CAR_Public/040126.mbx           C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
          Monday, January 26, 2004, Vol. 6, No. 17

                        Headlines                            

ABORTION LITIGATION: House Panel Approves Fetus-Protection Bill
ANTI-TERRORISM: ACLU Alleges Crime Database Threatens Privacy
BINDI NORTH AMERICA: Recalls Desserts For Undeclared Soy Content
COMPUTER ASSOCIATES: Board Approves Stock Settlement
DAIMLERCHRYSLER AG: Kirk Kerkorian Disputes New Evidence In Suit

EATON VANCE: Faces Lawsuit for Securities Violations in MA Court
ENRON CORPORATION: Justice Dept Charges Ex-Officer With Fraud
ENRON CORPORATION: SEC Files Securities Fraud Charges in S.D. TX
EQUITY ADVISORS: SEC Asks Court To Dismiss Civil Injunctive Suit
ARCHIBALD CANDY: Union Files Federal Lawsuit Over Plant Closure

HERCULES INC.: Discovery Proceeds in Georgia Gulf Lawsuit in LA
HERCULES INC.: Discovery Proceeds in Employees Suit in DE Court
HERCULES INC.: Faces Several Suits Over Agent Orange Defoliant
LEAR CORPORATION: Faces Informal SEC Probe Of Securities Filing
NCI BUILDING: Reaches $7 Million Settlement For Securities Suits

NOKIA CORPORATION: MD Court Dismisses Consumer Mobile Phone Suit
PARMALAT FINANZIARIA: Police Search Morgan Stanley Amid Probe
PENNSYLVANIA: Website Name In Pap Smear Lawsuit To Be Changed
PHILIPPINES: Tribunal Orders Transfer of Marcos Funds to Govt
SERVICE CORPORATION: Shareholders Launch Securities Suit in FL

TALX CORPORATION: MO Court Yet To Rule on Stock Suit Dismissal
TERRORIST ATTACK: Lawsuits Commence As Fund Deadline Approaches
UNION PACIFIC: Employee Lodges Suit Over Contraceptive Coverage
US VETERANS: Congressman, Vets To Commence Lawsuit Over Benefits
WHITEHALL JEWELLERS: Court Yet To Grant Final Approval to Pact

                 New Securities Fraud Cases

ADVANCED MARKETING: Lasky & Rifkind Files Securities Suit in CA
ADVANCED MARKETING: Cauley Geller Launches Securities Suit in CA
ADVANCED MARKETING: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Stock Suit in CA
ADVANCED MARKETING: Paskowitz & Associates Files CA Stock Suit
ALLIANCE CAPITAL: Brian Felgoise Launches Securities Suit in NV

DYNACQ HEALTHCARE: Goodkind Labaton Files Securities Suit in TX
REDBACK NETWORKS: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Suit in CA

                        *********


ABORTION LITIGATION: House Panel Approves Fetus-Protection Bill
----------------------------------------------------------------
The House Judiciary Committee approved the "Unborn Victims of
Violence Act," a bill that would make it a separate federal
crime to kill or injure a fetus during an attack on a pregnant
woman, the Associated Press reports.

Supporters nickname the bill the "Laci and Conner's law," after
Laci Peterson, a pregnant Modesto, California woman who
disappeared in late 2002.  Her husband, Scott Peterson, is
charged with murdering his wife and their unborn child.

Under current law, "injuring or killing an unborn child during
an attack against a pregnant woman has no legal consequence.
This situation is unacceptable," Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, the
bill's sponsor told AP.

However, Democrats sitting on the panel labeled the bill "a
thinly veiled attempt to erode abortion rights."  Democrats and
abortion rights groups said the real motive was to establish
"fetal personhood" by giving separate federal protection to a
fertilized egg, embryo or fetus.  "This is part of a larger
cultural war that is going on," said Rep. John Conyers of
Michigan, top Democrat on the committee, AP reports.

Congress has been divided on this highly controversial, election
year issue - with Republicans on the committee all voted in
favor of the bill, and all Democrats against.  Similar "unborn
victims" bills have twice before passed the House, in 1999 and
2001, but in both cases there was no action in the Senate, where
abortion rights lawmakers enjoy a stronger position. Sen. Mike
DeWine, R-Ohio, is sponsoring parallel legislation in the Senate
this year.

California and nearly 30 other states have laws giving different
degrees of protection to fetal victims.  The bill before
Congress probably would not apply in the Peterson case because
it covers only federal crimes, including kidnapping across state
lines, drug-related drive-by shootings, and assaults occurring
on federal property.

Rep. Chabot stressed that this legislation "has nothing to do
with abortion," and that it specifically states that it does not
permit the prosecution of legal abortions carried out with the
consent of the mother.  However, he and other Republicans
rejected an amendment, offered by Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-
California.  She would have increased penalties for attacks on a
pregnant woman leading to the interruption of a pregnancy but
not confer separate legal rights to the fetus.


ANTI-TERRORISM: ACLU Alleges Crime Database Threatens Privacy
-------------------------------------------------------------
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) criticized the Multi-
state Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange, a seven-state crime
database, alleging that it was a more powerful threat to privacy
than its organizers acknowledge, the Associated Press reports.  
The database was launched with $12 million in federal funds.

After obtaining documents relating to the program, the American
Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other privacy advocates
contended that the program closely resembled a scrapped Pentagon
program that aimed to mine a vast pool of data to spot patterns
useful in terrorism investigations.  Congress cut off funding
last year for the so-called Total Information Awareness program
after a privacy outcry.

The law enforcement officials and Matrix, a private database
company behind the project, defended the database, saying it is
merely an investigative tool that helps police quickly gather
already-available information on suspects.

The ACLU said that documents obtained through a Freedom of
Information Act request filed with Pennsylvania clearly showed
the Matrix's data-mining abilities.  Among them were minutes of
a 2002 planning meeting that said the FBI, the Secret Service,
the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Drug
Enforcement Agency helped craft data-mining software for Matrix.  
That represents more federal involvement in the program than
previously known, though the Departments of Justice and Homeland
Security invested $12 million to get the system running.

The Pennsylvania documents include security and privacy policies
that say Matrix is usable only in active criminal or
intelligence investigations.  Barry Steinhardt, director of the
ACLU's technology and liberty program, calls those guidelines
too broad and susceptible to abuse, AP reports.

Clay Jester, Matrix coordinator for the Institute for
Intergovernmental Research, the nonprofit group helping to
expand the project from its original implementation in Florida,
called any comparisons to the defanged Pentagon data-mining
program "a fallacy" resulting from misconceptions about Matrix.
Matrix lets states share criminal, prison and vehicle
information with each other and cross-reference it with up to 20
billion records in databases held by Seisint Inc, AP reports.  
The Seisint records include people's property, boats and
Internet domains, their address history, utility connections,
bankruptcies, civil court history, liens, voter registration and
business filings.


BINDI NORTH AMERICA: Recalls Desserts For Undeclared Soy Content
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bindi North America of Belleville, NJ, in cooperation with the
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), is recalling several of
its dessert products because they contain undeclared soy.

People who have allergies to soy run the risk of serious or
life-threatening allergic reaction if they consume these
products. There is no health risk to people who do not have
allergies to soy. The products that are being recalled are
chocolate chip cheesecake, chocolate ganache cheesecake,
chocolate fondant cake, chocolate raspberry fondant cake, white
chocolate mousse cake, and chocolate sorbet.

The recalled cakes were distributed nationwide in restaurants
and in retail stores in the state of New Jersey. The recalled
sorbet was distributed nationwide through mail order and in
Bindi retail stores in the state of New Jersey.

The cakes come either in 4.69 lb white cardboard boxes, or in
clear plastic containers. The sorbet comes in plastic
containers, or in natural cocoa pods which are wrapped in clear
plastic film. All packages that were sold before January 2004
are affected.

The recall was initiated after it was discovered that the soy-
containing product was distributed in packaging that did not
reveal the presence of soy.

All cakes that have expiration dates of 1/2005 or later are
properly labeled and are unaffected by this recall. All sorbet
plastic containers that have expiration dates of 09/2005 or
later are properly labeled. All sorbet in natural cocoa pods
that have expiration dates of 01/2005 or later are properly
labeled.

Consumers who have purchased these products may return them to
the place of purchase for a full refund if desired. Consumers
with questions may contact the company at 1-800-88-BINDI.


COMPUTER ASSOCIATES: Board Approves Stock Settlement
----------------------------------------------------
Computer Associates International, Inc.'s Governance, Audit, and
Compensation and Human Resource Committees of the Board
of Directors approved the Company's proposed settlement for
several shareholder class action and derivative suits filed
against the Company and several of its executives.

The Company, its former Chairman and CEO, Charles B. Wang,
Sanjay Kumar, and Russell M. Artzt were defendants in a number
of stockholder class actions, the first of which was filed July
23, 1998, alleging that a class consisting of all persons who
purchased the Company's common stock during the period January
20, 1998 until July 22, 1998 were harmed by misleading
statements, misrepresentations, and omissions regarding the
Company's future financial performance.

These cases, which sought monetary damages, were consolidated
into a single action in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of New York, the proposed class was certified,
and discovery was completed.

Additionally, in February and March 2002, a number of
stockholder lawsuits were filed in the same court against the
Company and Mr. Wang, Mr. Kumar, Mr. Ira H. Zar, the Company's
former Chief Financial Officer, and in one instance Mr. Artzt.  
The lawsuits generally alleged, among other things, that the
Company made misleading statements of material fact or omitted
to state material facts necessary in order to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which they
were made, not misleading in connection with the Company's
financial performance.

Each of the named individual plaintiffs in the 2002 lawsuits
sought to represent a class consisting of purchasers of the
Company's common stock and call options and sellers of put
options for the period May 28, 1999 through February 25, 2002.  
The 2002 cases were consolidated, and the Company's former
independent auditor, Ernst & Young LLP, was named as a
defendant.  

In addition, in May 2003, a class action lawsuit captioned John
A. Ambler v. Computer Associates International, Inc., et al. was
filed in the same court.  The complaint in this matter, a
purported class action on behalf of the Computer Associates
Savings Harvest Plan (the CASH Plan) and the participants and
beneficiaries of the CASH Plan for a class period running from
March 30, 1998 through May 30, 2003, asserted claims of breach
of fiduciary duty under ERISA, the federal Employee Retirement
Income Security Act.  The named defendants were the Company, the
Company's Board of Directors, the CASH Plan, the Administrative
Committee of the CASH Plan, and the following current or former
employees and/or Board members of the Company:


     (1) Charles B. Wang,

     (2) Sanjay Kumar,

     (3) Ira Zar,

     (4) Russell M. Artzt,

     (5) Peter A. Schwartz,

     (6) Charles P. McWade and

     (7) various unidentified alleged fiduciaries of the CASH
         Plan.  

The complaint alleged that the defendants breached their
fiduciary duties by causing the CASH Plan to invest in Company
securities and sought damages in an unspecified amount.  

A derivative lawsuit was filed against certain current and
former directors of the Company, based on essentially the same
allegations as those contained in the February and March 2002
stockholder lawsuits.  This action was commenced in April 2002
in Delaware Chancery Court, an amended complaint was filed in
November 2002, and a new derivative action, containing
essentially the same allegations, was filed in the Federal Court
in August 2003 in connection with the settlement described
below.

The defendants named in the amended and new complaints were the
Company as a nominal defendant, current Company directors Mr.
Kumar, Mr. Artzt, Mr. Ranieri and Mr. D'Amato, and former
Company directors Mr. Wang, Ms. Kenny, and Mr. de Vogel, Mr.
Grasso, and Mr. Pieper.  The derivative suit alleged breach of
fiduciary duties on the part of all the individual defendants
and, as against the current and former management director
defendants, insider trading on the basis of allegedly
misappropriated confidential, material information.  The amended
and new complaints sought an accounting and recovery on behalf
of the Company of an unspecified amount of damages, including
recovery of the profits allegedly realized from the sale of
common stock of the Company.

On August 25, 2003, the Company announced plans to settle all
outstanding litigation related to the stockholder and derivative
actions.  Following the approval of the Federal Court, which was
granted in December 2003, and which is subject to appeal, the
Company will issue a total of up to 5.7 million shares of common
stock to the shareholders represented in the three class action
lawsuits including payment of attorneys' fees.

If the Company's share price is below $23.43 per share at the
time of distribution, up to 2.2 million of the 5.7 million
shares will be payable in cash at that price - or a maximum of
$51.546 million in cash.  In that case, the stock portion of the
settlement would be reduced to no less than 3.5 million shares.

In January 2004, approximately 1.6 million settlement shares
were issued along with approximately $3.3 million to the
plaintiffs' attorneys for attorney fees and related expenses.  
In settling the derivative suit, the Company committed to adopt
and maintain certain corporate governance practices.

Under the settlement, the Company and the individual defendants
are released from any potential claim by shareholders relating
to accounting-related or other public statements made by the
Company or its agents from January 1998 through February 2002
(and from January 1998 through May 2003 in the case of the
employee ERISA action), and the individual defendants are
released from any potential claim by the Company or its
shareholders relating to the same matters.  Ernst & Young LLP is
not a party to the settlement.

The settlement was reviewed by the independent directors who
chair the Company's Governance, Audit, and Compensation and
Human Resource Committees of the Board of Directors as well as
by all non-interested, independent directors who were not named
in any of the suits.  It was also approved by the Board's
independent directors as a whole.


DAIMLERCHRYSLER AG: Kirk Kerkorian Disputes New Evidence In Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Billionaire investor Kirk Kerkorian challenged the findings of a
probe into an evidence fumble that halted the trial of his fraud
lawsuit against DaimlerChrysler AG, the Associated Press
reports.  Papers filed with the federal court say there is still
no explanation for the sudden appearance late in the trial of
documents Mr. Kerkorian's attorneys say were important to his
case.

Collins J. Seitz, the special master charged by the court with
investigating the circumstances behind the late discovery of the
documents, concluded the most likely explanation involved errors
by two photocopying companies.  He found no evidence indicating
German-U.S. auto giant DaimlerChrysler hid the documents.  U.S.
District Judge Joseph Farnan is expected to make a final
determination on the appropriate remedy for the late discovery
of the notes.

Papers filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Wilmington,
Delaware say Mr. Kerkorian will seek sanctions against
DaimlerChrysler for failure to hand over the evidence earlier.  
The investor won't, however, ask Judge Farnan to find
intentional misconduct as a basis for the sanctions.  

Judge Farnan in December recessed the trial so Mr. Seitz could
gather facts on the handling of the documents, handwritten notes
of top executives at the former Chrysler Corporation.  Not shown
to Kerkorian's lawyers during two years of preparation for the
trial, the notes turned up two days before the trial was
scheduled to end.  Included in the late-revealed documents are
notes that date back to the early days of merger negotiations
between Chrysler and Daimler-Benz AG in 1998.


EATON VANCE: Faces Lawsuit for Securities Violations in MA Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
Eaton Vance Distributors, Inc. faces a lawsuit filed in the
United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
on behalf of Eaton Vance Tax-Managed Growth 1.1 by Michelle
Yameen, a shareholder owning approximately 613 Class B shares of
the Fund.

The complaint alleges that EVD violated Section 36(b) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940 by charging the Fund excessive
distribution fees.  The complaint seeks injunctive relief and
the award to the Fund of the amount of allegedly excessive
distribution fees received by EVD during a one-year period
preceding December 3, 2003.


ENRON CORPORATION: Justice Dept Charges Ex-Officer With Fraud
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Department of Justice charged Enron
Corporation's former chief accounting officer Richard Causey
with helping engineer a "massive fraud" that sent the energy
company's stock price soaring before it went bankrupt in an
accounting scandal, Reuters reports.

Mr. Causey, 44, was the Company's chief accounting officer from
1998 until the Company collapsed in late 2001.  Mr. Causey and
former chief financial officer Fastow were just below former
Enron Chairman Ken Lay and former Chief Executive Jeff Skilling
during the energy giant's Wall Street heyday.  The Company's
stock price reached a high of $90 before it plunged when the
Company filed for bankruptcy in December 2001.  Mr. Causey
reported to Mr. Skilling and worked with Mr. Fastow and
Treasurer Ben Glisan, who in September became the first Enron
executive sent to prison for his role in the scandal.

The indictment charges Mr. Causey helped create a scheme to
fraudulently manipulate the Company's publicly reported
financial results and artificially inflate its stock price.  Mr.
Causey, Mr. Fastow and other unidentified senior managers
allegedly used devices like improper financial structures and
manipulation of reserve accounts to mislead investors an
artificially inflate financial results.  

Mr. Causey pleaded not guilty before U.S. Magistrate Judge
Frances Stacy to all six charges in the indictment, five counts
of securities fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit
securities fraud.  Mr. Causey faces a maximum of 55 years in
prison and a $5.25 million fine if convicted.  Judge Stacy
released him on $1 million bail.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission said it was also
filing a civil action against Mr. Causey accusing him of filing
misleading financial statements about the company, Reuters
reports.  Mr. Causey surrendered to the FBI in Houston and was
led in handcuffs into the federal courthouse, just days after
Enron's former chief financial officer Andrew Fastow agreed to
cooperate with prosecutors probing downfall.

"The dominoes continue to fall as we expose the truth about the
massive fraud at Enron," Assistant Attorney General Christopher
Wray told Reuters.

His lawyer, Reid Weingarten, told Reuters his client had
committed no crime.  "He did nothing wrong.  He's not happy to
be here," Mr. Weingarten said outside the FBI offices.


ENRON CORPORATION: SEC Files Securities Fraud Charges in S.D. TX
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission charged Richard A.
Causey, the former Chief Accounting Officer of Enron
Corporation, with violating, and aiding and abetting the
violation of, the antifraud, periodic reporting, books and
records, and internal controls provisions of the federal
securities laws, namely Sections 10(b), 13(a), 13(b)(2) and
13(b)(5) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Exchange Act
Rules 10b-5, 12b-20, 13a1, 13a-13, 13b2-1 and 13b2-2.

The Commission is seeking disgorgement of all ill-gotten gains,
civil money penalties, a permanent bar from acting as a director
or officer of a publicly held company, and an injunction against
future violations of the federal securities laws.  The
Commission brought this action in coordination with the Justice
Department's Enron Task Force, which filed related criminal
charges against Mr. Causey.

As alleged in the complaint, Mr. Causey, along with others at
Enron, engaged in a wide-ranging scheme to manipulate Enron's
publicly reported earnings through a variety of devices designed
to produce materially false and misleading financial results.  
As alleged, Mr. Causey and others:

     (1) fraudulently manipulated Enron's merchant asset
         portfolio;

     (2) improperly used "off-balance-sheet" special purpose
         entities (SPEs);

     (3) manipulated Enron's "business segment reporting" to
         conceal losses at Enron's retail energy  business,
         Enron Energy Services (EES);

     (4) manipulated expenses to conceal losses at Enron's
         broadband unit, Enron Broadband Services (EBS); and

     (5) manipulated reserves in Enron's wholesale energy
         trading business to conceal earnings volatility and
         losses.  

The Complaint also alleges that Mr. Causey, and others, made
false and misleading statements concerning Enron's financial
results and the performance of its businesses, and that these
misrepresentations also were reflected in Enron's public filings
with the Commission.

Specifically, the Commission's complaint charged the defendants
with manufacturing earnings by fraudulently manipulating asset
values.  Mr. Causey and other senior Enron managers artificially
increased the book value of certain assets in Enron's "merchant
asset portfolio" to manufacture earnings needed to meet Enron
internal budget targets.  Because the portfolio included many
energy-related businesses that were not publicly traded, Enron
valued the businesses according to its own internal accounting
"models."  Enron then manipulated these models in order to
produce results necessary to meet internal budget targets.  For
example, under the direction of Mr. Causey and others, Enron
personnel fraudulently increased the value of one of the largest
of Enron's merchant assets, Mariner Energy, Inc., by $100
million in the fourth quarter of 2000;

The suit also alleged the use of SPEs to manipulate reported
financial results.  Mr. Causey and others entered into
fraudulent transactions with LJM Cayman, L.P and LJM2 Co-
Investment, L.P., two "off-balance sheet" SPEs created and
managed by Andrew Fastow, Enron's then-Chief Financial Officer,
to manipulate Enron's reported financial results.  These
transactions primarily took the form of purported "asset sales,"
which were used to manufacture earnings for Enron and conceal
debt.  The transactions were not arm's-length and could not have
been accomplished using legitimate independent counterparties.  
In many instances, the transactions were conducted pursuant to
an undisclosed side agreement between Mr. Causey and Mr. Fastow
that LJM would be guaranteed against loss in certain of its
transactions with Enron, and that other losses to LJM would be
made up through other transactions with Enron.
  
In addition, the Commission's complaint describes Mr. Causey's
role in the infamous "Raptor" transactions.  Beginning in the
spring of 2000, Enron and LJM engaged in a series of financial
transactions with four SPEs called Raptor I, Raptor II, Raptor
III and Raptor IV.  Raptor I was designed to protect Enron from
having to report publicly decreases in value in large portions
of its energy "merchant asset portfolio" and technology
investments by allowing Enron to "hedge" the value of those
investments with an allegedly independent third party, known as
Talon.  The Raptor I structure, however, was invalid under
applicable accounting rules because, among other things, Talon
was not independent from Enron and LJM's investment in Talon was
not at risk, and Mr. Causey and Mr. Fastow had entered into an
oral side agreement that LJM would receive its initial
investment in Talon ($30 million) plus a large profit ($11
million) from Enron, all prior to Talon engaging in any of the
hedging transactions.   

To satisfy the side deal, Mr. Causey, Mr. Fastow, and others
manufactured a transaction between Enron and Talon that
generated a $41 million payment to LJM.  Mr. Causey and others
caused Enron to purchase a "put" on its own stock that had no
business purpose, but instead was designed to ensure that LJM
was returned its initial investment plus its promised profit.  
After satisfying the side deal, Enron used Raptor I to hedge the
value of Enron's already-inflated assets.  Mr. Causey and Mr.
Fastow also used Raptor I to fraudulently misrepresent Enron's
financial position by back-dating a hedge so that Enron could
capture the all-time high stock value of one of the Enron assets
at a time when they knew that the value had already declined.
     
The suit also charged the defendants with concealing EES
failures.  Mr. Causey and others concealed massive losses at EES
by fraudulently manipulating Enron's "business segment
reporting."  At the close of the first quarter of 2001, Enron,
with Mr. Causey's approval, "reorganized" its business segments
and moved a large portion of EES's business into Enron North
America (ENA), part of Enron's wholesale energy business
segment.  The "reorganization" was fraudulently designed to
conceal hundreds of millions of dollars of losses at EES,
Enron's heavily touted retail energy trading business, which it
would otherwise have had to disclose.  Enron moved the losing
portion of EES's business into ENA because, as Mr. Causey and
others knew, ENA had ample earnings, including large reserves
accounts as described below, and could cover the EES losses
while continuing to meet Enron's internal budget targets.
  
The defendants also concealed EBS Failures.  In the first
quarter of 2001, Mr. Causey and others concealed losses at EBS
by fraudulently manipulating EBS's expenses.  Mr. Causey
manipulated EBS's expenses to ensure that EBS did not record
first-quarter losses that exceeded the annual losses that Enron
had budgeted for EBS and to achieve Causey's dictated first
quarter 2001 financial result.
  
The defendants also alleged manipulated reserves to conceal
earnings volatility and losses.  During 2000 and 2001, Enron's
wholesale energy trading business, primarily its ENA business,
began generating extraordinary trading profits as a result of
rapidly rising energy prices in the western United States,
especially in California.  In order to mask these earnings and
preserve them for later use, Mr. Causey and others fraudulently
created and used reserve accounts within ENA both to conceal the
extent of ENA's trading profits and to avoid reporting large
losses in other areas of its business.

The suit is styled "SEC v. Richard A. Causey, Civil Action No.
H-04-0284."


EQUITY ADVISORS: SEC Asks Court To Dismiss Civil Injunctive Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission asked a federal judge to
dismiss its pending civil injunctive action against Marc
Barhonovich and his company, Equity Advisors.  

In connection with that dismissal, on January 21, the SEC
entered a cease-and-desist and disgorgement order against Mr.
Barhonovich and Equity Advisors, to which they consented without
admitting or denying the SEC's findings.
     
The Cease-and-Desist Order finds that Mr. Barhonovich violated
Sections 17(a)(2) and (a)(3) of the Securities Act of 1933 in
connection with the preparation and distribution of misleading
newsletters touting thinly traded stocks of two public companies
whose shares are quoted on the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board.  
The Cease-and-Desist Order found that Mr. Barhonovich, acting as
a consultant for the companies, hired the newsletter writers and
paid for the mass faxing but failed to review the newsletters
before they were publicly disseminated.  The SEC also ordered
Mr. Barhonovich to pay disgorgement and prejudgment interest
stemming from his sales of stock during the faxing periods.
          
The SEC had sued Mr. Barhonovich and Equity Advisors in U.S.
District Court, alleging their actions violated Section 10(b) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5.  The
District Court Judge subsequently denied the SEC's request for a
preliminary injunction against Mr. Barhonovich and Equity
Advisors, but set trial on the SEC's request for a permanent
injunction in September 2004.  


ARCHIBALD CANDY: Union Files Federal Lawsuit Over Plant Closure
---------------------------------------------------------------
Archibald Candy Corporation faces a lawsuit filed in the United
States District Court in Chicago, Illinois by workers at its 70-
year-old Fanny May candy factory, alleging the Company violated
federal labor law with its abrupt shutdown of the plant, the
Associated Press reports.

The suit, filed by Local 781 of the Teamsters Union, alleged
that the Company failed to give workers 60 days' notice as
required when it disclosed plans January 5 to close the plant.  
The plant is expected to close by the end of this month.  The
suit seeks an injunction against cuts of health coverage and
severance pay in adherence to the terms of their contract, and
also asks the court to appoint an arbitrator to settle the
matter.

"What we want is for Archibald to honor the contract that it
signed," said Teamsters spokesman Brian Rainville, AP reports.
Local 781 represents about half of Archibald's 625 factory
workers.

Archibald spokesman Ron Bottrell said Wednesday the company had
not been served with a complaint.  "The company has been in
negotiations with the unions representing Archibald's employees
and is optimistic that severance packages can be agreed to
through collective bargaining and without the need for
litigation," he told AP.


HERCULES INC.: Discovery Proceeds in Georgia Gulf Lawsuit in LA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Discovery is beginning in the consolidated class action filed
against Hercules, Inc. in the 18th Judicial District Court for
the Parish of Iberville, Louisiana.  The suit also names as
defendants:

     (1) the State of Louisiana,

     (2) American PetroFina,

     (3) Hercofina,

     (4) Ashland Oil,

     (5) International Minerals and Chemicals,

     (6) Allemania Chemical,

     (7) Ashland Chemical and

     (8) the Parish of Iberville

Two suits were initially filed against the Company, styled
"Jerry Oldham, et al. v. The State of Louisiana, et al., Civil
Action No. 55,160," and "John Capone, et al. v. The State
of Louisiana, et al., Civil Action No. 56,048C."  The Oldham
case is a purported class action comprised of as many as 4,000
plaintiffs, and the Capone case is a consolidated action by
approximately 50 plaintiffs.

The purported class members and plaintiffs, who claim to have
worked or lived at or around the Georgia Gulf plant in Iberville
Parish, allege injury and fear of future illness from the
consumption of contaminated water and, specifically, elevated
levels of arsenic in that water.  As to the Company, plaintiffs
allege that the Company, itself, and then as part of a joint
venture, operated a nearby plant and, as part of those
operations, used a groundwater injection well to dispose of
various wastes, and that those wastes contaminated the potable
water supply at Georgia Gulf.

On October 17, 2002, the Company removed these matters to
federal court.  In January 2003, the U.S. District Court for the
Middle District of Louisiana consolidated the Capone and Oldham
matters with other lawsuits in which the Company is not a party.  


HERCULES INC.: Discovery Proceeds in Employees Suit in DE Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
Discovery is ongoing in the class action filed against Hercules,
Inc. in the Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle County,
styled "Douglas C. Smith, Individually and on Behalf of All
Others Similarly Situated v. Hercules Incorporated and Thomas
Gossage, CA No. 01C-08-291 WCC."

This lawsuit, which was filed on August 31, 2001, on behalf of
Mr. Smith and a class of approximately 130 present and former
Hercules employees, seeks payments under the "Integration
Synergies Incentive Compensation Plan," a program put into place
by the Company following its acquisition of BetzDearborn Inc. in
October 1998.

The goal of the Plan was to provide certain financial incentives
to specific employees who were deemed to have significant impact
on the integration of BetzDearborn Inc. into Hercules
Incorporated.  The amount to be paid under the Plan was tied to
the successful achievement of "synergies," which were defined as
the annualized reduction of expenses or improvement of profits
realized as a result of the integration of BetzDearborn Inc.
into Hercules.  

The lawsuit essentially alleges that the payments made under the
Plan were not adequate and that the Company breached the terms
of the Plan.  The lawsuit seeks payments of between $25 million
and $30 million, although the Company does not believe that any
payments are owed to the class members.  

In February 2003, plaintiffs agreed to dismiss Thomas Gossage
from the lawsuit.  In June 2003, potential members who had
previously signed releases in favor of the Company were provided
an opportunity to "opt in" to the class, and the remaining class
members were provided an opportunity to "opt out" of the class.  
As a result of this process, the size of the class has been
reduced to approximately 87 members and, as a result, the
maximum potential damages payable to the class, should
plaintiffs prevail, should be significantly lower than the
amounts noted above.


HERCULES INC.: Faces Several Suits Over Agent Orange Defoliant
--------------------------------------------------------------
Hercules, Inc. faces several class actions relating to Agent
Orange, a defoliant that was manufactured by it and several
companies, at the direction of the United States Government, and
used by the United States Government in both Korea and Vietnam,
primarily from 1965 to 1970.

In 1984, as part of a class action settlement, the Company and
other defendants settled the claims of persons who were in the
United States, New Zealand and Australian Armed Forces who
alleged injury due to exposure to Agent Orange.  The suit was
styled "In Re "Agent Orange" Prod. Liab. Litig., 597 F. Supp.
740 (E.D.N.Y. 1984)."

Following that settlement, all claims for alleged injuries due
to exposure to Agent Orange by persons who had served in the
Armed Forces of those countries were treated as covered by that
class action settlement.

On June 9, 2003, the United States Supreme Court affirmed the
decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit in a case captioned "Dow Chemical Company, et al. v.
Daniel Raymond Stephenson, et al., 123 S. Ct. 2161 (2003)."  As
a result, the claims of persons who allege injuries due to
exposure to Agent Orange and whose injuries first manifest
themselves after exhaustion of the settlement fund created
through the 1984 class action settlement may no longer be barred
by the 1984 class action settlement.  As a result, such persons
may now be able to pursue claims against the Company and the
other former manufacturers of Agent Orange.

The Company is currently a defendant in sixteen lawsuits
(including one purported class action) where plaintiffs allege
that exposure to Agent Orange caused them to sustain various
personal injuries.  Despite the recent ruling by the United
States Supreme Court, the Company believes that it has
substantial meritorious defenses to these claims, denies any
liability to plaintiffs and will vigorously defend all actions
now pending or that may be brought in the future.


LEAR CORPORATION: Faces Informal SEC Probe Of Securities Filing
---------------------------------------------------------------
Lear Corporation faces an informal Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) Inquiry into the Company's 2002 amendment of a
2001 securities filing, which disclosed that it employed or did
business with several relatives of senior executives, the
Associated Press reports.

The Company's amended form 10-K revealed the names of 14 people
working for or with Lear who are related to senior company
executives.  Among the transactions cited in the amended filing
are $7.2 million in payments made in 2001 to Analysts
International for software services and computer equipment.

Analysts International's Sequoia Services Group employed
Terrence Rossiter and Ray Green as sales representatives, the
document says.  Mr. Rossiter is the brother of Robert Rossiter,
Lear's then-president and CEO, while Mr. Green is described as
the brother-in-law of Charles Fisher, president of Lear's
DaimlerChrysler division.  Robert Rossiter is now chairman and
CEO of Lear.  The document also shows that David Way was sales
director of Lear's premium car interiors division.  The son of
then-chairman Kenneth L. Way earned $186,081 in 2001 - including
bonuses totaling $63,080, AP states.

"No one's saying a red flag is raised here," Mel Stephens, the
Southfield-based automotive supplier's vice president of
investor relations and corporate communications, told The
Detroit News.  "We just have an informal, confidential inquiry
from (the SEC).  They're asking for some information.  We're
going to comply completely - give them whatever they want."

SEC spokesman Timothy Warren told AP the agency does not comment
on investigations and would not confirm that Lear is being
probed.


NCI BUILDING: Reaches $7 Million Settlement For Securities Suits
----------------------------------------------------------------
NCI Building Systems, Inc. reached a settlement for the class
action lawsuits that had been filed in 2001 in connection with
the restatement of the Company's financial statements for the
last half of fiscal 1999, all of fiscal 2000 and the first
quarter of fiscal 2001.

The Company reached a proposed settlement of the lawsuits,
without admitting any of the allegations against the Company or
its officers, by agreeing to pay $7 million for the dismissal of
all claims.  This amount is within the Company's insurance
coverage limits and has been agreed to by its insurance
carriers.  The Company has executed a definitive settlement
agreement, which is subject to notice and the approval by the
court and other procedural matters.  NCI expects to complete the
settlement before the end of its third fiscal quarter.

Mr. Ginn commented, "We are pleased to announce the proposed
settlement of these lawsuits, with no material impact on our
financial results, and to be able again to focus all our
attention on achieving profitable growth for our Company. This
situation has reinforced our commitment to maintaining a strong
ethical climate at NCI, supported by an effective internal
control system designed to provide assurance as to the integrity
and accuracy of the Company's consolidated financial
statements."


NOKIA CORPORATION: MD Court Dismisses Consumer Mobile Phone Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court in Baltimore, Maryland
dismissed a brain cancer suit filed against Nokia Corporation
and other mobile phone companies, on behalf of Brian Barrett, an
Atlanta resident who died in November 2002, due to brain tumor
allegedly caused by mobile phone use, Global Wireless News
reports.

Justice Catherine Blake approved a request to drop the suit,
which alleged mobile phone use causes brain cancer, and sought
to force mobile phone companies to supply consumers with hands
free devices to reduce health risks.  

Mr. Barrett is the second plaintiff among the nine with cancer
lawsuits pending before Judge Blake to withdraw health
litigation.  In 2002, Blake threw out an $800 million cancer
suit against wireless companies.  A US appeals court in
Richmond, Virginia, last year affirmed Judge Blake's decision.
The same court will hear oral argument next month in a separate
challenge to another Blake ruling that rejected five similar
class actions. The outcome of the headset appeal, which turns on
jurisdiction, could determine whether remaining brain-cancer
suits remain in Judge Blake's court or return to various state
courts.

Government health officials here and overseas say research does
not point to dangers from mobile phones, but add they cannot
guarantee safety of wireless handsets until further research is
conducted, Global Wireless News reports.


PARMALAT FINANZIARIA: Police Search Morgan Stanley Amid Probe
-------------------------------------------------------------
U.S.-based Morgan Stanley and Italy's Banca Intesa became the
latest big banks drawn into an ever-widening investigation into
the Parmalat scandal as financial police searched more offices
in Milan on Wednesday, Reuters news reports.

Magistrates trying to trace Parmalat's missing billions are
looking at the group's ties with banks involved in the sale of
its bonds, which totaled more than 8 billion euros.  On
Wednesday police took documents from Morgan Stanley and Intesa
asset manager Nextra about Morgan Stanley's purchase of 300
million euros in Parmalat bonds from Nextra, a judicial source
said, as well as the U.S. bank's later sale of the bonds.  The
searches were carried out on the suspicion that "Nextra and
Morgan Stanley employees worked together with Parmalat to
support its securities even as they knew the group's true
situation," according to a search warrant read to Reuters over
the phone by the source.  Neither the banks themselves nor their
employees are targets of the investigation.

Nextra said in a statement it had done nothing wrong and was
cooperating with the investigation, while a Morgan Stanley
spokesperson confirmed without elaborating that its offices had
been searched, Reuters reports.

"I didn't know about it, I'm not worried," Intesa Chief
Executive Officer Corrado Passera told reporters in Milan.
Intesa is Italy's largest bank by assets.  Mr. Passera said at a
shareholders meeting last week that the Parmalat bond, which
Nextra bought in June 2003 in a private placement, had been sold
in four tranches in September and October to Morgan Stanley,
which then sold it on again.  Mr. Passera, who called the bond
deal "normal," said he did not know who had bought the
securities from Morgan Stanley.

The latest searches in the scandal came amid fresh moves by the
company's court appointed administrator Enrico Bondi to clear
Parmalat's boardrooms of its founding family.  Parmalat founder
Calisto Tanzi, one of 11 people jailed in the fraud probe, has
admitted to siphoning 500 million euros in funds out of the
dairy firm, contributing to a hole in its accounts estimated at
more than 10 billion euros.  His son Stefano Tanzi quit the
board of Parmalat and other affiliates and Calisto Tanzi's
brother Giovanni and nephew Paolo also resigned from various
linked companies, Parmalat said.  "This sends a signal Bondi is
starting to clean up the place," a source close to the matter
told Reuters.

Police earlier this month searched offices in Milan of Bank of
America and took documents from Citigroup and Italy's Banca
Popolare di Lodi as part of the probe, which is also being
carried out in Parma.  A former Bank of America executive in
Italy is among at least 25 people being probed for possible
market-rigging, fraudulent bankruptcy, falsified accounts and
other offences.


PENNSYLVANIA: Website Name In Pap Smear Lawsuit To Be Changed
--------------------------------------------------------------
The University of Pittsburgh Medical Center's Magee-Women's
Hospital and three law firms agreed to change the name of a web
site being used to recruit women to join a class action suit,
alleging a university-certified hospital certified thousands of
Pap smears with doctors' signatures when they were never
reviewed by physicians, the Associated Press reports.

The University, law firms Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein of
New York, Roda & Nast of Lancaster and Sprague & Sprague of
Philadelphia, reached a settlement allowing the firms to
continue the Web site under a name different than
http://www.mageepapsmearsuit.com.

The settlement was revealed in Pittsburgh federal court where a
judge was scheduled to revisit a restraining order barring the
law firms from using the hospital's name, AP reports.

U.S. District Judge Arthur Schwab suggested that attorneys
attempt to settle the matter before yesterday's injunction
hearing, saying the law firms have a right to an Internet site
to recruit class-action plaintiffs.  He said the Web site
shouldn't use a name or Web address that might confuse the
public into thinking the site was affiliated with the hospital.


PHILIPPINES: Tribunal Orders Transfer of Marcos Funds to Govt
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Sandiganbayan tribunal court of the Philippines ordered the
Philippine National Bank (PNB) to transfer to the government
$683 million in funds allegedly illegally accumulated by the
late former dictator Ferdinand Marcos, the Associated Press
reports.

The money was transferred from Mr. Marcos' Swiss bank accounts
to a PNB escrow account in the late 1990s on the orders of the
Swiss federal Supreme Court.  Mr. Marcos, who was ousted in 1986
through a popular revolt, allegedly accumulated the wealth
through massive corruption while in office.

In July 2003, the Philippine Supreme Court ruled that the Marcos
family failed to justify the source of its money, noting that
the former dictator's wife, Imelda, legally earned only about
$300,000 during her husband's two-decade reign.  In November,
the Court further ruled that Mr. Marcos illegally accumulated
the money during his 20-year rule.  The amount originally
totaled $356 million in 1986, but grew with interest.

The Sandiganbayan court ruling enforces last week's Supreme
Court decision ordering the transfer of the money from an escrow
account to the country's treasury.  The Philippines National
Bank has until early next week to make the transfer, Sheriff Ed
Urieta told The Associated Press.

Philippine law requires all recovered Marcos assets to be spent
on land reform, but President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo said she
wants a portion used to compensate 9,539 Filipinos who won a
class action for human rights violations by the regime.


SERVICE CORPORATION: Shareholders Launch Securities Suit in FL
--------------------------------------------------------------
Houston-based Service Corporation International faces a
securities class action filed by a group of investors in the
United States District Court in Miami, Florida, the Associated
Press reports.  The suit, filed by Attorney Kenneth Vianale,
also names as defendants three of the Company's executives.

The Company, the world's largest in funeral services, was
charged with misplacing bodies, overselling plots, smashing
vaults and digging up remains to make room for new graves at the
Menorah Gardens cemeteries it owned in Broward and Palm Beach
counties in Florida.  The Company agreed to settle two lawsuits
for $100 million in December, and also settled a state lawsuit
for $14 million.

The suit alleges that the executives failed to disclose problems
with mishandled remains and that the Company did not have enough
money in reserve to deal with lawsuits stemming from the
mistakes.  The suit does not specify damages.

Mr. Vianale told AP that shareholders affected by steep drops in
the company's stock price were defrauded because company
officials "made no disclosure of the problems at Menorah
Gardens, which were substantial."  SCI spokesman Don Mathis said
he could not comment on the new lawsuit because he had not seen
it, AP reports.


TALX CORPORATION: MO Court Yet To Rule on Stock Suit Dismissal
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Missouri has yet to rule on Talx Corporation's motion to dismiss
the consolidated class action filed against it and:

     (1) William W. Canfield,

     (2) Craig N. Cohen,

     (3) Richard F. Ford,

     (4) Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated and

     (5) A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc.

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

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

In October 2002, the case was transferred from the Honorable
Donald J. Stohr, United States District Judge, to the Honorable
Henry E. Audrey, United States District Judge.  The consolidated
complaint seeks, among other things, an award of unspecified
money damages, including interest, for all losses and injuries
allegedly suffered by the putative class members as a result of
the defendants' alleged conduct and unspecified
equitable/injunctive relief as the Court deems proper.

On May 20, 2002, the Company and the Individual Defendants filed
a motion to dismiss the lawsuits, and the underwriter defendants
filed a separate motion to dismiss.  The plaintiffs filed their
opposition to the motions to dismiss on June 19, 2002.  The
defendants' reply memoranda in support of the motions to dismiss
were filed on July 9, 2002.  The Court issued a Memorandum and
Order on March 31, 2003 granting in part and denying in part the
motion to dismiss.  The Court's Order dismissed the plaintiffs'
claims under Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act of
1934. The plaintiffs were granted leave to file an amended
Consolidated Complaint on or before May 30, 2003.

On May 29, 2003, plaintiffs in the several pending securities
lawsuits filed an Amended Consolidated Complaint.  The Amended
Complaint changes the original Complaint by adding allegations
pertaining to the Company's December 2002 restatement of
financials and expanding the Putative Class Period to
include all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired shares
of the Company's common stock between April 25, 2001 and
November 14, 2002.

The Amended Complaint alleges, among other things, that certain
details in the registration statement and prospectus for the
Company's August 2001 secondary common stock offering, as well
as other statements made by the Company and/or the Individual
Defendants during the Amended Putative Class Period, were
materially false and misleading because the Company:

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

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

     (3) improperly recognized revenue and expenses during the
         Amended Putative Class Period; and

     (4) miscalculated diluted earnings per share during the
         Amended Putative Class Period.

All of these matters were the subject of the Company's 2002
restatement of financials described in the Company's Form 10-K/A
for the year ended March 31, 2002.  The Amended Complaint also
alleges, as did the original Complaint, that the Company did not
properly account for certain software and inventory, did not
reflect certain write-offs, and did not accurately disclose
certain business prospects.  The Amended Complaint seeks, among
other things, an award of unspecified money damages, including
interest, for all losses and injuries allegedly suffered by
the putative class members as a result of the defendants'
alleged conduct and unspecified equitable/injunctive relief as
the Court deems proper.  

On July 30, 2003, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the
Amended Complaint.  On September 26, 2003, plaintiffs filed
their opposition to the motion to dismiss.  On October 29, 2003,
defendants filed their reply in support of the motion to
dismiss.

The company is currently engaged in settlement negotiations.  
However, due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation, the
Company says it cannot accurately predict the ultimate outcome
of the litigation.


TERRORIST ATTACK: Lawsuits Commence As Fund Deadline Approaches
---------------------------------------------------------------
Families of September 11 victims who still want to sue airlines,
security companies and others for negligence have until Thursday
to opt out of the federal government's compensation fund - the
final step before what will probably be a lengthy legal battle,
the Associated Press reports.

Survivors of the nearly 3,000 people killed in the attacks had
until December 22 to file initial paperwork with the federal
program, but the fund gave them another month to submit the
additional paperwork necessary to judge their cases.  That
deadline expires Thursday, although fund administrators will
consider extenuating circumstances, like difficulty obtaining
certain medical records.

Aviation lawyer Mary Schiavo, who represents dozens intent on
suing, told AP many of her clients spent Wednesday deciding
which route to take.  "There aren't many, but they have been
fast and furious," Ms. Schiavo said.  "As a litigator, it's been
hard to be restrained for two years waiting for the fund" to
close.

To date, 2,924 death claims have been filed with the fund, and
more than 4,300 claims for injuries relating to the attacks or
the aftermath.  By choosing the fund, families forgo the right
to sue various US entities for alleged negligence related to the
attacks.  While estimates vary, lawyers for many of the families
estimate nearly 100 families will ultimately sue.

New York Federal Judge Alvin Hellerstein, who is overseeing the
lawsuits, will hold a hearing early next month to begin laying
out a pretrial schedule for the mammoth case.  That will kick
off the high-stakes court battle and begin the process of
discovery and deposing witnesses that many families believe will
show the companies did not follow their own security
regulations.

Ms. Schiavo said she will ask the judge for a trial date later
this year, but could not predict when the case might actually be
heard in open court.  "Everybody's feet will be held to the
fire," she told AP.


UNION PACIFIC: Employee Lodges Suit Over Contraceptive Coverage
---------------------------------------------------------------
Omaha-based Union Pacific Railroad faces a second class action
filed by its employees, demanding the Company be required to
provide prescription drug coverage for contraceptives, Knight-
Ridder/ Tribune Business News reports.

Samantha Brand, a Company employee, filed the suit in the United
States District Court for the Western District of Washington.  
The suit alleges that Union Pacific's failure to include the
coverage violates the portion of the Federal Civil Rights Act of
1964 that prohibits employers with 15 or more workers from
making decisions on the basis of gender.  The lawsuit calls for
Union Pacific to provide coverage for contraceptives approved by
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and to reimburse employees
who have paid for contraceptives themselves.

Company spokesman John Bromley told the Tribune Business News
the company had not yet seen the lawsuit but that it appeared to
be identical to other lawsuits involving Planned Parenthood and
filed against companies around the country.  Ms. Brand is a
union member, he said, and medical coverage is a matter for
negotiation.  Nonunion employees have had prescription
contraceptive coverage "for some time," he said.  "In theory, if
the union wants to (add the coverage), then we'll do it. It's
part of their health package negotiation," Mr. Bromley said.  
"It's something we would mutually agree on."

The company disagrees that it has violated any of the statutes
regarding discrimination, he added.

Beverly Todd Nolte, vice president of communications for Planned
Parenthood of Nebraska and Council Bluffs, said the case is
interesting for Nebraska because the Company is one of its
largest employers and the state is not among the 21 that have
passed contraceptive-equity legislation.  "Contraception really
is basic health care because 85 percent of women will use
contraception at some point, and if insurance doesn't cover it,
they're paying out of their pocket," Ms. Nolte told the Tribune
Business News.

Several large employers, such as Albertsons, American Mobile
Healthcare and Manpower, have added the coverage in the wake of
a ruling in a lawsuit against Bartell Drug Co. in Seattle that
the company had violated Title VII by failing to cover
prescription contraceptives.  "There's growing legal precedent
as well as growing movement by companies to accept contraceptive
coverage," Ms. Nolte said.


US VETERANS: Congressman, Vets To Commence Lawsuit Over Benefits
----------------------------------------------------------------
Rep. Ted Strickland, D-Ohio, and advocacy group Vietnam Veterans
of America intend to sue Department of Veterans Affairs
Secretary Anthony Principi over the department's failure to
publicize information about health care benefits and services
for veterans and their families, the Associated Press reports.

Citing a tight budget and overwhelming demand, the DVA stopped
all efforts aimed at enrolling new veterans into the health care
system.  In a July 2002 memo, the department said that marketing
health care services at health fairs, open houses or veterans
meetings was inappropriate.  After the VA opened its medical
facilities to all veterans in 1998, veterans have waited as long
as two years for appointments.

Rep. Strickland told AP a congressional mandate requires the
agency to perform outreach activities.  He said he has written
to and met with Secretary Principi about the issue and decided
to file the lawsuit only as a last resort.  "Rationing care or
rationing services is just not acceptable," Strickland, a member
of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, told AP.

Phil Budahn, a VA spokesman, didn't immediately comment on the
lawsuit, AP reports.


WHITEHALL JEWELLERS: Court Yet To Grant Final Approval to Pact
--------------------------------------------------------------
Whitehall Jewellers, Inc. await the California State Court's
final approval of the settlement for the wage hour
class action filed in California against the Company by three
former store managers.  The case is based principally upon the
allegation that store managers employed by the Company in
California should have been classified as non-exempt for
overtime purposes.

In April 2003, the parties reached a preliminary agreement to
settle the matter resulting in a pre-tax charge of $1,000,000,
inclusive of the plaintiffs' attorneys' fees, interest,
penalties, administrative costs and other Company costs.  This
settlement covers the period from July 25, 1998 through the date
of final settlement approval by the court. The final settlement
agreement was preliminarily approved on August 1, 2003 and
notices have been sent to class members.  Class members were
given until October 17, 2003 to opt out of the settlement.


                 New Securities Fraud Cases

ADVANCED MARKETING: Lasky & Rifkind Files Securities Suit in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Lasky & Rifkind, Ltd. Initiated a class action lawsuit in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of
California, on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise
acquired publicly traded securities of Advanced Marketing
Services Inc. between January 16, 1999 and January 13, 2004,
inclusive, against Advanced Marketing and certain officers and
directors.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period defendants
issued a series of false and misleading statements to the
market, resulting in Advanced Marketing's stock price being
artificially inflated. Specifically, on January 14, 2004,
Advanced Marketing announced that it would restate its financial
results for the fiscal years in the five-year period ended March
31, 2003. The restatement relates to the improper reporting of
some liabilities as income as well as overestimated circulation
for some publications. In response to this news, shares of
Advanced Marketing fell $1.82 or 15%, to $10.15 per share.

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


ADVANCED MARKETING: Cauley Geller Launches Securities Suit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Rudman, LLP initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of California, on behalf of purchasers of Advanced
Marketing Services, Inc. publicly traded securities during the
period between January 16, 1999 and January 13, 2004, inclusive,
against Advanced Marketing Services (AMS), and:

     (1) Charles C. Tillinghast,

     (2) Michael M. Nicita, and

     (3) Edward J. Leonard

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. More specifically, the Complaint alleges
that defendants failed to disclose and indicate

     (i) that the Company was improperly recognizing advertising
         revenue in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting
         Principals;

    (ii) that the Company improperly reported advertising
         liabilities as income in violation of GAAP;

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

    (iv) that as a result, the values of the Company's earnings,
         net income and earnings per share were materially
         overstated at all relevant times.

On January 14, 2004, AMS announced that it would restate its
previously filed financial statements for the fiscal years in
the five-year period ended March 31, 2003.  The restatement
resulted from the Company's ongoing review of its cooperative
advertising practices and related accounting, and related
primarily to the timing and quantification of recognition of
revenue and reversal of accrued liabilities.  News of this
shocked the market. Shares of AMS fell 15.2% or $1.82 per share
to close at $10.15 per share on extremely high volume on January
14, 2004.

For more information, contact Samuel H. Rudman, or David A.
Rosenfeld, Client Relations Department: 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 by E-mail: info@cauleygeller.com.


ADVANCED MARKETING: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Stock Suit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a class action lawsuit in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of
California, on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of
Advanced Marketing Services, Inc. from January 16, 1999 through
January 13, 2004, inclusive, against Advanced Marketing Services
(AMS), and:

     (1) Charles C. Tillinghast,

     (2) Michael M. Nicita, and

     (3) Edward J. Leonard

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. More specifically, the Complaint alleges
that defendants failed to disclose and indicate

     (i) that the Company was improperly recognizing advertising
         revenue in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting
         Principles;

    (ii) that the Company improperly reported advertising
         liabilities as income in violation of GAAP;

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

    (iv) that as a result, the values of the Company's earnings,
         net income and earnings per share were materially
         overstated at all relevant times.

On January 14, 2004, AMS announced that it would restate its
previously filed financial statements for the fiscal years in
the five-year period ended March 31, 2003. The restatement
resulted from the Company's ongoing review of its cooperative
advertising practices and related accounting, and related
primarily to the timing and quantification of recognition of
revenue and reversal of accrued liabilities.

News of this shocked the market. Shares of AMS fell 15.2% or
$1.82 per share to close at $10.15 per share on extremely high
volume on January 14, 2004.

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


ADVANCED MARKETING: Paskowitz & Associates Files CA Stock Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Paskowitz & Associates initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of California, on behalf of purchasers of Advanced
Marketing Services Inc. common stock between January 16, 1999
and January 13, 2004, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that certain Advanced Marketing senior
officers, and the Company, violated the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934. During the Class Period, Defendants are alleged to have
issued or caused to be issued a series of false and misleading
statements to the marketplace resulting in Advanced Marketing's
stock price trading at artificially inflated levels. The
Company's stock traded as high as $25.00 during the relevant
period. On January 14, 2004, the Company announced that it would
restate its previously filed financial statements for each of
the fiscal years in the five-year period ending March 31, 2003.
The false and misleading statements allegedly concern the
Company's net income, advertising revenue and related costs.

For more information, contact Laurence D. Paskowitz, by Phone:       
(212) 685-0969 or (800) 705-9529.


ALLIANCE CAPITAL: Brian Felgoise Launches Securities Suit in NV
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise, P.C. initiated a
securities class action in the United States District Court for
the District of Nevada, on behalf of shareholders who acquired
Alliance Capital Management Holdings L.P. securities between
January 1, 2001 and September 30, 2003, inclusive, against the
company and certain key officers and directors.

The action charges that defendants violated the 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 Brian M. Felgoise, by Mail: 261
Old York Road, Suite 423, Jenkintown, Pennsylvania, 19046, by
Phone: (215) 886-1900, or by E-mail:
securitiesfraud@comcast.net.


DYNACQ HEALTHCARE: Goodkind Labaton Files Securities Suit in TX
---------------------------------------------------------------
Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP initiated a securities
class action 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 the Company and:

     (1) Philip S. Chan, and

     (2) Chiu M. Chan

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


REDBACK NETWORKS: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Suit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, on behalf of all persons who
purchased securities of Redback Networks, Inc. between April 12,
2000 and October 10, 2003, inclusive, against the defendants,
certain officers and directors of the Company.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal
securities laws by issuing materially false and misleading
statements throughout the Class Period that had the effect of
artificially inflating the market price of the Company's
securities.

Redback's initial public offering, on May 17, 1999, was priced
at $23. On June 28, 1999, Redback announced a multi-year,
multimillion dollar agreement with Qwest Communications
International, Inc. Although the duration and the specific
amounts of the contract were not quantified, on July 9, 1999,
Redback stock was trading at $146. The Complaint alleges that
Defendants knew that there was no real commitment by Qwest and
that Qwest had entered into the agreement solely because Qwest
executives had received shares of Redback stock on the IPO.
Throughout the Class Period, Redback and Qwest continued this
practice of Qwest purchasing products from Redback in exchange
for Qwest executives receiving shares of Redback stock.
Additionally, the complaint further alleges that Qwest did not
need or want the large quantities of product it had ordered, and
in fact, had no strong obligation to purchase more products in
the future.

For more information, contact Fred Taylor Isquith, Gregory M.
Nespole, Christopher S. Hinton, George Peters, or Derek Behnke,
by Mail: 270 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016, by Phone:
(800) 575-0735, by E-mail: classmember@whafh.com, or visit the
firm's Website: http://www.whafh.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  * * *