/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/041011.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

             Monday, October 11, 2004, Vol. 6, No. 201


ALASKA: High Court Refuses Woman's Petition Over Fraud Sentence
ALBRIOND CAPITAL: SEC Settles Enforcement Action V. Alan Bond
ARKANSAS: Plaintiffs Want Suit Over School Uniforms Dismissed
AT&T: Trial Gets Underway For Shareholder Fraud Lawsuit in NJ
CALIFORNIA: AG Inks Pact With Sacramento Over Shuttle Services

CALIFORNIA: A.G. Lockyer Charges 20 Dentists With Medi-Cal Fraud
CARNETT'S INC.: GA Supreme Court Hears Lawsuit Over Junk Faxes
CHECK INVESTORS: Relief Defendant Turns Over Money From Scheme
CNJ DIECAST: IL Attorney General Launches Consumer Fraud Lawsuit
DESLY INTERNATIONAL: Recalls Mushrooms For Undeclared Sulfites

DON MULLERY: IL A.G. Madigan Sues Dealership For False Ads
FORD MOTOR: Elburn Officials Opt Out in IL Crown Victoria Suit
GTECH HOLDINGS: RI Court Grants Approval To Lawsuit Settlement
HAWAII: Judge Hears Arguments in $25M Substitute Teachers' Suit
HOMETOWN FINANCIAL: CA Judge Certifies Class in Credit Card Suit

ILLINOIS: Attorney General Sues Companies Over Medicare Fraud
KPMG DEFENDANTS: Reaches $115M Lawsuit Settlement With Investors
MARYLAND: Non-Profit Group Benefits From Lawsuit Settlements
MASONITE SETTLEMENT: Deadline For Claims Set January 15, 2005
MECCA N.Y.: Recalls Chocolate Candy Due To Undeclared Milk, Nuts

MEDQUIST INC.: Reveals Further Information On South Broward Suit
MERCK & CO.: FL Law Firm Mulls Filing Vioxx Suit, Seeks Clients
NDCHEALTH CORPORATION: Plaintiffs File Amended Stock Suit in GA
NORTHWESTERN CORPORATION: DE Bankruptcy Court Approves Agreement
PA DISTRIBUTORS: Reaches $9M Stock Fraud Settlement With CA AG

PRECISION TOYOTA: AZ A.G. Goddard Sues Over False Car Ads
RITE AID: AZ A.G. Goddard Forges Tobacco Sales Policies Pact
RJ REYNOLDS: CA Court Avows Dismissal of Youth Marketing Lawsuit
RJ REYNOLDS: NY, MD, IL AGs Settle "Kool MIXX" Marketing Lawsuit
RUNTAL NORTH: Recalls Towel Radiators Due To Burn, Injury Hazard

SPECTRALINK CORPORATION: Forges $1.5M Securities Suit Settlement
UNITED STATES: Scientists Seek Closer Look at Cox-2 Inhibitors

                 New Securities Fraud Cases

DIGIMARC CORPORATION: Lerach Coughlin Lodges OR Securities Suit
PRIMUS TELECOMMUNICATIONS: Murray Frank Files VA Securities Suit
TOMMY HILFIGER: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges NY Securities Fraud Suit
ZIX CORPORATION: Baron & Budd Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in TX
ZIX CORPORATION: Glancy Binkow Files Securities Fraud Suit in TX


ALASKA: High Court Refuses Woman's Petition Over Fraud Sentence
The Alaska Supreme Court denied a petition by Raejean Bonham,
which argued that her three-year sentence for Misleading
Securities Filings was excessive.  The Court of Appeals rejected
Ms. Bonham's claim in May, and the denial by the Supreme Court
allows the sentence to stand.

Ms. Bonham operated one of the largest "pyramid' schemes in
Alaska history that defrauded hundreds of investors of millions
of dollars.  This was her second appeal.

"We are pleased to bring this matter to a conclusion," said
Attorney General Gregg Renkes.  "The securities laws are
designed to protect investors, and this violation led to huge
losses.  Imposing significant jail time is a strong deterrent in
these types of offenses.  This should send a strong message to
all individuals who lie and betray the trust of investors."

In 1989, Ms. Bonham created a classic "pyramid" or "Ponzi"
scheme involving the World Plus travel agency in Fairbanks.  She
issued "contracts" in $5,000 increments, falsely telling private
investors that she was buying frequent-flier coupons in bulk
from large corporations and reselling the tickets redeemed.  The
contracts came due in just a few months and she promised a
twenty to fifty percent return, using money from new investors
to pay off the initial investors, and often convincing them to
"re-invest" their money.

In 1993, Ms. Bonham registered these "contracts" with the state
as securities, and provided false information in her filing.
Hundreds of people invested millions of dollars over several
years before the scheme collapsed.  Ms. Bonham was convicted of
money laundering and fraud under federal law, but the state was
not satisfied with the sentence imposed.  The state then
prosecuted her under state securities law.

The original state charges against Ms. Bonham were dismissed by
Anchorage Superior Court Judge Michael L. Wolverton because she
had already been convicted in federal court.  The Court of
Appeals reversed that decision concluding that it was proper to
prosecute Bonham separately under state law.

For additional questions, contact State Assistant Attorney
General Kevin Burke by Phone: (907) 269-6250.  To obtain copies
of public record documents related to this case, please contact
paralegal Cynthia Bradford by Phone: (907) 269-6250.

ALBRIOND CAPITAL: SEC Settles Enforcement Action V. Alan Bond
The Securities and Exchange Commission through the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York entered a permanent
injunction against Alan Brian Bond, 43, of Upper Montclair, New
York. The Commission filed a complaint against Bond on Dec. 16,
1999, alleging that he orchestrated a commission kickback
scheme. The Commission's complaint alleged that Bond received
over $6.9 million in commission kickbacks from three brokerage
firms. Subsequently, the Commission amended its complaint,
alleging that Bond later orchestrated an improper trade
allocation or cherry-picking scheme. The second amended
complaint alleged that Bond realized nearly $6.6 million in
profits from this cherry-picking scheme.

The Commission's complaint alleged that Bond, from at least
September 1993 through November 1998, through his former
investment advisory firm, Bond, Procope Capital Management,
received over $6.9 million in commission kickbacks from three
brokerage firms. The kickbacks, which were siphoned off of the
investment returns of Bond's clients in the form of mark-ups or
mark-downs on principal trades, were used by Bond to finance an
opulent personal lifestyle that included the purchase of more
than 75 luxury and antique automobiles and a large home and
beachfront condominium in Florida. On Aug. 10, 2001, the
Commission filed an amended complaint seeking emergency relief,
and added allegations that beginning in March 2000, Bond,
through his advisory firm, Albriond, participated in an ongoing
trade allocation or cherry-picking scheme, in which Bond
allocated the majority of profitable trades to himself,
realizing actual profits of nearly $6.6 million, and the
majority of unprofitable trades to three of his advisory
clients, causing them to lose a total of over $56.8 million.

Mr. Bond and his investment adviser, Albriond Capital
Management, LLC, without admitting or denying the Commission's
allegations, consented to the entry of a judgment permanently
enjoining them from future violations of the antifraud
provisions of the federal securities laws, specifically Section
10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
thereunder and Sections 206(1), 206(2) and 207 of the Investment
Advisers Act of 1940, and additionally enjoining Bond from
future violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of

In two related criminal actions, Bond was convicted of
investment advisory fraud, mail fraud, and conspiracy to commit
investment advisory fraud, wire fraud, and commercial bribery,
based on the same conduct alleged in the Commission's complaint.
Bond pled guilty to the kickback scheme and was found guilty by
a jury in the cherry-picking scheme. Bond is currently serving a
twelve and one-half year prison term and was ordered to pay
$12.3 million in restitution to the victims of the schemes. The
action is titled, SEC v. Alan Brian Bond, Robert I. Spruill and
Albriond Capital Management, LLC, Civil Action No. 99-12092,
SDNY (LR-18923).

ARKANSAS: Plaintiffs Want Suit Over School Uniforms Dismissed
Plaintiffs filed a motion of withdrawal of a class action filed
by student's families against the Crossett School District in
Arkansas over school uniforms, the Ashley News-Observer reports.

However, the move does not mean that litigation is over,
plaintiffs' attorney William Plouffe of El Dorado said.  He
alleged that Circuit Judge Robert Vittitow would rule on the
request for the suit to be dismissed with prejudice. If
dismissed without prejudice the case can be refiled in the
future in district, state or federal court, which Mr. Vittitow
reveals as part of their legal plan from the beginning. Mr.
Plouffe also adds, "We filed the suit in the state court to get
the declaratory judgment due to the state law problems where
they do not have an opt-out clause."

Jan Newberry and Jackie McMillan, the plaintiffs in the suit,
sued the district after their children were suspended for non-
compliance to the uniform dress policy adopted at Daniel
Intermediate School.

The suit seeking ex parte emergency temporary relief was filed
on September 7 on behalf of Honey McMillan and Sean and Andrea
Newberry and named the City of Crossett, the Crossett Board of
Education, each board member and "John Does" who are employees,
agents, supervisors, and/or policy makers for the district or
board as defendants.  Both Mrs. McMillan and Mrs. Newberry
question the validity of the dress code that has been adopted
for kindergarten through sixth grade students, citing it
violates their civil rights.

AT&T: Trial Gets Underway For Shareholder Fraud Lawsuit in NJ
Trial has begun for a shareholder class action lawsuit accusing
AT&T and its former Chairman and CEO C. Michael Armstrong with
breaking the nation's securities laws, The Associated Press

The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of
New Jersey in Trenton, alleges that AT&T issued inflated first
quarter 2000 projected revenues to artificially inflate the
stock price as it completed the largest IPO in the nation's
history.  Furthermore, the investors allege that the day after
AT&T received the wire transfer of $10.6 billion from the AT&T
Wireless IPO, it suddenly announced that the company would fall
short of the previously stated projected revenues. Immediately
after the announcements both AT&T and AT&T Wireless's stock
prices dropped.

Plaintiffs in the case include the International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers Local 98 (Philadelphia), the New Hampshire
Retirement System, Secure Holdings Inc., and two individual

Attorney Patrick Coughlin, plaintiffs' attorney and partner at
Lerach Coughlin told AP that they will prosecute this case
vigorously and are confident that in the end when all the facts
come to light, it will be clear that AT&T unashamedly misled
investors to put the wireless IPO out and put 10 billion dollars
in their pockets.

CALIFORNIA: AG Inks Pact With Sacramento Over Shuttle Services
California Attorney General Bill Lockyer's office entered into a
settlement agreement with the County of Sacramento to resolve an
investigation into problems with the Sacramento International
Airport's parking shuttle services that denied full access to
individuals with disabilities.

"This agreement will ensure that all travelers, including
individuals with disabilities, have full and equal access to
shuttle services so that they may catch their flights or return
to their homes without having to endure long waits at the
shuttle stop while crowded buses with inoperable wheelchair
lifts pass them by," AG Lockyer said in a statement.  "I am
pleased that the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors realizes
the importance of correcting these problems and has agreed to
move swiftly to ensure full and equal access to shuttle services
for individuals with disabilities."

The Attorney General's Office began its investigation in
September 2003, after receiving complaints from passengers about
inaccessibility to the shuttle service.  Specifically,
passengers complained that lifts were often broken, drivers did
not understand how to properly operate the lifts, drivers would
allow the bus to fill without first boarding the passenger with
the disability, drivers would avoid passengers with a
disability, and that the lifts were slow, cumbersome and
subjected passengers to humiliation.

The investigation included the examination of thousands of pages
of documents dating back to 2002 and interviews with more than a
dozen employees.  The Attorney General's Office discovered that
although buses with broken lifts were identified, those buses
continued to be used - sometimes for months before the lifts
were repaired.  The investigation revealed that the problem had
reached such proportions that at any given time in June 2003, up
to 30 buses out of a fleet of 40 had broken lifts.

Under the settlement agreement, the County immediately will
begin taking comprehensive measures to improve maintenance,
repair and inspection of bus lifts and will implement new
procedures for documenting and handling problems with lifts and
complaints from passengers with disabilities.  The County also
has agreed to provide better training to drivers on the use of
the lifts and assisting passengers with disabilities, and to
discipline drivers who do not comply with any of the new
procedures designed to ensure passengers with disabilities have
full and equal access to the buses.

The County is required to conduct audits to ensure all new
procedures are being followed.  The County also agrees to
completely transition by 2012 from buses requiring lifts, which
often are slow and subject to malfunctions, to low-floor buses
with ramps.  If the County adopts a plan to implement a
transportation system that utilizes vehicles that aren't covered
in the settlement, the County must notify the Attorney General's
Office and ensure the vehicles comply with all applicable
disabled access laws.

The agreement also provides for a consultant, hired by the
Attorney General's Office and paid for by the County, to audit
for a minimum of two years the County's compliance with the
agreement and draft an annual compliance report.  The monitoring
may end after the two-year period if the Attorney General
verifies that at least 80% of the airport's bus fleet has been
converted to low-floor transport vehicles and the monitor has
determined the County is in compliance with all terms of the
agreement.  Finally, the County has agreed to pay $41,471 in
attorney's fees to the Attorney General for the cost of the

Since 1969, California law has required that individuals with
disabilities have full and equal access to public
transportation, including buses, as well as buildings,
facilities and sites open to the general public. The law may be
enforced by The Attorney General, district attorneys and city
attorneys. The federal Americans with Disabilities Act, enacted
in 1990 and enforced by federal authorities, also requires that
buses be accessible.

"It is imperative that individuals with disabilities have full
and equal access to not only buildings open to the public, but
also transportation services," AG Lockyer said.  "Making our
transportation services available to all ensures that
individuals with disabilities have an equal opportunity to
participate in the many activities enjoyed by all residents of
our state."

For more information about the rights of individuals with
disabilities, visit the Attorney General's Civil Rights
Enforcement Section website: http://www.ag.ca.gov/civilrights.

CALIFORNIA: A.G. Lockyer Charges 20 Dentists With Medi-Cal Fraud
California Attorney General Bill Lockyer filed criminal
complaints against 20 dentists throughout the state, charging
them with defrauding the state Medi-Cal System of $4.5 million,
health benefits and workers' compensation fraud, conspiracy,
grand theft, child abuse, elder abuse, assault and intentional
infliction of great bodily injury.

"These dentists put at risk the health and well-being of
hundreds of children and adults by performing slipshod dental
services that were unnecessary, ignoring health problems that
needed tending, and even skimping on appropriate amounts of
anesthesia before submitting patients to painful procedures," AG
Lockyer said in a statement.  "This office will continue to
aggressively prosecute those who rip off the Medi-Cal system
that more than 6 million poor and elderly Californians depend on
for vital health care."

Filed in Stanislaus County Superior Court, the complaint charges
Modesto dentist Kyon Maung Teo, who owns Hatch Dental clinics in
Ceres, Stockton and Modesto, with being the mastermind of a scam
involving dentists from throughout the state.  The complaint
alleges Mr. Teo, 42, placed advertisements on the back of
missing-children flyers and in PennySaver and DollarSaver
publications.  The advertisements offered gifts or rebates to
Medi-Cal beneficiaries and "new patients" who sought services at
Hatch Dental.

The investigation by the Attorney General's Bureau of Medi-Cal
Fraud and Elder Abuse (BMFEA), assisted by the California
Department of Health Services (DHS) showed Teo recruited 19
other dentists, who were paid about 25 percent of the insurance
proceeds received by Hatch Dental for the work they performed.
The kickbacks provided an incentive to perform unnecessary
dental procedures of poor quality, including unnecessary filings
and even unnecessary root canal procedures.  It was not uncommon
for a patient to walk out of Hatch Dental with 20 or more
unnecessary fillings.  To help increase billings, dental
assistants also were instructed to perform procedures such as
cementing crowns, which lawfully can only be performed by
licensed dentists.

Co-defendant Kin Thor Pang, Mr. Teo's wife, was the office
manager for all three Hatch Dental clinics.  The complaint
alleges Ms. Pang, 33, trained office staff to complete false
dental claims, including changing dates of service or billing
Medi-Cal and private insurance companies for "emergency" office
visits if the patients were ineligible for routine coverage at
the time of service.

The Hatch clinic staffs also were trained to fabricate
periodontal charts and prepare Treatment Authorization Requests
(TARs) to obtain Medi-Cal reimbursement for services based on
the fabricated charts.  Claims also were submitted for visits
that never occurred and for non-existent procedures purportedly
performed during the fabricated office visits.  Insurance
billing clerks were docked a dollar from their paycheck for each
"mistake" they made.

As part of the conspiracy to defraud the Medi-Cal system, the
dentists committed acts injurious to public health, placing the
patients at risk of pain, infection, loss of teeth and great
bodily injury, including: reusing dental instruments without
sterilizing them, developing treatment plans that called for
unnecessary dental surgeries such as root canals and fillings,
performing dental surgeries without considering the patient's
medical history, providing numerous shallow fillings in lieu of
comprehensive treatment to patients in need of such treatment,
issuing prescriptions for Schedule III narcotics without
documenting the source and type of pain, forcibly restraining
children during dental operations, performing extensive dental
treatment on minors without fully disclosing the extent of the
treatment to the minor's parent or guardian and performing
dental surgeries without adequate anesthesia.

As the result of a separate investigation conducted by the
California Department of Insurance, Teo and Pang also are
charged with committing Workers' Compensation premium fraud by
grossly understating the salaries of Hatch employees. The under-
reporting resulted in a loss of $948.19 to Superior National
Insurance Company, and $9,154 to Everest National Insurance

Other dentists named as defendants in the complaint are:

     (1) Steve Sangmoon Ahn, 41, of Fullerton

     (2) Hoon Young Chang, 34, of Anaheim Hills

     (3) Wen Hsiang Chou, 46, of Alhambra

     (4) Anthony Halili Galvan, 42, of Dublin

     (5) Eduardo Sabater Gerodias, 36, of Modesto

     (6) Shahryar Baradaran Hashemi, 37, of Reseda

     (7) Keith Yoshikuzu Komaki, 58, of Anaheim

     (8) Ricky Hung-Tak Lam, 35, of Antioch

     (9) Rahim Mesbah, 49, of Modesto

    (10) Duc Sy Nguyen, 33, of Milpitas

    (11) Sang-Hyuk "Sean" Park, 35, of Merced

    (12) Luis Alexandrino Pinto, 42, of Irvine

    (13) Rodolfo Poscablo Ravanera, 57, of Oakland

    (14) Behnam Rostami, 48, of Stockton

    (15) Williams Defreitas Saraiva, 60, of Irvine

    (16) Seyed Mohamed Tarifard, 58, of Stockton

    (17) Tri Duy Vu, 32, of Sunnyvale

    (18) Shiyu Wang,44 of Alameda

    (19) Faruk Cenap Yetek, 43, of Pleasant Hill

Patients who believe they have been victimized by the Hatch
Dental clinic dentists are urged to contact the Attorney
General's Medi-Cal Fraud Hotline number: 1-800-722-0432.

CARNETT'S INC.: GA Supreme Court Hears Lawsuit Over Junk Faxes
The Supreme Court of Georgia is set to hear the protracted $110
million class action involving Lilburn-based Carnett's Inc. car
washes and Gwinnett entrepreneur Michelle Hammond, the Gwinnett
Daily Post reports.

Ms. Hammond is among the 73,500 people who received one of the
Carnett's coupons on her fax machine and later sued the car wash
business under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, a law that
bars junk faxes and allows individuals to collect damages of
$500 to $1,500 from violators.

The ruling by the Court of Appeals last year had enabled the
case to proceed as a class action suit, increasing penalties
facing Carnett's to at least $36 million and at most $110

However, in a recent legal brief, the Carnett's attorneys wrote
such cases "are not brought against the fax transmitter, but
against local businesses who innocently purchased advertising
services." Texas-based Sunbelt Communications was hired by
Cranett's to fax coupons to people in the market the company
serves. Even Carnett's owner Bruce Arnett said Sunbelt
Communications assured him faxing the coupons would not get him
in legal hot water.

Mr. Arnett later claimed that he had never heard of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act, labeling it as a bobby trap
for small businesses. Furthermore, Mr. Arnett states that he has
been targeted in this case because his business has a large
insurance policy.

John Salter, an attorney with former Georgia Gov. Roy Barnes'
Marietta law firm, countered the defense claims by saying that
it's time for the law to be enforced, whether they knew it or

The Supreme Court is set hear the case at the University of
Georgia School of Law.

CHECK INVESTORS: Relief Defendant Turns Over Money From Scheme
A relief defendant in a case against defunct New Jersey
collection agency Check Investors, Inc., charging it with
dunning consumers for debts they did not owe, has agreed to turn
over money she obtained as a result of the alleged scheme.

Elisabeth M. Sussman, wife of collection agency owner Barry
Sussman, will turn over approximately $600,000 to the Federal
Trade Commission under a settlement agreement with the agency.
The FTC's legal action against Barry Sussman and four other
defendants continues.

In a complaint filed in May 2003, the FTC alleged the defendants
violated federal laws by harassing consumers and threatening
them with arrest and prosecution unless the consumers
immediately paid the collection agency money they did not owe
for checks returned for insufficient funds. The defendants
allegedly harassed consumers with repeated phone calls, sent
threatening letters, and falsely threatened that consumers could
face civil or criminal charges if they did not pay the debts.
The FTC alleged that, in many cases, the defendants collected
amounts far in excess of any amounts that consumers might have

The FTC's complaint named as defendants:

     (1) Check Investors, Inc. (d/b/a National Check Control),

     (2) Check Enforcement, Inc. (d/b/a Goldman Check Systems),

     (3) Jaredco, Inc. (d/b/a Goldman & Co.),

     (4) their principal, Barry Sussman,

     (5) their corporate counsel, Charles T. Hutchins, and

     (6) Elisabeth Sussman

When it filed the settlement with Elisabeth Sussman, the FTC
also filed an amended complaint naming Ms. Sussman as a relief
defendant. According to the amended complaint, Elisabeth Sussman
unlawfully received funds and other property from consumer
payments to her husband's agencies.

The FTC received substantial assistance in pursuing this matter
from Postal Inspectors from the North Jersey/Caribbean Division;
the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of New Jersey; and
the New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety. In addition,
the FTC would like to thank the following states for their
invaluable assistance in investigating this matter and bringing
the complaint: Colorado, Idaho, Maine, Minnesota, North Dakota,
Washington, and West Virginia.

The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file an amended
complaint and approving a stipulated final order as to relief
defendant Elisabeth Sussman was 5-0. The amended complaint and
settlement were entered in the U.S. District Court for the
District of New Jersey on October 5, 2004.

For more details, contact Jennifer Schwartzman of the Office of
Public Affairs by Phone: 202-326-2674 or contact Darren A. Bowie
of the Bureau of Consumer Protection by Phone: 202-326-2018

CNJ DIECAST: IL Attorney General Launches Consumer Fraud Lawsuit
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan filed a lawsuit against a
Madison County man who allegedly defrauded at least 61 consumers
in just five months by offering items for auction on eBay.com
and then failing to deliver the products to the highest bidders.

AG Madigan's suit alleges Christopher Quick, operating as CNJ
Diecast, used the Internet auction house eBay.com to scam
consumers from at least 25 states across the country.  Using a
post office box in Pocahontas, IL, to collect payment from
consumers, Mr. Quick allegedly offered for sale die-cast model
cars on eBay.com, accepted money from the highest bidders and
then failed to deliver the products.  The four Illinois victims
live in Lake, Peoria and Tazewell Counties.

AG Madigan's suit alleges that 61 consumers paid Mr. Quick a
total of nearly $5,500 for Dale Earnhardt, Jr., model race cars
and other items he placed for auction.  All of his customers
allegedly paid with personal checks, cashier's checks or money

Filed in Madison County Circuit Court, the lawsuit charges Quick
with multiple violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and
Deceptive Business Practices Act for failing to deliver the
product after receiving payment from his customers and failing
to refund consumers' money.  Consumer complaints against Quick
and CNJ Diecast have been filed with Madigan's office, the
Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the U.S. Postal Inspector and

In addition to four consumers who reside in Illinois, consumers
allegedly defrauded by Quick reside in Alabama, Arkansas,
California, Connecticut, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky,
Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, North Carolina, Nevada,
New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas,
Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

The suit seeks full restitution for customers, a statutory civil
penalty of $50,000 and additional civil penalties of $50,000 per
violation of Illinois law.  In addition, the suit seeks to
prohibit Mr. Quick from any further violations of the Illinois
consumer protection laws.

Assistant Attorney General Avonne Seals is handling the case for
AG Madigan's Consumer Fraud Bureau.

DESLY INTERNATIONAL: Recalls Mushrooms For Undeclared Sulfites
Desly International Corp., 242 47 th Street, Brooklyn, New York
11220 is recalling "SMAK MUSHROOMS MARINATED" because it may
contain undeclared sulfites. People who have severe sensitivity
to sulfites run the risk of serious or life-threatening allergic
reactions if they consume this product.

The recalled "SMAK MUSHROOMS MARINATED" is packaged in clear
670g (23,45 oz.) glass jars with code 05.20.2006
T/L1241/Z0I/2405. They were sold throughout the United States.

New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets food
inspectors and subsequent analysis by Department food laboratory
personnel revealed the presence of undeclared sulfites in "SMAK
MUSHROOMS MARINATED" in packages, which did not declare sulfites
on the label, initiated the recall after routine sampling. The
consumption of 10 milligrams of sulfites per serving has been
reported to elicit severe reactions in some asthmatics.
Anaphylactic shock could occur in certain sulfite sensitive
individuals upon ingesting 10 milligrams or more of sulfites.
Analysis of the "SMAK MUSHROOMS MARINATED" revealed it contained
38.2 mg per serving.

No illnesses have been reported to date in connection with this

Consumers who have purchased "SMAK MUSHROOMS MARINATED" should
return it to the place of purchase. Consumers with questions may
contact the company at (718) 492-8492.

DON MULLERY: IL A.G. Madigan Sues Dealership For False Ads
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan filed a complaint against
a Lee County car dealership for multiple violations of Illinois
consumer protection laws following a July 2004 allegedly
deceptive advertising campaign that blared "Official Event
Headquarters" and "Don Mullery's World of Cars Has Been Chosen
as the Official Site for this Once in a Lifetime Event!
Virtually Every Make and Model Will Be Available!"

Among other violations, AG Madigan's suit charges that by
displaying a circular graphic with an eagle similar to the eagle
on the back of a $1 bill, the ad allegedly created the
impression that a governmental body had chosen the defendant as
Illinois' only automobile dealer for a seized and repossessed
dealer's sale when in fact it was not.

Madigan's complaint was filed today in Cook County Circuit Court
against Don Mullery Ford, Inc., a Delaware corporation, doing
business as Don Mullery's World of Cars, Inc., and Mullery
Mazda, for violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and
Deceptive Practices Act, Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade
Practices Act and Illinois Administrative Rules on Motor Vehicle
Advertising.  Don Mullery Ford, located at 489 Illinois Route 2,
in Dixon, allegedly placed the misleading advertisement in the
Dixon Telegraph newspaper and sent a deceptive direct mail
advertisement to consumers in July 2004.

"Car dealerships are not allowed to make up whatever they think
will lure consumers to the lot," AG Madigan said.  "Illinois has
laws that govern what ads can and cannot say, and in this case,
the dealer has gone too far."

In addition to creating the impression that a governmental body
had chosen or was sponsoring Don Mullery's sale, the direct mail
advertisement falsely claimed that consumers had won a grand
prize sweepstakes when car dealers are not allowed to offer free
gifts unless the gift is offered through a manufacturer or
manufacturer's authorized and approved dealer advertising
association; provided unauthorized coupons in connection with
the retail sale of a motor vehicle when state law does not allow
such coupons; and used footnotes and asterisks in their
advertisement to confuse the consumers about credit offers and

In addition, AG Madigan's complaint alleges the dealership's
newspaper advertisement violated Illinois law by creating an
exaggerated sense of discount when it claimed consumers could
Madigan said dealerships are not permitted to use the
Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price (MSRP) - the new car price
- as a basis for price comparison of used cars.

The lawsuit was filed in Cook County Circuit Court because the
registered agent for Don Mullery Ford, Inc., is located in Cook
County.  The suit seeks to prohibit Don Mullery Ford from
engaging in further activity that violates Illinois' consumer
protection laws.  In addition, AG Madigan is seeking an order
requiring Don Mullery Ford to pay restitution, court costs,
civil penalties of $50,000 for each violation of the law and
additional penalties of $50,000 for each violation that the
court finds the defendant committed with intent to defraud.

AG Madigan's office recently sued two auto dealers in Des
Plaines and DeKalb and their Ohio-based ad agency, Gunning &
Associates Marketing, Inc., for running similar deceptive ads
earlier this year in Chicago.

"My staff and I will continue our efforts to ensure that when a
consumer sees an advertisement in a newspaper or receives a
mailer on their doorstep, the promised deals are actually
available when they walk onto the car lot," AG Madigan said.

Assistant Attorney General Greg Grzeskiewicz is handling the
case for Madigan's Consumer Fraud Bureau.

FORD MOTOR: Elburn Officials Opt Out in IL Crown Victoria Suit
The village of Elburn, which was automatically included in a
lawsuit against the Ford Motor Company over a fatal flaw in the
design of its Crown Victoria police squad cars, has decided to
opt out of the class action lawsuit, the Elburn Herald reports.
According to the plaintiffs in the suit, the defect happens when
the car is struck from the rear, causing a fire.

Though automatically included, since it purchased the defective
models, the village decided not to participate in the suit,
which was based on the recommendation of Elburn Police
Department Chief Jim Linane. The police chief in his
recommendations cited Ford's action to correct the problem and
his own opinion that Ford offers the best car for law
enforcement as basis for the village to opt out.

The police chief also pointed out that choosing to remain in the
suit would have jeopardized the purchase of squad cars already
authorized by the Village Board and previously ordered by the
Police Department.

Landmark Automotive Group, the Ford supplier for Elburn,
recently issued a statement that Ford would not sell cars to any
municipalities who were a part of any lawsuit against the

GTECH HOLDINGS: RI Court Grants Approval To Lawsuit Settlement
The United States District Court in Rhode Island granted final
approval to the settlement of the securities class action filed
against GTECH Holdings Corporation, styled captioned "Sandra
Kafenbaum and Steven Schulman, individually and on behalf of all
other similarly situated v. GTECH Holdings Corporation, et. al."
The suit also names as defendants:

     (1) William Y. O'Connor, former Chairman and Chief
         Executive Officer,

     (2) Steven P. Nowick, former President and Chief Operating
         Officer, and

     (3) W. Bruce Turner, former Chairman and current President
          and Chief Executive Officer.

In September 2002, the court granted our motion to dismiss
plaintiff's claim against Mr. Turner, holding that there were no
actionable statements attributable to him.

The Company later entered into an agreement with plaintiffs to
settle the lawsuit on terms that require payment by the Company
of amounts that, after taking into account certain insurance
proceeds that the Company expects to receive, are not material
to its financial condition or results of operation, the Company
said in a disclosure to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

In September 2004, following a fairness hearing, the court
approved the terms of the Company's agreement with the class
action plaintiffs, as was required to finalize the terms of
settlement, and entered judgment in this matter incorporating
the agreed terms.  These developments effectively close this

HAWAII: Judge Hears Arguments in $25M Substitute Teachers' Suit
Circuit Judge Karen Ahn has started hearing arguments in a
class-action lawsuit filed by substitute teachers seeking $25
million in back pay, The Associated Press reports.

The suit was filed by Maui substitute teacher David Garner and
by other substitutes against the state and the Department of
Education demanding back pay based on a 1996 state law that
requires schools to pay substitute teachers a daily amount based
on the salary of a teacher with four years of college education.

That 8-year-old law, which is known as Act 89, specifically
states that the daily pay rate for substitutes "shall be based
on the annual entry step salary rate established for a Class II
teacher on the most current teacher's salary schedule."

Both parties also stated that regardless of how the state judge
rules on the case, the verdict would be appealed to the Hawaii
Supreme Court. However, according to the Plaintiff's lawyers, if
they prevail, the state will have to pay them even more money
because they will be entitled to interest on the amount owed.

Commenting on the suit, state attorneys say that substitutes
already earn the correct amount, the same as instructors with
four years of college education or who hold a bachelor's degree.

HOMETOWN FINANCIAL: CA Judge Certifies Class in Credit Card Suit
A lawsuit filed in California against Hometown Financial
Services by Eufaula woman who claims she was ripped off by its
credit card scheme was certified as a nationwide class action,
the Eufaula Tribune reports.

Birmingham attorney Brent Irby, who represents Connie McAdams in
the lawsuit, said that a judge in San Diego recently certified
the class.  With class certification granted the suit will now
be representing thousands of consumers across the country that
were also victims of this credit card scheme, which Mr. Irby
estimates could reach roughly 30,000 class members.

Mr. Irby believes the Company should be held accountable for
targeting consumers with poor credit and then taking advantage
of them by never sending promised credit cards. He further
stated that the company intentionally targets those with poor
credit histories.

However, in court filings in California, attorneys for Hometown
disputed the claims, defense attorney Leonard Burgess even told
The Tribune earlier, "We deny the allegations."

ILLINOIS: Attorney General Sues Companies Over Medicare Fraud
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan filed suit in federal
court against a group of companies - including two Canadian
telemarketing firms - that used confusion over a new federal
government Medicare discount prescription drug card program to
drain money out of consumers' checking accounts after convincing
them to give up sensitive financial information.

According to an investigation by Madigan's office, approximately
103 Illinois consumers were billed nearly $90,000, which was
debited out of their checking accounts after a smooth and
aggressive sales pitch led them to provide to the salespeople
the bank routing information from the bottom of their checks.

The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Springfield, Illinois
names as defendants:

     (1) Global Benefits Group Corporation;

     (2) Eileen de Oliveira, the general manager of Global

     (3) Leonardo de Oliveira, the president of Global Benefits;

     (4) John Doe 1, doing business as International Marketing
         Service and Medications 4 Less; and

     (5) John Doe 2, doing business as Euro Banca.

"Unfortunately, new programs bring new opportunities for fraud.
Con artists taking advantage of the confusion created during the
first stages of the Medicare card sign-up have victimized
elderly, and often low-income, Illinoisans - some of our most
vulnerable residents," AG Madigan said.  "The large number of
cards being offered and the complexity of the program allow
these scam artists to sneak in, potentially undetected."

According to the lawsuit, Global Benefits acted as the conduit
for Canadian and other telemarketers, including Medications 4
Less and Euro Banca, to debit money from consumers' checking
accounts. Under one variation of the alleged scam, Illinois
seniors received calls from Canadian telemarketers who offered
savings of 50 to 80 percent off of their drug purchases, leading
them to believe the callers were referring to the federally
approved Medicare discount drug program.

In another variation, the telemarketers promised a low-interest
credit card. In all instances, the telemarketers asked seniors
to read information from the bottom of their personal checks,
enabling the telemarketers, using desktop software, to create
what looks like an actual check from the consumer's checking
account. The consumer does not sign the check. This process is
legal under federal law if consumers provide the proper

AG Madigan noted that some consumers simply deny having provided
authorization for debits from their bank accounts. Many
consumers did not understand that once they read the numbers at
the bottom of their checks, the telemarketer would be able to
take money from their checking account. Other consumers
specifically told Medications 4 Less to wait until a specified
date to debit the money from their checking accounts and
believed the money would not be taken until that date. However,
once consumers provided their checking account information,
their accounts were debited for the Medications 4 Less offer.

In the case of Euro Banca, consumers believed they would receive
an unsecured credit card. Consumers provided their checking
account information to pay a fee for the card, but when they did
not receive the promised credit card, they began asking for
their money back.

Global Benefits arranged for Medications 4 Less, Euro Banca and
dozens of other telemarketers to have access to check debiting
services, enabling them to take money from consumers' checking
accounts merely by convincing them to read the numbers at the
bottom of their checks.

By the end of May 2004, approximately 22 Illinois consumers were
billed for the Medications 4 Less offer and approximately 81
Illinois consumers were billed for the Euro Banca offer.

Madigan's suit seeks a nationwide injunction against the
defendants, prohibiting further violations of consumer
protection laws. In addition, Madigan's suit seeks from each
defendant a civil statutory penalty of $50,000, additional civil
penalties of $50,000 per violation found to have been committed
with the intent to defraud and reimbursement for the costs of
prosecution and investigation.

Bureau Chief Elizabeth Blackston is handling the case for AG
Madigan's Springfield Consumer Fraud Bureau.

KPMG DEFENDANTS: Reaches $115M Lawsuit Settlement With Investors
Accounting firms KPMG Bedrijfsrevisoren of Belgium and KPMG LLP
of the United States (together the "KPMG Defendants") have
agreed to pay a total of $115 million to settle a shareholder
lawsuit stemming from the collapse of Lernout & Hauspie Speech
Products, N.V., a Belgian software company.

The payment by the KPMG Defendants represents one of the largest
combined recoveries from accounting firms in a securities class
action, according to Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt &
Pucillo (www.bermanesq.com), one of three law firms representing
co-lead plaintiffs in the case.

Investors who purchased Lernout & Hauspie common stock on the
Nasdaq Stock Market, purchased Lernout & Hauspie call options,
or sold Lernout & Hauspie put options on any U.S.-based options
exchange from April 28, 1998, through and including November 9,
2000 (the Class Period), are eligible to file claims to share in
the settlement proceeds. The settlement requires court approval
before becoming final.

"Lernout & Hauspie used almost every accounting trick in the
book to scam investors, which led to the company's demise," said
Berman DeValerio partner Jeffrey C. Block. "The recovery is a
win for investors, particularly considering the company went

The lawsuit, pending in U.S. District Court for the District of
Massachusetts, claimed that Lernout & Hauspie and its top
executives used deceptive accounting practices to artificially
inflate the company's reported revenues by an astounding 64
percent - or a total of $377 million - over a two-and-a-half-
year period.

The settlement ends litigation against the KPMG Defendants. The
case is continuing against other defendants, including Lernout &
Hauspie's former top officers, who are currently facing criminal
charges in Belgium. For more information about this case, visit

Berman DeValerio is co-lead counsel in the case, along with the
law firms of Shalov Stone & Bonner LLP and Cauley Bowman Carney
& Williams, PLLC. The firms represent a group of individual
investors as lead plaintiffs.

MARYLAND: Non-Profit Group Benefits From Lawsuit Settlements
Non-profit group CHAI, or Comprehensive Housing Assistance Inc.,
has been the recipient of $90,000 from two class action
settlements, which were reached by two Baltimore attorneys who
were faced with the question of where to place it's unclaimed
funds, the Baltimore Jewish Times reports.

The group, which was not involved in the litigation is receiving
the money through a process called "cy pres" - when members of a
class action cannot be reached to receive their portion of the
settlement, the money can be allocated for other purposes at the
court's discretion.

According to CHAI's Executive Director Kenneth N. Gelula, with
an annual budget of about $1.5 million this year his group will
make good use of the funds. He further adds, "We want the money
to be used to support those activities that are related to the

Both suits were filed in Maryland federal court, against title
companies that, the suits allege, were utilizing so-called "sham
entities" to secure kickbacks for themselves, charging clients
more money than necessary in loan closings. The two title
companies were Millenium Title and Fountainhead Title Group.

Millenium settled its suit earlier this year with the 3,000-
member class action for $1.3 million, while Fountainhead settled
for $915,000 distributed to the 1,250 consumers in its case.

Both class actions, represented by Richard S. Gordon of the
Towson firm of Quinn, Gordon & Wolf and co-counsel Denis J.
Murphy of Civil Justice Inc., a Baltimore City non-profit,
resulted in settlements totaling $2.2 million.

Mr. Gordon explains that since some of the class members in the
class actions cannot be located to receive their portion of the
settlement or do not, for whatever reason, cash their checks,
they decided to employ the cy pres process. Under cy pres, they
can petition the court to have the remaining money placed into a
fund or in the case of the two title company settlements,
counsel petitioned to donate the money to relevant charities.

MASONITE SETTLEMENT: Deadline For Claims Set January 15, 2005
The court-approved class action settlement with Masonite
Corporation has so far paid out over $584 million to homeowners
for qualifying damage to their Masonite hardboard siding. More
homes are still out there, and their owners may be eligible to
get a payment - but an important deadline to submit claims is
approaching, according to lawyers for the homeowners. "In 1998,
Masonite and International Paper Company did the right thing and
agreed to pay homeowners for all qualifying siding damage under
the terms of a fair settlement, but claims for older
installations - those during the 1980's - must be submitted by
January 15, 2005," noted attorney Jonathan Selbin, of Lieff
Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, New York.

A nationwide class action settlement approved by an Alabama
state court in 1998 set up a 10-year claims process through an
independent claims administrator. For those with Masonite
hardboard siding installed during the 1980's, the claims
deadline was set at January 15, 2005. For those with Masonite
hardboard siding installed between 1990 and January 15, 1998,
the deadline was set at January 15, 2008. "According to recent
figures more than 250,000 claims have been received, and more
than $584 million has been paid to homeowners with qualifying
siding damage. That is a tremendous victory for homeowners,"
said attorney Richard Dorman of Cunningham, Bounds, Yance,
Crowder & Brown, of Mobile, Alabama, who also represents the
homeowners. "While some of the newer installations may have more
time, we encourage all homeowners with qualifying damage to
Masonite hardboard siding to take advantage of the settlement by
submitting their claims now," he added.

The settlement pays all claims for siding damage that qualifies
under the settlement, including thickness swelling, fungal
degradation, buckling, raised or popped fibers, and other types
of qualifying damage. Homeowners may send in a claim form to ask
for a payment from the settlement if they own a property with
qualifying Masonite hardboard siding damage. The amount of the
payments that homeowners are eligible to receive is determined
by the amount of qualifying damaged siding, the cost of siding
replacement, and the age of the siding. Some problems caused by
installation are not covered. "The payment formula has allowed
thousands of homeowners across the country to get significant
amounts of money that they can put toward replacing their siding
or anything else they want to use it for," Selbin observed.

Masonite hardboard siding was made from wood fiber, wax, and
resin, and was designed to look like conventional wood siding.
It was sold in both lap (board) and panel (sheet) applications
in various textures.

One Alabama homeowner, George Yurcisin, learned about the
settlement and sent in a claim form to ask for a payment for his
Masonite hardboard siding which was swelling and buckling, and
needed replacement. He commented, "I sent in all the paperwork,
and after they looked over the house, I got a check in the mail.
It was a real simple process." Yurcisin added, "I want the house
to look right."

Claim forms and more information can be obtained by calling
1-800-330-2722. The Court's 1998 official notice can be viewed
at http://www.masoniteclaims.com.

MECCA N.Y.: Recalls Chocolate Candy Due To Undeclared Milk, Nuts
Mecca N.Y., Inc of Bronx, New York is recalling 10 dozens of the
chocolate candy with the brand name "Kinder Happy Hippo",
because it may contain undeclared milk and hazelnuts.  People
who have an allergy or severe sensitivity to milk and hazelnuts
run the risk of serious or life threatening allergic reaction if
they consume this product.

"KINDER HAPPY HIPPO" was distributed in New York State in the
Manhattan areas through deli grocery stores.  The product comes
in a light brown/chocolate colored box that weighs 4 oz. and the
product is designed in the shape of a hippo.  The brand name of
the product is "Kinder Happy Hippo" and comes only in a
chocolate flavor.  No illnesses have been reported to date.

The recall was initiated after routine sampling by a New York
State Department of Agriculture and Markets inspector and by
analysis by the food laboratory which revealed the presence of
milk proteins and hazelnuts in this product which packaging did
not reveal the presence of these allergens (milk and hazelnuts).

For more details, contact the Company by Phone: (718) 267-8506.

MEDQUIST INC.: Reveals Further Information On South Broward Suit
MedQuist Inc. (Pink Sheets: MEDQ), has been named as defendant
in a class action filed in the United States District Court for
the Central District of California. The action, entitled South
Broward Hospital District, dba Memorial Regional Hospital, et
al. v. MedQuist, Inc. et al., Case No. CV-04-7520-TJH-VBKx, was
filed with the Court on September 9, 2004 against the company
and certain present and former company officials, purportedly on
behalf of an alleged class of non-governmental hospitals and
medical centers that the complaint claims were wrongfully and
fraudulently overcharged for transcription services by

The complaint charges fraud, violation of the California
Business and Professional Code, unjust enrichment, conversion,
negligent supervision and violation of the federal RICO statute.
Plaintiffs seek damages in an unspecified amount, plus costs and
interest, an injunction against alleged continuing illegal
activities, an accounting, punitive damages and attorneys' fees.
Named, as defendants in addition to the company, are its
executive vice president of marketing and new business
development, a senior vice president, its former executive vice
president and chief legal officer, and its former executive vice
president and chief financial officer. MedQuist has retained the
law firm of Winston & Strawn LLP to represent it in the matter.

"We are diligently addressing this matter while continuing to
deliver the highest levels of service to our customers," said
MedQuist Chief Executive Officer Howard S. Hoffmann. "Although
MedQuist does not comment on the specifics of any litigation,"
he continued, "we will do what is necessary to achieve an
outcome that is in the best interests of our customers,
employees and shareholders."

For more details, contact Montieth M. Illingworth of Ruder Finn
Corporate & Financial by Phone: 212-715-1679 or by E-mail:
illingworthm@ruderfinn.com OR Renee Calabro of Ruder Finn
Corporate & Financial by Phone: 212-583-2750 or by E-mail:

MERCK & CO.: FL Law Firm Mulls Filing Vioxx Suit, Seeks Clients
A Tallahassee law firm is pondering its options on whether to
join the worldwide legal action against the makers of arthritis
drug Vioxx, which was recently recalled from the market after
clinical trials revealed a marked increase in heart attacks and
strokes upon taking the medication, according to Jim Messer of
Fonvielle, Lewis, Foote & Messer, the Tallahassee.com reports.

Mr. Messer stated that his firm, which specializes in product-
liability and personal-injury litigation "was considering"
several cases involving Vioxx but hastily added that they have
not filed suit. Proof of these considerations was the firm's
recent decision to run an advertisement in Thursday's
Tallahassee Democrat offering free consultations to people who
think Vioxx has injured them.

Merck & Co., the manufacturer of the arthritis drug is already
facing several class action lawsuits worldwide. The suit
includes a NIS 1.4 billion suit in Israel that alleges Merck
knew of the problems with drug, but chose not to act on it.
Similar suits were also filed in Canada, and in Oklahoma City
and Illinois in the United States.

In April, a suit was also filed in Kansas City, Missouri,
alleging a 34-year-old woman died of a heart attack after she
had taken the drug for 30 months. Another suit against Merck was
also filed in California in July 2003.

NDCHEALTH CORPORATION: Plaintiffs File Amended Stock Suit in GA
Plaintiffs filed an amended securities class action against
NDCHealth Corporation in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of Georgia.  The suit also names as
defendants two of the Company's officers, Walter Hoff and
Randolph Hutto.

The suit, styled "Garfield v. NDCHealth Corp. et al., was filed
on behalf of all purchasers of the Company's common stock during
the period October 1, 2003 through March 31, 2004.  The suit
alleges that the Company employed improper revenue recognition
practices in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting

The Complaint was filed shortly after the Company's April 1,
2004 announcement that it would delay the release of its fiscal
third quarter financial results pending the completion of a
special independent review of the timing of recognition of
revenue related to sales of the Company's physician practice
management systems through value added resellers.

On August 9, 2004, the Complaint was amended to extend the
putative class period to include the period from August 21, 2002
through April 19, 2004 and to add additional claims related to
the timing of the Company's write-down of its investment in
MedUnite.  On September 1, 2004, the Complaint was amended
further to include Charles W. Miller, David H. Shenk, James W.
FitzGibbons and Lee Adrean, each an officer of the Company, and
Ernst & Young LLP, the Company's independent registered public
accounting firm, as additional defendants.

As amended, the Complaint asserts violations of Section 10(b) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act.
The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages, attorney's fees and
costs, and prejudgment interest.

On April 22, 2004, another putative class action captioned
"Datwani v. NDCHealth Corp., et al." was filed on behalf of all
purchasers of NDCHealth common stock during the period October
1, 2003 through March 31, 2004 against NDC, Hoff and Hutto in
the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania.  The allegations in this lawsuit are similar to
those made in the action above.  The plaintiffs voluntarily
dismissed the lawsuit July 20, 2004.

NORTHWESTERN CORPORATION: DE Bankruptcy Court Approves Agreement
The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware has
approved an agreement that settles and dismisses all claims
associated with consolidated securities class action lawsuits
and derivative cases filed against the NorthWestern Corporation.

As previously publicized, NorthWestern entered into a settlement
agreement with parties involved in certain pending class action
and derivative lawsuits involving the Company, its subsidiaries
and certain present and former officers and directors. Under the
terms of the settlement, all claims against the Company, its
subsidiaries and other parties will be dismissed without
admission of liability or wrongdoing. The agreement establishes
a settlement fund for class members in the amount of $41 million
of which approximately $37 million will be contributed by the
Company's insurance carriers and $4 million would be contributed
from other persons or parties.

The settlement is subject to approval by the U.S. District Court
for the District of South Dakota, where the consolidated class
action lawsuits and derivative cases are pending. The fees and
expenses of class counsel and administration costs will be paid
from the settlement fund. Assuming receipt of the final judicial
approval, plaintiffs lawyers in these lawsuits will be sending a
notice to all class members containing a more complete
description of the proposed settlement and the steps class
members must take in order to share in the proposed settlement
will be mailed to class members.

PA DISTRIBUTORS: Reaches $9M Stock Fraud Settlement With CA AG
California Attorney General Bill Lockyer's office reached a $9
million settlement of a lawsuit against PA Distributors (PAD)
that alleged the firm violated state securities law by not
adequately disclosing payments and conflicts of interest related
to deals made with broker-dealers to sell PIMCO mutual funds.

"California workers and retirees deserve complete honesty and
full disclosure when they make decisions to invest their hard-
earned money," said AG Lockyer. "Our securities laws rest on
that foundation. To protect investors, strong enforcement of
these laws is crucial. That's why we brought this case, and
that's why we will continue to investigate and prosecute

AG Lockyer filed in Sacramento County Superior Court the
settlement of the complaint against PAD - formerly known as
PIMCO Advisors Distributors - along with the complaint itself.
PAD is the distributor and principal underwriter of PIMCO Funds,
including the Pacific Investment Management Series family of
mutual funds.  The court approved the settlement, which takes
effect immediately.

The California settlement requires PAD to pay $5 million in
civil penalties, and another $4 million to cover costs. The $5
million in penalties will go to the state general fund. A
separate federal settlement announced today by the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) requires PAD and
affiliated entities to pay $11.6 million.  AG Lockyer's office
and the SEC worked jointly on the PAD case.

Aside from monetary terms, the state's settlement memorializes
voluntary reforms adopted by PAD in response to Lockyer's
investigation. PAD will more fully inform investors about so-
called "shelf space" arrangements it enters with broker-dealers
to secure either sales of PIMCO funds or spots on lists of
recommended buys. These procedures will require PAD to disclose
both shelf space payments and the services those payments buy
from broker-dealers. Additionally, PAD will take steps to enter
written shelf space agreements that detail the terms of the

Pursuant to its own action, and a subsequent ban approved in
August by the SEC, PAD has ended its practice of directing
commission payments for its portfolio transactions to broker-
dealers in return for sales of PIMCO mutual funds. The practice
is known as directed brokerage. Regulators and law enforcement
officials view directed brokerage as particularly harmful to
investors because, unlike cash payments for shelf space,
commissions come out of mutual funds' assets.

The settlement also requires PAD to cooperate with AG Lockyer's
ongoing probe into mutual fund sales practices. Evidence
provided by PAD can be used in other enforcement actions.

AG Lockyer's investigation has helped expose shelf-space
agreements as a universal practice in the $7 trillion mutual
fund industry, and helped put an end to the most egregious
arrangements, such as directed brokerage. The agreements have
huge implications for investors because they create incentives
for broker-dealers to base investment recommendations on their
own interests, rather than consumers', the Attorney General's
office said in a statement.

From January 2000 through the present, PAD paid broker-dealers
about $79 million under shelf-space agreements, according to the
complaint. The $79 million included roughly $8.1 million in
directed brokerage, the complaint alleges. During this period,
PAD maintained shelf space agreements with some of Wall Street's
biggest names.

The PAD case is the first enforcement action Lockyer has taken
against a mutual fund firm using a law he sponsored which took
effect January 1, 2004. The statute, SB 434, expanded the
Attorney General's authority in securities fraud cases.
Specifically, the law grants the Attorney General concurrent
jurisdiction with the Commissioner of Corporations to
investigate violations of the state Corporate Securities Law
(CSL) and to bring civil enforcement actions for such

Wielding his new authority, AG Lockyer immediately launched his
wide-ranging, ongoing investigation into mutual fund sales
practices.  AG Lockyer said the investigation will remain
aggressive, and he predicted it will continue to be productive.
Two other major, California-based mutual fund families -Franklin
Templeton Funds and American Funds - are under investigation.
The probe also is targeting broker-dealers.

The CSL prohibits fraud in the sale of securities, including
mutual funds. Under the CSL, fraud includes failure to disclose
material facts that a consumer would consider important to know
in deciding whether to make a particular investment.

The shelf space arrangements qualify as such material facts,
Lockyer's complaint states, because they "create an incentive
for a broker-dealer to highlight, feature or recommend funds
that best compensate the broker dealer or to meet other promises
rather than to recommend investments that meet the customer's
personal investment needs." The complaint adds, "The failure to
adequately disclose these agreements prevents the prospective
mutual fund investor from recognizing this potential and/or
actual conflict of interest."

The complaint alleges PAD failed to adequately disclose, among
other material facts: the existence of the shelf space
arrangements; and broker-dealers' various obligations under the
agreements, including the requirement to tout PIMCO mutual
funds, via placement on intranet web sites or "preferred" or
"recommended" lists.

Employees of mutual funds or broker-dealers who have knowledge
of securities law violations by their companies should contact
the Attorney General's Whistleblower Hotline at 800-952-5225
(for California residents) or 916-322-3360 (for out-of-state

PRECISION TOYOTA: AZ A.G. Goddard Sues Over False Car Ads
Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard filed suit against
Precision Toyota of Tucson alleging the dealer falsely
advertised new cars for sale at 50 percent off the manufacture's
suggested retail price, violating provisions of the Arizona
Consumer Fraud Act.

The lawsuit, filed in Pima Superior Court, is against Rowe
Enterprises, Inc., doing business as Precision Toyota of Tucson.
The lawsuit alleges that the Company advertised this sale widely
in a variety of methods including placing ads in area
newspapers, on area radio stations, and on local television
during prime time coverage of the Summer Olympics.

The ads indicated that Precision Toyota was celebrating 50 years
in business by offering "50% off MSRP" on every new Toyota in
stock. However, when consumers visited or called the dealership
to take advantage of this sale, they were told they could not
buy a new Toyota for 50 percent off, the complaint alleges.
Instead, the lawsuit alleges, Precision Toyota turned away
consumers who offered to pay cash to purchase a new car and also
told consumers that the "50% off MSRP" sale applied only to

The lawsuit outlined one example: A consumer was offered a 36-
month lease based on a MSRP of $29,943, with a down payment of
$1,967, and a monthly lease payment of $599. The offer included
50 percent off the residual value normally paid at the end of
the lease, and this cost was valued at $13,600, so the sale
price was $6,800.

"This bait and switch tactic is intolerable," AG Goddard said in
a statement.  "Consumers count on a fair and truthful
marketplace. Auto dealers and Arizona businesses are on notice
that the Attorney General's Office will not permit them to use
false advertising to lure consumers into their showrooms, stores
or companies."

The Attorney General's Office is asking the Pima County Superior
Court to:

     (1) Prohibit the Company from engaging in false

     (2) Order the Company to engage in clear and truthful

     (3) Offer restitution for consumers;

     (4) Reimburse attorneys' fees and investigation costs;

     (5) Imposed a penalty of up to $10,000 for each willful
         violation of the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act;

Consumers who attempted to take advantage of this sale and
couldn't, can file a consumer complaint with the Attorney
General's Office by visiting the Attorney General's Website:
http://www.azag.gov,or contact the Tucson office by Phone:

RITE AID: AZ A.G. Goddard Forges Tobacco Sales Policies Pact
Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard forged an agreement with
Rite Aid Corporation that will establish positive store policies
and business practices aimed at reducing tobacco product sales
to minors.  Rite Aid is a national drug store chain that is
opening stores in Arizona.

Rite Aid voluntarily entered an "Assurance of Voluntary
Compliance" agreement with the Arizona Attorney General's
Office, 20 other Attorneys General and the District of Columbia
to show their support in reducing the number of young people who
become addicted to tobacco products.

The Rite Aid agreement is the most recent accord produced by an
ongoing, multi-state enforcement effort, seeking to secure
similar agreements.  Arizona has entered into similar
arrangements with Walgreens, Wal-Mart, ExxonMobile, ARCO,
British Petroleum and Amoco.

"Youth tobacco use is a serious issue in Arizona," AG Goddard
said in a statement.  "This is a great step in protecting
Arizona youth, and I applaud Rite Aid for coming to the table.
Together with other companies who have entered into this
agreement, I am confident we can combat the rising number of
youth smokers."

Under the agreement, Rite Aid must:

     (1) Minimize the use of underage persons in sales positions
         that involve the sale of tobacco products.

     (2) Train employees on state and local laws and internal
         company policies regarding tobacco sales to minors.

     (3) Require its employees to check the ID of any person
         attempting to purchase tobacco when that person appears
         to be under the age of 27.

     (4) Not sell candy, chewing gum or other items
         designed to look like cigarettes.

     (5) Use cash registers programmed to prompt ID checks on
         all tobacco sales.

     (6) Hire an independent entity to conduct random compliance
         checks over 10 percent of all Rite Aid stores in the
         participating states every six months.

     (7) Prohibit self-service displays of cigarettes, chewing
         tobacco and snuff.

The Attorneys General have long recognized that youth access to
tobacco products is one of the nation's most serious public
health problems.  Across the country, 2,000 teenagers begin
smoking each day, one-third of which will ultimately die of a
tobacco-related disease.  In Arizona, nearly 21 percent of all
smokers are under the age of 18.

The Tobacco Enforcement Unit of the Arizona Attorney's Office
monitors the retailer compliance with Arizona laws regarding the
sale of tobacco products.  To report suspected violations of
Arizona's youth tobacco laws, contact the Arizona Attorney
General's Office Youth Tobacco Inspection Information and
Referral Line by Phone: (602) 542-7747.

RJ REYNOLDS: CA Court Avows Dismissal of Youth Marketing Lawsuit
The Fourth Appellate District Court of Appeal in California has
upheld the dismissal of a class action lawsuit filed against
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, Brown & Williamson Tobacco
Corporation and other major U.S. cigarette manufacturers.

The lawsuit, brought by Devin Daniels and other individuals as
class representatives, was filed on behalf of all California
resident minors (under the age of 18) who smoked one or more
cigarettes between April 2, 1994, and Dec. 31, 1999, and who
were exposed to the defendants' marketing and advertising
activities in the state during that period.

Superior Court Judge Ronald Prager had granted the defendants'
motion for summary judgment on Sept. 13, 2002, principally on
First Amendment and preemption (by the Federal Cigarette
Labeling and Advertising Act) grounds.

On Oct. 6, a California court of appeal panel upheld that
decision primarily on the basis of preemption, concluding that,
"Congress has given the FTC [Federal Trade Commission] the
exclusive authority to address society's concern about smoking
and health by regulation of cigarette advertising and promotion,
and has preempted 'state regulation of cigarette advertising
that attempts to address the same concern, even with respect to

Martin L. Holton III, vice president and assistant general
counsel for R.J. Reynolds, said, "We are pleased that the court
of appeal agreed with Judge Prager and with us that the
plaintiffs' efforts to use state laws to regulate lawful
cigarette advertising and promotion were not appropriate."

RJ REYNOLDS: NY, MD, IL AGs Settle "Kool MIXX" Marketing Lawsuit
New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, Maryland Attorney
General J. Joseph Curran, Jr. and Illinois Attorney General Lisa
Madigan reached a settlement of their lawsuits against the Brown
& Williamson Tobacco Co. over the marketing of Kool cigarettes.

The lawsuits had asserted that the company's 2004 "Kool MIXX"
promotion - which was billed by the company as a "celebration"
of Hip Hop music and culture - violated the 1998 tobacco Master
Settlement Agreement (MSA) by targeting African American youth.
The settlement was reached with R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., which
acquired the assets of Brown & Williamson in July.  Under the
settlement, R.J. Reynolds agreed to substantial limitations on
all future "Kool MIXX" promotions, and agreed to pay $1.46
million to be used for youth smoking prevention purposes.

"This settlement is important for two reasons. First, it sends a
strong message to the tobacco industry that we will not tolerate
efforts to market cigarettes to children," said Attorney General
Spitzer.  "Second, this is the first time that the industry has
agreed to marketing limitations that are even stricter than
those set forth in the MSA, which will be helpful in future
enforcement efforts.  Overall, this landmark settlement will
reduce the number of children who start smoking, and thereby
protect them from a lifetime of addiction and disease."

"As the nation's leading cause of preventable death, tobacco
kills over 45,000 African Americans each year. This campaign
targeted a hip hop audience, including youth. I hope this
settlement sends a strong message that kids are off-limits for
tobacco companies," said Maryland Attorney General Joseph

"The tobacco industry has been creative when it comes to trying
to lure our children into a lifetime of addiction. Since the
Master Settlement Agreement was reached in 1998, companies have
tried to get around the prohibition on marketing to youth,"
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan said.  "This settlement
says 'no more.' No more cartoons on packages. No more graffiti
spray paint games on CD-ROMs. No more advertising in magazines
popular with teens. No more packages that can be pieced together
to make a puzzle."

She continued, "This case demonstrates that for every trick the
tobacco industry tries to get around the Master Settlement
Agreement, we will fight back to protect the health of our

The "Kool MIXX" promotion focused on Hip Hop music and culture,
and included a wide variety of marketing efforts, including:

     (1) Hip Hop DJ "mixing" competitions with cash prizes held
         in New York, Illinois, Maryland and 10 other states;

     (2) the nationwide distribution of over 1 million CD-ROMs
         featuring Hip Hop music and interactive games;

     (3) the distribution of over 750,000 "special edition" Kool
         cigarette packs with Hip Hop design graphics; and

     (4) the creation of a "House of Menthol" website that had a
         flawed "age verification" system.

Spitzer, Curran and Madigan all commenced lawsuits this summer,
charging that the promotion targeted children and violated the
MSA's prohibition against the distribution of brand name

Under the settlement, R.J. Reynolds agreed to significant
restrictions on all future Kool MIXX promotions, including:

     (i) Prohibiting use of the words "Kool," "Mixx" or "House
         of Menthol" on any merchandise;

    (ii) Prohibiting the use of Hip Hop songs and interactive
         games on the CD-ROM;

   (iii) Limiting the distribution of CD-ROMs to "adult-only"
         facilities and by mail to known adult smokers;

    (iv) Prohibiting the sale of "special edition" packs in
         retail stores, and instead limiting distribution to
         "adult-only" facilities;

     (v) Prohibiting the separate "House of Menthol" website;

    (vi) Ensuring that any "Kool MIXX" print advertisements are
         placed only in magazines with relatively low youth

In addition, R.J. Reynolds agreed to pay a total of $1.46
million to four not-for-profit organizations, to be used for
youth smoking prevention and cessation programs in those
minority communities that had been the focus of the Kool MIXX

Attorneys General Spitzer, Madigan and Curran applauded R.J.
Reynolds for recognizing the problems created by Brown &
Williamson's marketing campaign, and for agreeing to correct
those problems.  The settlement will be submitted to the trial
courts in New York, Maryland and Illinois, and will become final
as soon as it has been approved by all three courts.

The litigation and settlement were handled by New York State
Assistant Attorneys General Christine Morrison and Joy
Feigenbaum, under the direction of Consumer Bureau Chief Thomas
Conway; by Illinois Assistant Attorneys General Ben Weinberg and
Paul Gaynor; and by Maryland Assistant Attorney General Marlene

RUNTAL NORTH: Recalls Towel Radiators Due To Burn, Injury Hazard
Runtal North America, Inc. is cooperating with the Consumer
Product Safety Commission (CPSC) by voluntarily recalling 200
Runtal Sundance Towel Radiators.  The towel rack may overheat
and rupture when overloaded with towels, releasing heated fluid
which could result in a burn injury.  The Company has received
one report of a Sundance Towel Radiator rupturing, but no
injuries have been reported.

The Sundance Towel Radiator is a wall-mounted towel warmer and
decorative heater.  The product warms towels and provides
radiant heat through a thermal element inside the fluid-filled
tubular rack.

Runtal North America, Inc. sold these products at the Web site
www.runtalsundance.com between November 2003 and July 2004, and
through the Web sites of Bed, Bath and Beyond and eQwip on a
limited basis between November 2003 and January 2004 for about

Consumers should immediately stop using the heater function with
towels loaded on the top rungs. Runtal is replacing all current
Sundance units with new units incorporating an improved
temperature control and monitoring system at no cost to the
consumer.  Sundance is contacting every customer who purchased
this product by letter and by phone to arrange for pick-up and
replacement.  For more details, contact the Company by Phone:
800-526-2621 between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through

SPECTRALINK CORPORATION: Forges $1.5M Securities Suit Settlement
SpectraLink Corporation (Nasdaq: SLNK), an industry pioneer in
enterprise wireless communications, which is facing a
consolidated class action securities lawsuits filed on February
2002 at the United States District Court for District of
Colorado against the company and certain of its officers and
directors has been settled.

The federal judge presiding over the case granted final approval
of the $1.5 million negotiated settlement. SpectraLink's
insurance carrier has covered the entire amount of the

"I am pleased to put this issue behind us," said John Elms,
SpectraLink president and CEO. "While the company continues to
believe that its directors and officers acted properly at all
times, by settling the suit within coverage limits, we have
avoided further diversion of management time spent defending
these claims and additional costs to the company. The settlement
specifically provides that it is not to be construed as any
admission or concession that any of the claims made by the
plaintiffs were accurate or otherwise valid, or that SpectraLink
or any of its officers, directors or employees acted

The consolidated suits, first reported in the February 12, 2002
edition of the CAR newsletter, was filed on behalf of purchasers
of SpectraLink Corporation's (Nasdaq: SLNK) publicly traded
securities during the period between July 19, 2001 and January
11, 2002 and accuses defendants of violating 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 during the class period,
thereby artificially inflating the price of Company securities.

Throughout the class period, as alleged in the complaint,
defendants issued statements which represented that the Company
was experiencing continued growth and increasing its market
share and would continue to do so in the future.

Unbeknownst to investors, however, the Company was suffering
from a host of undisclosed adverse factors which were negatively
impacting its business and which would cause it to report
declining financial results, materially less than the market
expectations defendants had caused and cultivated.

The company remains in active negotiations to settle the two
derivative actions related to this case. The defendants believe
that these lawsuits are without merit and intend to vigorously
defend themselves if a successful settlement cannot be reached.

UNITED STATES: Scientists Seek Closer Look at Cox-2 Inhibitors
Scientists in the United States and Great Britain are asking for
a closer look at medications similar to Vioxx, after the heavily
advertised arthritis drug, was recalled last week, the
Associated Press reports.

Merck & Co. recalled its popular medication after a study
suggested it doubled the risk of heart attacks and strokes.
Hundreds of people who took Vioxx have initiated several class
actions this week against the Company.  This week, the European
Medicines Agency in London announced that it would review all
drugs of this type.

The New England Journal of Medicine published two reports
Wednesday on the internet, two weeks ahead of their planned
print publication to inform doctors and patients who are
considering whether to stop using the drugs.

A report by University of Pennsylvania cardiologist Dr. Garret
Fitzgerald suggested that problems might extend to the entire
class of medications, not just Vioxx, specifically citing
Pfizer's Celebrex.  Celebrex is the 10th most popular drug in
the United States, with annual sales of $2.7 billion, up 5
percent in a year, according to IMS Health, a company that
tracks drug industry trends.

Dr. Fitzgerald stated that studies done five years ago when
Celebrex and Vioxx were approved suggest the same mechanism that
inhibits inflammation and makes the drugs easier on the stomach
than traditional painkillers also blocks a substance that
prevents heart problems, according to AP.  "I've been concerned
all along," he said.  "I believe this is a class effect," not
just a problem with Vioxx."

Pfizer, maker of Celebrex and a newer but similar drug Bextra,
disputed the medical journal reports, saying its drugs are safe.
"The proof is really in the real-world data, and it hasn't been
borne out," Pfizer's medical director, Dr. Gail Cawkwell, said
of the heart problem risk, according to AP.

Dr. Cawkwell called Dr. Fitzgerald's contention "an interesting
theory," but said, "there is no evidence" of increased risk of
heart problems among the 75 million Americans who have taken
Celebrex.  Long-term studies are not yet available on Bextra,
which was approved in 2001.

Another article written in the same journal by Dr. Eric Topol of
the Cleveland Clinic chastised the United States Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) for not requiring Merck to do studies
investigating heart problems with Vioxx when hints of them first
appeared years ago, and for allowing the company to blitz
consumers with TV ads touting the drug.  He also called for a
congressional review of the matter.

Vioxx was the largest prescription drug withdrawal in history,
"but had the many warning signs along the way been heeded, such
a debacle could have been prevented," Dr. Topol wrote, according
to AP. "Neither Merck nor the FDA fulfilled its responsibilities
to the public...I believe there should be a full Congressional
review of this case."

An FDA spokeswoman said the agency had no comment, according to
AP.  Last week, FDA officials said problems were limited to
Vioxx.  Merck and FDA officials said the mechanism underlying
the problem with Vioxx wasn't known.

However, Dr. FitzGerald and colleagues published two studies in
1999 and another in 2001 suggesting that by selectively blocking
one of the two substances called prostaglandins that lead to
inflammation, these so-called cox-2 inhibitors were sparing the
stomach at the expense of the heart.  "There's a good
prostaglandin and a bad prostaglandin as far as the heart is
concerned," he explained, AP reports.

Suppressing both, as older painkillers like aspirin and other
non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or NSAIDS do, helps the
heart.  However, shutting down just the "good" one raises the
risk of high blood pressure, hardening of the arteries and
clotting, he continued.

Dr. FitzGerald also challenged Pfizer's contention that no
science shows increased risk from Celebrex.  The original report
from one study involving Celebrex found no increased risk of
heart problems, but it covered only six months of a year-long
study, according to the cardiologist.  A look at the full data
"reveals signs of increased cardiovascular risk," he writes.

                 New Securities Fraud Cases

DIGIMARC CORPORATION: Lerach Coughlin Lodges OR Securities Suit
The law firm of Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins
LLP ("Lerach Coughlin") initiated a class action in the United
States District Court for the District of Oregon on behalf of
purchasers of Digimarc Corp. ("Digimarc") (NASDAQ:DMRC) publicly
traded securities during the period between April 17, 2002 and
July 28, 2004 (the "Class Period").

The complaint charges Digimarc and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. Digimarc is a supplier of secure personal identification
systems, providing more than 60 million personal identification
documents and driver licenses per year.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
caused Digimarc's shares to trade at artificially inflated
levels through the issuance of false and misleading financial
statements. As a result of this inflation, defendants were able
to sell 248,450 shares of their Digimarc stock for net proceeds
of $3.1 million. Then, on July 28, 2004, defendants revealed
that Digimarc's second quarter 2004 results were much worse than
prior forecasts, later disclosing that the Company's 2002-2004
results would likely have to be restated to eliminate $1.2-$2.0
million in earnings due to the Company's improper capitalization
of costs. The stock dropped 25% to $9.04 per share on this news.

For more details, contact William Lerach or Darren Robbins of
Lerach Coughlin by Phone: 800-449-4900 or by E-mail:
wsl@lerachlaw.com or visit their Web site:

PRIMUS TELECOMMUNICATIONS: Murray Frank Files VA Securities Suit
The law firm of Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Virginia on behalf of all purchasers of
Primus Telecommunications Group securities ("Primus")
(Nasdaq:PRTL) during the period between August 5, 2003 through
July 29, 2004 (the "Class Period").

The complaint charges defendants with violations of 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 the Company failed to disclose and misrepresented
the following material adverse facts which were known to
defendants or recklessly disregarded by them: (1) that the
defendants knew or recklessly disregarded the fact that the
Company was operating in a new competitive reality where major
incumbent carriers used long distance offerings as a "loss
leader" to encourage customers to subscribe to their bundled
local, cellular and broadband services; (2) that the Company's
core long distance and dial-up Internet service provider
products ("ISP") were experiencing significant pricing
pressures; (3) that the Company's wireline long distance usage
was continuing to appreciably decline due to increased use of
cellular phones and Internet services; (4) that the Company was
forced to accelerate investment in voice-over-Internet protocol
("VoIP") and mobile virtual network operator ("MVNO") networks;
and (5) and that as a consequence of the foregoing, defendants
lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about
the Company's growth and progress.

On July 29, 2004, after the close of the market, Primus
announced its results for the quarter ended June 30, 2004. The
Company reported a net loss for the quarter of $15 million
compared to net income of $20 million in the second quarter of
2003. News of this shocked the market. Shares of Primus fell
$1.70 per share, or 50.75 percent, on July 29, 2004, to close at
$1.65 per share.

For more details, contact Eric J. Belfi or Aaron D. Patton of
Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP by Phone: (800) 497-8076 or
(212) 682-1818 by Fax: (212) 682-1892 by E-mail:

TOMMY HILFIGER: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges NY Securities Fraud Suit
The law firm of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz 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 the securities of Tommy Hilfiger
Corporation ("Tommy Hilfiger" or the "Company") (NYSE: TOM)
between November 3, 1999 and September 24, 2004, inclusive, (the
"Class Period") against defendants Tommy Hilfiger and certain
officers and directors of the Company.

The case name is Burkhalter v. Tommy Hilfiger Corporation, et

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

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, the
defendants made statements which were materially false and
misleading because they failed to disclose and misrepresented
the following adverse facts:

     (a) the Company had implemented and utilized an improper
         tax avoidance scheme whereby the Company shifted
         certain of its income to lower tax jurisdictions
         through the overpayment of commissions to a non-U.S.
         subsidiary located in the preferred tax jurisdiction;

     (b) the Company's reported income tax liability had been
         materially understated from at least 1999 because of
         the Company's use of the improper tax avoidance scheme;

     (c) the Company's effective tax rate would be significantly
         higher than the Company reported and the Company would
         likely have to pay back-taxes and significant fines.

For more details, contact Fred Taylor Isquith, Esq., Gregory M.
Nespole, Esq., Christopher Hinton, Esq., or Derek Behnke of Wolf
Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP by Mail: 270 Madison
Avenue, New York, NY 10016 by Phone: (800) 575-0735 by E-mail:
classmember@whafh.com or visit their Web site:

ZIX CORPORATION: Baron & Budd Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in TX
The law firm of Baron & Budd, P.C. initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Texas on behalf of purchasers of Zix Corporation
(Nasdaq: ZIXI)("Zix" or the "Company") securities during the
period between October 30, 2003 and May 4, 2004, inclusive (the
"Class Period").

The complaint charges Zix, as well as Zix corporate officers
John A. Ryan, Steve M. York, Ronald A. Woessner, Daniel S.
Nutkis, Russell J. Morgan, Wael Mohamed, and Dennis F.
Heathcote, with violations of Sections 10(b)-5 and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10(b)-5 promulgated
thereunder. More specifically, the Complaint alleges that the
Company failed to disclose and misrepresented the following
material adverse facts, which were known to defendants or
recklessly disregarded by them:

     (1) that the Company's deployment of e-prescription
         services was languishing;

     (2) that the Company seriously underestimated the hurdles
         of deploying e-prescription services in medical offices
         that lack up-to-date IT infrastructure;

     (3) as a result of these factors, the Company's deployment
         rate of 1,000 physicians a month was unattainable; and

     (4) as a consequence of the foregoing, the Company's
         projections lacked in any reasonable basis.

On May 4, 2004, Zix announced financial results for the first
quarter ended March 31, 2004. In the press release, the
Company's numbers were well below expectations. This news
shocked the market. Shares of Zix fell $2.12 per share or 15.58
percent on May 5, 2004, to close at $11.49 per share. On the
following day, shares of Zix fell an additional $2.60 per share
or 22.63 percent to close at $8.89 per share.

For more details, contact Randall K. Pulliam, Esq. or Max Jodry
of BARON & BUDD, P.C. by Phone: 1-800-222-2766 by E-mail:
info@baronbudd.com or visit their Web site:

ZIX CORPORATION: Glancy Binkow Files Securities Fraud Suit in TX
The law firm of Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas on behalf of a class (the "Class")
consisting of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise
acquired securities of Zix Corporation ("Zix" or the "Company")
(Nasdaq:ZIXI) between October 30, 2003 and May 4, 2004,
inclusive (the "Class Period").

The Complaint charges Zix and certain of the Company's executive
officers with violations of federal securities laws. Plaintiff
claims defendants' omissions and material misrepresentations
concerning Zix's operations and prospects artificially inflated
the Company's stock price, inflicting damages on investors. The
Complaint alleges that Zix, a global provider of e-messaging
protection and transaction services, failed to disclose and
misrepresented material adverse facts, which were known to or
recklessly disregarded by defendants, including:

     (1) that the Company's deployment of e-prescription
         services was languishing;

     (2) that the Company seriously underestimated the hurdles
         of deploying e-prescription services in medical offices
         that lack up-to-date IT infrastructure;

     (3) that, as a result of these factors, the Company's
         deployment rate of 1,000 physicians a month was
         unattainable; and

     (4) as a consequence of the foregoing, that the Company's
         projections lacked any reasonable basis.

On May 4, 2004, Zix announced financial results for the first
quarter ended March 31, 2004. In a press release, the Company
reported numbers well below expectations. This news shocked the
market, and on May 5, 2004, shares of Zix fell $2.12 per share,
or 15.58 percent, to close at $11.49 per share. The next day,
shares of Zix fell an additional $2.60 per share, or 22.63
percent, to close at $8.89 per share.

For more details, contact Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP by Phone:
(310) 201-9150 or (888) 773-9224 by E-mail: info@glancylaw.com
or visit their Web site: http://www.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


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.   Glenn Ruel Se¤orin, 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  * * *