/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/050727.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Wednesday, July 27, 2005, Vol. 7, No. 147
Headlines
ADVANTAGE BANK: Reaches Settlement For Ohio Interest Rate Suit
AMERITRADE HOLDING: DE Orders Shareholder Lawsuits Consolidated
ARIZONA: Court Asked To Exempt English-Learning Students
ASBURY AUTOMOTIVE: OR AG Launches Second Consumer Fraud Action
BEAVERTON FOODS: Recalls Wasabi Horseradish For Undeclared Eggs
CANADA POST: Quebec Class Action Over Internet Deal to Proceed
CARDIZEM CD: OK Customers To Receive Antitrust Settlement Share
CARDIZEM CD: PA Residents To Get Share in Antitrust Settlement
CARDIZEM CD: UT Consumers To Get Share in Antitrust Settlement
CRAFTMATIC ORGANIZATION: OH AG Forges Consumer Suit Settlement
CYBER POWER: Recalls 60,556 Power Inverters Due To Shock Hazard
DAN NELSON: Faces Native American Race Discrimination Lawsuit
FREEPORT-MCMORAN: Investors Keep Gold Lawsuit Alive in TX Court
GLOBAL CROSSING: Suit Settlement Hearing Set October 27, 2005
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: NZ Board OKs Deceptive Ads Suit V. Splenda
KMART CORPORATION: Settles Employees' Suit Over 2002 Bankruptcy
LITTLE HOCKING: Warns EPA of High C8 Levels in Customers' Blood
MAJESCO ENTERTAINMENT: Faces Securities Fraud Suits in NJ Court
MARYLAND: 14 People Injured in Greyhound Bus Accident on I-95
MASSACHUSETTS: Disabled Groups File Report on MBTA Facilities
MAYTAG CORPORATION: Shareholders File Suit V. Merger in DE Court
MAYTAG CORPORATION: Pension Fund Launches Investor Suit in Iowa
MAYTAG CORPORATION: Faces Securities Fraud Lawsuit in S.D. Iowa
NEW YORK: Consumer Affairs Dep't Files Fraud Suit V. Phone Firms
NORVERGENCE INC.: NJ Court Issues Judgment To Cancel Contracts
OREGON: Hundreds of Defendants Named in Diocese Bankruptcy Suit
RAMP CORPORATION: Shareholders File Stock Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
ROADHOUSE GRILL: SEC Files Fraud Case V. Ex-CFO Glenn Glasshagel
ROYAL DUTCH: Ex-Exec Charges UK FSA With Mischief in Stock Probe
SILICON LABORATORIES: Revised Settlement Submitted To NY Court
SOUTH KOREA: Financial Watchdog Fines Foreign Banks For Fraud
TAKE-TWO: Faces SEC, FTC Probe For Grand Theft Auto Sex Scene
UNION PACIFIC: Judge Sides With Plaintiffs in Health Care Suit
UNITE HERE: Ex-Labor Organizers File Overtime Wage Suit in WA
VIOXX LITIGATION: UCLA Cardiologist To Testify in TX Civil Suit
VISIONTECH USA: Recalls 280 Bicycle Aero Bars For Injury Hazard
WORLDCOM INC.: 3 Former Executives Opt To Settle Investors' Suit
Meetings, Conferences & Seminars
* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
* Online Teleconferences
New Securities Fraud Cases
CONAGRA FOODS: Dyer & Shuman Schedules Lead Plaintiff Deadline
LAZARD LTD.: Dyer & Shuman Schedules Lead Plaintiff Deadline
MAJESCO ENTERTAINMENT: Chitwood Harley Lodges Stock Suit in NJ
MAJESCO ENTERTAINMENT: Dyer & Shuman Sets Lead Plaintiff Cutoff
NAVARRE CORPORATION: Dyer & Schuman Sets Lead Plaintiff Deadline
*********
ADVANTAGE BANK: Reaches Settlement For Ohio Interest Rate Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Advantage Bank reached a settlement of a class action filed
against it in the Montgomery County Common Pleas in Dayton,
Ohio, alleging it charged inflated interest rates on homes sold
since February 2000, The Dayton Business Journal reports. Law
firm Statman, Harris, Siegel & Eyrich filed the suit on behalf
of the mortgage loan company's customers in Ohio, West Virginia
and Indiana.
Under the settlement, the Company agreed to pay its customers a
total of $475,000. Affected former bank customers could receive
up to $25.63 from the bank, and current customers could receive
$50 for a future Advantage Bank service. The settlement is
awaiting approval by Judge Michael Tucker of Montgomery County
Common Pleas Court, and will undergo a fairness hearing in
October.
Officials with Advantage Bank could not immediately be reached
for comment, the Dayton Business Journal reports.
AMERITRADE HOLDING: DE Orders Shareholder Lawsuits Consolidated
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Delaware Court of Chancery ordered consolidated the four
class actions filed against Ameritrade Holding Corporation and
its directors, alleging they breached their fiduciary duties to
the Company's shareholders. The suits will be consolidated
under the caption "In re Ameritrade Holding Corporation
Shareholders Litigation."
Four putative class actions were initially filed in May 2005.
The plaintiffs, Judith Friedman, Margaret Carroll, Mirfred
Partners LLC and Irgun Torah, bring the actions on behalf of
themselves and other stockholders of the Company. The
complaints allege that defendants breached their fiduciary
duties by refusing to consider a merger and acquisition proposal
by E*Trade Financial Corporation. The complaints request
injunctive relief and unspecified damages.
On May 31, 2005, the Court entered an order consolidating the
actions. Under the order, the plaintiffs are to file a
consolidated amended complaint and the defendants are not
required to respond to the original complaints. The plaintiffs
have not yet filed a consolidated amended complaint.
ARIZONA: Court Asked To Exempt English-Learning Students
--------------------------------------------------------
A lawyer asked the United States District Court for the District
of Arizona to exempt students learning English from the looming
requirement that high school seniors pass the Arizona's
Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMs) test in order to
graduate, KVOA4 reports.
Attorney Tim Hogan represents parents of English-learning
children, in a class action suit against the state, over the
adequacy of English-learning programs in K-12 schools. Mr.
Hogan said its unfair to require English language learners to
pass the AIMS test to graduate when they've been denied equal
educational opportunities guaranteed to them under federal law.
The AIMS graduation requirement begins in 2006 with students
becoming seniors this fall. However, a law passed by the
Legislature this spring is expected to allow small numbers of
students who don't pass the test to still graduate by getting
extra points through good grades on required courses, AP
reports.
ASBURY AUTOMOTIVE: OR AG Launches Second Consumer Fraud Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers filed a second, major court
action in less than four years against one of the state's
largest automobile groups for violations of a 2001 agreement
concerning misleading advertising and for circumventing the
state's anti-bushing laws. Named in an Assurance of voluntary
Compliance filed on July 22,2005 in Marion County Circuit Court
are Asbury Automotive Oregon LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company, doing business in Oregon as Thomason Autogroup, and all
of their affiliated Oregon dealerships. The agreement admits no
violation of law.
"Just because Asbury is one of the biggest in the automobile
industry doesn't mean it can willfully ignore Oregon's consumer
protection laws," Mr. Myers said. "When we caught
Asbury/Thomason Autogroup in 2001 selling cars to consumers for
thousands of dollars more than the advertised sale price, we
were surprised at their brashness but frankly, we were shocked
to find that not only were Asbury's dealerships ignoring our
earlier agreement but were committing new violations of the
Unlawful Trade Practices Act."
Department of Justice staff closely monitored the advertising
and business activities of Asbury and its Thomason dealerships
after 2001 when they admitted to advertising car sales through
"spot" ads in the classified sections of many Oregon newspapers
and then not disclosing the sale to buyers and selling them for
thousands more than the advertised price. Thomason paid over
$1.5 million in restitution as well as $300,000 to the Justice
Consumer Protection and Education Fund.
As part of the 2001 agreement, Thomason dealerships also were
required, when financing for a vehicle was not available, to
return the buyer's trade-in and refund the down payment. This
was to be done before entering into any negotiations for
different financing terms or a different vehicle. In 2003,
Justice investigators learned that Thomason Toyota of Gladstone
was not in compliance with the court agreement by having
customers sign an acknowledgement of the possibility of
renegotiation, if financing fell through, at the inception of
the transaction, rather than when financing was actually denied.
Furthermore, the Gladstone Toyota dealer wasn't offering a full
recession and termination of the original contract when
financing fell through before trying to talk consumers into
signing new deal, mostly with higher interest. This practice is
known as "bushing."
In March 2004, the Thomason Honda dealership in Gladstone
advertised an offer in large, bold print of "35 PERCENT OFF MSRP
(Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price) ON ALL HONDAS IN
STOCK!!" In very small type above the offer, the dealership
posted "Dealer Installed Options Discounted." The offer was
clearly misleading, as the dealership soon discovered, as large
numbers of angry customers arrived to buy a new Honda at a 35
percent reduction, only to find the discount was for dealer
installed options. The dealership closed its doors early that
day and remained closed the next day. More than 30 consumers
filed complaints with Justice concerning the alleged fraudulent
advertising.
After lengthy negotiations concerning the defendants' "bushing"
and advertising violations, Asbury and Thomason agreed to pay
$250,000 to the Justice Department consumer protection and
education account.
Under today's settlement agreement, the defendants must comply
with the Unlawful Trade Practices Act and the terms of the prior
court order especially in the area of "bushing." The defendants
must designate an employee to ensure legal compliance of all of
their advertising and promotional materials prior to
publication, and they must offer "35 PERCENT OFF MSRP" of any
new Honda to 23 consumers, who filed complaints with the
Attorney General, concerning the misleading advertisements. The
buyers must be authentic individuals, who want to buy a car for
their own personal use.
Consumers wanting more information about today's agreements for
other consumer protection issues in the state may contact the
Attorney General's consumer hotline: (503) 378-4320 (Salem area
only), (503) 229-5576 (Portland area only), or toll-free at
1-877-877-9392 or visit the Website: http://www.doj.state.or.us.
BEAVERTON FOODS: Recalls Wasabi Horseradish For Undeclared Eggs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Beaverton Foods, Inc. of Hillsboro, Oregon is recalling
Inglehoffer Wasabi Horseradish Code N172, because the labeling
may not declare the eggs, Metabisulfite and Yellow No.5
contained in the product. People who have an allergy or severe
sensitivity to eggs, sulfites and/or Yellow No.5 run the risk of
serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they consume
this limited mislabeled product.
Inglehoffer Wasabi Horseradish was distributed nationwide in
retail grocery chain stores.
Wasabi Horseradish is packaged in a 9.5oz clear plastic squeeze
bottle. The product is a light green typical of Wasabi products
packaged under the brand name of Inglehoffer. Below the black
lid on the shoulder of the jar is a code of N172.
No illnesses have been reported to date. The recall was
initiated after if was discovered that Wasabi Horseradish
containing eggs, sulfites and Yellow No.5 was distributed in
packaging with another product's ingredient statement, thereby
not disclosing the known allergens for the Wasabi Horseradish.
Additional steps and procedures in the production process have
been added to prevent this from happening in the future.
Consumers who have purchased Inglehoffer 9.5oz Wasabi
Horseradish with Code N172 are urged to return it to the place
of purchase for a full refund or call Beaverton Foods, Inc. for
refund or replacement product. Consumers with questions may
contact Beaverton Foods, Inc. at 503.646.8138 or 1.800.223.8076.
CANADA POST: Quebec Class Action Over Internet Deal to Proceed
--------------------------------------------------------------
A Quebec Superior Court judge recently ruled that Quebec buyers
who say they were swindled in an Internet deal with Canada Post
could continue their class action independently of an Ontario
court decision on the matter, The Montreal Gazette reports.
Court documents revealed that a Quebec consumer started a class
action against Canada Post and co-defendant CyberSurf
Corporation in 2003, the year of the settlement of a class
action on the same matter by the Ontario Court of Appeal.
In that settlement, the Ontario court ruled that anyone who
bought the $9.95 CD-ROM kit advertising Net Access for Life was
eligible for a refund of the price of the CD and three months of
free Internet access. Canada Post wanted these terms to apply
to Quebec consumers, but Quebec Superior Court Justice Roger
Baker rejected that motion.
Charles Tanguay, spokesperson for the Union des consommateurs,
told The Montreal Gazette, "It's an important ruling in the
field of class-action suits," because it clarifies the question
of whether a judgment issued by an outside court can apply in
this province.
As part of the Quebec suit, 35,000 complainants are demanding
either free Internet for life or $23 a month for life. Back in
2001, Canada Post offered free Internet for life with the
purchase of the CD on behalf of CyberSurf at 900 outlets across
the country. As many as 150,000 Canadians bought the kit though
the free service ended after three months.
CARDIZEM CD: OK Customers To Receive Antitrust Settlement Share
---------------------------------------------------------------
More than $300,000 is in the mail to Oklahoma consumers who
over-payed for a commonly prescribed heart medication, state
Attorney General Drew Edmondson said in a statement. The money
is part of a settlement that will bring nearly half a million
dollars to Oklahoma.
Checks were mailed this week to consumers who purchased Cardizem
CD or its generic equivalent between January 1998 and January
2003. The checks, which will range in amount from $10 to
$3,585.91, are the result of a settlement between 27 states, the
District of Columbia and Puerto Rico and the drug's maker after
the states accused the company of conspiring to keep Cardizem's
generic equivalents off the market.
Cardizem CD is used to treat high blood pressure, chest pains
and heart disease. The suit alleged Aventis, Cardizem's maker,
paid competing pharmaceutical company Andrx almost $90 million
to keep its generic version of Cardizem CD off the market.
One month's prescription of Cardizem CD costs about $67. Generic
drugs are typically sold at about 70 percent of the brand name
price. As additional generic brands become available, the price
for the generic version often falls to 30 percent of the price
of the brand name drug. One month's prescription of one of the
three available generic versions of Cardizem CD costs about $32.
"Prescription medication is a necessary and expensive part of
the daily lives of many Oklahoma consumers," Mr. Edmondson said.
"When companies conspire to drive up drug prices, it is the
consumer who ultimately pays. We are pleased to be able to
return some money to people who rely on this medication for
their survival."
The settlement, which was approved May 31, 2005, in U.S.
District Court, required Aventis and Andrx to pay $80 million
into a fund to compensate consumers, state agencies and
insurance companies who overpaid for Cardizem CD between 1998
and 2002. Consumers who purchased the drug during that time
were asked to submit claims for restitution prior to Nov. 15,
2003. In Oklahoma, 884 consumers submitted claims for a total of
$305,888.34. In addition, state agencies will receive
$169,092.86 from the settlement.
"With the costs of health care ever rising, we will continue to
vigorously prosecute those who conspire to drive up prices even
further," Mr. Edmondson said. "There is more than money at
stake."
For more details, contact the Office of the Attorney General by
Mail: 2300 N. Lincoln Blvd, Ste 112 Oklahoma City, OK 73105 by
Phone: 405.521.3921 (OKC) or 918.581.2885 (Tulsa) or visit the
Website: http://www.oag.state.ok.us/.
CARDIZEM CD: PA Residents To Get Share in Antitrust Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------------
Nearly $1.4 million will be released this week to 4,700
Pennsylvania residents who were prescribed the heart drug
Cardizem CD between 1998 and 2004. Each consumer will receive an
average refund of $317, state Attorney General Tom Corbett
announced in a statement.
The funds represent a portion of a $24 million settlement
between 50 state Attorneys General and New Jersey-based Aventis
Pharmaceuticals Inc., and Andrx Corporation, located in Kansas
City, Missouri. Aventis Pharmaceuticals, the maker of Cardizem
CD, and Andrx, a generic drug company, were accused of engaging
in a price-fixing scheme that violated state and federal
antitrust laws.
Mr. Corbett said the 2003 settlement resolves claims that
beginning in July 1998 Hoechst, one of the world's largest
pharmaceutical companies, acquired by Aventis in 2000, along
with Andrx illegally agreed that Andrx would stay out of the
market and not produce a less expensive generic version of
Cardizem CD. In return, Aventis agreed to pay Andrx nearly $90
million.
States' investigators claimed that the delay in the availability
of the generic form of Cardizem CD meant that patients without
prescription drug coverage, medical insurance companies and the
government had to pay a much higher price for the brand name
version of the drug for at least an extra year.
"This alleged price-fixing scheme forced thousands of
Pennsylvanians to pay more for a life saving heart drug because
the parties consciously and illegally manipulated the system,"
Mr. Corbett said. "Today, we begin to return to consumers what
should never have been taken in the first place."
Mr. Corbett said the distribution to third party purchasers of
the drug will begin later this year. In addition, approximately
$4.5 million will be distributed among the states to reimburse
certain government purchasers, including Medicaid.
Under the terms of the 2003 settlement, Aventis and Andrx will
pay the states $24 million in restitution to 76,000 consumers
nationwide including 4,700 from the Commonwealth. The checks
will be released to consumers this week by the claims
administrator. This settlement is in addition to a $110 million
agreement reached earlier between the companies and drug
wholesalers involving similar alleged antitrust violations.
The Commonwealth's case was negotiated by Chief Deputy Attorney
General James A. Donahue III and Deputy Attorney General
Benjamin Cox of Corbett's Antitrust Section in Harrisburg.
For more details, contact the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney
General, Strawberry Square, Harrisburg, PA 17120 by Phone:
717-787-3391 or visit the Website:
http://www.attorneygeneral.gov/.
CARDIZEM CD: UT Consumers To Get Share in Antitrust Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------------
Hundreds of Utah heart patients will be getting a healthy refund
soon for being overcharged for the heart medication Cardizem CD,
state Attorney General Mark Shurtleff announced in a statement.
405 Utahns will receive a total of $126,907 from a multi-state
antitrust settlement with two pharmaceutical companies.
Aventis Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Andrx Corporation agreed to pay
$80 million for delaying the sales of generic versions of
Cardizem CD. The lawsuit alleged that in July 1998, Hoechst, a
pharmaceutical company acquired by Aventis in 2000, paid Andrx
to withhold marketing of the generic version of the heart
medication.
"Those delays meant higher prices for consumers and higher taxes
for everyone else because government agencies also had to pay
the inflated price," says Mr. Shurtleff. "It's about time these
drug companies gave the money back."
Utahns who purchased Cardizem CD between 1998 and 2002 will
receive an average refund of $313. The checks will begin to be
mailed from the court-appointed administrator this week. Utah
will also receive more than $80,600 to recover damages incurred
by the state, plus attorneys fees and costs incurred in the
litigation. Assistant Attorney General Ronald Ockey represented
Utah in the settlement.
For more details, contact Paul Murphy by Phone: (801)-538-1892
or visit the Website:
http://www.attorneygeneral.utah.gov/settlements.html.
CRAFTMATIC ORGANIZATION: OH AG Forges Consumer Suit Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro entered a settlement agreement
with Craftmatic Organization, Inc., where the Company agreed to
reimburse consumers $200,000 based on disputes about the sales
practices of the Company and its distributor, J. Kaz Craftmatic
Beds. By entering into this order, the Company and J. Kaz
agreed to change many of their business practices in order to
operate in compliance with the Ohio Consumer Sales Practices
Act.
"My Consumer Protection Section discovered Craftmatic engaged in
high-pressure tactics, misleading advertising and claims that
the beds would resolve consumers' medical problems, which were
not medically verified," said Mr. Petro. "This settlement
resolves those issues and my office intends to monitor the
company to make sure it continues to comply with Ohio law."
In a complaint filed in Franklin County Common Pleas Court
against Craftmatic Organization, Inc. of Trevose, PA, and J KAZ
(doing business as Craftmatic of Pittsburgh), of Verona, PA, the
Attorney General alleged that the companies engaged in false
claims of medical benefits, deceptive price comparisons, false
advertising, making false or misleading statements, high
pressure sales tactics, Home Solicitation Sales Act violations,
deceptive warranty practices, direct solicitation violations,
bait-and- switch advertising, failure to disclose material
financing terms, failure to disclose material contract terms,
illegal attorney fee provision in consumer contracts, and unfair
and deceptive and unconscionable business practices.
As a result of this agreement, Craftmatic has agreed to
significantly change their business practices and to let the
Attorney General's Office monitor its business records for the
next three years. Craftmatic has agreed to mediate in good faith
any further complaints that come to the office. A total of
$225,000 will be paid in increments over the next three years in
civil penalties and attorney fees to the state.
For more details, contact Attorney General Jim Petro's office by
Phone: 1-800-282-0515 or visit the Website:
http://www.ag.state.oh.us,or contact Michelle Gatchell,
Attorney General's Office, by Phone: (614) 466-3840.
CYBER POWER: Recalls 60,556 Power Inverters Due To Shock Hazard
---------------------------------------------------------------
Cyber Power Systems (USA), Inc. is cooperating with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) by voluntarily
recalling 60,556 power inverters, namely:
(1) TARGUS / APV0601US, model 2004-2005
(2) TARGUS / APV07US, model 2004-2005
(3) TARGUS / APV08US, model 2004-2005
(4) TARGUS / BUS0008, model 2004-2005
These Targus Slimline Power Inverters were manufactured between
June 2004 and May 2005. It is possible for a user to plug a
computer or other electrical device into the inverter
incorrectly, in such a way as to leave one of the two AC power
plug exposed. In some circumstances, this pin can become
"live." If the user were to touch a "live" pin while the user
was in contact with a grounded object or become grounded, the
user could receive a potentially serious electrical shock.
The Company will notify its distributors and any identified
customers to return the inverter for a full refund. The recall
is expected to begin during July/August 2005. For more details,
contact the Company by Phone: 714-765-5555 or visit the NHTSA's
auto safety hotline: 1-888-327-4236; or visit the Website:
http://www.safercar.gov/
DAN NELSON: Faces Native American Race Discrimination Lawsuit
-------------------------------------------------------------
A Rapid City attorney is suing Dan Nelson Automotive on behalf
of several Native American clients, claiming that the car dealer
deceived them and discriminated against them, The KELOLAND TV
reports.
The lawsuit dates back to 2001 and started out involving the
former JD Byrider car lot in Rapid City. Since that time, the
legal action expanded to include Dan Nelson, his father and two
brothers who have all worked with the dealership. There are now
class action lawsuits filed in Rapid City, the Cheyenne River
Tribal Court in Eagle Butte and soon the Oglala Tribal Court in
Pine Ridge.
Claiming that between 80%-85% of Rapid City Byrider customers
were Native American, the suit alleges that the dealership made
racially motivated distinctions between native American
customers and Caucasian customers, including charging higher
interest rates and requiring payroll deductions from Native
Americans.
According to the plaintiffs' attorney, Mark Koehn, "It was
striking that the pattern was always the same and that's what
led me to start looking at it more deeply, not as a car deal
gone bad but as potentially a way of doing business."
Dan Nelson's former Sioux Falls dealership isn't part of the
latest lawsuit against him...but the whole business model used
to run the company is what Mr. Koehn wants to put before the
court. It offers customers the chance to both buy and finance a
car at the same place.
Mr. Koehn told KELOLAND TV, "In this case it's a one stop
shopping approach which is not illegal in itself, but when you
have a captive finance operation, it allows you to manipulate
aspects of the transaction."
Court papers indicated that customers paid too much for their
vehicles and bought extended warranties that were fundamentally
worthless, calling the dealership a fraudulent scheme and course
of business. Mr. Koehn even told KELOLAND TV, "The warranties
covered certain repairs, again and again clients have told us
that the repairs, when they made a claim, they were told there
was nothing wrong with the car or the repair was not covered."
As for what he hopes to gain by suing a bankrupt business, Mr.
Koehn told KELOLAND TV that the lawsuit is aimed more at the
business plan in general, rather than just any one person or
company. As of the present, about 50 customers have signed onto
the lawsuits with their lawyer expecting to add more.
FREEPORT-MCMORAN: Investors Keep Gold Lawsuit Alive in TX Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
In an old gold lawsuit still pending in Texarkana, Texas,
federal court, lawyers for investors of Bre-X are still hoping
to recoup money they lost after investing in a company that
boasted finding the largest gold mine in the world, The
Texarkana Gazette reports.
Bre-X stock dropped 83 percent and was eventually pulled from
American and Canadian financial markets. This action followed an
announcement by New Orleans-based Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold
Inc., revealing that there were insignificant amounts of gold
found in the Busang area of Indonesia where Bre-X executives
claimed to be mining the largest gold reserve ever. However,
after they realized their stock, once worth $4 billion on four
Canadian and American stock markets, was now worthless, Bre-X
shareholders struck back at the Canadian gold company and a
dozen others by filing a lawsuit.
According to the minutes of a recent hearing on the case, the
stockholders' lawyers told U.S. District Judge David Folsom they
could be prepared for a 2006 trial date. Though filed in such a
manner that it could be presented as a class action lawsuit,
Judge Folsom denied class certification on March 21, 2003.
According to the judge, there was a problem with one of the
fraud claims. That claim was drafted so that Judge Folsom was
not sure if it could meet legal scrutiny.
However, at the recent hearing, Paul Yetter and Damon Young, who
represent the stockowners with Paul Miller, told Judge Folsom
that they would amend the lawsuit within 30 days. The lawyers
defending the company and its executives did not object to the
filing of a new court date. The suit is on behalf of people who
held Bre-X stock on the NASDAQ exchange from August 19, 1996, to
March 27, 1997.
Court papers indicated, "Plaintiffs allege that they and other
members of the class purchased Bre-X common stock on the NASDAQ
at artificially inflated prices during the period when
defendants were disseminating false and misleading statements.
The artificial price inflation affected all class members."
With that announcement to the judge, Bre-X and the other
companies named in the lawsuit are now bound to respond to the
shareholders' request for class certification.
GLOBAL CROSSING: Suit Settlement Hearing Set October 27, 2005
-------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York will hold a fairness hearing for the proposed
settlement in the matter: In re Global Crossing, Ltd.,
Securities Litigation, Case No. 02 Civ. 910 (GEL), on behalf of
all persons who bought Global Crossing Ltd. or Asia Global
Crossing Ltd. Securities Between February 1, 1999 and December
8, 2003.
The Court will hold a hearing on October 27, 2005 at 2 p.m. to
consider whether to approve the Settlement and whether to grant
the request by the lead lawyers representing the Class Members
for attorneys' fees and costs.
For more details, contact Jay W. Eisenhofer, Esq., Sidney S.
Liebesman, Esq. or Grant & Eisenhofer P.A. of Chase Manhattan
Centre, 1201 N. Market St., Wilmington, DE, 19801, Phone: (302)
622-7149, Fax: (302) 622-7100 OR Global Crossing, Ltd.
Securities Litigation, Andersen Entities Partial Settlement, c/o
The Garden City Group, Inc., Claims Administrator, P.O. Box 9000
#6152, Merrick, NY, 11566-9000, Phone: 1-866-808-3497, Web site:
http://www.globalcrossinglitigation.com.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: NZ Board OKs Deceptive Ads Suit V. Splenda
-------------------------------------------------------------
The New Zealand Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has upheld
a complaint against Johnson & Johnson for misleading marketing
practices in advertisements for the chlorinated artificial
sweetener Splenda.
"This complaint is on the basis that Splenda is being compared
directly to sugar and misleading and confusing consumers into
thinking it's as natural as sugar because it's 'made from sugar
and tastes like sugar,'" according to the upheld complaint.
The Authority's Advertising Standards Complaints Board, made up
of representatives from New Zealand's advertising and marketing
agencies, reviewed 15 second and 30 second versions of an ad for
the artificial sweetener along with focus group input. The Board
determined that the ad deceived consumers into thinking Splenda
is all natural like sugar, when it is actually a chemical
compound. "The (Splenda) advertisement . gave rise to a
likelihood of a consumer being confused and mislead as a result
of the comparison in the advertisement," the Board decided.
According to the ASA, when the Board upholds a complaint, they
ask the company not to run the ad again. In reality, the
product Splenda does not contain and is not sugar. The
artificial sweetener ingredient (sucralose) in Splenda is
manufactured chemically. The sweetness of Splenda is due to the
chlorocarbon chemical (sucralose) that contains three atoms of
chlorine in every one of its molecules. In fact, the name
sucralose is misleading because it is not a sugar but a
chlorinated chemical.
In the United States, Johnson & Johnson is currently involved in
more than ten federal and consumer class action lawsuits
alleging misleading marketing for the chlorinated artificial
sweetener Splenda.
"This is an important ruling for consumers. As more and more
sweeteners are used to formulate foods in the U.S., consumers
need to be vigilant in reading the ingredients part of the Food
Label to verify if the product is made with all natural real
sugar or some man-made, chemical sweetener. To help consumers,
advertising of these food products must be accurate and not
misleading," says Andy Briscoe, President of the Sugar
Association.
The New Zealand Advertising Standards Authority was formed in
1973 and is a self-regulating body comprised of marketing and
advertising agencies in New Zealand.
To learn more about the truth about Splenda, please contact Rich
Masters at Qorvis Communications by Phone: 202-496-1000, by E-
mail: rmasters@qorvis.com or visit the Website:
http://www.truthaboutsplenda.com.
KMART CORPORATION: Settles Employees' Suit Over 2002 Bankruptcy
---------------------------------------------------------------
Kmart workers who lost millions in retirement savings when the
retailer collapsed in 2002 may recoup 10 cents on the dollar or
less, according to people familiar with the terms of a legal
settlement. The Detroit News
Court records show that following the company's 2002 bankruptcy,
more than 50,000 Kmart employees suffered combined losses of at
least $100 million in their 401(k) plans when Kmart Corporation
stock became worthless. At one point, the records indicated, 32
percent of the retirement plan's assets were in Kmart shares.
Three lawyers familiar with the settlement terms told The
Detroit News, that under the settlement, which is to be
announced soon, the former directors and officers named in the
suit will reimburse workers about $11.5 million. The losses will
be covered by a $25 million insurance policy the now-defunct
Kmart Corporation held to protect executives. That figure
includes the cost of administering the settlement and employees'
lawyers' fees, so the 401(k) holders might actually receive as
little as 5 or 10 percent of their losses.
Rita Morris started working at a Kmart in Saginaw at age 20, and
in August she will mark 35 years with the company. When Kmart
Corporation stock was canceled following the company's
bankruptcy, Morris' 401(k) balance shrank by $18,000. Ms.
Morris, who used to be an assistant manager in receiving but now
stocks shelves on the third shift, told The Detroit News, "A lot
of people lost even more than I did. It's hard. You work for a
long time, and nobody ever told us that the company was going to
go bankrupt."
Attorneys for the employees and the defendants told U.S.
District Court Judge Avern Cohn last week that they had reached
a settlement in the three-year-old class action lawsuit.
In the suit, the plaintiffs alleged that Kmart executives hid
the dire nature of the retailer's finances, prompting workers to
unwittingly invest in the doomed company. They also charged
that, despite executive knowledge of the company's poor
prospects, Kmart forced workers to maintain the company-match
portion of their 401(k) in Kmart stock until they reached age
55.
Kmart's former Chairman and CEO Charles Conaway was named as a
defendant, along with former CEO James Adamson, former vice
president Jim Defebaugh and six former members of the board of
directors.
Kmart emerged from bankruptcy in May 2003. During its 15-month
reorganization, it closed 600 stores and eliminated more than
57,000 jobs. In November, Kmart announced a merger with Sears.
The renamed company, Sears Holdings, is based in Hoffman
Estates, Ill. Shareholders of the former Kmart Corporation have
no claim on the stock issued by the new company.
Glen Connor, a lawyer for the workers, told The Detroit News
that he didn't want to comment until the settlement was made
public, but he confirmed that it would cover more than 50,000
401(k) participants. All of them, according to Mr. Connor, will
receive notification letters telling them how to collect any
money they are owed. Though the lawyers were unable to predict
when the mailings would be sent, it is very likely to be months
away.
Curtis Borders, 56, of Warren, who worked at Kmart for 12 years
in Warren and Detroit until 2004, told The Detroit News that he
lost about one-third of the value of his 401(k) plan after the
bankruptcy. He's happy for a settlement even if it's a small one
saying, "I could use it. It's better than nothing."
Even with the settlement, a lawyer for the former outside
directors, Walter B. Connolly Jr., told The Detroit News the
employee lawsuits are abusive. He pointed out that for attending
a handful of meetings, the outside directors are subjected to
years of litigation. He did say though, "Once you see the
settlement, it is apparent that our clients did not have any
vulnerability, and for that we're very thankful." He went on to
say, "The directors aren't sitting there looking at every
financial nook and cranny."
LITTLE HOCKING: Warns EPA of High C8 Levels in Customers' Blood
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ohio's Little Hocking Water Association are worried about the
high levels of C8 found in the blood of customers who drink
their water, documents filed with the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency state, according to Red Nova.
The water system's general manager Robert L. Griffin filed the
results on July 13 at the EPA headquarters in Washington, D.C.
According to the reports, C8 concentrations ranging from 112
parts per billion to more than 1,000 parts per billion were
found in two dozen customers tested.
"The results, to me, seem very high," Mr. Griffin told The
Athens (Ohio) Messenger, which first reported the numbers
Wednesday. "We have been concerned about the exposure of our
customers, and we need information to make decisions -- both
short term and long term."
C8 is another name for ammonium perfluorooctanoate (PFOA).
Recently, several class actions have been filed against chemical
giant DuPont over the presence of PFOA in chemicals used to make
their popular Teflon products.
The results from Little Hocking customers are far higher than
the 3 to 5 parts per billion concentrations in the general U.S.
population that prompted the EPA in 2002 to launch a "priority
review" of C8's dangers, Red Nova reports. Also, the results
indicate concentrations of C8 in DuPont plant neighbors that
rival those that the Company has found in its workers.
In his letter to the EPA, Mr. Griffin noted that the Little
Hocking water system wells - which serve about 12,000 people,
according to EPA data - "contain the highest levels of C8 found
in any public water supply in the country to date," Red Nova
reports.
MAJESCO ENTERTAINMENT: Faces Securities Fraud Suits in NJ Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
Majesco Entertainment Company and certain of its officers face
several securities class actions filed in the United States
District Court for the District of New Jersey, on behalf of
purchasers of the Company's securities from December 8,2004 to
July 12,2005.
The suits allege that defendants, Majesco and certain of its
officers, represented that the Company's revenue and income
would continue to grow over its impressive 2004 and first half
of 2005 results in its fiscal year 2005, even as the Company
increased its investment in product development and marketing.
According to defendants, the Company expected $175-$185 million
in net revenues and operating income of $16-$18 million in 2005,
representing strong growth over Majesco's 2004 results.
Unbeknownst to investors, however, Majesco's strong reported
growth resulted, in material part, from the Company having
inundated its retailers with product that defendants knew was in
excess of end-user demand. Defendants representations regarding
the Company's expected 2005 revenues and earnings lacked any
basis and deceived investors about the true state of Majesco's
business and prospects. As defendants knew or recklessly
disregarded, the Company's strong growth was unsustainable
because retailers would either return a material quantity of
unsold products or would meet 2005 demand by selling off excess
inventory instead of ordering new products. In addition,
unbeknownst to investors, but known to or recklessly disregarded
by defendants, two of the Company's new video game titles
flopped, and the Company could not meet its earnings
expectations without the success of these new titles. Defendants
were motivated to engage in the wrongdoing alleged herein so
that Majesco's planned secondary offering, which allowed many
large stockholders, mostly institutions, to sell their
personally held Majesco shares, would be priced higher than it
would have been had investors known the truth about the
Company's business.
The complaints further allege that on or around July 12, 2005,
after the close of regular trading, Majesco issued a press
release announcing a dramatic reduction in its expected 2005
results. Rather than earning $16-$18 million in 2005, defendants
announced that the Company would swing to a loss of $16-$19
million on revenues of $120 to $125 million. The Company
attributed this astounding reversal to: substantially weaker
demand for all of the Company's products; a glut of Majesco
products sitting on retailers' shelves or in their stockrooms;
and weak reorders. Majesco also announced that defendant
Yankowski had resigned his positions as Majesco's Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer. In response to this announcement, the
price of Majesco common stock plummeted, falling by 48% in one
day, from $6.89 per share on July 12, 2005 to $3.56 per share on
July 13, 2005, earning it the dubious distinction of being the
largest percentage loser on the Nasdaq for the day.
The first identified complaint in the litigation is styled
"Central Laborers' Pension Fund, et al. v. Majesco Entertainment
Company, et al.," filed in the United States District Court for
the District of New Jersey. The plaintiff firms in this
litigation are:
(1) Charles J. Piven, World Trade Center-Baltimore,401 East
Pratt Suite 2525, Baltimore, MD, 21202, Phone:
410.332.0030, E-mail: pivenlaw@erols.com
(2) Chitwood & Harley, 7945 East Paces Ferry Road, 1400
Resurgens Plaza, Atlanta, GA, 30326, Phone:
404.266.1650,
(3) Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise, P.C., Esquire at 261
Old York Road, Suite 423, Jenkintown, PA, 19046, Phone:
215.886.1900, E-mail: securitiesfraud@comcast.net
(4) Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York), One
Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, New York, NY, 10119,
Phone: 212.594.5300, Fax: 212.868.1229, E-mail:
info@milbergweiss.com
(5) Schatz & Nobel, P.C., 330 Main Street, Hartford, CT,
06106, Phone: 800.797.5499, Fax: 860.493.6290, E-mail:
sn06106@AOL.com
(6) Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala Cynwyd,
PA, 19004, Phone: 610.667.7706, Fax: 610.667.7056, E-
mail: info@sbclasslaw.com
(7) Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLC, 35 East State
Street, Media, PA, 19063, Phone: 877.891.9880, E-mail:
jshah@classactioncounsel.com
(8) Stull, Stull & Brody (New York), 6 East 45th Street,
New York, NY, 10017, Phone: 310.209.2468, Fax:
310.209.2087, E-mail: SSBNY@aol.com
MARYLAND: 14 People Injured in Greyhound Bus Accident on I-95
-------------------------------------------------------------
14 people were injured when a Greyhound bus ran off a rain-
slicked Interstate-95 in Baltimore, Maryland and flipped on to
its side Monday, the Associated Press reports.
The bus was traveling from Washington to Philadelphia. It left
Washington at 5 a.m., about thirty minutes late and The bus left
Washington at 5 a.m., about 30 minutes late, and had made a stop
in Baltimore before the crash, Greyhound spokeswoman Anna
Folmnsbee told AP. There were 32 passengers and the driver on
the bus, she said.
Sections of Interstate 95 north of Baltimore were closed after
the crash of the Washington-to-Philadelphia bus. Two people were
trapped in the bus and had to be pulled out by rescue crews,
fire officials said.
Authorities could not provide details on how the accident
happened, although roads were wet from a heavy shower that
passed through just before dawn, Kevin Cartwright, a spokesman
for the Baltimore Fire Department, told AP.
Fire officials said 14 were hurt. Ms. Folmnsbee could not
confirm the number but said people were taken to three
hospitals, AP reports.
MASSACHUSETTS: Disabled Groups File Report on MBTA Facilities
-------------------------------------------------------------
Advocacy groups for the disabled in Boston, Massachusetts
released reports stating that the Massachusetts Bay Transit
Authority (MBTA) has failed to make their facilities accessible
to the disabled, the Boston Globe reports.
The reports are part of the research for a class action filed
against the MBTA in 2002. The suits were filed in the United
States District Court in Boston, Massachusetts on behalf of
disabled train and bus riders, seeking repairs and improvements
instead of monetary damages. The suit claims bus drivers pass
disabled riders by on the street, and that equipment meant to
help them, such as elevators and bus wheelchair lifts, is often
in disrepair. The plaintiffs also alleged elevators at MBTA
stations are often broken or contaminated by human waste, an
earlier Class Action Reporter story (August 15,2002) reports.
The reports state that the MBTA has failed to keep elevators and
escalators in good repair, preventing the disabled from riding
buses and trains 10 to 20 percent of the time. The reports,
which are to be handed out to the public at a 3 p.m. rally at
Park Street station, allege that the train, popularly called
"T," had 1,900 elevator failures last year alone. They also say
that problems with elevator and escalator access have increased
this year despite the MBTA's pledges to fix the problem.
Rob Park, who works at the Boston Center for Independent Living,
a plaintiff in the lawsuit, uses elevators to get in and out of
stations in his wheelchair. The T "is a nightmare for me at
least twice a week," Mr. Park said in a statement, the Globe
reports. "I've been stuck in elevators. . . . Too many times I
have to reboard trains because I can't exit a station."
Dan Manning, the attorney from Greater Boston Legal Services who
is heading the lawsuit, told the Globe advocates plan to meet in
the next few weeks with the MBTA's general manager, Daniel
Grabauskas, who on his first day on the job in May pledged to
make the issue a top priority. "We're hopeful there may be a
way to resolve this," Mr. Manning said.
The number of broken or out-of-service escalators and elevators
at MBTA stations hit a five-year high at the start of this year,
prompting the Federal Transit Administration to begin monitoring
the problem. On some days in the late winter and early spring,
more than 20 percent of the MBTA's 167 escalators and more than
15 percent of the 143 elevators were not working, T documents
indicate. Those numbers have improved, but still fall below the
T's goal of having at least 97 percent of elevators and
escalators working, the Globe reports.
"The FTA's Office of Civil Rights is continuing to monitor the
situation, but we believe there is a commitment from MBTA
leadership to resolve these issues," MBTA spokesman Paul Griffo
told the Globe.
MAYTAG CORPORATION: Shareholders File Suit V. Merger in DE Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
Maytag Corporation faces a consolidated amended class action
filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery for New Castle County,
in connection with Ripplewood Holding's proposed takeover of the
Company.
Between May 20 and 31, 2005, plaintiffs Market Street
Securities, Inc., Herbert Resnik, David Roitman, Hindie Silver,
Louis Rubinstein, David Birnbaum and Morris Gurt, filed seven
class actions on their own behalves and on behalf of an alleged
class of the Company's stockholders, against the Company and its
directors:
(1) Barbara Allen,
(2) Howard Clark, Jr.,
(3) Lester Crown,
(4) William Kerr,
(5) Ralph Hake,
(6) Wayland Hicks,
(7) James McCaslin,
(8) Bernard Rethore,
(9) W. Ann Reynolds,
(10) Neele Stearns, Jr., and
(11) Fred Steingraber
These actions were thereafter consolidated into one action, and
a consolidated and amended class action complaint was filed on
July 15, 2005. The amended complaint alleges, among other
things, that the merger consideration to be paid to the
Company's stockholders in the Ripplewood merger is inadequate
and unfair. The amended complaint further alleges that the
Company's directors violated their fiduciary duties to the
Company's stockholders by, among other things, failing to
maximize stockholder value, by failing to complete a "meaningful
market-check" of the Company's value before entering into the
merger agreement with Ripplewood, and by agreeing to a merger
agreement that contained a $40 million termination fee "designed
to deter more competitive offers for the Company." The amended
complaint seeks, among other relief, certification of the
alleged class, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief
against consummation of the merger (or rescinding the merger if
it is completed prior to the receipt of such relief), an order
directing the disclosure of all material information,
compensatory and/or rescissory damages to the class, and an
award of attorneys' fees and expenses.
MAYTAG CORPORATION: Pension Fund Launches Investor Suit in Iowa
---------------------------------------------------------------
Maytag Corporation faces a stockholder class action filed in
Iowa District Court in Jasper County, styled "Sheet Metal
Workers Local #218(S) Pension Fund v. Maytag Corporation."
On May 26, 2005, Sheet Metal Workers Local #218(S) Pension Fund
filed a complaint on its own behalf and on behalf of an alleged
class of the Company's stockholders against the Company and its
directors:
(1) Barbara Allen,
(2) Howard Clark, Jr.,
(3) Lester Crown,
(4) William Kerr,
(5) Ralph Hake,
(6) Wayland Hicks,
(7) James McCaslin,
(8) Bernard Rethore,
(9) W. Ann Reynolds,
(10) Neele Stearns, Jr., and
(11) Fred Steingraber
The complaint alleges, among other things, that the directors
violated their fiduciary duties to the Company's stockholders
by, among other things, agreeing to sell the Company at an
"artificially depressed" price before the impact of the
Company's recent restructuring efforts was reflected in its
stock price, by causing the Company to enter into agreements
that provide severance benefits to the Company's officers in the
event that they are terminated following a change of control,
and failing to disclose non-pubic information concerning the
value of the Company to stockholders. The complaint seeks,
among other relief, certification of the alleged class, an
injunction preventing completion of the merger (or rescinding
the merger if it is completed prior to the receipt of such
relief), the imposition of a constructive trust in plaintiff's
favor upon any benefits improperly received by defendants, and
an award of attorneys' fees and expenses.
MAYTAG CORPORATION: Faces Securities Fraud Lawsuit in S.D. Iowa
---------------------------------------------------------------
Maytag Corporation, Chief Executive Officer Ralph Hake, and
Chief Financial Officer George C. Moore, face a securities class
action filed in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Iowa, styled "Barry Yellen, et al. v.
Maytag Corp., et al."
On July 5, 2005, Barry Yellen filed a complaint for alleged
violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The complaint,
brought on behalf of a purported class of purchasers of the
Company's common stock between March 7, 2005 and April 21, 2005,
alleges, among other things, that the defendants knowingly or
recklessly made materially false statements in a press release
and at an investor conference on March 7, 2005 regarding the
Company's expected earnings range in 2005, and that defendants
made such statements seeking to inflate the price of the
Company's shares in conjunction with ongoing negotiations to
sell the Company to Ripplewood Holdings. The complaint seeks,
among other relief, certification of the alleged class,
unspecified compensatory damages, and an award of attorneys'
fees and expenses.
The suit is styled "Barry Yellen, et al. v. Maytag Corp., et
al., case no. 05-CV-00388," filed in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Iowa. Representing the
plaintiffs is Shalov Stone & Bonner LLP (New York), 485 Seventh
Avenue, Suite 1000, New York, NY, 10018, Phone: (212) 239-4340,
Fax: (212) 239-4310, E-mail: lawyer@lawssb.com.
NEW YORK: Consumer Affairs Dep't Files Fraud Suit V. Phone Firms
----------------------------------------------------------------
The New York City Department of Consumer Affairs filed a lawsuit
against wireless carriers Sprint, Nextel and T-Mobile, charging
them with deceptive advertising practices, Newsday reports.
The suit refers to advertisements that contain "fine print"
which allegedly violated the city's consumer protection laws.
An advertisement for Nextel, for example, listed service plans
"starting at $10 per month" and phones "starting at $24.99,"
without describing other plans or products and without
disclosing either the highest price or the average cost of plans
and phones.
The suit, filed on July 20,2005 in State Supreme Court in
Manhattan, alleges the companies used the ads to promise one
thing in large type but say something different in less
conspicuous footnotes.
"You can't promise a great deal in the headline and hide the
true costs in the fine print," Jonathan Mintz, the department's
acting commissioner, said in a statement, Newsday reports.
Nextel spokesman Scott Sloat told Newsday that following the
city's law - which he said is the only one like it in the
country - would only complicate matters. "If we were to follow
the rule that the department is discussing, it would make our
advertising more confusing to customers and less helpful," Mr.
Sloat said. "We believe our advertising is truthful and
straightforward."
The department, which had monitored cell phone advertising for a
year and a half before filing suit, also made similar claims
against AT&T Wireless, Cingular and Verizon Wireless. Verizon
paid $30,000 to settle; Cingular bought AT&T Wireless for $41
billion in October, and the combined company paid a $95,000
settlement, Newsday reports.
Sprint spokeswoman Lisa Malloy said the company was in
discussions with the city and "was hoping to work this out
amongst ourselves." She told Newsday Sprint believes its ads
comply with all federal, state and local laws. "We're
disappointed that the DCA chose to file a lawsuit," Ms. Malloy
said.
A T-Mobile spokesman said corporate policy prohibits commenting
on pending litigation, Newsday reports.
NORVERGENCE INC.: NJ Court Issues Judgment To Cancel Contracts
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court in Newark, New Jersey, entered
a final default judgment against NorVergence, Inc., that will
immediately result in the cancellation of 1,600 contracts with
the company valued at more than $47 million.
The judgment is the result of a November 2004 Federal Trade
Commission complaint charging the Company with defrauding
consumers through misleading claims that it would provide them
with dramatic savings on their monthly telephone, cellular, and
Internet bills.
The court found that consumers signed a set of applications and
agreements with a total price equal to the promised monthly
payments over five years. Most of the total payments were
allocated to rental agreements for a "Matrix" or "Matrix Soho"
device that supposedly would provide the promised costs savings.
In reality, the Matrix was just a standard integrated access
device (IAD), commonly used to connect telephone equipment to a
long-distance provider's lines. The Matrix Soho was essentially
a firewall.
The Matrix boxes cost between $200 and $1,550. The total cost to
the consumer was $7,000 to $340,000, with an average cost of
$29,291. The price of the rental agreement had nothing to do
with the cost of the Matrix, which itself was an incidental part
of the promised services.
The Company had an estimated 9,400 Matrix rental agreements
totaling over $275 million. Other than the 1,600 contracts
cancelled by this judgment, the Company sold its rental
agreements shortly after they were signed to over 40 finance
companies for cash. These sold contracts are not immediately
affected by the default judgment. An unknown minority of these
contracts were sold to finance companies for only a part of
their typical five-year term. The default judgment makes these
contracts void and unenforceable as of the end of the partial
term when they are due to come back to the Company.
The court also found that the Company failed to tell consumers
that it did not have a long-term commitment from any service
provider for the services it was promising to provide. The
Company also failed to tell consumers that the Matrix boxes
covered by the rental agreement would be of little or no value
to them if it failed to provide the promised telecommunications
services.
Finally, the court found that the Company had furnished the
finance companies who purchased its contracts with the means and
instrumentalities to commit deceptive and unfair acts or
practices violating the FTC Act. It provided those finance
companies with rental agreements that allowed the finance
companies to misrepresent that consumers owe money on the rental
agreements, regardless of whether NorVergence provided the
promised telecommunications services; and file collection suits
against consumers in courts far from where the consumers are
located.
The FTC worked cooperatively on this matter with various state
attorney generals' offices, which also have investigated
NorVergence's business practices. More than 20 states also have
reached settlements with some of the finance companies that
purchased and are collecting on NorVergence rental agreements.
Consumers in these states should contact their attorney general
directly for further information on the state settlements. The
states include: New Jersey, New York, Florida, Massachusetts,
Illinois, California, Maryland, Rhode Island, Delaware, Georgia,
Connecticut, Kansas, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Arizona,
Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas,
West Virginia, North Carolina, and the District of Columbia.
Copies of the Commission's complaint and the default judgment
are available from the FTC's Web site at http://www.ftc.govand
also from the FTC's Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600
Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580. The FTC works
for the consumer to prevent fraudulent, deceptive and unfair
business practices in the marketplace and to provide information
to help consumers spot, stop and avoid them. To file a
complaint, or to get free information on any of 150 consumer
topics, call toll-free, 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357), or use
the complaint form at http://www.ftc.gov.The FTC enters
Internet, telemarketing, identity theft and other fraud-related
complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database
available to hundreds of civil and criminal law enforcement
agencies in the U.S. and abroad. For more details, contact
Mitchell J. Katz, Office of Public Affairs, by Phone:
202-326-2161 or Randy Brook, Nadine Samter, or Robert Schroeder,
FTC Northwest Region, Seattle by Phone: 206-220-6350 or visit
the Website: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2005/07/norvergence.htm.
OREGON: Hundreds of Defendants Named in Diocese Bankruptcy Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Hundreds of thousands of defendants have been added to the class
action bankruptcy case involving the Portland Catholic
Archdiocese, Oregon Public Broadcasting reports.
The diocese filed for bankruptcy on July 6,2002 due to
continuing litigation over sexual abuse of children by parish
priests. More than 200 sex abuse complaints are pending against
the archdiocese, an earlier Class Action Reporter story
(September 22,2004) reports.
Nearly 400,000 parishioners were added as defendants to the
unique case, since the diocese's property at issue in the case
may belong to church members. Attorney for the plaintiffs, Al
Kennedy, says the additional defendants will make things
smoother for both sides. Mr. Kennedy told Oregon Public
Broadcasting, "The purpose of this is to make sure that everyone
is at the table, and the decisions that the court makes will be
binding on everyone, and they can't come back later and say we
didn't have a chance to defend ourselves."
A handful of defendants will represent the hundreds of thousands
of parishioners. Mr. Kennedy says anyone receiving a notice can
join the case, Oregon Public Broadcasting reports.
RAMP CORPORATION: Shareholders File Stock Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ramp Corporation faces a shareholder class action filed in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York, on behalf of purchasers of the Company's securities from
April 14,2004 to May 20,2005.
According to a press release dated July 20, 2005, the complaint
alleges that the Company and certain of its present and former
officers and directors violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making materially false and
misleading representations and omissions in public filings with
the Securities and Exchange Commission. The complaint alleges
that on May 21, 2005, BDO Seidman LLP resigned as the Company's
auditor and advised the Company that the Company's 2003 and 2004
audit reports were unreliable.
The complaint further alleges that as a result of such
information, the Company stated that is would not file its
quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,
2005 on time, which led to its defaulting on certain debentures.
It is also alleged in the complaint that the Company's CEO
resigned and was suspended on May 22, 2005 because he may have
violated Company policies or the law when he received an
unspecified amount of cash as a gift in December 2003. The
complaint alleges that the Company filed for reorganization
under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy laws on June 2, 2005, and
that the American Stock Exchange notified it on June 6, 2005
that it was delisting the Company's stock. It is alleged that
when Seidman announced that it was resigning and that the
Company's financial statements were unreliable, trading in the
Company's stock was halted on May 23, 2005. At the time, the
Company's stock was trading at $1.25 per share. When the
Company's stock began trading again, it decreased in price to
$0.10 per share.
The suit is styled "Silverlake Holdings, Inc., et al. v. Ramp
Corporation, et al., case no. 05-CV-06521," filed in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York,
under Judge Denise L. Cote. Representing the plaintiffs is
Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York), One
Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, New York, NY, 10119, Phone:
212.594.5300, Fax: 212.868.1229, E-mail: info@milbergweiss.com.
ROADHOUSE GRILL: SEC Files Fraud Case V. Ex-CFO Glenn Glasshagel
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed civil fraud charges
against Glenn E. Glasshagel, the former Chief Financial Officer
of Roadhouse Grill, Inc., a Pompano Beach, Florida restaurant
chain. The SEC's complaint, which alleges that Glasshagel
orchestrated a scheme to manipulate Roadhouse Grill's earnings
between 1999 and 2000, seeks injunctive relief, disgorgement
plus prejudgment interest, civil money penalties, and an officer
and director bar.
According to the SEC's complaint, during Roadhouse Grill's 1999
and 2000 fiscal years, Mr. Glasshagel implemented various
accounting schemes designed to artificially inflate Roadhouse
Grill's reported pre-tax earnings in order to meet the
expectations of the one Wall Street analyst that covered the
company. The complaint alleges, for example, that Mr.
Glasshagel caused Roadhouse Grill to inflate its earnings by
understating various accrual accounts. Accrual accounts contain
provisions for anticipated expenses that companies expect to
incur within a fiscal year. According to the Commission's
complaint, at the end of certain periods during the 1999 and
2000 fiscal years, Mr. Glasshagel made improper reductions in
these accrual accounts in order to improve Roadhouse Grill's
earnings.
The complaint also alleges that Mr. Glasshagel caused Roadhouse
Grill to overstate its fiscal 2000 net income by recording a
non-existent rebate receivable from one of the company's
suppliers. According to the Commission's complaint, this rebate
never existed and Roadhouse Grill never received it. Based on
these various improper entries, the Commission's complaint
alleges that Mr. Glasshagel caused Roadhouse Grill to overstate
its fiscal 1999 net income by 5% and its fiscal 2000 net income
by 35%. In both of those fiscal years, Roadhouse Grill met the
expectations set by the Wall Street analyst that covered the
company. After Mr. Glasshagel resigned from Roadhouse Grill in
July 2000, the company's new management discovered his
misconduct. On August 1, 2001, Roadhouse Grill issued a press
release announcing that it had overstated its net income during
its fiscal years ended 1999 and 2000 and the intervening
quarterly periods, and that it would be restating its prior
financial results.
The SEC's complaint alleges that, as a result of Glasshagel's
conduct, he violated Sections 10(b) and 13(b)(5) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5, 13b2-1 and
13b2-2 thereunder, and that he aided and abetted Roadhouse
Grill's violations of Sections 13(a), 13(b)(2)(A) and 13
(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act and Rules 12b-20, 13a-1, and 13a-
13, thereunder. The action is styled, SEC v. Glenn E.
Glasshagel, Civil Action No. 05-61159-CIV-COOKE, S. D. Fla.,
filed July 15, 2005.
ROYAL DUTCH: Ex-Exec Charges UK FSA With Mischief in Stock Probe
----------------------------------------------------------------
Former Royal Dutch Shell Plc chairman Philip Watts has charged
the United Kingdom's Financial Services Authority (FSA) of
"mischief" for implicating him personally when it punished the
company for overstating oil reserves, Bloomberg News reports.
The FSA imposed a whopping GBP 17 million (US$30 million) fine
on the Company last year. Several suits and class actions were
also filed against the oil giant, alleging it mislead its
investors by overstating its reserves between 1998 and last
year, an earlier Class Action Reporter story (September 20,2004)
reports. The Company also lost its top-tier credit rating, and
two executives, along with Mr. Watts, left the Company.
Mr. Watts is starting a campaign to clear his name of
wrongdoing, in the hopes that it may help him defend himself in
litigation against the Company and its officers. Mr. Watts has
asked an independent tribunal to support his claim that the FSA
"identified and prejudiced" him when it published findings of an
inquiry into Shell and fined the company last July. The
regulator, which didn't mention Mr. Watts's name in the penalty
notice, rejected the accusations and said it's still probing
Watts, Bloomberg News reports.
The FSA's reference to matters suggesting Watts was guilty of
"negligent wrongdoing is exactly the form of mischief" the law
is designed to prevent, David Pannick QC, Mr. Watts' lawyer,
told Bloomberg News. It "magnified" the unfairness because
"when the final notice against Shell was issued the authority
was still considering the role of Sir Philip," Mr. Pannick said.
Both sides agreed, in separate arguments to the two-member
Financial Services and Markets Tribunal, that Mr. Watts wasn't
explicitly identified by name in the FSA's notice of the Shell
penalty. FSA lawyers demanded that the case be dismissed and
said the regulator hasn't reached conclusions about Watts's
personal responsibility in the overstatement of reserves last
year, Bloomberg News reports.
"The FSA did not identify him and it did not prejudicially
identify him," said Anthony Grabiner QC, representing the
regulator, told Bloomberg News. "Even if it did identify him it
certainly did not prejudice him. There is simply no reference to
or singling out of any individual at all."
SILICON LABORATORIES: Revised Settlement Submitted To NY Court
--------------------------------------------------------------
Parties have submitted a revised settlement for the consolidated
securities class action filed against Silicon Laboratories,
Inc., four of its officers individually and the three investment
banking firms who served as representatives of the underwriters
in connection with the Company's initial public offering of
common stock to the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York.
The Consolidated Amended Complaint alleges that the registration
statement and prospectus for the Company's initial public
offering did not disclose that the underwriters solicited and
received additional, excessive and undisclosed commissions from
certain investors, and the underwriters had agreed to allocate
shares of the offering in exchange for a commitment from the
customers to purchase additional shares in the aftermarket at
pre-determined higher prices. The action seeks damages in an
unspecified amount and is being coordinated with approximately
300 other nearly identical actions filed against other
companies.
A court order dated October 9, 2002 dismissed without prejudice
the Company's four officers who had been named individually. On
February 19, 2003, the Court denied the motion to dismiss the
complaint against the Company. On October 13, 2004, the Court
certified a class in six of the approximately 300 other nearly
identical actions and noted that the decision is intended to
provide strong guidance to all parties regarding class
certification in the remaining cases. Plaintiffs have not yet
moved to certify a class in the Company's case.
The company has approved a settlement agreement and related
agreements which set forth the terms of a settlement between the
Company, the plaintiff class and the vast majority of the other
approximately 300 issuer defendants. Among other provisions,
the settlement provides for a release of the Company and the
individual defendants for the conduct alleged in the action to
be wrongful. The Company would agree to undertake certain
responsibilities, including agreeing to assign away, not assert,
or release certain potential claims it may have against its
underwriters. The settlement agreement also provides a
guaranteed recovery of $1 billion to plaintiffs for the cases
relating to all of the approximately 300 issuers. To the extent
that the underwriter defendants settle all of the cases for at
least $1 billion, no payment will be required under the issuers'
settlement agreement. To the extent that the underwriter
defendants settle for less than $1 billion, the issuers are
required to make up the difference.
On February 15, 2005, the Court granted preliminary approval of
the settlement agreement, subject to certain modifications
consistent with its opinion. The Court ruled that the issuer
defendants and the plaintiffs were required to submit a revised
settlement agreement which provides for a mutual bar of all
contribution claims by the settling and non-settling parties and
does not bar the parties from pursuing other claims. The
issuers and plaintiffs have submitted to the Court a revised
settlement agreement consistent with the Court's opinion. The
revised settlement agreement has been approved by all of the
issuer defendants who are not in bankruptcy. The underwriter
defendants will have an opportunity to object to the revised
settlement agreement. There is no assurance that the Court will
grant final approval to the settlement.
The suit is styled "In re Silicon Laboratories, Inc. Initial
Public Offering Securities Litigation," filed in relation to "IN
RE INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING SECURITIES LITIGATION, Master File
No. 21 MC 92 (SAS)," both pending in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York, under Judge Shira
N. Scheindlin. The plaintiff firms in this litigation are:
(1) Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz LLP (New York, NY), 10 E.
40th Street, 22nd Floor, New York, NY, 10016, Phone:
800.217.1522, E-mail: info@bernlieb.com
(2) Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, LLP (New York,
NY), One Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, NY, 10119-1065,
Phone: 212.594.5300
(3) Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, Mail: 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala
Cynwyd, PA, 19004, Phone: 610.667.7706, Fax:
610.667.7056, E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com
(4) Sirota & Sirota, LLP, 110 Wall Street 21st Floor, New
York, NY, 10005, Phone: 888.759.2990, Fax:
212.425.9093, E-mail: Info@SirotaLaw.com
(5) Stull, Stull & Brody (New York), 6 East 45th Street,
New York, NY, 10017, Phone: 310.209.2468, Fax:
310.209.2087, E-mail: SSBNY@aol.com
(6) Wolf, Haldenstein, Adler, Freeman & Herz LLP, 270
Madison Avenue, New York, NY, 10016, Phone:
212.545.4600, Fax: 212.686.0114, E-mail:
newyork@whafh.com
SOUTH KOREA: Financial Watchdog Fines Foreign Banks For Fraud
-------------------------------------------------------------
South Korea's Financial Supervisory Commission meted penalties
to the Seoul offices of several foreign banks, for inadequately
advising state-run companies over the risks involved in
derivatives trading, Newsday reports.
The financial industry watchdog penalized the Seoul offices of
Germany's Deutsche Bank, BNP Paribas of France and Britain's
Barclays Capital. The Commission also suspended the head of
Deutsche Bank's Seoul office for one month, and ordered
dismissals or salary cuts for five officials at the Seoul
offices of the three banks. As part of the penalties, two
officials from Deutsche Bank's Seoul office were dismissed from
their jobs, while one from BNP Paribas and two at Barclays
Capital will receive reduced salaries for three months, the FSC
said, according to Newsday.com.
The group alleged that state-run companies incurred losses
because the foreign banks failed to adequately advise them on
the financial risks and some conditions related to trading in
derivatives. The Commission also said that officials at
Deutsche Bank paid bribes to executives of local companies in
relation to derivatives trading and that BNP Paribas illegally
commissioned work to its Hong Kong branch, even after receiving
a warning from the authorities not to do so, Newsday reports.
"Barclays is cooperating fully ... on the implementation of
measures designed to strengthen and improve its business model
in Korea," the bank said in a statement, Newsday reports.
Barclays also said "no institutional sanction has been imposed"
on it.
Deutsche Bank declined to comment on the penalty. BNP Paribas
declined to comment on the South Korean regulator's decision,
which it characterized as a "warning," Newsday reports.
TAKE-TWO: Faces SEC, FTC Probe For Grand Theft Auto Sex Scene
-------------------------------------------------------------
Video game company Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. faces
investigations from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) over the controversial
"hot coffee" sex scene found in the video game "Grand Theft
Auto: San Andreas," gamesindustry.biz reports.
Lawmakers, notably Sen. Hillary Clinton, have raised complaints
after hearing that players of GTA: San Andreas can unlock a
secret "sex scene" using a so-called "hot coffee mod," an
unauthorized third party modification that alters the retail
version of the game.
The controversy caused the Entertainment Software Rating Board
(ESRB) to change the rating of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas on
all platforms from "Mature 17+" (M) to "Adults Only 18+." It
was an embarrassing and highly public retraction for the body,
which has recently been under fire from a number of vocal
politicians, gamesindustry.biz reports. In light of this, the
ESRB plans to introduce tougher standards for its ratings, which
will demand more detail from publishers so that all content
shipped on the disc, regardless of how accessible it is, can be
considered in creating the rating for a game.
The ESRB also initiated a probe of the Company and Rockstar
Games, which has ceased manufacturing of the current version of
the title and will begin working on a version of the game with
enhanced security to prevent the "hot coffee" modifications. In
a statement, the Company said "This version will retain the
original ESRB M-rating and is expected to be available during
the Company's fourth fiscal quarter. Rockstar Games will be
providing AO labels for retailers who wish to continue to sell
the current version of the title."
As a result of the re-rating of the game, the Company also
lowered guidance for the third fiscal quarter ending July 31,
2005 to $160 to $170 million in net sales and a net loss per
share of $(0.40) to $(0.45) to provide reserves for the value of
the title's current North American retail inventory.
Accordingly, guidance for the fiscal year ending October 31,
2005 is also being lowered to $1.26 to $1.31 billion in net
sales and $1.05 to $1.12 in diluted earnings per share.
"Take-Two and Rockstar Games have always worked to keep mature-
themed video game content out of the hands of children and we
will continue to work closely with the ESRB and community
leaders to improve and better promote a reliable rating system
to help consumers make informed choices about which video games
are appropriate for each individual," Paul Eibeler, Take-Two's
President and Chief Executive Officer said in a statement. "The
ESRB's decision to re-rate a game based on an unauthorized third
party modification presents a new challenge for parents, the
interactive entertainment industry and anyone who distributes or
consumes digital content. Rockstar Games is pleased that the
investigation is now settled and they look forward to returning
their focus to making innovative and groundbreaking video games
for a mature audience."
The scenes depicted in the "hot coffee" modification are not
playable in the retail version of the game unless the user
downloads and/or installs unauthorized software that alters the
content of the original retail version of the title,
representing a violation of Take-Two and Rockstar's end user
license agreement (EULA) and intellectual property rights. "We
are deeply concerned that the publicity surrounding these
unauthorized modifications has caused the game to be
misrepresented to the public and has detracted from the creative
merits of this award winning product," Mr. Eibeler said. The
Company is exploring its legal options as it relates to
companies that profited from creating and distributing tools for
altering the content of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.
Rockstar Games also agreed to make available a downloadable
software patch to render Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas for PC
impervious to the "hot coffee" modification. Rockstar encourages
parent groups and political leaders to assist with distribution
of the patch to prevent the content of the modification from
spreading further.
Commenting in a research note yesterday, Banc of America
Securities analyst Gary Cooper said that "regulatory risks
remain for Take Two" and described a class action lawsuit over
the matter as "inevitable," gamesindustry.biz reports. "Some
political figures are agitating for an FTC investigation on the
grounds of indecency and/or false advertising related to GTA San
Andreas and the original product rating," he said, going on to
note that the company has not created an exchange or return
program for the 12 million already sold copies of San Andreas,
something which the FTC could push it to do, gamesindustry.biz
reports.
It's not just the Federal Trade Commission which may look at
Take Two now, however; Mr. Cooper warned that several stock
transactions over the past few weeks could also come under
scrutiny from the Securities and Exchange Commission. "Several
TTWO insiders, including Chief Operating Officer Gary Lewis sold
common shares recently," he noted. "Lewis sold 20,000 shares on
July 13th and filed to sell 40,000 shares on July 19th. The SEC
could choose to investigate these sales. It remains unclear as
to when the ESRB investigation began."
However, Wedbush Morgan Securities' Michael Pachter doesn't
agree that the scandal will have a major impact on Grand Theft
Auto going forward. "We do not expect this issue to recur," Mr.
Pachter told gamesindustry.biz. "After speaking with company
management, we are confident that the company has taken this
matter quite seriously, and believe that all employees involved
are sufficiently embarrassed and contrite so as to ensure
management will carefully vet any proposed controversial content
in the future."
Mr. Pachter believes that the whole affair does demonstrate that
Rockstar's management has been too "lax" in its handling of the
incredibly valuable GTA franchise, however. "We are at a loss
to understand the desire to write the sex minigame in the first
place," he noted. "While we were not particularly offended by
the content, and understand that such content is perfectly
acceptable in the United Kingdom (Rockstar North, the developer
of the game, is headquartered in Scotland), we question the
judgment of the development team in taking such a risk with the
crown jewel of the Take-Two empire . We again, acknowledge that
the decision to omit the content from the commercial version was
a prudent one, but question whether the company's management is
too lax in its oversight."
UNION PACIFIC: Judge Sides With Plaintiffs in Health Care Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. District Judge Laurie Smith-Camp recently ruled in a class
action lawsuit that Union Pacific Railroad discriminated against
women by not covering contraceptives in its health care plan,
The Associated Press reports.
According to court documents, the lawsuit claimed that the
company discriminated by providing a range of preventive health
benefits including impotence drugs but no contraceptive care.
Judge Smith-Camp wrote in her ruling, "Union Pacific's policy of
excluding prescription contraceptives and related outpatient
services from its plans" is discriminatory "because it treats
medical care women need to prevent pregnancy less favorably than
it treats medical care needed to prevent other medical
conditions that are no greater threat to employees' health than
is pregnancy."
Union Pacific spokesman Mark Davis told The Associated Press
that the ruling would be appealed because, among other things,
the decision to exclude contraceptives in the benefits package
was negotiated with the company's unions. He added that nonunion
company employees have had prescription contraceptive coverage
for "some time."
Backed by Planned Parenthood, the suit also alleged that Union
Pacific's action violated the federal Civil Rights Act, which
prohibits employers with 15 or more workers from making
decisions based on gender or pregnancy.
Chris Funk, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Nebraska
& Council Bluffs told The Associated Press, "This is a
tremendous victory for women all over the country. It is time
that employers such as Union Pacific realize that contraception
is essential health care and must be included in all worker
health plans in order to support women's health." Planned
Parenthood itself told The Associated Press that recent studies
show that 88 percent of employer health plans provide coverage
for all methods of prescription contraception, compared with
only 64 percent in 2001.
The lead plaintiffs in the class action were Brandi Standridge,
a 25-year-old trainman and engineer for Union Pacific who lives
in Pocatello, Idaho, and Kenya Phillips, a 32-year-old engineer
who lives near Kansas City, Missouri.
In a statement released by Planned Parenthood, Ms. Philips said,
"We are thrilled with the court ruling and simply want Union
Pacific to cover all FDA-approved methods of prescription
contraception and reimburse employees who had to pay for their
contraception out-of-pocket."
Omaha-based Union Pacific Corporation operates Union Pacific
Railroad, which is the largest railroad in North America,
covering 23 states.
UNITE HERE: Ex-Labor Organizers File Overtime Wage Suit in WA
-------------------------------------------------------------
Four former organizers for Unite Here, who fought to improve
working conditions for the nation's hotel and textile workers
filed a lawsuit in federal court in Seattle against their former
employer, which is one of the largest labor unions in the
country, The Seattle Times reports.
In their lawsuit, the workers claim that they and hundreds of
others were expected to work more than 40 hours a week without
overtime pay. They are thus suing for back wages and seeking
class action status so as to include an estimated 500 current
and former employees who worked for the New York-based labor
union after 2002.
Andrew Gibert, who lives near Bellingham but worked all over the
United States and Canada, is one of the plaintiffs. According to
him, he worked up to 16 hours a day, seven days a week,
traveling, passing out leaflets at factories and knocking on
doors in neighborhoods. He claims that when he complained about
the hours, his supervisor gave him a verbal warning for a bad
attitude. He also claims that the stressful workload put him on
disability for a year before he quit in April.
Unite Here spokeswoman Amanda Cooper told The Seattle Times that
the union was unaware of the lawsuit, which was filed in May and
amended recently. However, she did say that the nature of
organizing requires unusual work schedules. She also adds,
"We're confident that the suit is baseless and we're going to
fight it. We are an organization that is committed to the rights
of workers."
Federal law requires employers to pay employees time-and-a-half
after 40 hours a week unless their job falls into one of several
white-collar exemptions, including salaried executives and
professionals.
Ed Budge, a Seattle attorney representing the union workers told
The Seattle Times, "I don't think there's any legitimate
argument that these people were professional," and adds, "These
were the ground troops."
Mr. Gibert's partner and fellow organizer, 26-year-old Jennifer
Jason, told The Seattle Times that she worked more hours at the
union than she did starting her own company in 2000, the now-
shuttered virtualintern.com. "If I didn't get the work done, I'd
get written up," she adds.
However, longtime organizer Cindy Richardson, who works 50-hour
weeks for Unite Here's Seattle affiliate, called the suit
"ridiculous." She told The Seattle Times, "When you come into
organizing, you know what you're walking into. This is not a
job, it's my passion. It's not like I'm making sacrifices that
I'm not willing to make."
Mr. Gibert, 46, told The Seattle Times that the union exploits
this dedication, particularly among its younger employees, many
of whom are fresh out of college with few family commitments. He
added, "They create this atmosphere that's extremely intense,
getting people to buy into the notion that we're part of this
movement so you're supposed to sacrifice your home life, your
pocketbook, your health, your body. And it works."
Unite Here represents more than 440,000 employees working in
apparel, laundry, food service and other service and textile
industries. It is one of six unions threatening to form a rival
organization to the AFL-CIO, claiming, in part, that the labor
federation is spending too much on political donations and not
enough on organizing.
VIOXX LITIGATION: UCLA Cardiologist To Testify in TX Civil Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Isaac Wiener, cardiologist and co-director of the Cardiac
Arrhythmia Center at the UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles, is
set to testify in the first Vioxx-related civil trial in the
Texas State Court in Angleton, the Associated Press reports.
Houston-based lawyer Mark Lanier intends to prove that Merck &
Co.'s controversial painkiller caused the death of Robert Ernst
from arrhythmia, or an irregular heartbeat, in 2001. Mr. Ernst,
Robert Ernst, a produce manager at a Wal-Mart near Fort Worth
who ran marathons and worked as a personal trainer, took Vioxx
for eight months to alleviate pain in his hands until he died in
his sleep.
Last week, Merck & Co.'s lawyers presented evidence that the
company studied whether Vioxx caused arrhythmias in nine
clinical trials before the drug went on the market in May 1999
and found "no clinically meaningful differences" in patients who
took the painkiller compared to those who took sugar pills or
other anti-inflammatory pain relievers, AP reports. The lawyers
asserted that the company acted responsibly, disclosed studies
on Vioxx and believed it to be safe until results from the long-
term study last year prompted pulling the drug.
Mr. Lanier contends Mr. Ernst died too quickly for his heart to
show damage. He also pointed to Merck's medical manual used by
doctors across the country, which says arrhythmia in some form
occurs in more than 90 percent of heart attack patients. He
also asserted that the Company knew of the dangers of using
Vioxx years before it recalled the drug. However, the Company
allegedly ignored those concerns in favor of aggressive
marketing for a multibillion-dollar seller.
More than 4,200 state and federal lawsuits are pending across
the country. They were filed after the Company recalled the
drug in September last year, after a study linked it to greater
risk of heart attack or stroke if taken for 18 months or more.
About 20 million people have taken Vioxx after its launch in
1999.
VISIONTECH USA: Recalls 280 Bicycle Aero Bars For Injury Hazard
---------------------------------------------------------------
In cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
(CPSC), VisionTech USA, Inc., of Auburn, Washington is
voluntarily recalling about 280 units of VisionTech USA
SuperMax, TriMax, TriMax Plus and Pro model Integrated Bicycle
Aero Bars.
The centerpiece of these bicycle aero bars can crack or break,
causing the bicycle rider to lose control and crash. VisionTech
has received two reports of the centerpiece of these aero bars
breaking, resulting in minor scrapes and abrasions.
Aero bars are handlebar extensions typically used on racing and
triathlon bicycles that either clip on to the handlebars or are
sold as an integrated handlebar and stem system. The aero bars
allow riders to ride in an aerodynamic crouching position. The
recalled aero bars are an integrated system which have a casted
aluminum centerpiece which are attached to a handlebar, a stem
and two aero bars each approximately 15 inches long, protruding
in front of the handlebar. The VisionTech logo is displayed in
gold lettering against a black background on the wings of the
bar. Bicycle aero bars bearing a silver and red decal on the
wings with the words "Vision by Full Speed Ahead" are not
included in this recall.
Manufactured in the United States, the aero bars were sold at
bicycle specialty stores nationwide from March 2002 through
March 2003 for about $435.
Consumers should stop using the bicycle aero bars immediately
and contact VisionTech USA, Inc. to have their aero bars tested.
A free replacement will be provided for any bicycle aero bars
found defective.
Consumer Contact: Contact VisionTech USA, Inc. toll-free at
(866) 204-5798, pin number 0118, between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. ET
Monday through Friday.
WORLDCOM INC.: 3 Former Executives Opt To Settle Investors' Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Three former executives of WorldCom Inc., finance chief Scott
Sullivan, accounting director Buford Yates and controller David
Myers, reached settlements in a class action lawsuit brought by
investors who lost billions of dollars when the
telecommunications firm collapsed in an $11 billion accounting
fraud, according to a judge, The Associated Press reports.
U.S. District Court Judge Denise Cote, of Manhattan federal
court, scheduled a hearing on Thursday to discuss preliminary
approval of the settlements, reached by the three former
WorldCom executives, who were the last remaining defendants in
the investor lawsuit.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, former
WorldCom CEO Bernard Ebbers, 12 former WorldCom directors,
auditing firm Arthur Andersen and major investment banks that
underwrote WorldCom securities already reached settlements with
the investors totaling more than $6 billion.
In an order posted on a court Web site, the judge did not
indicate how much money the three remaining defendants would pay
for their parts of the settlements or whether they were likely
to forfeit property. The Judge though said that the details of
the settlements would be made public before the scheduled
settlement hearing.
Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Yates and Mr. Myers were among five former
WorldCom executives who pleaded guilty to fraud and helped the
government build its case against Mr. Ebbers. They and two
WorldCom accountants who helped carry out the fraud, are to be
sentenced in August.
WorldCom collapsed in the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history in
2002. It has since re-emerged under the name MCI.
Meetings, Conferences & Seminars
* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
-------------------------------------------------
July 28-29, 2005
CLASS ACTION LITIGATION: PROSECUTION & DEFENSE STRATEGIES 2005
Practising Law Institute
New York, NY
Contact: 800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu
August 18-19, 2005
PRODUCTS LIABILITY: PHARMACEUTICAL AND MEDICAL DEVICE ISSUES
ALI-ABA
San Francisco
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614
August 25-26, 2005
CLASS ACTION FAIRNESS ACT OF 2005 AND OTHER EMERGING CLASS
ACTION ISSUES
ALI-ABA
Chicago
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614
September 8-9, 2005
CLASS ACTION LITIGATION: PROSECUTION & DEFENSE STRATEGIES 2005
Practising Law Institute
Chicago, IL
Contact: 800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu
September 19-20, 2005
NATIONAL ASBESTOS LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Four Seasons Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
September 26-27, 2005
CONSUMER FINANCE LITIGATION & CLASS ACTIONS
American Conferences
New York
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com
September 26-27, 2005
REINSURANCE SUMMIT
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
September 26-27, 2005
WATER CONTAMINATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Marina del Rey Los Angeles
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
September 26-27, 2005
BAD FAITH LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
September 27, 2005
ARBITRATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
September 27-28, 2005
PREPARING FOR THE FUTURE OF FINITE AND STRUCTURED RISK
(RE)INSURANCE
American Conferences
New York
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com
October 2005
ASBESTOS LIABILITY FORUM
Mealey Publications
London, England
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
October 2005
LAW CLIENT DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
October 6-7, 2005
ASBESTOS LITIGATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY
ALI-ABA
Chicago
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614
October 7, 2005
REINSURANCE LAW & PRACTICE 2005: NEW LEGAL & BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENTS IN A CHANGING ENVIRONMENT
Practising Law Institute
New York, NY
Contact: 800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu
October 17-18, 2005
BENZENE LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz Carlton, Phoenix
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
October 17-18, 2005
INSURANCE COVERAGE DISPUTES CONCERNING CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS
Mealey Publications
The Ritz Carlton, New Orleans
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
October 27-28, 2005
RETAIL LIABILITY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Mandalay Bay Resort & Casino,Las Vegas
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
November 3-4, 2005
CONFERENCE ON LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRODUCTS
ALI-ABA
Washington DC
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614
November 3-4, 2005
NATIONAL MANUFACTURING CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Coconut Grove, Miami
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
November 7, 2005
ALL SUMS: REALLOCATION & SETTLEMENT CREDITS CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
November 7-8, 2005
LEXISNEXIS PRESENTS: COPYRIGHT - FROM TRADITIONAL CONCEPTS TO
THE DIGITAL AGE
Mealey Publications
Downtown Conference Center at Pace University, New York City
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
November 7-8, 2005
CONSTRUCTION DEFECT & MOLD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz Carlton Phoenix, Phoenix
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
November 7-8, 2005
FUNDAMENTALS OF REINSURANCE LITIGATION & ARBITRATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Downtown Conference Center at Pace University, New York City
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
November 9, 2005
CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION DEFECT LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Four Seasons Resort, Santa Barbara
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
November 10-11, 2005
CALIFORNIA SECTION 17200 CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Four Seasons Resort Santa Barbara
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
November 14-15, 2005
SILICA LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton, New Orleans
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
November 17-18, 2005
ASBESTOS LIABILITY FORUM
Mealey Publications
London, England
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
November 17-18, 2005
Mass Torts Made Perfect Seminar
MassTortsMadePerfect.Com
Las Vegas, Nevada
Contact: 800-320-2227; 850-436-6094 (fax)
December 1-2, 2005
REINSURANCE GENERAL COUNSEL'S CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Fairmont Scottsdale Princess
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
December 5-6, 2005
ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton New York, Battery Park
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
December 6, 2005
ASBESTOS INSURANCE CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton New York, Battery Park
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
December 12-13, 2005
VIOXX LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Caesars Palace, Las Vegas
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
December 12-13, 2005
LEAD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Pentagon City, Washington DC
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com
February 16-17, 2006
ACCOUNTANTS' LIABILITY
ALI-ABA
Coral Gables, Miami, Florida
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614
September 28-30, 2006
LITIGATING MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CLAIMS
ALI-ABA
Boston
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614
* Online Teleconferences
------------------------
July 01-30, 2005
HBA PRESENTS: AUTOMOBILE LITIGATION: DISPUTES AMONG
CONSUMERS, DEALERS, FINANCE COMPANIES AND FLOORPLANNERS
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com
July 01-30, 2005
CONSTRUCTION DISPUTES: TEXAS RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION DEFECT
LIABILITY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com
July 01-30, 2005
HBA PRESENTS: ETHICS IN PERSONAL INJURY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com
July 01-30, 2005
IN-HOUSE COUNSEL AND WRONGFUL DISCHARGE CLAIMS:
CONFLICT WITH CONFIDENTIALITY?
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com
July 01-30, 2005
BAYLOR LAW SCHOOL PRESENTS: 2004 GENERAL PRACTICE INSTITUTE --
FAMILY LAW, DISCIPLINARY SYSTEM, CIVIL LITIGATION, INSURANCE
& CONSUMER LAW UPDATES
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com
July 28-29, 2005
CLASS ACTION LITIGATION: PROSECUTION & DEFENSE STRATEGIES 2005
(VIDEOCONFERENCE)
Practising Law Institute
Contact: 800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu
TORTS PRACTICE: 18TH ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS #1
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444
TORTS PRACTICE: 18TH ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS #2
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444
TORTS PRACTICE: 18TH ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS #3
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444
TORTS PRACTICE: 19TH ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444
CIVIL LITIGATION PRACTICE: 21ST ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS #1
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444
CIVIL LITIGATION PRACTICE: 21ST ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS #2
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444
CIVIL LITIGATION PRACTICE: 21ST ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS #3
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444
CIVIL LITIGATION PRACTICE: 22ND ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444
PUNITIVE DAMAGES: MAXIMIZING YOUR CLIENT'S SUCCESS OR MINIMIZING
YOUR CLIENT'S EXPOSURE
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444
EFFECTIVE DIRECT AND CROSS EXAMINAITON
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444
STRATEGIC TIPS FOR SUCCESSFULLY PROPOUNDING & OPPOSING WRITTEN
DISCOVERY
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444
CACI: CALIFORNIA'S NEW CIVIL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444
ADVERSARIAL PROCEEDINGS IN ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCIES
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Online Streaming Video
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com
ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCY - PANEL OF CREDITORS COMMITTEE MEMBERS
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Online Streaming Video
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com
EXPERT WITNESS ADMISSIBILITY IN MOLD CASES
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Online Streaming Video
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com
INTRODUCTION TO CLASS ACTIONS AND LARGE RECOVERIES
Big Class Action
Contact: seminars@bigclassaction.com
NON-TRADITIONAL DEFENDANTS IN ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com
PAXIL LITIGATION
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS INVOLVING BAYCOL
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com
RECOVERIES
Big Class Action
Contact: seminars@bigclassaction.com
SELECTION OF MOLD LITIGATION EXPERTS: WHO YOU NEED ON YOUR TEAM
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com
SHOULD I FILE A CLASS ACTION?
LawCommerce.Com / Law Education Institute
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com
THE EFFECTS OF ASBESTOS ON THE PULMONARY SYSTEM
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com
THE STATE OF ASBESTOS LITIGATION: JUDICIAL PANEL DISCUSSION
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com
TRYING AN ASBESTOS CASE
LawCommerce.Com
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com
THE IMPACT OF LORILLAR ON STATE AND LOCAL REGULATION OF TOBACCO
SALES AND ADVERSTISING
American Bar Association
Contact: 800-285-2221; abacle@abanet.org
_______________________________________________________________
The Meetings, Conferences and Seminars column appears in the
Class Action Reporter each Wednesday. Submissions via
e-mail to carconf@beard.com are encouraged.
New Securities Fraud Cases
CONAGRA FOODS: Dyer & Shuman Schedules Lead Plaintiff Deadline
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Dyer & Shuman, LLP is encouraging persons who
purchased the common stock of ConAgra Foods, Inc. (NASDAQ: CAG)
between September 18, 2003 and June 7, 2005 ("Class Members") to
contact Kip B. Shuman of Dyer & Shuman, LLP at 1-800-711-6483 or
via email at KShuman@DyerShuman.com, or their counsel of choice,
concerning their rights and interests as potential class members
in the shareholder class action recently filed in the United
States District Court for the District of Nebraska against
ConAgra Foods, Inc. and certain of its officers and directors.
The firm reminds investors that they have until August 22, 2005
to file for lead plaintiff in the case.
For more details, contact Kip B. Shuman of Dyer & Shuman, LLP,
Phone: 1-800-711-6483, E-mail: KShuman@DyerShuman.com, Web site:
http://www.dyershuman.com.
LAZARD LTD.: Dyer & Shuman Schedules Lead Plaintiff Deadline
------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Dyer & Shuman, LLP is encouraging persons who
purchased the common stock of Lazard, Ltd. (NYSE: LAZ) pursuant
to the initial public offering or in the open market between May
4, 2005 and May 12, 2005 ("Class Members") to contact Kip B.
Shuman of Dyer & Shuman, LLP at 1-800-711-6483 or via email at
KShuman@DyerShuman.com, or their counsel of choice, concerning
their rights and interests as potential class members in the
shareholder class action recently filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York against
Lazard, Ltd. and certain of its officers and directors.
The firm reminds investors that they have until August 15, 2005
to file for lead plaintiff in the case.
For more details, contact Kip B. Shuman of Dyer & Shuman, LLP,
Phone: 1-800-711-6483, E-mail: KShuman@DyerShuman.com, Web site:
http://www.dyershuman.com.
MAJESCO ENTERTAINMENT: Chitwood Harley Lodges Stock Suit in NJ
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Chitwood Harley Harnes LLP initiated a lawsuit
seeking class action status in the United States District Court
for the District of New Jersey on behalf of all persons (the
"Class") who purchased the securities of Majesco Entertainment
Co. (NASDAQ: COOL) ("Majesco" or the "Company") during the
period December 8, 2004 and July 12, 2005 (the "Class Period").
The Complaint charges Majesco, a producer of video games, and
its former CEO, Carl Yankowski, and its former CFO, Jan E.
Chasen ("Defendants"), with violations of Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated there under, by issuing a series of materially false
and misleading statements to the market throughout the Class
Period that had the effect of artificially inflating the market
price of the Company's securities. The Complaint alleges that
throughout the Class Period, Defendants touted the
diversification of Majesco's product line and stated that the
Company's revenue and income would significantly increase in
fiscal year 2005. Unbeknownst to investors, Majesco's claimed
increase in revenue and income was unreasonable because it would
disproportionately depend on the success of just one of its
video games, and on the Company's continued improper accounting
for development costs.
The truth emerged on July 12, 2005, when Majesco issued a press
release after the market closed announcing a dramatic reduction
in its anticipated 2005 results. Rather than the expected net
revenues of $175-$185 million and income of $16-$18 million, the
Company stated an expected loss of $16-$19 million on revenues
that would be at least $50 million less than previously
announced. Majesco also announced that after less than a year,
Yankowski had resigned as CEO and that Chasen had been removed
as CFO. On this news, Majesco shares fell 48%, from $6.89 per
share on July 12, 2005 to $3.56 per share on July 13, 2005.
For more details, contact Nichole Browning Adams, Esq. of
Chitwood Harley Harnes, LLP, Phone: 1-888-873-3999 extension
4873, E-mail: nadams@chitwoodlaw.com, Web site:
http://www.chitwoodlaw.com.
MAJESCO ENTERTAINMENT: Dyer & Shuman Sets Lead Plaintiff Cutoff
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Dyer & Shuman, LLP is encouraging persons who
purchased the common stock of Majesco Entertainment Company
(Nasdaq: COOL) between December 8, 2004 and July 12, 2005
("Class Members") to contact Kip B. Shuman of Dyer & Shuman, LLP
at 1-800-711-6483 or via email at KShuman@DyerShuman.com, or
their counsel of choice, concerning their rights and interests
as potential class members in the shareholder class action
recently filed in the United States District Court for the
District of New Jersey against Majesco Entertainment Company and
certain of its officers and directors.
The firm reminds investors that they have until August 16, 2005
to file for lead plaintiff in the case.
For more details, contact Kip B. Shuman of Dyer & Shuman, LLP,
Phone: 1-800-711-6483, E-mail: KShuman@DyerShuman.com, Web site:
http://www.dyershuman.com.
NAVARRE CORPORATION: Dyer & Schuman Sets Lead Plaintiff Deadline
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Dyer & Shuman, LLP is encouraging persons who
purchased the common stock of Navarre Corporation (NASDAQ: NAVR)
between January 21, 2004 and February 22, 2004 ("Class Members")
to contact Kip B. Shuman of Dyer & Shuman, LLP at 1-800-711-6483
or via email at KShuman@DyerShuman.com, or their counsel of
choice, concerning their rights and interests as potential class
members in the shareholder class action recently filed in the
United States District Court for the District of Minnesota
against Navarre Corporation and certain of its officers and
directors.
The firm reminds investors that they have until August 12, 2005
to file for lead plaintiff in the case.
For more details, contact Kip B. Shuman of Dyer & Shuman, LLP,
Phone: 1-800-711-6483, E-mail: KShuman@DyerShuman.com, Web site:
http://www.dyershuman.com.
*********
A list of Meetings, Conferences and Seminars appears in each
Wednesday's edition of the Class Action Reporter. Submissions
via e-mail to carconf@beard.com are encouraged.
Each Friday's edition of the CAR includes a section featuring
news on asbestos-related litigation and profiles of target
asbestos defendants that, according to independent researches,
collectively face billions of dollars in asbestos-related
liabilities.
*********
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 Senorin, Aurora Fatima Antonio and Lyndsey
Resnick, Editors.
Copyright 2005. 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 * * *