose fees
and terms, Knight-Ridder / Tribune Business News reports.

The settlement covers customers of Verizon Wireless and certain
partners between January 1, 1991, and November 2, 2003.  A
spokeswoman declined to say how many customers were eligible or
how much the agreement would cost.  The company, which denied
any wrongdoing, currently has 36 million customers nationwide.

The suit, filed in San Diego in 2000, alleged Bedminster, N.J.-
based Verizon Wireless engaged in various improper practices,
including charging for airtime on "toll free" calls, charging
roaming fees when they didn't apply and falsely claiming it had
nationwide service.  The settlement, which received preliminary
approval in California Superior Court in mid-November, is
expected to get the final nod in April. Customers will receive
details once that happens, Verizon said.

Current customers don't have to do anything to qualify for
settlement funds, but former customers must complete a claim
form. Forms are available online by visiting
www.verizonwireless.com and doing a search for Verizon Wireless
Campbell settlement.  For more information, contact toll free
settlement hot line at 1-866-881-7170.


WAL-MART: Czechs, Illegal Workers To Join Lawsuit, Says Lawyer
--------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Attorney James Linsey said that dozens of Czechs and others
who once worked illegally at Wal-Mart stores in the United
States will join a lawsuit against the retail giant seeking
millions of dollars in compensation, the Associated Press
reports.  Mr. Linsey, wrapping up a weeklong visit to Prague,
said he plans to add new names to a class-action list of
plaintiffs "very soon."

The lawsuit was filed by Mr. Linsey and other lawyers on
November 10 on behalf of nine Mexican workers who were among 245
people from 18 countries taken into custody in a 21-state sweep
that targeted contract cleaning crews at 58 Wal-Mart stores in
October.  Although most of those detained were Mexicans, who
accounted for 90 arrests, 35 workers were from the Czech
Republic and many others came from other post-communist
countries.

Mr. Linsey accuses Wal-Mart of conspiring in a criminal
enterprise by using contractors to violate the civil rights and
wage protections of immigrants without proper documentation who
were hired to clean its stores.  "Wal-Mart cannot deny that they
know that these people are in the stores," he told AP.

Most of the immigrants had to work seven days a week, 365 days a
year, with no medical coverage and no extra money for working
overtime, Mr. Linsey said.  They received virtually no money
first few months of their employment, he said.  "This is the
21st century, and this is what in essence is slavery going on in
the United States of America. It's outrageous," Mr. Linsey said.

Wal-Mart on Monday denied any wrongdoing and said the lawsuit
was groundless, AP reports.

"We are especially concerned about allegations that undocumented
workers were not treated fairly, whether they were from Mexico
or Eastern Europe or wherever," said spokeswoman Mona Williams,
speaking from Wal-Mart headquarters in Bentonville, Arkansas.  
"We are just very sorry that contractors we hired took advantage
of the fact that they had no other job option or legal recourse.
That's simply wrong . We don't think they have any basis for
such a suit.  These workers were hired by contractors and we
feel that the suit is absolutely without merit."

Mr. Linsey was in the Czech Republic to find Czechs who were
recruited for jobs at Wal-Mart.  So far, he said, up to 28
Czechs have approached him from among 200 workers worldwide,
including about 50 in the United States.  "We are looking for
the clients in terms of thousands, maybe tens of thousands of
dollars," Linsey said, adding that individual damages would
depend on the number of months or years worked.  "For Wal-Mart,
we're talking about millions of dollars."

A website was launched in various languages a month ago to give
former Wal-Mart workers information about the lawsuit, Linsey
said.  Many immigrants who since have left the United States are
willing to be named in the suit, and those who fear legal
repercussions would be identified by pseudonyms.

The Czech Republic was the first country Linsey visited during
his search for immigrants once employed at Wal-Mart stores.  He
said he has discussed the dispute with Mexican, Polish and Czech
authorities.


                  New Securities Fraud Cases     

AEROSONIC CORPORATION: Goodkind Labaton Files Stock Suit in FL
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP initiated
a class action lawsuit, in the United States District Court for
the Middle District of Florida, on behalf of persons who
purchased or otherwise acquired publicly traded securities of
Aerosonic Corp. between May 3, 1999 and March 17, 2003,
inclusive, against Aerosonic Corporation, and certain of its
officers and directors.

The complaint alleges that Defendants artificially inflated the
price of Aerosonic shares during the Class Period. Specifically,
on March 17, 2003 Defendants revealed what appeared to be
certain discrepancies in previously reported financial
information concerning inventory accounting and revenue
recognition. The market reacted negatively to this news, sending
the share price of Aerosonic 24% lower to $3.32 per share.

For more information, contact Christopher Keller, by Phone:
800-321-0476, or E-mail: investorrelations@glrslaw.com.


AMERICAN PHYSICIANS: Charles Piven Files Securities Suit in MI
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities
class action, in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Michigan (Grand Rapids), on behalf of
shareholders who purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise
acquired the common stock of American Physicians Capital, Inc.  
between February 13, 2003 and November 6, 2003, inclusive,
against the Company, William B. Cheeseman, and Frank H. Freund.

The action charges that defendants violated federal securities
laws by issuing a series of materially false and misleading
statements to the market throughout the Class Period which
statements had the effect of artificially inflating the market
price of the Company's securities.

For more information, contact Charles J. Piven, by Mail: The
World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525,
Baltimore, Maryland 21202, by Phone: 410/986-0036, or by E-mail:
hoffman@pivenlaw.com.


BIOPURE CORPORATION: Stull Stull Files Securities Suit in MA
-------------------------------------------------------------
Stull, Stull & Brody, LLP initiated a class action lawsuit, in
the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts, on behalf of all purchasers of common shares of
Biopure Corporation between March 17, 2003 and December 24,
2003, inclusive. In addition, plaintiff in the Complaint that
was filed asserts claims on behalf of a subclass of persons who
traded contemporaneously with defendants Carl W. Rausch, and
Thomas A. Moore

Notably, defendant Rausch sold large amounts of his Biopure
common share holdings during the Class Period while plaintiff
and other members of the Class and Subclass were purchasing
their shares. The Complaint alleges that Defendants Rausch and
Moore made these sales while in the possession of material
adverse non-public information about the Company as described
below.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
defendants Rausch and Moore also violated Section 20(A) of the
Exchange Act. Section 20(A) requires that insiders who illegally
sold their shares of Biopure stock give up their gains from
these sales to persons who purchased their shares. The Complaint
alleges that the defendants made numerous positive and
misleading statements in Biopure's public filings and press
releases about the progress of the Biopure's licensing
application with the Food and Drug Administration for one of the
Company's primary products -- Hemopure. In particular,
defendants from the start of the Class Period concealed the fact
that the FDA had raised significant "safety concerns" about
Hemopure because of adverse clinical data about this drug
obtained from its use with orthopedic surgical patients and that
the FDA had, in fact, put a hold on further trials of this drug
with trauma patients. In addition to several public offerings
that took place during the Class Period, as noted above, certain
defendants were unloading large amounts of their Biopure common
shares while in possession of non-public information about the
halt of clinical trials with trauma patients and other material
adverse non-public information about Hemopure while plaintiff
and members of the proposed Class and Subclass were buying
shares.

Under pressure from an investigation by the Securities Exchange
Commission on December 24, 2003 Biopure stunned the investing
public by finally announcing that the FDA had halted further
trials of Hemopure because of safety concerns and that
commercial release of Hemopure would be delayed beyond mid-2004.
The market reaction to news of the truth was quick. On the first
day after the news was announced Biopure common shares lost 16%
of their value falling to $2.43 per share from a Class Period
high of $8.25 on August 21, 2002 when plaintiff bought many of
his Biopure shares.

For more information, contact Howard T. Longman, by Mail: 6 East
45th Street, New York, NY 10017, by Phone: toll-free at
1-800-337-4983, Fax: 212/490-2022, or by E-mail: TSVI@aol.com.


CENTRAL PARKING: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in M.D. TN
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Middle
District of Tennessee, Nashville Division, on behalf of all
purchasers of the common stock of Central Parking Corporation
(NYSE: CPC) from November 4, 2002 through February 13, 2003,
inclusive.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market between November 4, 2002 and
February 13, 2003, thereby artificially inflating the price of
Central Parking common stock.

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

     (1) that the Company's internal controls were inadequate to
         record and document the Company's financial results;

     (2) that the Company was materially understating its bad
         debt reserve, thereby overstating its earnings;

     (3) that the Company was materially understating its
         accounts payable, thereby overstating its financial
         condition; and

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

On February 14, 2003, Central Parking shocked the market when it
announced that it would be taking a charge to increase its bad
debt reserve and that it would be taking a charge to increase
its accounts payables.  In response to this announcement, the
price of Central Parking common stock dropped from $15.82 on
February 13, 2003 to a close of $12.31 on February 14, 2003, or
a single-day decline of more than 22%, on more than seven times
normal trading volume.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com       


DYNACQ HEALTHCARE: Brodsky & Smith Launches TX Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law offices of Brodsky & Smith, LLC initiated a securities
class action lawsuit, in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of Texas, on behalf of shareholders who
purchased the common stock and other securities of Dynacq
Healthcare Inc., between January 14, 2003 and December 18, 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 Dynacq securities.

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


DYNACQ HEALTHCARE: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Suit in TX
-------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a class
action lawsuit, in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Texas, on behalf of purchasers of the
securities of Dynacq Healthcare, Inc. between January 14, 2003
and December 18, 2003, inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, against the Company
and:

     (1) Philip S. Chan, and

     (2) Chiu M. Chan

The complaint alleges that defendants knowingly or recklessly
made materially false and misleading statement throughout the
class period with respect to Dynacq's financial performance.
Specifically, the complaint alleges that the defendants' made
statements that were materially false and misleading because
they failed to disclose and/or misrepresented the following
adverse facts:

     (i) that the Company had materially overstated its
         earnings, revenues, net income, and earnings per share;

    (ii) that the Company was improperly accounting for its
         costs and revenue in violation of Generally Accepted
         Accounting Principals;  

   (iii) that the Company lacked adequate internal controls, and

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

On December 2, 2003, the Company announced that it was
requesting an automatic extension of up to 15 days for filing
its 2003 Form 10-K. The Company stated that recently the
Division of Corporation Finance of the United States Securities
and Exchange Commission commented upon Dynacq's periodic
filings. On December 16, 2003, the Company announced that it
would further postpone the filing of its 2003 Form 10-K until
the SEC completed its review of Dynacq's periodic filings and
its independent auditors have completed their audit of the
Company's Aug. 31, 2003 financial statements.

On December 18, 2003, the Company announced that Ernst & Young,
LLP resigned late on December 17, 2003 as the Company's
independent auditor effective immediately. E&Y advised the
Company that E&Y resigned due to the Company's lack of internal
controls necessary to develop reliable financial statements.
News of this shocked the market with shares of Dynacq falling
18.56 percent or $2.04 per share to close at $8.95 per share on
December 18, 2003.

The Company further shocked the market when it announced, after
the markets had closed on December 18, 2003, that it had
received a NASDAQ Staff Determination stating that because
Dynacq failed to comply with the requirement of NASD Marketplace
Rule 4310 c (14), that it file a copy of its Form 10-K Annual
Report to the Securities and Exchange Commission in a timely
fashion, that its common stock would be delisted from the NASDAQ
on December 30, 2003, unless Dynacq requested a hearing.
Additionally, the Company disclosed that it had received a
notice from the Ft. Worth, Texas office of the SEC that it was
conducting an informal investigation pertaining to Dynacq's
reporting of its financial statements, its recognition of costs
and revenue, its allowances for doubtful accounts, and its
internal controls.

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


DYNACQ HEALTHCARE: Lasky & Rifkind Launches TX Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lasky & Rifkind, LLP initiated a lawsuit in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Texas, on behalf of
persons who purchased or otherwise acquired publicly traded
securities of Dynacq Healthcare Inc. between January 14, 2003
and December 18, 2003, inclusive, against Dynacq and certain
officers and directors.

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. Specifically, the complaint alleges that
Defendants fraudulently certified that Dynacq's financial
statements for the first three quarters of fiscal 2003 were
compiled in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles.

On December 2, 2003, Dynacq announced that it was requesting an
automatic extension of 15 days to file its Form 10K with the
SEC. Then on December 18, 2003, the Company announced that its
auditor, Ernst & Young LLP, had resigned due to the Company's
"lack of internal controls necessary to develop reliable
financial statements." On that same day the Company announced
that NASDAQ would delist its shares for failing to file its
annual documentation in a timely manner, and it was notified
that the SEC had opened an investigation into the company's
financial reporting.

The market reacted negatively to this news, falling $4.86 per
share, or approximately 54%, to $4.09 per share.

For more information, call (800) 495-1868 to speak with an
advisor.


NASDAQ: Landskroner Grieco Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Landskroner Grieco, Ltd. initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, on behalf of all persons who
traded the stock of Corinthian Colleges, Inc. between 10:46 a.m.
and approximately 12:30 p.m. on December 5, 2003, against the
Nasdaq Stock Market Inc. and  Robert Greifeld (Pres. And CEO)

According to the complaint, defendants violated sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-
5. The complaint alleges that beginning at approximately 10:46
a.m. on December 5, 2003, the market price of COCO fell
precipitously from $57.45 to as low as $38.97 per share within
12 minutes.

At 10:58 a.m., Nasdaq halted trading in COCO, stating that the
plunge was caused by "misuse or malfunction" of an electronic
trading system. Nasdaq permitted trading to resume approximately
one hour later at 11:55 a.m. When COCO reopened at 11:55 a.m.,
the price of the stock recovered quickly. Approximately 30
minutes after trading in COCO resumed, Nasdaq belatedly
announced that it would cancel all trades in COCO made between
10:46 a.m. and 10:58:08 a.m.

At no time prior to approximately 12:30 p.m. did Nasdaq inform
investors that it would cancel all trades in COCO between 10:46
a.m. and 10:58:08 a.m. Therefore, during the period between the
time COCO resumed trading at 11:55 a.m. and the time Nasdaq
announced the cancellation of such trades at approximately 12:30
p.m., investors made trading decisions in reliance on Nasdaq's
statement that trading had resumed and without knowing that
Nasdaq had decided to cancel the trades between 10:46 a.m. and
10:58:08 a.m. Nasdaq's belated cancellation of such trades
caused injury to investors who traded COCO securities between
10:46 a.m. and approximately 12:30 p.m. on December 5, 2003.
Investors who had their purchases canceled and who sold shares
after trading resumed were forced to buy shares at inflated
prices to cover their sell orders, turning their profits into
losses through no fault of their own.

For more information, contact Jack Landskroner, by Mail: 1360
West 9th Street, Suite 200, Cleveland, Ohio 44113, by Phone:           
(866) 522-9500 (toll-free), by E-mail: jack@landskronerlaw.com,
or visit the firm's Website: www.landskronerlaw.com.


NETWORK ENGINE: Goodkind Labaton Launches Securities Suit in MA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP initiated a class action
lawsuit, in the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts, on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise
acquired publicly traded securities of Network Engines Inc.
between November 6, 2003 and December 10, 2003, inclusive,
against Network Engines and certain of its officers and
directors.

The complaint alleges that Defendants knew but failed to
disclose that Network Engines was in the process of
renegotiating its distribution contract with EMC, and that EMC
was calling for price reductions, which if agreed to, would
negatively impact the Company's financial results. Nevertheless,
throughout the class period, the Company continued to issue
positive statements, touting the company's financial performance
and the success of its relationship with its largest customer
EMC.

On December 10, 2003, the Company announced, along with other
items, that it had renegotiated its distribution contract with
EMC. The amendment to the contract would negatively impact the
company's results. Following this announcement, shares of
network Engines fell $3.92 per share, or 39% to close at $6.10
per share.

For more information, contact Christopher Keller, by Phone:
800-321-0476, or E-mail: investorrelations@glrslaw.com.


NETWORK ENGINES: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in MA Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts on behalf of purchasers of Network Engines, Inc.
(Nasdaq: NENG) publicly traded securities during the period
between November 6, 2003 and December 10, 2003, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that by the start of the Class Period,
defendants knew, but failed to disclose, that Network Engines
was in the process of renegotiating its distribution contract
with EMC, and that EMC was demanding price reductions, which, if
agreed to, would negatively impact the Company's future
financial results.

Nevertheless, throughout the Class Period, defendants issued
positive statements highlighting the Company's strong financial
performance, continued growth and the success of its
relationship with EMC, its largest customer.  Defendants failed
to disclose, however:

     (1) that the Company was in the process of renegotiating
         its distribution contract with EMC;

     (2) that EMC was demanding price concessions to bring its
         agreement with Network Engines in line with the pricing
         that Network Engines was providing to other customers;

     (3) that the new distribution contract with EMC would
         negatively impact the Company's future financial
         performance;

     (4) that the Company would not be able to sustain the
         growth in its gross margins as a result of the amended
         contract; and

     (5) as a result, the Company's positive statements issued
         during the Class Period were materially false and
         misleading when made.

Finally, on December 10, 2003, the Company announced, among
other things, that it had renegotiated its distribution contract
with EMC and the amended contract would negatively impact the
Company's gross profit related to the sale of EMC-approved Host
Bus Adapters and the Company's distribution operations gross
profit.

Following this announcement, shares of Network Engines common
stock fell $3.92 per share, or 39%, to close at $6.10 per share,
on extraordinarily high trading volume, and have continued to
decline since that time.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com       


PARMALAT FINANZIARIA: Charles Piven Files Securities Suit in NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities
class action, in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, on behalf of those who purchased
securities (including stock, bonds and notes) of Parmalat
Finanziaria, SpA between January 5, 1999 and December 29, 2003,
inclusive.

The action charges that defendants violated federal securities
laws by issuing a series of materially false and misleading
statements to the market throughout the Class Period which
statements had the effect of artificially inflating the market
price of the Company's securities.

For more information, contact Charles J. Piven, by Mail: The
World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525,
Baltimore, Maryland 21202, by Phone: 410/986-0036, or by E-mail:
hoffman@pivenlaw.com.


PARMALAT FINANZIARIA: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Suit in 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 purchasers of the securities
of Parmalat Finanziaria, SpA (OTC:PARAF.PK Milan:PRF IM) and its
subsidiaries during the period between January 5, 1999 and
December 29, 2003.

The complaint charges certain of Parmalat's senior insiders and
its legal, accounting and financial advisors with violations of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Parmalat is an
international food and dairy company.

The complaint alleges that Parmalat's senior insiders, together
with Parmalat's legal, accounting and financial advisors,
concocted a massive scheme whereby they overstated Parmalat's
reported profits and assets for more than a decade. The alleged
scheme involved the creation of bogus bank accounts, the use of
forged financial records and the manipulation of Parmalat's
balance sheet and income statement via fictitious investment
assets and sham transactions, and was designed to and did allow
defendants to divert approximately $1 billion to themselves
and/or to companies controlled by them via professional fees and
clandestine asset transfers and enabled Parmalat to raise more
than $5 billion from unsuspecting investors from the sale of
newly issued securities.

The fraudulent scheme began to unravel in the fourth quarter of
2003, when, contrary to defendants' Class Period representations
that Parmalat was experiencing strong growth in net operating
profit and had a healthy balance sheet, it was disclosed that:

     (1) almost 40% of Parmalat's entire asset base, purportedly
         held in a bank account at Bank of America, did not
         exist;

     (2) Parmalat had been declared insolvent;

     (3) the $625 million of Parmalat's cash purportedly
         invested in a liquid investment fund in the Cayman
         Islands could not be retrieved;

     (4) defendants had manipulated the Company's income
         statements and balance sheet for more than a decade by
         using off-shore shell companies, special purpose
         entities, forged documents and sham transactions; and

     (5) at least eight Parmalat senior insiders, auditors and
         lawyers, including certain of the defendants, had been
         taken into custody for the perpetration of this multi-
         billion dollar fraud.

As the magnitude of the fraud began to reach the market, the
complaint alleges that defendants attempted to destroy evidence
and/or ordered their subordinates to destroy evidence of the
fraudulent scheme in an effort to evade liability for their
participation in one of the most shocking corporate scandals
ever to afflict the public financial markets.  The revelations
of defendants' misconduct caused the price of Parmalat stock to
plunge 95% before trading was suspended on December 29, 2003.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com       


PMA CAPITAL: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. PA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania on behalf of all persons who purchased
the securities of PMA Capital Corporation (NasdaqNM: PMACA)
(AMEX: PMK) between November 13, 1998 and November 3, 2003
seeking remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(NasdaqNM: PMACA) and on behalf of all persons who purchased
securities of PMA issued in public offerings dated October 16,
2002, 4.25% Convertible Senior Debentures Due 2022 (the "4.25%
Debentures") and June 5, 2003, 8.5% Monthly Income Senior Notes
due 2018 (the "8.5% Notes'" (AMEX:PMK) seeking remedies under
Sections 11, 12 (a), 20 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933.

On November 4, 2003, before the market opened, PMA disclosed in
a press release and a concurrent SEC filing on Form 8-K, that it
would record a pre-tax charge of $150 million primarily to
compensate for PMA Re's inadequate loss reserves.  Defendants
stated that an internal review of the Company's reserves
revealed that the material charge ``relates to higher than
expected underwriting losses in PMA Re's reinsurance operations,
primarily from casualty business written in accident years 1997
to 2000.''

As a result of this charge, the Company suspended its common
stock dividend, and has engaged Banc of America Securities LLC
to explore ``strategic alternatives.'' On the same day, PMA
announced that it was in discussions with the Pennsylvania
Insurance Department over the Company's insurance operations.
Immediately following this announcement, the price of PMA common
stock plummeted $8.11, or 61.7 percent, from its previous day's
trading, to close at $5.03 per share. On November 6, 2003, PMA
revealed that the write down will effectively force the Company
to withdraw from the reinsurance business, and that defendant
John W. Smithson had resigned as President and Chief Executive
Officer of PMA.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com       


QUEST SOFTWARE: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit In C.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Central
District of California on behalf of purchasers of Quest
Software, Inc. (NASDAQ: QSFT) publicly traded securities during
the period between April 30, 2002 and July 23, 2003.

The complaint charges Quest and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934.  Quest provides application and information availability
software solutions that enhance the performance and reliability
of e-business, enterprise and custom applications and enable the
delivery of information across the enterprise.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
caused Quest's shares to trade at artificially inflated levels
through the issuance of false and misleading financial
statements.

On July 23, 2003, Quest revealed that its 2002 and Q1 03 results
were false when issued due to a "computational error" in revenue
recognition. The stock dropped below $9 per share on this news.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com       


TITAN PHARMACEUTICALS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California on behalf of purchasers of Titan
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (AMEX: TTP) common stock during the period
between December 1, 1999 and July 22, 2002.

The complaint charges Titan Pharmaceuticals and certain of its
officers and directors with violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.  During the Class Period, Titan
Pharmaceuticals sought to develop Iloperidone (Zomaril), a
potential new drug for the treatment of schizophrenia.

The complaint alleges that from the very beginning of the Class
Period, defendants declared that the development program for
Iloperidone was making steady progress through Phase III
clinical trials and towards drug approval in the U.S. Defendants
expressed excitement over the safety and efficacy of Iloperidone
and with the Phase III study results, particularly the
statistically significant reduction in the symptoms of
schizophrenia in patients.  Defendants concluded that the
positive late-stage development results pointed to an important
role for Iloperidone as an important new option for the
treatment of schizophrenia.

Heightened expectations for the success of Iloperidone stood in
contrast to an ongoing process of U.S. Food and Drug
Administration review of serious unaddressed safety issues
facing older, established antipsychotic drugs.  This process has
resulted in the imposition of severe marketing restrictions for
a number of established antipsychotic drugs.

However, during the Class Period, defendants artificially
inflated the price of Titan Pharmaceuticals shares by issuing a
series of materially false and misleading statements about the
Company's Investigational New Drug and New Drug Applications for
Iloperidone (Zomaril).

As a result of the defendants' alleged false statements, Titan
Pharmaceuticals stock traded at inflated prices during the Class
Period, causing millions of dollars of damages to the Class.
However, based on the disclosures made in defendants' press
release of July 22, 2002, pointing to the ability of Iloperidone
to prolong the QT interval and raising serious questions about
Iloperidone cardiovascular safety and marketability, the price
of Titan Pharmaceuticals' shares fell a precipitous 58%, to
$1.63, its lowest level ever, on volume of 3.8 million shares.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com       


VAN DER MOOLEN: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York on behalf of all persons who purchased the
American Depository Receipt shares (ADRs) of Van der Moolen
Holding N.V. (NYSE:VDM), between October 18, 2001 through
October 15, 2003, inclusive.  

The complaint charges Van Der Moolen Holding N.V., Friedrich
M.J. Bottcher, Frank F. Dorjee, James P. Cleaver, Jr., and
Casper F. Rondeltap with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder.  

Van der Moolen acts as a specialty firm on the New York Stock
Exchange (NYSE).  As a specialist on the NYSE, Van der Moolen is
required to uphold the rules and requirements of the NYSE.  One
such requirement that Van der Moolen must adhere to is called
the "negative obligation."  The negative obligation is the duty
to hang back and not trade for the specialist firm's own account
when enough public investor orders exist to pair up naturally,
without undue intervention.

Rather than uphold its duties, Van der Moolen, during the class
period, repeatedly violated its duties by engaging in an illegal
scheme to drive up the Company's financial results.  More
specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Company's
statements concerning its financial results during the class
period were materially false and misleading because they failed
to disclose and misrepresented the following adverse facts,
among others:

     (1) that Van der Moolen engaged in the illegal practice of
         "front-running" trades at the NYSE, which allowed Van
         der Moolen to act on nonpublic information to trade
         ahead of customers lacking that knowledge and pocket a
         profit on each trade;

     (2) that Van der Moolen illegally "traded ahead" of
         customer orders by causing or allowing its traders to
         put Van der Moolen's own interest ahead of investors by
         ignoring one investor order in the process of
         interacting with another investor, thereby creating
         more illegal profits for the Company;

     (3) that Van der Moolen, throughout the Class Period,
         improperly recognized revenue from its illegal scheme
         in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting
         Principles (GAAP); and

     (4) as a result of this illegal scheme, Van der Moolen
         materially overstated and artificially inflated its
         earnings and net income.

On April 17, 2003, the NYSE issued a statement wherein it
disclosed that it had begun an investigation of the specialist
firms of the NYSE. On news of this Van der Moolen ADRs fell 4.8%
or $0.52 per share to close at $10.19 per share. On April 18,
2003, The Wall Street Journal reported that Van der Moolen and
others were the subject of an investigation by the NYSE into
illegal trading practices on the floor of the NYSE.

Additionally on April 18, 2003, Bloomberg reported that the SEC
had also begun an investigation into illegal trading practices
by specialist firms, such as Van der Moolen. On news of this,
Van der Moolen ADRs fell another 4.7% or $0.48 per share to
close at $9.71 per share on April 21, 2003. On September 22,
2003, The Wall Street Journal reported that SEC had intensified
its inquiry into the NYSE specialist firms, like Van der Moolen.
The article noted that SEC was not only investigating the
illegal "front-running" practices of the specialist firms, like
Van der Moolen but was now investigating whether floor traders
"traded ahead" of customer orders. On news of this, Van der
Moolen ADRs fell 4.4% or $0.62 per share to close at $ 13.35 per
share.

Lastly, on October 16, 2003, the NYSE announced that the NYSE
Enforcement Division had decided to bring disciplinary action
against Van der Moolen and the other specialist firms.
Additionally, the NYSE stated that for the three- year period
ended December 31, 2002, Van der Moolen disadvantaged customers
who entered orders via the NYSE's Designated Order Turnaround
System ("DOT") through alleged "interpositioning" resulting in
losses to customers of approximately $10 million. In the case of
such alleged "interpositioning" Van der Moolen is believed to
have traded unnecessarily as dealer with DOT orders on one side
of the market, and then immediately traded with DOT orders on
the opposite side, at a profit to the specialist. The NYSE
further stated that Van der Moolen's illegal actions resulted in
additional losses to customers of approximately $25 million. In
these alleged "one-sided trading" cases, the specialist is
believed to have traded unnecessarily, as dealer, on one side of
the market only, at a price level where one or more DOT orders
could have traded instead.

News of this shocked the market. Van der Moolen ADRs fell 14.7%
or $1.56 per share to close at $9.05 per share on extremely high
volume.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-mail:
mhenzel182@aol.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., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Frederick, Maryland
USA.  Roberto Amor, Aurora Fatima Antonio and Lyndsey Resnick,
Editors.

Copyright 2004.  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  * * *