CAR_Public/040114.mbx           C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
           Wednesday, January 14, 2004, Vol. 6, No. 9

                        Headlines                            

CANADA: Lawyer Charges Tobacco Firms With Hiding Smoking Dangers
CATHOLIC CHURCH: Vatican Disciplines 2 Priests For Abuse Charges
CINCINNATI BELL: Former Unit Faces Lawsuit For Accounting Fraud
COMPUTER ASSOCIATES: SEC Might Launch Civil Securities Charges
COVAD COMMUNICATIONS: Suit Charges Ex-CEO of Trashing Finances

CVS CORPORATION: Court Grants Certification Of Securities Suit
FONECASH INC.: DC Court Enters Default Securities Fraud Judgment
FRANK QUATTRONE: NY Court Refuses To Move Quattrone Trial to CA
GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 824,000 Cars For Power Steering Defect
GENESCO INC.: TN Court Enters Final Judgments Against 2 Traders

GREAT ATLANTIC: Plaintiffs Appeal Dismissal of Securities Suit
MISSOURI: Bus Overturns on Interstate 64, 12 Youngsters Injured
MORGAN STANLEY: TN Court Dismisses Class B Mutual Funds Lawsuit
MSC INDUSTRIAL: Settlement Fairness Hearing Set March 16,2004
OL' MAN TREESTANDS: Recalls 1,775 Tree Stands For Product Defect

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS: Settlement Hearing Set For March 3, 2004
SPYDER SECURITIES: SEC Sustains NYSE Stock Disciplinary Action
SUSAN BRISTOL: Recalls Feather-Trimmed Sweaters For Fire Hazard
TYLER FLEMING: SEC Settles Administrative Cease-And-Desist Suit
UNITED STATES: High Court Refuses Review of 9/11 Detainees Study

               Meetings, Conferences & Seminars

* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
* Online Teleconferences


                  New Securities Fraud Cases

ALLIANCE CAPITAL: Bernstein Liebhard Files Securities Suit in NY
BEAR STEARNS: Bonnett Fairbourn Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY
BIOPURE CORPORATION: Cauley Geller Lodges Securities Suit in MA
BIOPURE CORPORATION: Fruchter & Twersky Files Stock Suit in MA
BIOPURE CORPORATION: Cohen Milstein Lodges Securities Suit in MA

BIOPURE CORPORATION: Kirby McInerney Files Securities Suit in MA
BIOVAIL CORPORATION: Weiss & Yourman Files Securities Suit in NY
BIOVAIL CORPORATION: Glancy & Binkow Lodges NY Securities Suit
CHARLES SCHWAB: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. CA
DYNACQ HEALTHCARE: Barrack Rodos Lodges Stock Fraud Suit in TX

EXCELSIOR FUNDS: Much Shelist Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. CA
GILEAD SCIENCES: Wechsler Harwood Files Securities Suit in CA
IBIS TECHNOLOGY: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Lawsuit in MA
JANUS CAPITAL: Schiffrin & Barroway Files Securities Suit in CO
MARSH & MCLENNAN: Scott + Scott Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY

MARSH & MCLENNAN: Rabin Murray Commences Securities Suit in NY
MARSH & MCLEENAN: Glancy Binkow Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY


                        *********

CANADA: Lawyer Charges Tobacco Firms With Hiding Smoking Dangers
----------------------------------------------------------------
Three tobacco companies conspired to keep smokers in the dark
about the dangers of cigarettes, a lawyer argued at a hearing to
certify what could become the largest lawsuit in Canadian
history, the Associated Press reports.

Up until 1972, the companies gave no warnings to consumers about
the addictive qualities of cigarettes and their health dangers,
said Kirk Baert, who represents four plaintiffs in the class
action suit.  "The defendants sought to undermine" measures to
implement health-warning labels, Mr. Baert said.  "They left
generations of Canadians addicted to a drug."

The companies at the center of the class action certification
hearing are Rothmans, Benson & Hedges, Imperial Tobacco Canada
and JTI MacDonald.  David Caputo, Luna Roth, Lori Cawardine and
Russell Hyduk originally filed the suit nine years ago, but a
number of procedural delays had prevented it from going ahead.
That nearly happened again Monday when defense lawyers tried to
argue that the plaintiffs had been late in amending their legal
arguments.

However, Justice Warren Winkler decided to proceed as planned
with the hearing, which began the day after the 40th anniversary
of the US surgeon-general's warning about the dangers of
cigarette smoking.

The four plaintiffs allege the tobacco companies tried to hide
the health risks of smoking and the addictive nature of tobacco
from the public in order to increase sales of their products.
They are seeking $1-million each in damages, in addition to
funding for nicotine addiction rehabilitation centers.  If
approved, observers say the multi-million-dollar class action
has the potential to become the largest in Canadian history.

However, Judge Winkler told lawyers for the plaintiffs that a
key concern would be the difficult task of determining the scope
of such a suit, warning them against comparing their case to a
product recall, AP reports.  "Here, the product hasn't been
pulled off the market," he said.  "Here, the product has been
marketed since time began."

In their statement of defense, lawyers for the three companies
maintain that the evidence for the plaintiffs is largely
opinion-based, adding that health risks associated with smoking
have been well-publicized for half a century in Canada.  More
than 40 similar cases have been brought forward in the United
States, but Imperial Tobacco Canada spokeswoman Christina Dona
told AP the courts have ruled overwhelmingly against
certification.

Anti-tobacco lobbyists are watching the proceedings closely and
say such a hearing is long overdue.  "There's been a massive
fraud which has taken place over several decades where the
(tobacco) industry has lied and misrepresented the situation to
its customers," Garfield Mahood, executive director for the Non-
Smokers' Rights Association, told AP.

Under Ontario law, the public does not have to opt in if a class
action is approved, meaning millions of smokers could end up
suing the three tobacco companies if the suit proceeds.  The
hearing is expected to last two weeks, but a decision whether to
proceed with the suit could take months.


CATHOLIC CHURCH: Vatican Disciplines 2 Priests For Abuse Charges
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Vatican has sanctioned two Michigan priests who allegedly
sexually abused children, the Associated Press reports.

Pope John Paul II issued a decree dismissing the Rev. Joseph
Sito, 68, who allegedly convinced a 17-year-old boy to expose
himself.  Court records show that Rev. Sito was charged with
fourth degree criminal sexual conduct in 1999.  Rev. Sito forged
a deal with the prosecutor's office, pleading no contest to a
reduced assault charge.  The sex offense was dismissed, and Rev.
Sito did not go to jail.  Rev. Sito has been on leave since 1993
because of "substantive allegations," the Archdiocese of Detroit
told AP.

The Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith also
rejected an appeal by the Rev. James Wysocki, 63, of Marine
City, who was suspended by Cardinal Adam Maida in February 2003
after an archdiocesan review board found evidence that Rev.
Wysocki had abused minors during the early years of his
ministry.

Cardinal Maida asked Rev. Wysocki to resign but the priest
refused and appealed to the Vatican.  Prosecutors did not seek
charges because the statute of limitations had expired, but the
panel said Rev. Wysocki should stand trial under canon law
before a panel of three lawyer-priests.


CINCINNATI BELL: Former Unit Faces Lawsuit For Accounting Fraud
---------------------------------------------------------------
Cincinnati Bell Inc. is investigating new allegations that its
former broadband business improperly accounted for construction
contracts to mislead investors, the Cincinnati Enquirer reports.

The allegations are contained in an amended complaint filed last
month in a 2-year-old shareholder class action.  The suit
accused the company, then known as Broadwing Inc., of violating
federal securities laws and misleading investors, who bought its
stock between Jan. 17, 2001 and May 21, 2002.

Broadwing's shares plummeted 32 percent May 20, 2002, after the
company disclosed that it booked $32 million in revenue from
controversial swaps of leased capacity on its network with other
carriers.

The new allegations maintain that the company improperly
accelerated revenue from network construction contracts to meet
quarterly earnings expectations of Wall Street analysts.  "For
each quarter between the 4Q '00 and 3Q '01, the revenues for
Broadwing's broadband segment were artificially inflated by
approximately 10 percent," according to the amended lawsuit.

In a government filing Wednesday, Cincinnati Bell, which dropped
the Broadwing name last summer after selling off the broadband
business, said it was investigating the new allegations.  
According to the Enquirer, a spokesman declined further comment,
but added, "we take such allegations seriously." The company has
said it expects to succeed in defending the earlier allegations
in the lawsuit.

Many of the allegations in the 112-page amended complaint
rehashed claims contained in about a dozen individual class-
actions suits, filed in late 2002 in U.S. District Court in
Cincinnati. The lawsuits accused the company and some
executives, including former CEO Rick Ellenberger, who resigned
unexpectedly in September 2002, and former chief financial
officer Kevin Mooney, of making false statements to mislead
investors about the company's prospects.

The individual cases were combined into a single consolidated
complaint last October.  "All the claims are very serious
because they accuse the company of not properly complying with
securities laws," Richard Wayne, co-lead lawyer on the lawsuit
told the Enquirer.  He said the new allegations came out of
information provided by unidentified former executives.

In one of the allegations, the suit says a former controller for
Broadwing's Austin, Texas-based broadband unit "demanded that
the Network Construction department create between $20 and $30
million in phony customer invoices at the end of each quarter
between the 4Q' 00 and the 3Q '01 for work that (in many cases)
was not even commenced."

No date has been set, and Judge Sandra Beckwith, who had been
assigned the case, recently withdrew and no replacement has been
named.  The company and other former executives named as
defendants are slated to file a motion to dismiss the complaint
by the end of this month, Mr. Wayne told the Enquirer.


COMPUTER ASSOCIATES: SEC Might Launch Civil Securities Charges
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Securities and Exchange Commission might file
civil charges against software company Computer Associates
International, Inc., after it prematurely recognized revenue
from its software licensing contracts, the Associated Press
reports.

In October, the Company, one of the world's largest software
companies, said its own investigation had found that sales
contracts in fiscal 2000 had been booked as revenue before being
signed.  Its chief financial officer and two other finance
executives were forced to resign.  Computer Associates had
revenue of $3.12 billion for the fiscal year ended March 31,
2003.

The Company received a "Wells Notice" from the SEC, which
notifies it that the SEC staff may recommend a civil enforcement
proceeding against it for possible federal securities law
violations.  The Company is currently facing a joint probe into
its accounting practices by the Department of Justice and the
SEC.  Under SEC procedures, Computer Associates has the
opportunity to respond to the SEC before the agency makes a
formal recommendation.


COVAD COMMUNICATIONS: Suit Charges Ex-CEO of Trashing Finances
--------------------------------------------------------------
According to a lawsuit brought against Covad Communication's
Board of Directors, Robert Knowling, the man whom Chancellor
Joel Klein hired to teach principals to think like CEOs ran the
Company to the ground while traveling on pricey junkets and
splurging on big salaries for his buddies, Knight-Ridder/
Tribune Business News reports.

Mr. Knowling, who now runs Klein's Leadership Academy, resigned
from the top post at California-based Covad in 2000.  He stepped
down after the company handed him a $1.5 million severance
package and forgave a $500,000 personal loan, according to the
lawsuit filed by Dhruv Khanna, co-founder of Covad and its
largest shareholder.

Once one of the telecom industry's highest-profile executives,
Mr. Knowling gained a reputation as a turnaround man for his
work at U.S. West and Ameritech before joining Covad in 1998.  
He was invited to sit next to First Lady Hillary Clinton during
President Bill Clinton's 2000 State of the Union address and met
Klein when the chancellor headed up the anti-trust division at
the U.S. Justice Department, the Tribune Business News reports.  
Last year, Mr. Klein tapped Mr. Knowling, 48, to run the
nonprofit Leadership Academy, where aspiring public school
principals go to learn how to manage like topnotch executives.

However, the lawsuit depicts Mr. Knowling as a reckless spender
who frittered away cash as Covad, a high-speed Internet
provider, sank into bankruptcy.  Among the allegations in the
suit:

     (1) He dipped into the till for "wasteful junkets, even as
         Covad's stock price plummeted;"

     (2) He hired two friends, a married couple, along with
         several of their children, for top positions in the
         company;

     (3) He transferred the company's controller after he
         "objected to many of the expenditures approved by
         Knowling;"

More disturbing to Wall Street was that Mr. Knowling failed to
disclose Covad's shaky finances before selling $500 million in
bonds, the lawsuit contends.  Mr. Klein and Mr. Knowling
declined to comment on the lawsuit, The Tribune Business News
reports.

Two of Knowling's six top managers at the Leadership Academy are
former Covad employees: Terry Moya, the academy's chief
financial officer, and Carra Scott, the academy's vice president
of recruiting and marketing.  The lawsuit, filed in September in
Delaware, also charges that Covad's auditors could not complete
their 2000 review because the record books were such a mess.

Mr. Knowling resigned from Covad in October 2000 and the
company, $1.4 billion in debt, went bankrupt in early 2001.
Covad climbed out of bankruptcy in late 2001.


CVS CORPORATION: Court Grants Certification Of Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court of Massachusetts has granted
Class Certification of a lawsuit brought against CVS
Corporation, on behalf of all persons who purchased CVS common
stock during the period between February 6, 2001 through October
30, 2001, inclusive.

The action asserts claims against CVS and certain of the
Company's officers and directors for violations of certain
provisions of the federal securities law. Defendants have denied
all allegations of wrongdoing asserted against them and have
asserted affirmative defenses to the claims asserted by the Lead
Plaintiff in the Action.

To receive a detailed printed Notice of Pendency of Class
Action, contact CVS Corporation Securities Litigation, by Mail:
The Garden City Group, Inc. P.O. Box 9000 #6172, Merrick, NY
11566-9000, or by Phone: 1-866-808-3529.


FONECASH INC.: DC Court Enters Default Securities Fraud Judgment
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Honorable Rosemary M. Collyer, U.S. District Judge for the
District of Columbia, entered a Default Judgment against
defendant FoneCash, Inc., restraining and enjoining FoneCash
from further violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act
of 1933, Sections 10(b) and 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and Rules 10b-5, 12b-20, 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder.   

The Court also ordered disgorgement and prejudgment interest
against FoneCash in the respective amounts of $49,150 and
$12,677, and imposed a civil penalty against FoneCash of
$49,150.

The Commission's complaint, filed on April 8, 2002, alleged that
a registration statement and amendments, filed with the
Commission by FoneCash in December 2001, January 2002 and March
2002, and signed by Daniel E. Charboneau, the president of
FoneCash, contained material misrepresentations and omissions.  
Such misrepresentations included, among other things, the claim
that FoneCash manufactured credit card terminals under a
specified patent to which it obtained the exclusive rights in
1997, when in fact, the patent had lapsed in 1993.  

The complaint further alleged that Fonecash maintained a website
which grossly misrepresented the company's business and, through
Mr. Charboneau, had distributed via the internet several
misleading press releases which falsely described various
mergers and acquisitions.

The suit is styled, "SEC v. FoneCash, Inc., and Daniel E.
Charboneau, Civil Action No. 1:02CV00651RJL (D.D.C.)."


FRANK QUATTRONE: NY Court Refuses To Move Quattrone Trial to CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
United States District Judge Richard Owen refused former Credit
Suisse First Boston (CSFB) star banker Frank Quattrone's request
to move his second trial from New York to California, the
Associated Press reports.

Mr. Quattrone is due for a retrial on March 22 for obstruction
of justice, after he allegedly sent an email to CSFB employees
in late 2000, to destroy documents.  At that time, the
government was investigating the firm's role in the allocation
of new Internet stocks.  

Mr. Quattrone asked for the move because his wife is ill and
because he wants to be closer to his teenage daughter.  The
family lives in Menlo Park, California.  However, Judge Owen
said federal prosecutors in California were not prepared to take
the case now, and he said any trial - even close to home - would
keep Mr. Quattrone away from his family for large amounts of
time.

"That factor is sad to tragic, but I don't know what can be done
about it," Judge Owen said, according to AP.  "If there's a
trial, there's a trial."

Mr. Quattrone claims he was simply following company policy,
which called for routine document destruction.  His first trial
ended October 24 in a mistrial, after jurors failed to reach a
verdict on the three counts against him.

Judge Owen also refused to grant Mr. attorney, John W. Keker, to
access to certain grand jury material from the original
investigation.  He also indicated that he would soon deny a
motion by the Quattrone defense team to transfer the case to
another judge, AP reports.  The defense cited "pro-government,
anti-defense comments" by the judge at the first trial.  At the
first trial, the judge told Mr. Keker, "You're like a fire
hydrant on the corner of somewhere in New York City in the
summer, and I can't turn you off."


GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 824,000 Cars For Power Steering Defect
--------------------------------------------------------------
General Motors Corporation is recalling about 824,000 cars built
from January 1996 through October 1997, to fix a possible power
steering problem, Reuters reports.  The recall affected the
models:

     (1) the 1996 Buick Regal,

     (2) the 1997 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme,

     (3) the 1997-98 Oldsmobile Cutlass,

     (4) Chevrolet Lumina,

     (5) Monte Carlo,

     (6) Malibu and

    (7) 1998 Oldsmobile Intrigue cars

Some 1996 Pontiac Grand Prix and Oldsmobile Cutlass Supremes and
1997-98 Buick Regal cars were also affected, GM said, according
to an Reuters report.  About 750,000 of the vehicles in the
recall are in the United States, while the rest was sold in
Canada.

The Company stated that in some of the vehicles a lower pinion
bearing in the power steering gear may separate, causing the
driver to experience an intermittent loss of power steering
assist or unintended power assist.  The Company further staid
there had been reports of eight injuries that may be related to
the problem but no fatalities.


GENESCO INC.: TN Court Enters Final Judgments Against 2 Traders
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Honorable John T. Nixon, U.S. District Judge for the Middle
District of Tennessee, entered Final Judgments as to defendants
Dorothy L. Mahler and Patricia L. Jones, restraining and
enjoining them from further violations of Sections 10(b) and
13(b)(5) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and from aiding
and abetting violations of Sections 13(a) and 13(b)(2)(A) of the
Exchange Act and Rules 10b-5, 12b-20, 13a-1 and 13b2-1
thereunder.

Ms. Mahler and Ms. Jones consented to the entries of the
judgments without admitting or denying any of the allegations of
the Commission's complaint.  Further, the court ordered
disgorgement and prejudgment interest against Ms. Mahler in the
respective amounts of $17,675 and $2,300, ordered Ms. Mahler to
pay a civil penalty of $25,000, and barred her from serving as
an officer or director of a public company for ten years.
     
The complaint alleges that the defendants perpetrated a
financial reporting fraud involving the financial statements of
Genesco, Inc., a footwear and accessories company headquartered
in Nashville, Tennessee.  Ms. Mahler, President of Genesco's
Johnston & Murphy division, Bracewell, a division vice
president, and Ms. Jones, the division's Director of Customer
Care, caused Genesco to improperly recognize $2.8 million of
sales revenue prior to the end of a quarter and in advance of a
customer's requested shipping date.  The defendants improperly
recorded revenue in the quarter to meet sales targets for the
quarter.  This overstatement of sales and earnings was reflected
on Genesco's financial statements included in its Form 10-K for
fiscal year 2001.         

The suit is styled, "SEC v. Dorothy L. Mahler, John W.
Bracewell, III, and Patricia L. Jones, Civil Action No. 3:03-CV-
1202 (MDTN)."


GREAT ATLANTIC: Plaintiffs Appeal Dismissal of Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs appealed the United States District Court for the
District of New Jersey's dismissal of the securities class
action filed against The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. and
certain of its officers and directors, captioned "In re The
Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, Inc. Securities
Litigation, No. 02 CV 2674 (FSH)."

The consolidated suit alleged claims under Sections 10(b) (and
Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 arising out of the Company's July 5, 2002
filing of restated financial statements for fiscal 1999, fiscal
2000 and the first three quarters of fiscal 2001.  The Complaint
sought unspecified money damages, costs and expenses.

On January 17, 2003, defendants filed a motion seeking to
dismiss the complaint.  That motion was fully briefed on March
28, 2003.  By Opinion & Order entered on September 18, 2003, the
District Court dismissed plaintiffs' Complaint without
prejudice.  On October 13, 2003, after having declined to file a
Second Amended Complaint, plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal
advising that they are appealing to the United States Court of
Appeals for the Third Circuit from the District Court's
September 18, 2003 Opinion & Order.  Plaintiffs filed their
opening appellate brief on January 5, 2004.  It is currently
anticipated that the appeal will be fully briefed by February
18, 2004.


MISSOURI: Bus Overturns on Interstate 64, 12 Youngsters Injured
---------------------------------------------------------------
More than two dozen Missouri youngsters were hurt as a school
bus taking city children to a suburban school overturned on
Interstate 64 about 10 miles west of the St. Louis city limits
on Monday, the Associated Press reports.

The bus was carrying St. Louis students to Shenandoah Valley
Elementary School in Chesterfield as part of the region's
voluntary desegregation program, Parkway School District
spokeswoman Suzanne Miller told AP, when the accident happened
at about 8:30 am.  

A Missouri State Highway Patrol spokesman said the westbound bus
flipped onto its side after the driver apparently tried to stop
because of the traffic in front of her.  "It was chaotic,"
Highway Patrol Cpl. Jeff Meyer told KSDK-TV.  "There were kids
on the bus, kids off the bus.  There were a lot of people who
stopped on the highway to help out."

Mr. Meyer said two of the injuries were serious.  Hospitals
reported treating or expecting to treat 29 to 31 students, many
with minor injuries.

Laidlaw Transit Inc. operates the bus.  Spokesman Kevin August
told AP he didn't yet have any details on the wreck.


MORGAN STANLEY: TN Court Dismisses Class B Mutual Funds Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. District Court Judge Todd J. Campbell of the Middle
District of Tennessee on Friday dismissed a class action brought
against Morgan Stanley on its marketing of Class B mutual-fund
shares, the Dow Jones Business News reports.  Judge Campbell
ruled in favor of Morgan Stanley in dismissing the case, saying
the plaintiffs hadn't met the standard for launching a class
action against the firm.

Morgan Stanley settled Securities and Exchange Commission
charges in November and paid a $50 million fine after the SEC
accused it of a "firm-wide failure" to explain to clients that
they would often pay more to purchase Class B shares in Morgan
Stanley Funds than if they bought Class A shares.

The plaintiffs in the dismissed case, led by a Franklin,
Tennessee resident named Edward Benzon, claimed Morgan Stanley's
prospectus for its mutual funds didn't disclose that an
investment in Class B shares is "never the best choice for any
rational investment strategy" and failed to disclose certain
allocations and incentives in the fees for Class B shares.

Judge Campbell said even if it is assumed that the allegation
about Class B shares being a uniformly poor investment choice is
true, Morgan Stanley had no duty to spell that out in its
prospectus.  In addition, he said the prospectus adequately
describes the total amounts paid to Morgan Stanley for each
class of shares, Dow Jones reports.  "So long as defendants
provide truthful information, then investors, with or without
financial advisors, have the duty to decide what is 'best' for
them," the judge wrote in his opinion.

Attorneys for Mr. Benzon and other class members didn't
immediately return calls seeking comment, Dow Jones states.
Morgan Stanley said it was pleased with the dismissal of the
nationwide class action.  "As the court said, our prospectus
'discloses information which would permit any investor to
determine the best investment for him or her, under the
circumstances'," the firm said in a statement.

Under the judge's ruling, investors such as Benzon are still
free to pursue their claims about Morgan Stanley's mutual fund
Class B shares in arbitration cases filed with the National
Association of Securities Dealers.

Under commission structures used by Morgan Stanley and many
other fund firms charging commissions, or "loads," on fund
sales, Class B fund shares carry sales charges paid when fund
shares are sold, while Class A shares carry charges paid when
the shares are purchased. In the SEC's case, it alleged Morgan
Stanley brokers would often earn more money by selling Class B
shares than for other share classes of the firm's funds.


MSC INDUSTRIAL: Settlement Fairness Hearing Set March 16,2004
-------------------------------------------------------------
The fairness hearing for the settlement of the securities class
action filed against MSC Industrial Direct Co., Inc. is set for
March 16,2004 in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of New York.  The suit, styled "In RE: MSC
Industrial Direct Co., Inc. Securities Litigation," also names
as defendants the Company's directors and certain of its
officers.

Plaintiff, on behalf of a class of the Company's stockholders,
sought unspecified damages based on his allegations arising from
the Company's announcement that it would restate its
consolidated financial statements for fiscal years 1999 through
2001 and the first three quarters of fiscal 2002.

Plaintiff alleged that during the periods affected by the
restatement, the Company, its directors and certain of its
officers violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by
materially misleading the investing public by making false
statements in order to inflate the price of the Company's common
stock.

A lead plaintiff, International Association of Machinists
National Pension Fund, was named on November 6, 2002, and such
lead plaintiff filed a consolidated amended class action
complaint on December 23, 2002.  The Court granted the Company's
motion to dismiss the amended complaint on September 13, 2003.  
The plaintiffs were granted leave to re-plead their complaint
and had until October 28, 2003 to file a second amended
complaint.

On October 28, 2003, the parties entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding to settle the matter for $1,250.  It is
anticipated that substantially all of the settlement will be
covered by insurance.  On November 27, 2003, the parties filed a
Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement.  On December 3, 2003,
the court preliminarily approved the settlement, certified the
action as a class action.


OL' MAN TREESTANDS: Recalls 1,775 Tree Stands For Product Defect
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ol' Man Treestands, of Hattiesburg, Miss., a division of L & L
Enterprises, Inc., in cooperation with the U.S. consumer Product
Safety Commission (CPSC), is recalling 1,775 Tree Stands for
Hunters since a serrated blade that supports the stand on a tree
can bend, posing the risk of falls and serious injuries to
hunters. Ol' Man Treestands has received five reports of
serrated blades bending, but no reports of injuries.

The climbing tree stands included in this recall are the
Original Ol' Man Double X with model number OMDX-MO, Grand Ol'
Man Double X with model number GOMDX-MO, Multi-Vision with model
number MV- MO, and Grand Multi-Vision with Model number GMV-MO.
All units have Warning labels affixed to the stands varying in
weight capacities of 250 lbs to 350 lbs. The bottom platform of
each tree stand has a lot number stamped on the serrated blades
that would indicate when it was produced. Only tree stands
having the number 1903 or 2103 stamped on the blades of the
stand bottom are included in the recall. The stands have a mesh
net seat and are painted green.

The tree stands, manufactured in China, were sold at Hunting
supply stores, Web sites and catalogs nationwide from June 2003
through November 2003 for between $160 and $270.

Consumers are urged to stop using these tree stands with 1903
and 2103 stamping on the blades immediately, and call Ol' Man
Treestands for a repair or replacement product. For more
information, contact Ol' Man Treestands at (800) 861-7595 Ext.
20 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., or visit the company's Web site at
www.olmantreestands.com.


SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS: Settlement Hearing Set For March 3, 2004
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Superior Court of New Jersey, Bergen County announced that a
Settlement Hearing will be held before Judge Jonathan Harris, on
March 3, 2004 at 8:30 a.m. with regards a lawsuit brought
against Samsung Electronics America, Inc., on behalf of John K.
Friedman, and all other persons in the United States who
purchased, at retail, a Samsung brand DVD player between January
1, 1997, and December 31, 2001, inclusive.

To receive a detailed Notice of Pendency of Class Action and
Hearing on Proposed Settlement, downloadable copies are
available at the Claims Administrator's website:
http://www.dvdclassnotice.com,or get a copy by Mail: DVD Claims  
Administrator, c/o The Notice Company, P.O. Box 526, Accord, MA
02018.


SPYDER SECURITIES: SEC Sustains NYSE Stock Disciplinary Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission has sustained
disciplinary action taken by the New York Stock Exchange, Inc.
against Stephen Michael Sohmer, a former lessee member of the
Exchange, and Spyder Securities, Inc., a former member
organization of the Exchange.  

The Exchange found that Mr. Sohmer and Spyder executed trades
for two separate accounts maintained by the Oakford Corporation
and Generic Trading Associates LLC, respectively, in which Mr.
Sohmer and Spyder had an interest and in which they shared
profits; prepared inaccurate commission statements in violation
of Exchange record keeping requirements; and improperly crossed
trades by accepting orders for securities for execution and
filling those orders by buying or selling such securities for an
account in which they had an interest.  The Exchange also found
that Mr. Sohmer, individually, made material misstatements to
the Exchange.
     
The Exchange censured Mr. Sohmer, barred him for three years
from Exchange membership, allied membership, approved person
status, and from employment or association in any capacity with
any member or member organization, and permanently barred him
from membership or employment on the Exchange floor.  The
Exchange further censured and permanently barred Spyder as a
member organization of the Exchange.
     
The Commission found that Mr. Sohmer and Spyder's misconduct was
serious and recurrent.  The Commission concluded that the
sanctions imposed were neither excessive nor oppressive, and
were consistent with sanctions imposed in cases involving
similar conduct.  


SUSAN BRISTOL: Recalls Feather-Trimmed Sweaters For Fire Hazard
---------------------------------------------------------------
Susan Bristol Inc., of Boston, Mass., in cooperation with the
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is recalling
1,100 Christmas Sweaters with Feather Trim since the marabou
feather trim on the sweaters is dangerously flammable. There
have been no reports of incidents or injuries regarding this
product.

The recalled products are ladies' Christmas sweaters with
marabou feather trim that come in two different styles. One is a
black pullover with marabou feather trim at the neckline and
cuffs. The other style is a black, mohair-lined cardigan with
embroidery and marabou trim at the neckline and cuffs. "Susan
Bristol LTD" is written on the collar tag located at the center
back neck of the garment. The RN #43189 (CA05633) can be found
on a tag sewn in the right side seam of the sweaters.

The sweaters, manufactured in Hong Kong, are sold at Clothing
stores and small boutiques nationwide from November 2002 through
January 2003 for between $44 and $74, depending on the style.

Consumers are urged to contact Susan Bristol Inc. customer
service for information on returning the sweaters for credit for
another product or a replacement of the trim. For more
information, contact Susan Bristol Inc. at (800) 537-4309
between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday.


TYLER FLEMING: SEC Settles Administrative Cease-And-Desist Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission settled administrative
cease-and-desist proceedings previously instituted against
former internet stock promoter Tyler T. Fleming and his two
companies, SmallCap Solutions, Inc. and Complete Financial and
Operations LLC.

In its action, the Commission found that Mr. Fleming, SmallCap
Solutions and Complete Financial participated in the
unregistered distribution of two OTC Bulletin Board-traded
stocks, in violation of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities
Act of 1933.

Without admitting or denying the Commission's findings, Mr.
Fleming, SmallCap Solutions and Complete Financial consented to
the entry of the Commission's order ordering that they cease and
desist from committing or causing any violations and any future
violations of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act, and
ordering that they pay disgorgement of $24,721.05, representing
the proceeds of their unregistered stock sales plus prejudgment
interest.   


UNITED STATES: High Court Refuses Review of 9/11 Detainees Study
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Supreme Court refused to review whether the
government properly withheld details about hundreds of
foreigners detained after the September 11 terrorist attacks,
the Associated Press reports.

More than 700 detainees were picked up in the United States
immediately after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the
Pentagon.  Some were charged with crimes, others were held as
material witnesses, but only Zacarias Moussaoui is being
prosecuted in connection with the attacks.  Many have since been
deported.

Washington-based Center for National Security Studies later
filed a suit, seeking to learn names and other basic information
about the detainees.  Lawyers for the center told the court that
the government grabbed people on thin suspicion, then moved to
deport detainees who had no demonstrated link to terrorism but
who had violated civil immigration laws.  The government later
sealed immigration records and omitted detainees' names from
jail rosters, among other tactics, to make sure that details of
hundreds of arrests remained secret, the lawyers alleged,
according to AP.

The center's appeal makes constitutional claims under the First
Amendment right to freedom of speech and freedom of the press,
and raises legal questions under the federal Freedom of
Information Act.  

"It is the responsibility of courts, and especially this court,
to provide meaningful judicial review when the government
invokes national security to justify unprecedented secrecy in
exercising its awesome power to arrest and detain hundreds of
people," lawyers for the Center for National Security Studies
argued in a court filing.  "History shows that, in times of
crisis and fear, executive officials are prone to overreact,
especially in their treatment of minorities in their midst."

Twenty-three news organizations and media groups, including The
Associated Press, joined in asking the high court to hear the
case.

The detainee names case is Center for National Security Studies
v. Justice Department, 03-472.


               Meetings, Conferences & Seminars


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

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

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

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

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

February 2-3, 2004
EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES LIABILITY INSURANCE
American Conference Institute
New York City
Contact: 1-888-224-2480; http://www.americanconference.com  

February 9-10, 2004
REDUCING LEGAL RISK IN PROMOTING & CONDUCTING CLINICAL TRIALS
American Conference Institute
New York City
Contact: 1-888-224-2480; http://www.americanconference.com  

February 18-20, 2004
CIVIL PRACTICE AND LITIGATION TECHNIQUES IN FEDERAL AND STATE
COURTS
ALI-ABA
Scottsdale, Arizona
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

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

February 23-24, 2004
REINSURANCE 101
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Boston Common, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 8-9, 2004
THE ROLE OF PARALEGALS IN MASS TORT LITIGATION
Mealey Publications
The Westin Chicago River North, Chicago
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 9, 2004
PATENT LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Chicago River North, Chicago
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 9, 2004
INSURANCE CLAIMS CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Chicago River North, Chicago
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 11-12, 2004
CONSUMER FINANCIAL SERVICES LITIGATION 2004
Practicing Law Institute
New York
Contact: 800-260-4pli; info@pli.edu

March 11-12, 2004
WELDING ROD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Caesar's Palace, Las Vegas
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 18-19, 2004
SECURITIES, DRUGS & ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION
MassTortsMadePerfect.Com
The Fairmont, San Francisco, California
Contact: 1-800-320-2227; register@masstortsmadeperfect.com

March 22-23, 2004
INSURANCE CLAIMS CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Kierland, Scottsdale, AZ
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 22-23, 2004
EMERGING DRUGS AND DIVICES CONFERENCE FOR PLAINTIFF ATTORNEYS
Mealey Publications
The Westin Kierland, Scottsdale, AZ
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 22-23, 2004
DEFENSE STRATEGIES IN PHARMACEUTICAL LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Kierland, Scottsdale, AZ
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 22-23, 2004
INSURANCE 101 CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

April 7-8, 2004
INSURANCE LAW 2004: UNDERSTANDING THE ABC'S
Practicing Law Institute
New York
Contact: 800-260-4pli; info@pli.edu

April 14-17, 2004
INSURANCE INSOLVENCY AND REINSURANCE ROUNDTABLE
Mealey Publications
The Scottsdale Princess, Scottsdale, AZ
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

April 15-16, 2004
OPINION AND EXPERT TESTIMONY IN FEDERAL AND STATE COURTS
ALI-ABA
New Orleans
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

April 15-16, 2004
HANDLING CONSTRUCTION RISKS 2004: ALLOCATE NOW OR LITIGATE LATER
Practicing Law Institute
New York
Contact: 800-260-4pli; info@pli.edu

April 22-24, 2004
LITIGATING MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CLAIMS
ALI-ABA
New Orleans
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

May 6-7, 2004
CONSUMER FINANCIAL SERVICES LITIGATION 2004
Practicing Law Institute
San Francisco
Contact: 800-260-4pli; info@pli.edu

May 6-7, 2004
CONFERENCE ON LIFE AND HEALTH INSURANCE LITIGATION
ALI-ABA
Washington, D.C. Tuition $995
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

May 20-21, 2004
ACCOUNTANTS' LIABILITY
ALI-ABA
Chicago
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

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

July 15-16, 2004
PRODUCTS LIABILITY
ALI-ABA
Chicago
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

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

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

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



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

January 06-30, 2004
DAMAGES IN TEXAS INSURANCE LITIGATION:
EVALUATING, PLEADING, AND PROVING
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

January 06-30, 2004
NBI PRESENTS "EMERGING ISSUES IN CALIFORNIA
INDOOR AIR QUALITY AND TOXIC MOLD LITIGATION
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

January 06-30, 2004
NBI PRESENTS "LITIGATING THE CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT IN FLORIDA
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

May 6-7, 2004
CONSUMER FINANCIAL SERVICES LITIGATION 2004
Practicing Law Institute
Contact: 800-260-4pli; info@pli.edu

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RECOVERIES
Big Class Action
Contact: seminars@bigclassaction.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


                  New Securities Fraud Cases


ALLIANCE CAPITAL: Bernstein Liebhard Files Securities Suit in NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York on behalf of all persons who purchased or
otherwise acquired shares or other ownership units in the mutual
funds in the AllianceBernstein family of funds, which are
managed by Alliance Capital Management Holding L.P.  from
October 2, 1998 through September 29, 2003, inclusive.

These funds are subject to this class action lawsuit:


     (1) AllianceBernstein Growth & Income Fund (Sym: CABDX,
         CBBDX, CBBCX)

     (2) AllianceBernstein Health Care Fund (Sym: AHLAX, AHLBX,
         AHLCX)

     (3) AllianceBernstein Disciplined Value Fund (Sym: ADGAX,
         ADGBX, ADGCX)

     (4) AllianceBernstein Mid-Cap Growth (Sym: CHCAX, CHCBX,
         CHCCX)

     (5) AllianceBernstein Real Estate Investment Fund (Sym:
         AREAX, AREBX, ARECX)

     (6) AllianceBernstein Growth Fund  (Sym: AGRFX, AGBBX,
         AGRCX)

     (7) AllianceBernstein Select Investor Series Biotechnology
         Portfolio (Sym: ASBAX, AIBBX, ASBCX)

     (8) AllianceBernstein Small CapValue Fund (Sym: ABASX,
         ABBSX, ABCSX)

     (9) AllianceBernstein Premier Growth Fund (Sym: APGAX,
         APGBX APGCX)

    (10) AllianceBernstein Select Investor Series Technology
         Portfolio (Sym AITAX, AITBX, AITCX)

    (11) AllianceBernstein Value Fund (Sym: ABVAX, ABVBX,
         ABVCX)

    (12) AllianceBernstein Quasar Fund (Sym: QUASX, QUABX,
         QUACX)

    (13) AllianceBernstein Technology Fund (Sym: ALTFX, ATEBX,
         ATECX)

    (14) AllianceBernstein Select Investor Series Premier
         Portfolio (Sym: ASPAX, ASPBX, ASPCX)

    (15) AllianceBernstein Utility Income Fund (Sym: AUIAX,
         AUIBX, AUICX)

    (16) AllianceBernstein Balanced Shares (Sym: CABNX, CABBX,
         CBACX)

    (17) AllianceBernstein Disciplined Value Fund (Sym: ADGAX,
         ADGBX, ADGCX)

    (18) AllianceBernstein Global Value Fund (Sym: ABAGX, ABBGX,
         ABCGX)

    (19) AllianceBernstein International Value Fund (Sym: ABIAX,
         ABIBX, ABICX)

    (20) AllianceBernstein Real Estate Investment Fund (Sym:
         AREAX, AREBX, ARECX)

    (21) AllianceBernstein Small Cap Value Fund  (Sym: ABASX,
         ABBSX, ABCSX)

    (22) AllianceBernstein Utility Income Fund (Sym: AUIAX,
         AUIBX, AUICX)

    (23) AllianceBernstein Value Fund (Sym: ABVAX, ABVBX, AVBCX)

    (24) AllianceBernstein Blended Style Series - U.S. Large Cap
         Portfolio (Sym: ABBAX, ABBAX, ABBCX)

    (25) AllianceBernstein All-Asia Investment Fund (Sym: AALAX,
         AAABX, AAACX)

    (26) AllianceBernstein Global Value Fund (Sym: ABAGX, ABBGX,
         ABCGX)

    (27) AllianceBernstein Greater China '97 Fund (Sym: GCHAX,
         GCHBX, GCHCX)

    (28) AllianceBernstein International Premier Growth Fund
        (Sym: AIPAX, AIPBX, AIPCX)

    (29) AllianceBernstein International Value Fund (Sym: ABIAX,
         ABIBX, ABICX)

    (30) AllianceBernstein Global Small Cap Fund (Sym: GSCAX,
         AGCBX, GSCCX)

    (31) AllianceBernstein New Europe Fund (Sym: ANEAX, ANEBX,
         ANECX)

    (32) AllianceBernstein Worldwide Privatization Fund (Sym:
         AWPAX, AWPBX, AWPCX)

    (33) AllianceBernstein Select Investor Series Biotechnology
         Portfolio (Sym: ASBAX, AIBBX, ASBCX)

    (34) AllianceBernstein Select Investor Series Premier
         Portfolio (Sym: ASPAX, ASPBX, ASPCX)

    (35) AllianceBernstein Select Investor Series Technology
         Portfolio (Sym: AITAX, AITBX, AITCX)

    (36) AllianceBernstein Americas Government Income Trust
         (Sym: ANAGX, ANABX, ANACX)

    (37) AllianceBernstein Bond Fund Corporate Bond Portfolio
         (Sym: CBFAX, CBFBX, CBFCX)

    (38) AllianceBernstein Bond Fund Quality Bond Portfolio
         (Sym: ABQUX, ABQBX, ABQCX)

    (39) AllianceBernstein Bond Fund U.S. Government Portfolio
         (Sym: ABUSX, ABUBX ABUCX)

    (40) AllianceBernstein Emerging Market Debt Fund (Sym:
         AGDAX, AGDBX, AGDCX)

    (41) AllianceBernstein Global Strategic Income Trust
         (Sym: AGSAX, AGSBX, AGCCX)

    (42) AllianceBernstein High Yield Fund (Sym: AHYAX, AHHBX,
         AHHCX)

    (43) AllianceBernstein Multi-Market Strategy Trust (Sym:
         AMMSX, AMMBX, AMMCX)

    (44) AllianceBernstein Short Duration (Sym: ADPAX, ADPBX,
         ADPCX)

    (45) AllianceBernstein Intermediate California Muni
         Portfolio (Sym: AICBX, ACLBX, ACMCX)

    (46) AllianceBernstein Intermediate Diversified Muni
         Portfolio (Sym: AIDAX, AIDBX, AIMCX)

    (47) AllianceBernstein Intermediate New York Muni Portfolio:
         (Sym: ANIAX, ANYBX, ANMCX)

    (48) AllianceBernstein Muni Income Fund National Portfolio
         (Sym: ALTHX, ALTBX, ALNCX)

    (49) AllianceBernstein Muni Income Fund Arizona Portfolio
         (Sym: AAZAX, AAZBX, AAZCX)

    (50) AllianceBernstein Muni Income Fund California Portfolio
         (Sym: ALCAX, ALCBX, ACACX)

    (51) AllianceBernstein Muni Income Fund Insured California
         Portfolio (Sym: BUICX, BUIBX, BUCCX)

    (52) AllianceBernstein Muni Income Fund Insured National
         Portfolio (Sym: CABTX, CBBBX, CACCX)

    (53) AllianceBernstein Muni Income Fund Florida Portfolio
         (Sym: AFLAX, AFLBX, AFLCX)

    (54) AllianceBernstein Muni Income Fund Massachusetts
         Portfolio (Sym: AMAAX, AMABX)

    (55) AllianceBernstein Muni Income Fund Michigan Portfolio
         (Sym: AMIAX, AMIBX, AMICX)

    (56) AllianceBernstein Muni Income Fund Minnesota Portfolio
         (Sym: AMNAX, AMNBX, AMNCX)

    (57) AllianceBernstein Muni Income Fund New Jersey Portfolio
         (Sym: ANJAX, ANJBX, ANJCX)

    (58) AllianceBernstein Muni Income Fund New York Portfolio
         (Sym: ALNYX, ALNBX, ANYCX)

    (59) AllianceBernstein Muni Income Fund Ohio Portfolio
        (Sym: AOHAX, AOHBX, AOHCX)

    (60) AllianceBernstein Muni Income Fund Pennsylvania
         Portfolio (Sym: APAAX, APABX, APACX)

    (61) AllianceBernstein Muni Income Fund Virginia Portfolio
         (Sym: AVAAX, AVABX, AVACX)

Investors in the State of Rhode Island 529 Plan, known as the
CollegeBoundfund(SM), may have invested in one or more of the
funds listed below:

     (i) AllianceBernstein Growth & Income Fund

    (ii) AllianceBernstein Mid-Cap Growth Fund

   (iii) AllianceBernstein Premier Growth Fund

    (iv) AllianceBernstein Quasar Fund

     (v) AllianceBernstein Technology Fund

    (vi) AllianceBernstein Quality Bond Portfolio

   (vii) AllianceBernstein International Value Fund

  (viii) AllianceBernstein Small Cap Value Fund

    (ix) AllianceBernstein Value Fund

The complaint charges that defendants violated Section 34(b) of
the Investment Company Act of 1940. The complaint alleges that
during the Class Period defendants engaged in an unlawful and
deceitful course of conduct designed to improperly financially
advantage defendants to the detriment of plaintiff and the other
members of the Class.

As part and parcel of defendants' unlawful conduct, defendants
failed to properly disclose:

     (a) that select favored customers were allowed to engage in
         illegal "late trading," a practice whereby an investor
         may place an order to purchase fund shares after 4:00
         p.m. and have that order filled at that day's closing
         net asset value; and

     (b) that select favored customers were improperly allowed
         to "time" their mutual fund trades. Such timing
         improperly allows an investor to trade in and out of a
         mutual fund to exploit short-term moves and
         inefficiencies in the manner in which the mutual funds
         price their shares.

For more information, contact Ms. Linda Flood (Director of
Shareholder Relations), by Mail: 10 East 40th Street, New York,
New York 10016, by Phone: (800) 217-1522 or 212-779-1414, or by
E-mail: AllianceBernstein@bernlieb.com.


BEAR STEARNS: Bonnett Fairbourn Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Bonnett Fairbourn Friedman & Balint, P.C.
initiated a securities class action lawsuit in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf
of purchasers, redeemers and holders of shares of certain mutual
funds in the Janus and Putnam families between November 1, 1998,
and July 3, 2003, against The Bear Stearns Cos. Inc., Canary
Capital Partners, LLC, Empire Financial Holding Co., Advantage
Trading Group, Millenium Partners, L.P., Edward J Stern, Donald
A. Wojnowski Jr., Putnam Investment Management, LLC, Janus
Mutual Funds, Janus Capital Group and certain of the
accompanying subsidiaries and affiliates.

The funds included and the respective symbols are listed below:

     (1) Janus Fund (Nasdaq:JANSX)

     (2) Janus Enterprise Fund (Nasdaq:JAENX)

     (3) Janus Twenty Fund (Nasdaq:JAVLX)

     (4) Janus Investment Fund (Nasdaq: JABAX)

     (5) Putnam OTC & Emerging Growth Fund (Nasdaq: POEGX)

The complaint alleges violations of the Securities Act of 1933,
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Investment Company Act
of 1940, and for common law breach of fiduciary duties in return
for substantial fees, sticky money investments and other income
for themselves and their affiliates.

The complaint alleges that, during the class period, Bear
Stearns and the other defendants engaged in illegal and improper
trading practices, in concert with certain traders, which caused
financial injury to the shareholders of the above-referenced
Janus and Putnam funds. According to the complaint, the
defendants permitted certain favored investors, including
Defendant Canary Capital Partners, LLC and Canary Investment
Management, LLC to engage in "timing" and late trading of the
Janus and Putnam funds.

Timing is an arbitrage strategy whereby the favored investors
are permitted to conduct short-term trading of mutual fund
shares, despite explicit restrictions on such activity in the
funds' prospectuses and at the expense of long-term holders.

For more information, contact Andrew S. Friedman, or Francis J.
Balint Jr., by Mail: 2901 N. Central Ave., Suite 1000, Phoenix,
AZ 85012, by Phone: 800-847-9094, Fax: 602-274-1199, or by E-
mail: afriedman@bffb.com


BIOPURE CORPORATION: Cauley Geller Lodges Securities Suit in MA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Rudman, LLP initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts, on behalf of purchasers of Biopure Corporation
publicly traded securities during the period between March 17,
2003 and December 24, 2003, inclusive, against the Company and:

     (1) Thomas A. Moore,

     (2) Carl W. Rausch, and

     (3) Ronald F. Richards

The lawsuit charges the Defendants with violations of Sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule
10b-5 promulgated thereunder.  The Complaint alleges that,
throughout the Class Period, defendants issued numerous positive
statements concerning the progress of its application to the
U.S. Food and Drug Administration seeking regulatory approval to
market Hemopure in the United States for patients undergoing
orthopedic surgery.

In truth and in fact, however, by the beginning of the Class
Period, the FDA had informed defendants of flaws in the Hemopure
application, citing "safety concerns" arising from adverse
clinical data submitted as part of the Company's application,
making FDA approval highly unlikely.  Prior to the disclosure of
these adverse facts, defendants conducted at least two offerings
of Biopure common stock generating millions of dollars in
proceeds and certain high-level Biopure insiders sold hundreds
of thousands of Biopure common shares to the unsuspecting
investing public at artificially inflated prices.

Then, on December 24, 2003, under the threat of civil litigation
by the SEC, defendants stunned the market by announcing that, in
fact, the FDA had halted further clinical trials of Hemopure due
to safety concerns.  Defendants also disclosed that the
commercial release of Hemopure in the United States would be
delayed beyond mid-2004.

Market reaction to defendants' belated disclosures was swift and
severe. On December 26, 2003, Biopure common shares lost over
16% of their value to close at $2.43 per share, representing a
decline of more than 239% from a Class Period high of $8.25 per
share, reached on or about August 21, 2003.

For more information, contact Samuel H. Rudman, or David A.
Rosenfeld, or the Client Relations Department c/o Jackie
Addison, Heather Gann or Chandra West, by Mail: P.O. Box 25438
Little Rock, AR 72221-5438, by Phone: 1-888-551-9944 (toll
free), Fax: 1-501-312-8505, or E-mail: info@cauleygeller.com


BIOPURE CORPORATION: Fruchter & Twersky Files Stock Suit in MA
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fruchter & Twersky, LLP initiated a class action in the United
States District Court for the District of Massachusetts on
behalf of purchasers of Biopure Corporation publicly traded
securities during the period between March 17, 2003 and December
24, 2003, inclusive, against the Company and:

     (1) Thomas A. Moore,

     (2) Carl W. Rausch, and

     (3) Ronald F. Richards

The lawsuit charges the Defendants with violations of Sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule
10b-5 promulgated thereunder.  The complaint alleges that,
throughout the Class Period, defendants issued numerous positive
statements concerning the progress of its application to the
U.S. Food and Drug Administration seeking regulatory approval to
market Hemopure in the United States for patients undergoing
orthopedic surgery.

In truth and in fact, however, by the beginning of the Class
Period, the FDA had informed defendants of flaws in the Hemopure
application, citing "safety concerns" arising from adverse
clinical data submitted as part of the Company's application,
making FDA approval highly unlikely.  Prior to the disclosure of
these adverse facts, defendants conducted at least two offerings
of Biopure common stock generating millions of dollars in
proceeds and certain high-level Biopure insiders sold hundreds
of thousands of Biopure common shares to the unsuspecting
investing public at artificially inflated prices.

Then, on December 24, 2003, under the threat of civil litigation
by the SEC, defendants stunned the market by announcing that, in
fact, the FDA had halted further clinical trials of Hemopure due
to safety concerns. Defendants also disclosed that the
commercial release of Hemopure in the United States would be
delayed beyond mid-2004.

Market reaction to defendants' belated disclosures was swift and
severe.  On December 26, 2003, Biopure common shares lost over
16% of their value to close at $2.43 per share, representing a
decline of more than 239% from a Class Period high of $8.25 per
share, reached on or about August 21, 2003.

For more information, contact Jack Fruchter, by Mail: One
Pennsylvania Plaza, Suite 1910, New York, NY 10119, by Phone:
(212) 279-5050, (800) 440-8986, Fax: (212) 279-3655, or by E-
mail: JFruchter@FruchterTwersky.com.


BIOPURE CORPORATION: Cohen Milstein Lodges Securities Suit in MA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
District of Massachusetts, on behalf of all persons who acquired
securities of Biopure Corporation, between March 5, 2003 and
December 24, 2003, inclusive, against the Company and:

     (1) Thomas A. Moore,

     (2) Carl W. Rausch, and

     (3) Ronald F. Richards

The lawsuit alleges that Defendants violated Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder. The complaint alleges that defendants
issued a number of positive statements regarding the progress of
Biopure's application for regulatory approval to market Hemopure
in the United States, which was submitted to the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration. Hemopure is a drug for patients undergoing
orthopedic surgery. In fact, by the beginning of the Class
Period, the FDA had informed defendants of flaws in the Hemopure
application, making FDA approval highly unlikely, including
"safety concerns" arising from adverse clinical data submitted
as part of the Company's application. Yet, before defendants
disclosed these adverse facts, they conducted at least two
offerings of Biopure common stock and generated millions of
dollars in proceeds. Additionally, certain high-level Biopure
insiders sold hundreds of thousands of Biopure common shares at
artificially inflated prices.

On December 24, 2003, after the SEC threatened civil litigation,
defendants surprised the market when they announced the truth,
that, in fact, the FDA had halted further clinical trials of
Hemopure due to safety concerns. Defendants also announced that
Hemopure's commercial release in the United States would be
delayed beyond mid-2004. The market promptly reacted to this
announcement. Biopure common shares lost over 16% of their value
on December 26, 2003, to close at $2.43 per share. This was a
decline of more than 239% from the stock's Class Period high of
$8.25 per share, reached on or about August 21, 2003.

For more information, contact Steven J. Toll, or Robert Smits,
by Phone: 1100 New York Avenue, N.W., West Tower - Suite 500,
Washington, D.C. 20005, by Phone: (888) 240-0775 or (202) 408-
4600, or by E-mail: stoll@cmht.com, or rsmits@cmht.com


BIOPURE CORPORATION: Kirby McInerney Files Securities Suit in MA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kirby McInerney & Squire, LLP initiated a class action lawsuit
in the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts, on behalf of all purchasers of Biopure
Corporation securities during the period from March 17, 2003
through December 24, 2003, inclusive.

The action charges Biopure and certain of its senior officers
with violations of Sections 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The alleged violations stem
from the dissemination of false and misleading statements, which
had the effect - during the Class Period - of artificially
inflating the price of Biopure's shares.

Investors allege that Biopure and certain of its officers
disseminated materially false and misleading statements and/or
concealing material adverse facts. The scheme:

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

     (2) allowed the Company to sell its common shares
         generating millions of dollars in proceeds;

     (3) enabled the Individual Defendants and other insiders to
         sell significant amounts of their personally-held
         shares of Biopure common stock at artificially inflated
         prices; and

     (4) caused members of the Class to purchase Biopure
         securities at artificially inflated prices.

For more information, contact Pamela E. Kulsrud, by Phone:
(212) 317-2300, or (888) 529-4787, or by E-mail: emui@kmslaw.com


BIOVAIL CORPORATION: Weiss & Yourman Files Securities Suit in NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
Weiss & Yourman initiated a class action lawsuit against Biovail
Corporation and its officer, in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of purchasers
of Biovail securities between May 17, 2002 and October 30, 2003,
inclusive.  

The complaint charges the defendants with violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The complaint alleges that
defendants issued false and misleading statements, artificially
inflating the stock.

For more information, contact: James E. Tullman, Mark D. Smilow,
or David C. Katz, by Mail: The French Building, 551 Fifth
Avenue, Suite 1600, New York, New York 10176, by Phone:
(888) 593-4771 or (212) 682-3025, or by E-mail: info@wynyc.com.


BIOVAIL CORPORATION: Glancy & Binkow Lodges NY Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Glancy & Binkow, LLP initiated a securities
class action in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, on behalf of a class consisting
of all persons who purchased securities of Biovail Corporation
between May 17, 2002 and October 30, 2003, inclusive.

The Complaint charges Biovail and certain of the Company's
executive officers with violations of federal securities laws.
Among other things, plaintiff claims that defendants'
dissemination of materially false and misleading statements
concerning Biovail's financial performance caused the Company's
stock price to become artificially inflated, inflicting damages
on investors.

Biovail is a pharmaceutical company engaged in the development,
manufacture and marketing of medications utilizing advanced drug
delivery technologies for the treatment of chronic medical
conditions. Despite defendants' representations to the contrary
during the Class Period, the Complaint alleges that:

     (1) Biovail was aware that its aggressive growth
         projections could not be maintained due to a rise in
         internal expenses and competition;

     (2) Biovail was aware that it could not achieve its
         forecasted growth projections due to an increase in
         production and sales costs; and

     (3) Biovail was aware that it could not achieve its
         forecasted growth projections because of slow internal
         growth and added expenses associated with its recent
         acquisitions.

For more information, contact Lionel Z. Glancy, by Mail: 1801
Avenue of the Stars, Suite 311, Los Angeles, California 90067,
by Phone: (310) 201-9161 or Toll Free at (888) 773-9224, or by
E-mail: info@glancylaw.com.


CHARLES SCHWAB: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California on behalf of all purchasers of
shares of The Charles Schwab Corporation, U.S. Trust
Corporation, N.A., and its Excelsior family of funds during the
period between November 23, 1998 and November 14, 2003,
inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Act
of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment
Company Act of 1940.

The Funds and the symbols for the respective Funds subject to
the lawsuit are:

     (1) Excelsior California Tax Exempt Income Fund
         (Nasdaq:UMCAX)

     (2) Excelsior Early Life Cycle Fund (Nasdaq:UMLCX)

     (3) Excelsior Funds Equity Income Fund (Nasdaq:UMEIX)

     (4) Excelsior Funds Inc. Biotechnology Fund (Nasdaq:UMBTX)

     (5) Excelsior Funds Inc. Blended Equity Fund (Nasdaq:UMEQX)

     (6) Excelsior Funds Inc. Emerging Markets Fund
         (Nasdaq:UMEMX)

     (7) Excelsior Funds Inc. Energy & Natural Resource Fund
         (Nasdaq:UMESX)

     (8) Excelsior Funds Inc. High Yield Fund (Nasdaq:EXHYX;
         Nasdaq:UMHYX)

     (9) Excelsior Funds Inc. Large Capital Growth Fund
         (Nasdaq:UMLGX)

    (10) Excelsior Funds Inc. Real Estate Fund (Nasdaq:UMREX)

    (11) Excelsior Funds Inc. Value & Restructuring Fund
         (Nasdaq:EXBIX; Nasdaq:UMBIX)

    (12) Excelsior Funds Mid Cap Value Shares Fund
        (Nasdaq:EXVAX; Nasdaq:UMVEX)

    (13) Excelsior Government Money Fund (Nasdaq:UTGXX)

    (14) Excelsior Institutional Equity Fund (Nasdaq:EXEQX)

    (15) Excelsior Institutional Funds International Equity Fund
         (Nasdaq:EXIIX)

    (16) Excelsior Institutional Money Fund (Nasdaq:EXINX;
         Nasdaq:EXIXX)

    (17) Excelsior Institutional Total Return Fund
         (Nasdaq:EXTBX)

    (18) Excelsior Intermediate-Term Managed Income Fund
         (Nasdaq:UIMIX)

    (19) Excelsior Intermediate-Term Tax-Exempt Fund
         (Nasdaq:UMITX)

    (20) Excelsior International Fund (Nasdaq:UMINX)

    (21) Excelsior Long Term Tax Exempt Fund (Nasdaq:UMLTX)

    (22) Excelsior Managed Income Fund (Nasdaq:UMMGX)

    (23) Excelsior Money Fund (Nasdaq:UTMXX)

    (24) Excelsior Optimum Growth Fund (Nasdaq:EXOAX;
         Nasdaq:UMGRX)

    (25) Excelsior Pacific/Asia Fund (Nasdaq:USPAX)

    (26) Excelsior Pan European Fund (Nasdaq:UMPNX)

    (27) Excelsior Short Term Government Securities Fund
         (Nasdaq:UMGVX)

    (28) Excelsior Short-Term Tax-Exempt Securities Fund
         (Nasdaq:USSSX)

    (29) Excelsior Tax Exempt Fund (Nasdaq:USSXX)

    (30) Excelsior Tax Exempt Funds Inc. New York Intermediate
         Term Tax Exempt Fund (Nasdaq:UMNYX; Nasdaq:UTNXX)

    (31) Excelsior Treasury Money Fund (Nasdaq:UTTXX)

The wrongful conduct alleged in and which is the subject of the
lawsuit relates to "timing."  The lawsuit alleges that timing
injures ordinary mutual fund investors who are not allowed to
engage in such practices and benefits the mutual fund companies.

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.


DYNACQ HEALTHCARE: Barrack Rodos Lodges Stock Fraud Suit in TX
--------------------------------------------------------------
Barrack, Rodos & Bacine initiated a class action lawsuit in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas,
on behalf of all persons who purchased the securities of Dynacq
Healthcare, Inc. between January 14, 2003, and December 18,
2003, inclusive.

The complaint charges Dynacq, which develops and operates
surgical hospitals focusing on certain surgical specialties, and
certain of its officers and directors with violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

On December 2, 2003, the company announced that, as part of the
Securities and Exchange Commission's routine review of filings
of public companies, the SEC's Division of Corporation Finance
had "commented upon" the company's public filings and, as a
result, the company had requested an automatic 15-day extension
to file its 10-K for its fiscal year ended August 31, 2003. Two
weeks later, the company announced it would further postpone the
filing. Two days later, the company announced that its auditor,
Ernst & Young, had resigned and that the SEC had begun an
informal probe of the company's accounting.

According to news reports, the resignation was due to the
company's lack of internal controls necessary to develop
reliable financial statements. On the same day, the company also
revealed that it had received a NASDAQ determination that,
because it had not filed a timely 10-K, the stock would be
delisted. The news caused Dynacq's stock price to tumble from a
close of $8.95 on December 18, 2003, to $4.09 the following day.

For more information, contact Maxine S. Goldman, Shareholder
Relations Manager, by Mail: 3300 Two Commerce Square, 2001
Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103, by Phone: 215- 963-0600,
Fax: 215-963-0838, or by E-mail: mgoldman@barrack.com.


EXCELSIOR FUNDS: Much Shelist Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein,
P.C. initiated a class action lawsuit in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California, on
behalf of purchasers, redeemers and holders of shares of the
Excelsior Mutual Funds set forth below, between November 23,
1998 and November 14, 2003, inclusive.

The Funds that are the subject of this suit and their symbols
are:

     (1) Excelsior California Tax Exempt Income Fund
         (Nasdaq:UMCAX)

     (2) Excelsior Early Life Cycle Fund (Nasdaq:UMLCX)

     (3) Excelsior Funds Equity Income Fund (Nasdaq:UMEIX)

     (4) Excelsior Funds Inc. Biotechnology Fund (Nasdaq:UMBTX)

     (5) Excelsior Funds Inc. Blended Equity Fund (Nasdaq:UMEQX)

     (6) Excelsior Funds Inc. Emerging Markets Fund
         (Nasdaq:UMEMX)

     (7) Excelsior Funds Inc. Energy & Natural Resource Fund
        (Nasdaq:UMESX)

     (8) Excelsior Funds Inc. High Yield Fund (Nasdaq:EXHYX,
         UMHYX)

     (9) Excelsior Funds Inc. Large Capital Growth Fund  
         (Nasdaq:UMLGX)

    (10) Excelsior Funds Inc. Real Estate Fund (Nasdaq:UMREX)

    (11) Excelsior Funds Inc. Value & Restructuring Fund
         (Nasdaq:EXBIX, UMBIX)

    (12) Excelsior Funds Mid Cap Value Shares Fund
         (Nasdaq:EXVAX, UMVEX)

    (13) Excelsior Government Money Fund (Nasdaq:UTGXX)

    (14) Excelsior Institutional Equity Fund (Nasdaq:EXEQX)

    (15) Excelsior Institutional Funds International Equity Fund
         (Nasdaq:EXIIX)

    (16) Excelsior Institutional Money Fund (Nasdaq:EXINX,
         EXIXX)

    (17) Excelsior Institutional Total Return Fund
         (Nasdaq:EXTBX)

    (18) Excelsior Intermediate-Term Managed Income Fund
         (Nasdaq:UIMIX)

    (19) Excelsior Intermediate-Term Tax-Exempt Fund
         (Nasdaq:UMITX)

    (20) Excelsior International Fund (Nasdaq:UMINX)

    (21) Excelsior Long Term Tax Exempt Fund (Nasdaq:UMLTX)

    (22) Excelsior Managed Income Fund (Nasdaq:UMMGX)

    (23) Excelsior Money Fund (Nasdaq:UTMXX)

    (24) Excelsior Optimum Growth Fund (Nasdaq:EXOAX, UMGRX)

    (25) Excelsior Pacific/Asia Fund (Nasdaq:USPAX)

    (26) Excelsior Pan European Fund (Nasdaq:UMPNX)

    (27) Excelsior Short-Term Government Securities Fund
         (Nasdaq:UMGVX)

    (28) Excelsior Short-Term Tax-Exempt Securities Fund
         (Nasdaq:USSSX)

    (29) Excelsior Tax-Exempt Fund (Nasdaq:USSXX)

    (30) Excelsior Tax-Exempt Funds Inc. New York Intermediate
         Term Tax Exempt Fund (Nasdaq:UMNYX, UTNXX)

    (31) Excelsior Treasury Money Fund (Nasdaq:UTTXX)

The Complaint charges The Charles Schwab Corporation, Charles
Schwab & Co., Inc., U.S. Trust Corporation, United States Trust
Company of New York, Excelsior Funds, Inc., Excelsior Funds
Trust, the Excelsior Mutual Funds, and John Doe Defendants with
violating the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, the Investment Company Act of 1940, and with common
law breach of fiduciary duties.

Specifically, the Complaint alleges that during the Class Period
Charles Schwab and U.S. Trust Corporation allowed the Doe
defendants and others to engage in illegal and improper trading
practices, in concert with certain institutional traders, which
caused financial injury to the shareholders of the Excelsior
Mutual Funds.

According to the Complaint, the Defendants surreptitiously
permitted certain favored investors to illegally engage in
"market timing" of the Excelsior Mutual Funds whereby these
favored investors were permitted to conduct short-term, "in and
out" trading of mutual fund shares, despite explicit
restrictions on such activity in the Excelsior Mutual Funds'
prospectuses.

For more information, contact Carol V. Gilden, by Phone:
(800)-470-6824, or by E-mail: investorhelp@muchshelist.com.


GILEAD SCIENCES: Wechsler Harwood Files Securities Suit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wechsler Harwood LLP initiated a class action lawsuit in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
California against Gilead and certain of its senior officers and
directors, on behalf of all purchasers of publicly traded
securities of Gilead Sciences, Inc. from July 14, 2003 through
October 28, 2003, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants Gilead, John C. Martin,
John F. Milligan, Mark L. Perry, Norbert W. Bischofberger,
Anthony Carraciolo, and William A. Lee 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 July 14, 2003 through
October 28, 2003.

More specifically, the complaint alleges that the defendants'
statements were materially false and misleading because they
failed to disclose and/or misrepresented the following adverse
facts:

     (1) that Gilead was aware that its revenue was not
         increasing due to sales of its drug Viread;

     (2) that Gilead was aware that Viread sales had only
         increased because wholesalers bought an excessive
         amount of the drug before July 27, 2003 in an attempt
         to avoid the price increase scheduled for July 27,
         2003;

     (3) that Gilead was aware that its wholesalers' over-buying
         of Viread to avoid the price increase accounted for $33
         to $37 million, not the $25 to $30 million that Gilead
         originally purported; and

     (4) that Gilead was aware that the wholesaler over-buying
         would decrease projected revenue in the future.

On October 28, 2003, Gilead announced that sales of Viread in
the third quarter 2003 would be less than expected due to an
inventory buildup by wholesalers.  The market reacted swiftly to
this news, with the Company's stock falling 12%, or $7.46 per
share from a high of $59.46 per share on October 28, 2003 to
close at $52.00 per share on October 29, 2003.

For more information, contact Craig Lowther, by Mail: 488
Madison Avenue, 8th Floor, New York, NY 10022, by Phone: toll
free (877) 935-7400 Ext. 257, or by E-mail: clowther@whesq.com


IBIS TECHNOLOGY: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Lawsuit in MA
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A.  initiated a
securities class action in the United States District Court for
the District of Massachusetts, on behalf of shareholders who
purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired the common
stock of Ibis Technology Corp. between October 2, 2003 and
December 12, 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.


JANUS CAPITAL: Schiffrin & Barroway Files Securities Suit in CO
---------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the District of Colorado on
behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Janus Capital Group,
Inc., between July 21, 2000 and September 2, 2003, inclusive,
against the Company and:

     (1) Mark B. Whiston,

     (2) Loren M. Starr, and

     (3) Gregory A. Frost

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.  More specifically, the Defendants
failed to disclose and indicate:

     (i) that it's wholly-owned subsidiary Janus Capital Corp.
         entered into an illegal agreement with Edward Stein,
         Canary Capital Partners, LLC, and Canary Investment
         Management, LLC wherein JCC permitted Canary to time
         Janus mutual funds;

    (ii) that in exchange for permitting Canary to time Janus
         mutual funds, Canary deposited "sticky assets" into
         certain Janus money market funds;

   (iii) that the "sticky assets" deposited into certain Janus
         money market funds permitted Janus to materially
         overstate its assets under management and thus
         permitted Janus to receive a steady flow of fees from
         such "sticky assets;" and

    (iv) as a result of this illegal scheme, Janus, through the
         Class Period, materially overstated and artificially
         inflated Janus' earnings, income, and earnings per
         share.

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


MARSH & MCLENNAN: Scott + Scott Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Scott + Scott, LLC initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York against Marsh and certain of its officers
and directors, on behalf of purchasers or those who acquired
Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. common stock during the period
between January 3, 2000 and November 3, 2003, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that Marsh represented that Putnam's
mutual funds were designed to be long-term investments for "buy
and hold" investors and were a favored investment for Americans'
retirement plans or annuities for a child's education. Certain
investors, however, have attempted to use mutual funds to
generate quick profits by rapidly trading in and out of mutual
funds which have been the topic of business news as of late
(examples include the Mutual Fund's of Excelsior, Invesco, MFS,
PBHG,SNWL, Van Kampen and more). Typically, these investors, who
are able to time the market, seek to capitalize on low fund
prices. They then focus on price discrepancies involving
international funds (examples other than Putnam include those by
Templeton, T Rowe Price, Scudder, Credit Suisse, Morgan Stanley
and more). Market timers take advantage of price inequities and
thereby damage long-term shareholders who own such annuities.

The complaint alleges that Marsh had a duty to treat all
shareholders equally. This duty would not permit granting one
group of shareholders (i.e., market timers) privileges and
rights not granted to all shareholders (i.e., long-term
investors). In addition, when a fund's prospectus discloses that
the fund management will act to limit timing the market, it
cannot knowingly permit such activities. The complaint further
alleges that Marsh knowingly permitted this behavior.

As a result of the defendants' false statements and/or failure
to disclose adverse facts regarding Marsh's Putnam subsidiary,
Plaintiff alleges Marsh's stock price traded at inflated levels
during the Class Period, increasing to as high as $67.43 on
October 5, 2000, whereby the Company's top officers and
directors sold more than $31 million worth of their own shares.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers
of Marsh common stock during the Class Period.

For more information, contact Neil Rothstein, by Phone:
(619) 251-0887, or by E-mail: nrothstein@scott-scott.com.


MARSH & MCLENNAN: Rabin Murray Commences Securities Suit in NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Rabin, Murray & Frank LLP initiated a Class Action lawsuit, in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York, on behalf of a class consisting of all persons who
purchased securities of Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. between
January 3, 2000 and November 3, 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. The Complaint charges Marsh & McLennan
and certain of the Company's executive officers with violations
of federal securities laws.

Among other things, plaintiff claims that defendants'
dissemination of materially false and misleading statements
concerning the Company's subsidiary, Putnam Investments, LLC,
caused Marsh & McLennan's stock price to become artificially
inflated, inflicting damages on investors. Marsh & McLennan is a
global professional services firm and the parent company of
various subsidiaries and affiliates, including Putnam, that
provide clients with analysis, advice and transactional
capabilities in the fields of risk and insurance services,
investment management and consulting.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period defendants
failed to disclose and/or misrepresented the following adverse
facts, among others:

     (1) that Putnam entered into an illegal agreement with its
         own fund managers and favored investors wherein Putnam
         permitted its own fund managers and the favored
         investors to "market time" the Putnam mutual funds;

     (2) that in exchange for permitting the favored investors
         to time the Putnam mutual funds, they deposited "sticky
         assets" with Putnam;

     (3) that the "sticky assets" deposited with Putnam
         permitted Putnam to materially overstate its assets
         under management and thus permitted Marsh & McLennan to
         receive a steady flow of fees from such "sticky
         assets;" and

     (4) as a result of this illegal scheme, defendants,
         throughout the Class Period, materially overstated and
         artificially inflated Marsh & McLennan's earnings,
         income and earning per share.

For more information, contact Eric J. Belfi, or Greg Linkh, by
Phone: (800) 497-8076, or (212) 682-1818, Fax: (212) 682-1892,
or E-mail: email@rabinlaw.com


MARSH & MCLEENAN: Glancy Binkow Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP initiated a Class
Action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, on behalf of a class consisting
of all persons who purchased securities of Marsh & McLennan
Companies, Inc. between January 3, 2000 and November 3, 2003,
inclusive.

The Complaint charges Marsh & McLennan and certain of the
Company's executive officers with violations of federal
securities laws. Among other things, plaintiff claims that
defendants' dissemination of materially false and misleading
statements concerning the Company's subsidiary, Putnam
Investments, LLC, caused Marsh & McLennan's stock price to
become artificially inflated, inflicting damages on investors.
Marsh & McLennan is a professional services firm and parent
company of various subsidiaries and affiliates that provide
clients with analysis, advice and transactional capabilities in
the fields of risk and insurance services, investment management
and consulting.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period defendants
failed to disclose and/or misrepresented, among other things,
that:

     (1) Putnam entered into an illegal agreement with its fund
         managers and favored investors wherein Putnam permitted
         them to "market time" the Putnam mutual funds;

     (2) in exchange for permitting the favored investors to
         time the Putnam funds, they deposited "sticky assets"
         with Putnam;

     (3) the "sticky assets" permitted Putnam to materially
         overstate its assets under management and thus
         permitted Marsh & McLennan to receive a steady flow of
         fees from such "sticky assets;" and

     (4) as a result of this illegal scheme, defendants
         materially overstated and artificially inflated Marsh &
         McLennan's earnings, income and earnings per share.

For more information, contact Lionel Z. Glancy, by Mail: 1801
Avenue of the Stars, Suite 311, Los Angeles, California 90067,
by Phone: (310) 201-9161 or Toll Free at (888) 773-9224, or by
E-mail: info@glancylaw.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  * * *