/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/060629.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Thursday, June 29, 2006, Vol. 8, No. 128
Headlines
ALLIED MUTUAL: Refunds in $100M Settlement Set for Summer
AMERICAN FEDERATION: Fox 5 Staff Sues Union Over Alleged Threat
AT&T INC: Hollywood Woman Sues Over Phone Call Surveillance
AUSTRALIA: Independent Inquiry Called for Binary Toxic Fire
CIPHERGEN BIOSYSTEMS: Calif. Court Dismisses Securities Suit
COLLEGIATE PACIFIC: Continues to Face Stockholder's Suit in Del.
DYNEX CAPITAL: Pursues Bid to Dismiss Securities Suit in N.Y.
EDWARD D JONES: Investment Reps File FLSA Breach Suit in Calif.
EDWARD D JONES: Investment Reps File Wage Violations Suit in Pa.
EUROWEB INT'L: Opts to Settle Stockholders Litigation in Del.
GEORGIA: District Judge Temporarily Holds Enforcement of HB 1059
GILMAN & CIOCIA: Mediation in Del. Stockholder's Suit Fruitless
GREAT LAKES: Faces La. Property Damage Suit Over MRGO Dredging
HELEN OF TROY: Continues to Face Securities Fraud Suits in Tex.
HIGHMARK INC: Fri. Hearing Set in $10M Deal With Ambulance Cos.
IBIS TECHNOLOGY: Mass. Court Partially Dismisses Securities Suit
ILLINOIS: ABATE Wins Partial Victory in Suit Over State Funds
IMPERIAL TRADING: Aug. Trial Set for Junk Faxes Suit Settlement
INTERVOICE-BRITE INC: Continues to Face Securities Suit in Tex.
KOBE STEEL: Investors Sue Japanese Firm Over Alleged Bid Rigging
MEMBERS MORTGAGE: Sept. Hearing Set for Mass. Suit Settlement
NATIONAL SECURITY: Aug. Hearing Set for Ala. Insurance Suit Deal
NAVARRE CORPORATION: Minn. Judge Junks Securities Fraud Suit
PARLUX FRAGRANCES: Shareholder File Suit in Fla. Over Sale
PEMCO AVIATION: High Court Nixes Writ of Certiorari in Bias Suit
PEPSI BOTTLING: Phil. Supreme Court Ends 14-Yr. 349 Controversy
PIONEER ELECTRONICS: July Hearing Slated for Elite PRO-x30 Deal
PORTLAND GENERAL: No Electricity Rates Suit Filed Despite Notice
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS: Ariz. City Approves LGIP Suit Settlement
PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL: Sept. Hearing Set for Ind. Suit Settlement
ROLLING MEADOWS: Faces Ill. Suit Over Senior Housing Agreement
SOURCEONE HEALTHCARE: July Trial Set for Junk Fax Suit Deal
SUMITOMO METAL: Investors File Suit Over Alleged Bid Rigging
SWIFT: Belgian Banking Sued Over Alleged Conspiracy with U.S.
TRIPOS INC: Settlement Reached in Consolidated Stock Suit in Mo.
UST LIQUIDATING: Judge Mulls Parties' Positions in Veeder Suit
WELDING FUME LITIGATION: Welder Loses Trial Over Health Ailments
New Securities Fraud Cases
GLOBETEL COMMUNICATIONS: Shalov Stone Files Stock Suit in Fla.
HERLEY INDUSTRIES: Goldman & Scaralto Files Stock Suit in Pa.
*********
ALLIED MUTUAL: Refunds in $100M Settlement Set for Summer
---------------------------------------------------------
Jason Adkins, an attorney for Allied Mutual Insurance
policyholders, said an estimated 75,000 policyholders are
believed to be eligible to share in a $100 million settlement
that could be out by the end of July or in August, KCCI.com
reports.
Attorney Adkins said the paperwork involved in the settlement
has been overwhelming, but if all goes well, he'll send refund
checks later this summer.
In 1998, Brad Brady, representing policyholders of Allied
Mutual, filed a lawsuit against the Des Moines company when
Ohio-based Nationwide Mutual Insurance bought Allied Mutual and
sister company Allied Group for $1.57 billion. Policyholders of
Allied Mutual received $110 million from Nationwide at the time
of the sale.
The suit claimed that the policyholder-owned company improperly
transferred assets to publicly held Allied Group of Des Moines.
In July 2005, both sides finally agreed to a settlement that
would have Nationwide pay a minimum of $100 million and a
maximum of $135 million more to Allied Mutual customers who
owned policies as of Feb. 18, 1993.
Under the settlement, policyholders of both auto and home
insurances could receive as much as 40 percent of the premiums
they paid in during a three-year period between 1990 and 1993.
They estimated that as many as 25 percent of potential claimants
are from Iowa (Class Action Reporter, Oct. 11, 2005).
In October 2005, the suit's payout fund of $100 million to $135
million has drawn 45,000 claims from Allied Mutual Insurance
policyholders who are eligible to claim the money, even though
at least 305,000 notices have been sent (Class Action Reporter,
Oct. 11, 2005).
Plaintiffs were represented by Brad J. Brady of Brady & O'Shea,
P.C., 2735 First Avenue S.E., Suite 205, Cedar Rapids, IA 52402,
Phone: (319) 866-9277, Fax: (319) 866-9280, Web site:
http://www.bradyoshea.com.
Allied Mutual is represented by Jason Adkins of Adkins, Kelston
& Zavez, P.C., 90 Canal Street, Suite 500, Boston, MA 02114,
Phone: 617.367.1040, Fax: 617.742-8280, E-mail:
jadkins@akzlaw.com.
AMERICAN FEDERATION: Fox 5 Staff Sues Union Over Alleged Threat
---------------------------------------------------------------
WTTG-TV (Fox 5) production employee Marianne Krist filed a class
action with the National Labor Relations Board against the
American Federation of Television and Radio Artists union after
its officials allegedly threatened to have her fired for refusal
to support the group.
The union officials are accused of violating the employee's
rights by making these threats while failing to inform her and
her coworkers of their right to refrain from formal union
membership and payment of certain dues.
AFTRA officials allegedly failed to provide her and her
coworkers with a legally mandated audit of the union's
expenditures, demanded that they pay union initiation fees, and
insisted that she sign a dues "check off" card authorizing the
automatic deduction of forced dues from her paycheck.
Union officials allegedly unlawfully failed first to notify the
employees of their right to refrain from formal union membership
and withheld forced dues spent on activities unrelated to
collective bargaining, such as union political activities.
After Ms. Krist refused to pay, the union hierarchy -- by letter
dated April 17, 2006 -- allegedly unlawfully threatened her that
"without tender of initiation and dues, you may not be employed
in AFTRA's jurisdiction."
"Union officials are unlawfully retaliating against Krist for
refusing to toe the union line," said Stefan Gleason, vice
president of the National Right to Work Foundation. "These
heavy-handed tactics demonstrate how far union officials will go
to keep a steady stream of forced union dues flowing into union
coffers."
Under numerous U.S. Supreme Court precedents, including
"Patternmakers v. NLRB," workers have the right to resign their
formal union memberships at any time.
AFTRA union officials' actions also allegedly violated
employees' rights affirmed in the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme
Court decision "Communications Workers v. Beck." Under Beck,
union officials may not compel workers to pay forced union dues
for costs unrelated to collective bargaining, and must
specifically inform employees of their right to refrain from
full dues-paying union membership before seizing any forced
union dues from their paychecks.
The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation --
http://www.nrtw.org-- is a nonprofit, charitable organization
providing free legal aid to employees whose human or civil
rights have been violated by compulsory unionism abuses.
For more information, contact Patrick Ashby, Phone: 703-770-
3306.
AT&T INC: Hollywood Woman Sues Over Phone Call Surveillance
-----------------------------------------------------------
A computer database designer from Hollywood has filed a suit to
block the U.S. government from collecting phone call records of
its citizens, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel reports.
Theresa Fortnash filed her suit in Miami against AT&T Inc. The
case is the first to be filed in Florida over allegations that
phone companies are illegally sharing with the federal
government millions of Americans' private communication. Like
other suits filed in some states, Ms. Fortnash wants an
injunction barring AT&T from handing phone logs to the federal
government, which is trying to uncover possible plans of
terrorist attack in the country.
Ms. Fortnash said telephone logs can be used to track newspaper
reporters and their sources, impede lawyers defending their
clients. It gives the government too much power over citizens,
according to her.
A&T hasn't yet responded to Ms. Fortnash's lawsuit, the report
said.
Representing Ms. Fortnash is John Gillespie of Broad and Cassel,
Tower 101, Suite 1700, 101 Northeast Third Avenue, Fort
Lauderdale, Florida 33301 (Broward Co.), Phone: 954-771-0908,
Fax: 954-771-9880.
AUSTRALIA: Independent Inquiry Called for Binary Toxic Fire
-----------------------------------------------------------
The Queensland opposition is calling for an independent inquiry
into the government's response to a toxic fire at a chemical
factory at the Narangba industrial estate in August last year,
according to Ninemsn.
Coalition deputy leader Bob Quinn said, "There is a sneaking and
growing suspicion that the government has done nothing because
of the political affiliations this company has enjoyed with the
government over a long period of time."
Herbicide and insecticide factory Binary Chemicals has since
been revealed to be co-owned by the family of former state Labor
minister Ken Hayward. The company was placed into liquidation
in November.
Mr. Quinn is asking for an independent inquiry into the
circumstances under which the fire occurred at the company, the
appropriate responses made by the government, and "the effect on
individuals who live close to that site in terms of their own
personal health."
About 60 residents nearby have filed a class action against the
state government and the Caboolture Shire Council over reduced
health quality and property prices, according to The Courier
Mail.
Meanwhile, Premier Peter Beattie met community representatives
to discuss their concerns and establish an action plan.
CIPHERGEN BIOSYSTEMS: Calif. Court Dismisses Securities Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
ordered the dismissal, per the parties' stipulation, of the
securities fraud class action, "Cohen v. Ciphergen Biosystems,
Inc., et al., Case No. C-05-4997-MHP."
On Dec. 5, 2005, a securities class action was filed against
Ciphergen Biosystems, Inc. and certain former officers and
directors.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the purchasers of the
company's common stock between Aug. 8, 2005 and Nov. 16, 2005.
Plaintiff alleged, among others, violations of sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. They sought unspecified
monetary damages and other relief against all defendants.
On March 28, 2006, the parties stipulated to the dismissal of
the action without prejudice. The court ordered the action
dismissed per the parties' stipulation on March 29, 2006.
The suit is "Cohen v. Ciphergen Biosystems, Inc. et al., Case
No. 3:05-cv-04997-MHP," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California under Judge Marilyn H. Patel.
Representing the plaintiffs are:
(1) Linda M. Fong and Laurence D. King of Kaplan Fox &
Kilsheimer, LLP, 555 Montgomery Street, Suite 1501, San
Francisco, CA 94111, Phone: 415-772-4700, Fax: 415-772-
4707, E-mail: lfong@kaplanfox.com and
lking@kaplanfox.com; and
(2) Todd M. Schneider of Schneider & Wallace, 180
Montgomery Street, Suite 2000, San Francisco, CA 94104,
Phone: 415-421-7100, Fax: 415-421-7105, E-mail:
tschneider@schneiderwallace.com.
Representing the defendants is Caz Hashemi of Wilson Sonsini
Goodrich & Rosati, 650 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050,
Phone: (650) 320-4827 and E-mail: CHASHEMI@WSGR.COM.
COLLEGIATE PACIFIC: Continues to Face Stockholder's Suit in Del.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Collegiate Pacific, Inc. remains a defendant in a purported
stockholder's class action in the Court of Chancery of the state
of Delaware in and for New Castle County, according to the
company's May 15, 2006 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the period ended March 31, 2006.
On Dec. 15, 2005, a stockholder of Sport Supply Group, Inc.,
Jeffrey S. Abraham, as trustee of the Law Offices of Jeffrey S.
Abraham Money Purchase Plan, dated Dec. 31, 1999, f/b/o Jeffrey
S. Abraham, filed a lawsuit against:
-- Emerson Radio Corp.,
-- Geoffrey P. Jurick,
-- Arthur J. Coerver,
-- Harvey Rothenberg,
-- the company, and
-- Michael J. Blumenfeld
Plaintiff filed the lawsuit on behalf of plaintiff and as a
class action on behalf of the public stockholders of Sport
Supply in connection with the now terminated agreement and plan
of merger pursuant to which the company was to have acquired the
remaining shares of the outstanding capital stock of Sport
Supply that it does not already own and the company's subsequent
acquisition of an additional 1.66 million shares of Sport Supply
for approximately $9.2 million cash from an institutional
stockholder.
The suit alleges the defendants breached certain fiduciary
duties owed to Sport Supply's stockholders and the company was
unjustly enriched from its use of certain Sport Supply assets.
For more details, contact the Law Offices of Jeffrey S. Abraham,
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4700, New York, NY 10165, Phone:
(212) 692-0555.
DYNEX CAPITAL: Pursues Bid to Dismiss Securities Suit in N.Y.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Dynex Capital, Inc. moved for reconsideration and interlocutory
appeal of the order of the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York to deny its motion to dismiss a securities
class action filed against it and several other defendants.
On Feb. 11, 2005, the Teamsters Local 445 Freight Division
Pension Fund filed a putative class action complaint against the
company alleging violations of the federal securities laws and
various state common law claims.
Named in that complaint were the company, its subsidiary MERIT
Securities Corp., Stephen J. Benedetti, the company's executive
vice president, and Thomas H. Potts, the company's former
president and a former director.
The suit purported to be a class action on behalf of purchasers
of MERIT Series 13 securitization financing bonds, which are
collateralized by manufactured housing loans.
On May 31, 2005, the Teamsters filed an amended class action
complaint. The amended complaint dropped all state common law
claims but added federal securities claims related to the MERIT
Series 12 securitization financing bonds.
On July 15, 2005, the defendants moved to dismiss the amended
complaint. On Feb. 10, 2006, the District Court dismissed the
claims against Messrs. Benedetti and Potts, but did not dismiss
the claims against the company and MERIT.
On Feb. 24, 2006, the company and MERIT moved for
reconsideration and interlocutory appeal of the district court's
order denying the motion to dismiss it and MERIT from the case.
The suit is "Teamsters Local 445 Freight Division Pension Fund
et al. v. Dynex Capital, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:05-cv-01897-
HB," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of New York, under Judge Harold Baer.
Representing the plaintiffs are Joel P. Laitman, Christopher
Lometti and Samuel P. Sporn of Schoengold & Sporn, P.C., 19
Fulton Street, Suite 406, New York, NY 10038, Phone: 212-964-
0046, Fax: 212-267-8137, E-mail: chris@spornlaw.com.
Representing the company are Monica Shelton Call, Eric Harrison
Feiler, Edward Joseph Fuhr, Terence James Rasmussen and Joseph
John Saltarelli of Hunton & Williams, LLP, (Richmond VA), 951
East Byrd Street, Richmond, VA 23219, Phone: (804)-788-8632,
Fax: (804)-788-8218, E-mail: trasmussen@hunton.com or
jsaltarelli@hunton.com.
EDWARD D JONES: Investment Reps File FLSA Breach Suit in Calif.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P., a principal subsidiary of The Jones
Financial Companies, L.L.L.P., is defendant in a class action
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California by a former investment representative.
The case was filed on March 31, 2006 by Gerald Booher as a
putative class action on behalf of all present and former
investment representatives in the state of California and,
potentially, throughout the U.S.
Though the lawsuit consists of seven separate causes of action,
all of the causes of action arise from claims that Edward D.
Jones failed to comply with California State Wage and Hour Laws
and the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act.
Specifically, it is alleged that Edward D. Jones failed to pay
overtime in compliance with such laws, unlawfully deducted
business expenses from the wages of investment representatives,
failed to fully compensate terminated Investment Representatives
and failed to provide mandatory meal and rest periods in
violation of California State Law.
The suit is "Gerald Booher v. Edward D. Jones and Co LP et al.,
Case No. 2:06-cv-01977-JFW-SH," filed in the U.S. District Court
for the Central District of California, under Judge John F.
Walter with referral to Judge Stephen J. Hillman.
Representing the plaintiffs are Lorinda D. Franco, Nicolas
Orihuela and Christopher Kim of Lim Ruger & Kim, 1055 W. 7th
St., Ste. 2800, Los Angeles, CA 90017, Phone: 213-955-9500, E-
mail: christopher.kim@lrklawyers.com.
Representing the defendants are:
(1) Tracy L. Cahill and Peter B. Gelblum of Mitchell
Silberberg & Knupp, 11377 W. Olympic Blvd., Los
Angeles, CA 90064-1683, Phone: 310-312-2000, E-mail:
tlc@msk.com and pbg@msk.com; and
(2) Dennis G. Collins, David M. Harris and Timothy M.
Huskey of Greensfelder Hemker and Gale, 10 South
Broadway, Suite 2000, St. Louis, MO 63102, US, Phone:
314-241-9090, E-mail: dgc@greensfelder.com.
EDWARD D JONES: Investment Reps File Wage Violations Suit in Pa.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P., a principal subsidiary of The Jones
Financial Companies, L.L.L.P., is a defendant in a class action
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Pennsylvania by a former investment representative.
James E. Ellis filed the suit on March 16, 2006, as a putative
class action on behalf of all present and former Pennsylvania
investment representatives.
Though the suit consists of three separate causes of action, all
the causes of action arise from claims that Edward D. Jones
failed to pay Pennsylvania investment representatives overtime
in accordance with Pennsylvania's Minimum Wage Act and the
Pennsylvania Wage Payment Collection Law.
The suit is "Ellis v. Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P., Case No.
3:06-cv-00066-KRG," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Pennsylvania under Judge Kim R. Gibson.
Representing the plaintiffs are:
(1) R. Bruce Carlson and Gary F. Lynch of Carlson Lynch,
Ltd., Phone: (412) 749-1677 and (724) 656-1555, E-mail:
bcarlson@carlsonlynch.com and glynch@carlsonlynch.com;
and
(2) Daniel O. Myers of Richardson, Patrick, Westbrook &
Brickman, 1037 Chuck Dawley Boulevard, Building A, Mt.
Pleasant, SC 29464, Phone: (843) 727-6500, E-mail:
dmyers@rpwb.com.
Representing the company are:
(i) Amy L. Blaisdell and Dennis G. Collins of Greensfelder,
Hemker & Gale, 10 South Broadway, 2000 Equitable Bldg.,
St. Louis, MO 63102, Phone: (314) 241-9090, E-mail:
apb@greensfelder.com and dgc@greensfelder.com; and
(ii) Ronald P. Carnevali, Jr. of Spence, Custer, Saylor,
Wolfe & Rose, P.O. Box 280, AmeriServ Financial
Building, Johnstown, PA 15907, Phone: (814) 536-0735,
E-mail: rcarnevali@spencecuster.com.
EUROWEB INT'L: Opts to Settle Stockholders Litigation in Del.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Euroweb International Corp. reached settlement in a purported
stockholders' class action, "Laurence Paskowitz v. Csaba Toro et
al., C.A. No. 2110-N," pending in the Delaware Court of
Chancery.
On April 26, 2006, a lawsuit was filed by a stockholder of the
company against it, each of the company's directors and CORCYRA
d.o.o., a stockholder of the company that beneficially owns
39.81% of the company's outstanding common stock.
The complaint was brought individually and as a class action on
behalf of certain of the company's common stockholders excluding
defendants and their affiliates.
Plaintiff alleges the proposed sale of 100% of the company's
interest in the company's two Internet and telecom-related
operating subsidiaries constitutes a sale of substantially all
of the company's assets and requires approval by a majority of
the voting power of the company's outstanding common stock under
Section 271 of the Delaware General Corporation Law.
Plaintiff also alleges the defendants breached their fiduciary
duties in connection with the sale of the subsidiaries and the
disclosures contained in the proxy statement filed on April 24,
2006.
The company denies any and all allegations of wrongdoing,
however, in the interests of conserving resources, on April 28,
2006, the parties to the litigation entered into a memorandum of
understanding providing for, subject to confirmatory discovery
by plaintiff, the negotiation of a formal stipulation of a
settlement of the litigation.
Pursuant to the proposed settlement, the board of directors of
the company has determined to:
-- increase the vote required to approve the sale of 100%
of the company's interest in the Subsidiaries;
-- revise the disclosure within the proxy statement to
eliminate the bonus of up to $400,000, which the
Compensation Committee of the company had the option
to pay to select members of management, as the Board
of Directors had previously elected to terminate the
ability to pay such bonus; and
-- provide supplemental disclosure as contained in the
Supplemental Proxy Statement to be mailed to
stockholders and filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on May 3, 2006.
The settlement will provide for dismissal of the litigation with
prejudice and is subject to court approval.
As part of the settlement, the company has agreed to pay an
amount of attorneys' fees and expenses to be negotiated between
the two parties or, lieu of such agreement between the two
parties, will be determined by the court.
GEORGIA: District Judge Temporarily Holds Enforcement of HB 1059
----------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Clarence Cooper of the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Georgia has temporarily barred the state
from forcing eight registered sex offenders to move at least
1,000 feet from school bus stops, the Washington Times reports.
Earlier, the Southern Center for Human Rights and the American
Civil Liberties Union of Georgia filed a complaint in the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Georgia in Rome
against HB 1059, which limits registered sex offenders' access
to public places (Class Action Reporter, June 26, 2006).
The advocacy groups asked the court to issue an injunction
blocking the enactment of House Bill 1059, which takes effect on
July 1. The suit alleges HB 1059 turns the law "from one
tailored to keep offenders away from children into one that
essentially drives every person on the registry from all urban
areas and many rural areas."
HB 1059 broadens the law governing where registered sex
offenders may reside by prohibiting them from living or working
within 1,000 feet of any child care facility, church, school or
"area where minors congregate," including parks and recreation
facilities, playgrounds, skating rinks, neighborhood centers,
gymnasiums, swimming pools and bus stops.
According to Southern Center for Human Rights attorney, Sarah
Geraghty, the act makes it impossible to settle anywhere for any
permanency, throwing thousands of sex offenders into the
streets.
But Senior Assistant Attorney General Joseph Drolet, contested
that while the law, at worst, inconveniences sex offenders, it
protects the children.
Named defendants in the suit are Sonny Perdue, governor of the
state of Georgia, Georgia Attorney General Thurbert E. Baker,
Chief of Probation in Cedartown Scot Dean and Polk County
Sheriff Robert Sparks.
A copy of the complaint is available free of charge at:
http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?bdb
The suit is "Whitaker et al v. Perdue et al., Case No. 4:06-cv-
00140-CC," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Georgia under Judge Clarence Cooper.
Representing the plaintiffs are:
(1) Stephen Brooks Bright of the Southern Center for Human
Rights, 83 Poplar Street, N.W., Atlanta, GA 30303-2122,
Phone: 404-688-1202, E-mail: sbright@schr.org;
(2) Margaret Fletcher Garrett of the American Civil
Liberties Union Foundation of Georgia, Inc., Suite 514
75 Piedmont Avenue, Atlanta, GA 30303, Phone: 404-523-
6201, E-mail: mgarrett@acluga.org;
(3) Sarah E. Geraghty of the Southern Center for Human
Rights, 83 Poplar Street, N.W., Atlanta, GA 30303-2122,
Phone: 404-688-1202, E-mail: sgeraghty@schr.org;
(4) Lisa L. Kung of the Southern Center for Human Rights
83 Poplar Street, N.W., Atlanta, GA 30303-2122, Phone:
404-688-1202;
(5) Elizabeth Lynn Littrell of the American Civil Liberties
Union Foundation of Georgia, Inc., Suite 514, 75
Piedmont Avenue, Atlanta, GA 30303, Phone: 404-523-
6201, E-mail: blittrell@acluga.org; and
(6) Gerald R. Weber of the American Civil Liberties Union
Foundation of Georgia, Inc., Suite 514, 75 Piedmont
Avenue, Atlanta, GA 30303, Phone: 404-523-6201, E-mail:
gweber@acluga.org.
GILMAN & CIOCIA: Mediation in Del. Stockholder's Suit Fruitless
---------------------------------------------------------------
Gilman & Ciocia, Inc. reports that a March 29 mediation in a
class action pending against the company in the Court of
Chancery of the state of Delaware in and for New Castle County
did not reached a resolution.
On Feb. 4, 2004, the company was served with a Summons and a
shareholder's class action and derivative complaint, "Gary
Kosseff v. James Ciocia, Thomas Povinelli, Michael P. Ryan,
Kathryn Travis, Seth A. Akabas, Louis P. Karol, Edward H. Cohen,
Steven Gilbert and Doreen Biebusch, and Gilman & Ciocia, Inc.,
Civil Action No. 188-N."
The action accuses the company, its board of directors and its
management of breaching their fiduciary duty of loyalty in
connection with the sale of offices to Pinnacle Taxx Advisors,
LLC in 2002.
The action alleges that the sale to Pinnacle was for inadequate
consideration and without a fairness opinion by independent
financial advisors, without independent legal advice and without
a thorough evaluation and vote by an independent committee of
the board of directors.
The action seeks:
-- a declaration that the company, its board of directors
and management breached their fiduciary duty and other
duties to the plaintiff and to the other members of the
purported class;
-- a rescission of the Asset Purchase Agreement;
-- unspecified monetary damages; and
-- an award to the plaintiff of costs and disbursements,
including reasonable legal, expert and accountants
fees.
On March 15, 2004, counsel for the company and for all
defendants filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. On June 18,
2004, counsel for the plaintiff filed an amended complaint.
On July 12, 2004, counsel for the company and for all defendants
filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On March 8,
2005, oral argument was heard on the motion to dismiss, and on
July 29, 2005 the case master delivered his draft report denying
the motion.
The parties have briefed exceptions to the report, after review
of which the master will deliver his final report. A mediation
proceeding requested by plaintiff took place without resolution
on March 29, 2006.
GREAT LAKES: Faces La. Property Damage Suit Over MRGO Dredging
--------------------------------------------------------------
Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company was named as defendant in a
purported property damage class action in the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana with regards to the
dredging operation at the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet.
On April 24, 2006, a class action complaint was filed in the
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, on
behalf of citizens of Louisiana who suffered property damage
from the waters that flooded New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina
hit the area.
The suit names the company along with numerous other dredging
companies who have completed projects on behalf of the Army
Corps of Engineers in the MRGO, and the federal government as
defendants.
The complaint alleges that dredging of MRGO caused the
destruction of the Louisiana wetlands, which provide a natural
barrier against storms and hurricanes.
This loss of natural barriers then contributed to the failure of
the levees upon the impact of Hurricane Katrina, which allowed
the floodwaters to damage plaintiffs' property.
The company is accused of negligence in violation of the Water
Pollution Control Act, among others. The amount of damages was
not stated.
The suit is "Reed v. USA et al., Case No. 2:06-cv-02152-SRD-
JCW," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Louisiana under Judge Stanwood R. Duval, Jr. with referral to
Judge Joseph C. Wilkinson, Jr.
Representing the plaintiffs are:
(1) Camilo Kossy Salas, III of Salas & Co. L.C., 650
Poydras St., Suite 1650, New Orleans, LA 70130, Phone:
504-799-3080, E-mail: csalas@salaslaw.com;
(2) Daniel E. Becnel, Jr. of the Law Offices of Daniel E.
Becnel, Jr., 106 W. Seventh St., P.O. Drawer H,
Reserve, LA 70084, Phone: 985-536-1186, E-mail:
dbecnel@becnellaw.com; and
(3) John Francis Nevares of John F. Nevares & Associates,
P.O. Box 13667, San Juan, PR 00908-3667, Phone: 787-
722-9333, E-mail: jfnevares-law@microjuris.com.
Representing the defendants is James H. Roussel of Baker
Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, 201 St. Charles Ave.,
Suite 3600, New Orleans, LA 70170, Phone: 504-566-5278, E-mail:
jroussel@bakerdonelson.com.
HELEN OF TROY: Continues to Face Securities Fraud Suits in Tex.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Helen of Troy, Ltd., remains a defendant in a consolidated
securities fraud class action pending in the U.S. District Court
for the Western District of Texas, according to the company's
May 15, 2006 Form 10-Q Filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the period ended Feb. 28, 2006.
Initially, class actions were filed and later consolidated into
one action against the company, Gerald J. Rubin, the company's
chairman of the board, president and chief executive officer,
and Thomas J. Benson, the company's chief financial officer, on
behalf of purchasers of publicly traded securities of the
company.
The company understands that the plaintiffs allege violations of
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, on the grounds that the
company and the two officers engaged in a scheme to defraud the
company's shareholders through the issuance of positive earnings
guidance intended to artificially inflate the company's share
price so that Mr. Rubin could sell almost 400,000 of the
company's common shares at an inflated price.
Plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages, interest, fees,
costs, an accounting of the insider trading proceeds, and
injunctive relief, including an accounting of and the imposition
of a constructive trust and/or asset freeze on the defendant's
insider trading proceeds.
The suit, which is still in the preliminary stages, alleges a
class period between Oct. 12, 2004 and Oct. 10, 2005.
The suit is "In Re: Helen of Troy, Ltd., Securities Litigation,
Case No. 3:05-cv-00431-DB," filed in the U.S. District Court for
the Western District of Texas under Judge David Briones.
Representing the plaintiffs are:
(1) Ariel Acevedo, Tower One, 5200 Town Center Circle, #600
Boca Raton, FL 33486, Phone: (561) 361-5000; and
(2) Daniel R. Malone of The Malone Law Firm, 300 East Main,
#1100, El Paso, TX 79901, Phone: (915) 533-5000, Fax:
915/533-5009.
Representing the defendants are:
(i) Nicholas Even and Noel M. Hensleyof Haynes and Boone,
LLP, 901 Main St., Ste. 3100, Dallas, TX 75202-3789,
Phone: (214) 651-5000, Fax: 214/651-5940 and 214/200-
0470, E-mail: nick.even@haynesboone.com; and
(ii) H. Christopher Mott of Krafsur Gordon Mott, PC, 4695
North Mesa Street, El Paso, TX 79912-6103, Phone: (915)
545-1133, Fax: 915/545-4433, E-mail:
cmott@gordonmottpc.com.
HIGHMARK INC: Fri. Hearing Set in $10M Deal With Ambulance Cos.
---------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. District Judge Gary L. Lancaster in Pittsburg will hold on
June 30, 2006 a fairness hearing on the proposed $10 million
settlement of a class action filed by 300 ambulance companies in
29 Western Pennsylvania counties against Highmark Inc.,
according to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.
The suit was filed in July 2003 by 20 ambulance services in
southwestern Pennsylvania and the City of Pittsburgh. Parties
in the suit are in disagreement on the amount of reimbursement
that the company should pay non-contract ambulance companies for
transporting enrollees in Highmark's SecurityBlue program. The
company said it should be at the Medicare-approved rate, which
is generally half of actual charges. The ambulance companies
said it should be at the full rate.
Keystone Health Plan West Inc. is also named defendant in the
suit.
Plaintiffs are seeking additional payment for services provided
from mid-1999 through March 31, 2002. Highmark owns and
operates the for-profit Keystone, which has a contract with the
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to offer SecurityBlue
to seniors in the Pittsburgh region.
A July 18, 2003 issue of Pittsburgh Business Times, stated that
plaintiffs in the suit include:
-- Brentwood Emergency Medical Services,
-- Butler Ambulance Service,
-- McCandless-Franklin Park Ambulance Authority,
-- Monessen Ambulance Services,
-- Robinson Emergency Medical Service Inc., and
-- Shaler Area Emergency Medical Services Inc.
Highmark admits to no wrongdoing in the case.
Representing the ambulance companies is Charles Kelly of
Sinclair Kelly Jackson Reinhart & Hayden LLC.
IBIS TECHNOLOGY: Mass. Court Partially Dismisses Securities Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S District Court in the District of Massachusetts granted
in part and denied in part the Ibis Technology Corp.'s motion to
dismiss the consolidated securities fraud class action against
it and one of its officers.
Initially, five securities class actions were filed against the
company and its president and chief executive, styled:
-- "Martin Smolowitz v. Ibis Technology Corporation, et
al., Case No. 03-12613 (RCL)";
-- "Fred Den v. Ibis Technology Corporation, et al., Case
No. 04-10060 (RCL)";
-- "Weinstein v. Ibis Technology Corporation, et al., Case
No. 04-10088 (RCL)";
-- "George Harrison v. Ibis Technology Corporation, et
al., Case No. 04-10286 (RCL)"; and
-- "Eleanor Pitzer v. Ibis Technology Corporation, et al.,
Case No. 04-10446 (RCL)."
On June 4, 2004, the court entered an order consolidating these
actions as, "In re Ibis Technology Securities Litigation, Case
No. 04-10446 RCL."
On July 6, 2004, a consolidated amended class action complaint
was filed which alleges, among other things, that the company
violated federal securities laws by allegedly making
misstatements to the investing public relating to demand for
certain Ibis products and intellectual property issues relating
to the sale of the i2000 oxygen implanter. Plaintiffs are
seeking unspecified damages.
On Aug. 5, 2004, the company filed a motion to dismiss the
consolidated amended complaint on the grounds, among others,
that it failed to state a claim on which the relief could be
granted.
On Sept. 25, 2005, the Magistrate Judge issued a report and
recommendation recommending that the company's motion be granted
in part and denied in part.
The company and the plaintiffs both filed partial objections to
the report and recommendation with the Court. On March 31,
2006, the court adopted the Magistrate Judge's report and
recommendation, and thus granted in part and denied in part the
company's motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' claims.
The suit is "In Re IBIS Technology Securities Litigation, Case
No. 1:04-cv-10446-RCL," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Massachusetts under Judge Reginald C. Lindsay.
Representing the plaintiffs are:
(1) Theodore M. Hess-Mahan, Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP, 53
State Street, Boston, MA 02108, Phone: 617-439-3939,
Fax: 617-439-0134, E-mail: ted@shulaw.com; and
(2) Gregory M. Nespole, Wolf, Haldenstein, Adler, Freeman &
Herz LLP, 270 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016,
Phone: 212-545-4600, Fax: 2112-545-4653, E-mail:
nespole@whafh.com.
Representing the Company are:
(i) Christine A. S. Chung and Brian E. Pastuszenski,
Goodwin Procter LLP, Exchange Place, 53 State Street,
Boston, MA 02109, E-mail: cchung@goodwinprocter.com or
BPastuszenski@goodwinprocter.com; and
(ii) Laura M Stock of Goodwin Procter LLP, Exchange Place 53
State Street, Boston, MA 02109, Phone: 617-570-1709,
Fax: 617-523-1231, E-mail: lstock@goodwinprocter.com.
ILLINOIS: ABATE Wins Partial Victory in Suit Over State Funds
-------------------------------------------------------------
A Sangamon County judge granted only part of a request by ABATE,
an organization that represents motorcycle enthusiasts, to block
the transfer of millions of public funds needed to pay state
bills, the PJStar.com reports.
Sangamon County Circuit Judge Leo Zappa barred the state from
transferring about $344,000 from two funds used to support
motorcycle safety and off-road trail programs, but he allowed
the state to tap more than $34 million from dozens of special-
purpose state funds.
Judge Zappa said ABATE has no legal standing to get involved
with special-purpose state funds that do not affect
motorcyclists, according to the report. ABATE earlier filed a
purported class action to keep the state from using special-
purpose state funds for its expenses, saying the act is
unconstitutional.
Judge Zappa's order last until July 10. ABATE attorneys plan to
pursue efforts to make the order permanent after the temporary
restraining expires.
For more details, contact ABATE attorney George W. Tinkham, 423
W. Vine, Springfield, IL 62704-2932, Phone: (217) 753-2737 and
(217) 789-1192, Fax: (217) 525-0823.
IMPERIAL TRADING: Aug. Trial Set for Junk Faxes Suit Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois County Department,
Chancery Division, will hold a fairness hearing on Aug. 7, 2006,
11:00 a.m. for the proposed $100,000 settlement in the matter:
"Jordan C. Block v. Imperial Trading, Ltd., Case No. No. 02 CH
15137."
The case was brought on behalf of all persons who on or after
Sept. 3, 1998, were sent advertising faxes by Imperial Trading,
Ltd.
Jordan Block, represented by Edelman, Combs, Latturner &
Goodwin, LLC, filed the suit against Imperial Trading Ltd.,
alleging that it sent him an unsolicited fax advertisement in
violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
Jordan Block filed his suit as a class action on behalf of
himself and all others who received the advertising faxes as
well.
The fairness hearing will be held at room 1703 of the Richard J.
Daley Center, 50 W. Washington, Chicago, IL 60602 before Judge
Patrick E. McGann.
For more details, contact Edelman, Combs, Latturner & Goodwin,
LLC, 18th Floor, 120 S. LaSalle, Chicago, Illinois 60603, Phone:
312-917-4504, Fax: 312-419-0379.
INTERVOICE-BRITE INC: Continues to Face Securities Suit in Tex.
---------------------------------------------------------------
InterVoice-Brite, Inc. remains a defendant in a securities fraud
class action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Texas.
Initially, several related class actions were filed on behalf of
purchasers of common stock of the company on Oct. 12, 1999 to
June 6, 2000.
Plaintiffs filed claims, which were consolidated into one
proceeding, under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Securities and Exchange Commission Rule
10b-5 against the company as well as certain named current and
former officers and directors of the company on behalf of the
alleged class members.
In the complaint, plaintiffs claim that the company and the
named current and former officers and directors issued false and
misleading statements during the class period concerning the
financial condition of Intervoice, the results of the merger
with Brite Voice Systems, Inc. and the alleged future business
projections of Intervoice.
Plaintiffs have asserted that these alleged statements resulted
in artificially inflated stock prices.
The company requested that the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Texas dismiss the complaint in its
entirety, since it lacked the degree of specificity and factual
support to meet the pleading standards applicable to federal
securities litigation.
On Aug. 8, 2002, the court entered an order granting the
company's motion to dismiss the class action. In the dismissal
order, the court granted plaintiffs an opportunity to reinstate
the lawsuit by filing an amended complaint.
Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, which the court dismissed
on Sept. 15, 2003. Plaintiffs appealed the district court
decision to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
On Jan. 12, 2005, the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued
an opinion in which it affirmed, in part, the district court's
order of dismissal. The court of appeals' opinion also reversed
a limited number of issues in the district court's proceedings.
On Feb. 25, 2005, the company filed a motion for rehearing with
the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals requesting the court to
modify its opinion.
On May 12, 2005, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the
company's petition for rehearing, but modified its opinion to
clarify the court's decision. The case was remanded to the
district court for further proceedings consistent with the Fifth
Circuit's opinion.
Plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification on Feb. 3,
2006 and the company filed an opposition to plaintiffs' motion
on March 20, 2006.
Plaintiffs filed a reply in further support of their motion for
class certification on April 10, 2006 and the company petitioned
the court for a hearing on the motion. Both parties are also in
the process of producing documents in response to requests for
discovery.
The suit is "Barrie, et al v. Intervoice Brite Inc, et al., Case
No. 3:01-cv-01071," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, under Judge Ed
Kinkeade.
Representing the plaintiffs are:
(1) Marc R. Stanley, Stanley Mandel & Iola, 3100 Monticello
Ave., Suite 750, Dallas, TX 75205, Phone: 214/443-4301,
Fax: 214/443-0358, E-mail: mstanley@smi-law.com; and
(2) Lauren M. Winston, Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman
& Robbins-San Francisco, 100 Pine St, Suite 2600 San
Francisco, CA 94111, Phone: 415/288-4545.
Representing the defendant is Timothy R. McCormick, Thompson &
Knight, 1700 Pacific Ave., Suite 3300, Dallas, TX 75201-4693,
Phone: 214/969-1103, Fax: 214/880-3253, E-mail:
timothy.mccormick@tklaw.com.
KOBE STEEL: Investors Sue Japanese Firm Over Alleged Bid Rigging
----------------------------------------------------------------
Shareholders of Kobe Steel Ltd. initiated a class action in Kobe
District Court in Japan against the management of Kobe Steel
over an alleged bid rigging on steel bridge construction public
works projects, the Jiji Press reports.
According to the suit, Kobe Steel paid fines of JPY201 million
by May to rig bids for public bridge construction projects
between April 2002 and October 2004.
Shareholders allege management failed to establish an effective
inner control system to prevent their respective companies from
becoming involved in bid rigging.
The suit seeks payments of damages worth JPY201 million from
Chairman Koshi Mizukoshi and four other company executives.
A Kobe Steel spokesman said that the company will deal with the
matter while watching how the situation develops.
In March, similar bid-rigging cases have been filed against
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. and Hitachi Zosen Corp.
Headquartered at Chuo-ku, Kobe, in Hyogo, Japan, Kobe Steel,
Limited -- http://www.kobelco.co.jp/english/corp/index.html--
is one of Japan's leading steel makers, as well as the top
supplier of aluminum and copper products. Other businesses
include welding consumables, urban infrastructure and plant
engineering services, and industrial machinery.
MEMBERS MORTGAGE: Sept. Hearing Set for Mass. Suit Settlement
-------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts will
hold a fairness hearing on Sept. 18, 2006, 2:00 p.m. for the
proposed $3.375 million settlement in the matter: "Rodrigues, et
al. v. Members Mortgage Company, Inc. and Plymouth Savings Bank,
Case No. 1:03-cv-11301-PBS."
The case was brought on behalf of all persons who obtained a
loan from Members Mortgage Company or Plymouth Savings Bank and
who signed at closing a Confirmation of Non-Exercise of Right to
Cancel in connection with a mortgage loan secured by property in
Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire, or Rhode Island from July 11,
2000 to Dec. 31, 2001, or in Massachusetts from July 11, 1999 to
Dec. 31, 2001.
Plaintiffs Raul and Jo-Ann Rodrigues and Michael and Lisa
Phillips allege that defendants violated the Truth In Lending
Act and the Massachusetts Consumer Credit Cost Disclosure Act
either by providing borrowers with a form at the closing that
did not technically comply with those statutes or by asking
borrowers to sign a form at the closing that should have been
signed three days after the closing. The lawsuit seeks damages,
attorneys' fees, and costs of suit from Defendants.
The hearing will take place before The Honorable Patti Saris at
the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, John
Joseph Moakley U.S. Courthouse, 1 Courthouse Way, Boston,
Massachusetts 02210.
Exclusions and objections to and from the settlement must be
submitted on or before Aug. 14, 2006. Claim forms must be
submitted on or before Oct. 2, 2006.
For more details, contact:
(1) Daniel A. Edelman, Cathleen Combs and Heather Kolbus of
Edelman, Combs, Latturner & Goodwin, LLC, 120 S.
LaSalle St., 18th Floor, Chicago, IL 60603, Phone:
(312) 739-4200, Fax: (312) 419-0379, Web site:
http://www.edcombs.com;and
(2) Christopher M. Lefebvre, P.O. Box 479, Pawtucket, RI
02862, Phone: 401-728-6060, Fax: 401-728-6534, E-mail:
lefeblaw@aol.com.
NATIONAL SECURITY: Aug. Hearing Set for Ala. Insurance Suit Deal
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama set
an Aug. 22, 2006 fairness hearing for the settlement in the
class action against a subsidiary of The National Security
Group, Inc.
On Dec. 12, 2005, the U.S. District Court for the Middle
District of Alabama entered an order preliminarily approving a
proposed settlement of the case and preliminarily certifying
such a case as a class action.
The "Mary V. Williams" case relates primarily to claims that a
subsidiary of the company sold industrial burial insurance
policies to racial minorities on which it charged higher
premiums or provided inferior benefits than premiums charged to
or policy benefits provided to similarly situated non-minority
policyholders. The company's subsidiary has not sold industrial
burial insurance for more than 20 years.
The proposed settlement provides for the company's subsidiary
to, among others, provide additional policyholder benefits,
including premiums adjustments and benefits enhancements on
existing policies and additional benefits on matured policies
and pay attorneys fees.
The class, as preliminarily certified, would not permit any
class members to opt out of the settlement and preliminarily
enjoins all similar litigation against the company's subsidiary.
In the settlement, the company's subsidiary denied all claims
and allegations made in the lawsuit. The proposed settlement is
subject to final approval by the court following a fairness
hearing, presently set Aug. 22, 2006.
The suit is "Williams, et al v. Nat'l Security Ins., Case No.
1:02-cv-00877-MHT-DRB," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Middle District of Alabama under Judge Myron H. Thompson with
referral to Judge Delores R. Boyd.
Representing the plaintiffs are:
(1) Eric James Artrip of Watson Jimmerson, 203 Greene
Street, P.O. Box 18368, Huntsville, AL 35801, Phone:
(256) 536-7423, Fax: 256-536-2689, E-mail:
artrip@watsonjimmerson.com;
(2) Christa L. Collins of James, Hoyer, Newcomer &
Smiljanich, P.A., One Urban Centre, 4830 W. Kennedy
Boulevard, Suite 550, Tampa, FL 33609, Phone: (813)
286-4100, Fax: 813-286-4174, E-mail:
ccollins@jameshoyer.com;
(3) Joel Lee DiLorenzo of K. Stephen Jackson, PC, Black
Diamond Building, 2229 First Avenue North, Birmingham,
AL 35203, Phone: 205-252-3535, Fax: 205-252-3536, E-
mail: joel@ksjpc.com; and
(4) John J. Stoia of Milberg, Weiss, Bershad, Hynes &
Lerqch, LLP, 600 West Broadway, Suite 1800, San Diego,
CA 92101, Phone: 619-231-1058, Fax: 619-231-7423, E-
mail: johns@lerachlaw.com.
Representing the defendants are, Richard A. Ball, Jr. and Thomas
Cowin Knowles of Ball Ball Matthews & Novak, PA, PO Box 2148,
Montgomery, AL 36102-2148, Phone: 334-387-7680, Fax: 334-387-
3222, E-mail: rball@ball-ball.com and cknowles@ball-ball.com.
NAVARRE CORPORATION: Minn. Judge Junks Securities Fraud Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota dismissed
the amended class action brought against Navarre Corporation,
which alleges securities fraud by the company and certain of its
officers and directors.
The dismissal by the court was without prejudice, meaning that
the plaintiffs were granted 30 days if so desired to amend their
complaint to cure its deficiencies. If not, the complaint will
be dismissed with prejudice.
Early this year, two groups filed lead plaintiff motions for the
consolidated class action litigation against Navarre Corp.,
which were initially commenced in June 2005, in the United
States District Court for the District of Minnesota.
The complaints allege that these accounting irregularities
benefited company insiders including the individual defendants.
It further alleged that the company failed to properly recognize
executive deferred compensation and improperly recognized a
deferred tax benefit as income. Plaintiffs sought compensatory
but unspecified damages allegedly sustained as a result of the
alleged wrongdoing, plus costs, counsel fees and experts fees.
The actions are identified as:
(1) AVIVA Partners, Ltd. v. Navarre Corp., et al., case no.
05-1151 (PAM/RLE);
(2) Vivian Oh v. Navarre Corp., et al., case no. 05-01211
(MJD/JGL); and
(3) Matthew Grabler v. Navarre Corp., et al., case no. 05-
1260 (DWF/JSM).
The consolidated suit is "In re Navarre Corporation Securities
Litigation, Case No. 0:05-cv-01151-PAM-RLE," filed in the United
States District Court for the District of Minnesota under Judge
Paul A Magnuson, with referral to Judge Raymond L Erickson.
Representing the plaintiffs are:
(1) Laura M Andracchio, Amber L Eck and Trig R Smith all of
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP - SD,
655 W Broadway Ste 1900, San Diego, CA 92101, Phone:
619-338-3829 or 619-231-1058 or 619-338-3858, E-mail:
lauraa@lerachlaw.com or ambere@lerachlaw.com or
trigs@lerachlaw.com;
(2) Frances E Baillon of Halunen & Associates, 220 South
Sixth Street, Suite 2000, Minneapolis, MN 55402, Phone:
612-605-4098, Fax: 612-605-4099, E-mail:
baillon@halunenlaw.com;
(3) Garrett D Blanchfield, Jr of Reinhardt Wendorf &
Blanchfield, 332 Minnesota St Ste E-1250, St Paul, MN
55101, Phone: 651-287-2100, E-mail:
g.blanchfield@rwblawfirm.com;
(4) Richard B Brualdi of The Brualdi Law Firm, 29 Broadway
24th Floor, New York, NY 10006, Phone: 212-952-0602, E-
mail: rbrualdi@brualdilawfirm.com;
(5) Gregg M Fishbein, Richard A Lockridge and Gregory J
Myers all of Lockridge Grindal Nauen PLLP, 100
Washington Ave S Ste 2200, Minneapolis, MN 55401-2179,
Phone: (612) 339-6900, Fax: (612)339-0981, E-mail:
gmfishbein@locklaw.com or lockrra@locklaw.com or
myersgj@locklaw.com; and
(6) Andrei V Rado, Steven G Schulman and Peter E Seidman
all of Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP, One
Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, New York, NY 10119-
0165, Phone: 212-946-4474 or 212-946-9356 or 212-631-
8625, E-mail: arado@milbergweiss.com or
sschulman@milbergweiss.com or
pseidman@milbergweiss.com.
Representing the defendants are David A Davenport, Geoffrey P
Jarpe, Kyle J Kaiser and William A McNab all of Winthrop &
Weinstine, PA, 225 S 6th St Ste 3500 Mpls, MN 55402-4629, Phone:
612-604-6716 or 612-604-6697 or 612-604-6735 or 612-604-6652,
Fax: 612-604-6816 or 612-604-6897 or 612-604-6835 or 612-604-
6852, E-mail: ddavenport@winthrop.com or gjarpe@winthrop.com or
kkaiser@winthrop.com or wmcnab@winthrop.com.
PARLUX FRAGRANCES: Shareholder File Suit in Fla. Over Sale
----------------------------------------------------------
Parlux Fragrances, Inc. was served with a shareholder's class
action complaint filed in the Circuit Court of the Seventeenth
Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County, Florida by Glen
Hutton, purporting to act on behalf of himself and other public
stockholders of the company.
Parlux was also served with a stockholder derivative action
filed in the Circuit Court of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit
in and for Broward County, Florida by NECA-IBEW Pension Fund,
purporting to act derivatively on behalf of Parlux.
The class action names Parlux Fragrances, Inc. as a defendant,
along with its directors:
-- Ilia Lekach,
-- Frank A. Buttacavoli,
-- Glenn Gopman,
-- Esther Egozi Choukroun,
-- David Stone,
-- Jaya Kader Zebede, and
-- Isaac Lekach
The class action relates to the proposal from PF Acquisition of
Florida LLC, which is presently owned by Ilia Lekach, to acquire
all of the outstanding shares of common stock of Parlux for
$29.00 ($14.50 after the stock split) per share in cash. The
plan was disclosed in Parlux's June 14, 2006 Form 8-K filing.
The class action seeks equitable relief for inadequate and
unfair consideration, without full disclosure of all material
information, to the detriment of the public shareholders, all in
breach of defendants' fiduciary duties.
The class action alleges that the proposal is solely designed to
ensure that Parlux's management completes the proposal despite
the fact that the consideration called for in the proposal is
unfair to the public shareholders and Parlux's public
shareholders have not been provided with all material
information concerning the proposal necessary for them to make
an informed decision.
The derivative action names the identical defendants as the
class action and relates to the proposal. It seeks to remedy
the alleged breaches of fiduciary duties, waste of corporate
assets, and other violations of law and seeks injunctive relief
from the court appointing a receiver or other truly neutral
third party to conduct and/or oversee any negotiations regarding
the terms of the proposal, or any alternative transaction, on
behalf of Parlux and its public shareholders, and to report to
the court and plaintiff's counsel regarding the same.
The derivative action alleges that the unlawful plan to attempt
to buy out the public shareholders of Parlux without having
proper financing in place, and for inadequate consideration,
violates applicable law by directly breaching and/or aiding the
other defendants' breaches of their fiduciary duties of loyalty,
candor, due care, independence, good faith and fair dealing,
causing the complete waste of corporate assets, and constituting
an abuse of control by the defendants.
The Independent Committee of the Board has responded to the
proposal, the details of which were included in Parlux's June
20, 2006 Form 8-K, filed on June 22, 2006.
Parlux and the other named defendants have engaged experienced
Florida securities counsel and intend to respond to the class
action and the derivative action in a timely manner, but Parlux
believes that the class action and the derivative action are
without merit.
Parlux Fragrances, Inc. is a manufacturer and international
distributor of prestige products. It holds licenses for Paris
Hilton fragrances, watches, cosmetics, sunglasses, handbags and
other small leather accessories in addition to licenses to
manufacture and distribute the designer fragrance brands of
Perry Ellis, GUESS?, XOXO, Ocean Pacific (OP), Maria Sharapova,
Andy Roddick, babyGund and Fred Hayman Beverly Hills.
For more information, contact Frank A. Buttacavoli of Parlux
Fragrances, Inc., Phone: +1-954-316-9008, ext. 8117.
PEMCO AVIATION: High Court Nixes Writ of Certiorari in Bias Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Supreme Court denied Pemco Aviation Group, Inc.'s
petition for a writ of certiorari in relation to a purported
class action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Alabama against the company and its subsidiary,
Pemco Aeroplex.
In Dec. 1999, the company and Pemco Aeroplex were served with
the suit, alleging unlawful employment practices of race
discrimination and racial harassment by the company's managers,
supervisors and other employees.
The suit is seeking declaratory, injunctive relief and other
compensatory and punitive damages. It sought damages in the
amount of $75.0 million.
On July 27, 2000, the U.S. District Court determined that the
group would not be certified as a class since the plaintiffs
withdrew their request for class certification.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission subsequently entered
the case purporting a parallel class action. The court denied
consolidation of the cases for trial purposes, but provided for
consolidated discovery.
On June 28, 2002, a jury determined that there was no hostile
work environment in the original case and granted verdicts for
the company with regard to all 22 plaintiffs. Nine plaintiffs
elected to settle with the company prior to the trial.
On Dec. 13, 2002, the court granted the company summary judgment
in the EEOC case. That judgment was appealed to the 11th
Circuit Court of Appeals by the EEOC. The panel reinstated the
case to federal district court.
On Oct. 27, 2004, the company petitioned the 11th Circuit to
rehear the case en banc. The petition was denied on Dec. 23,
2004.
The company filed a petition for a Writ of Certiorari with the
U.S. Supreme Court on March 23, 2005, which was denied on Oct.
3, 2005. The case is now remanded to federal district court in
Birmingham, Alabama, according to the company's May 15, 2006 10-
Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for
the period ended March 31, 2006.
The suit is "Thomas, et al. v. Pemco Aeroplex, Inc, et al., Case
No. 2:99-cv-03280-WMA," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Alabama under Judge William M. Acker, Jr.
Representing the plaintiffs are:
(1) Adedapo T Agboola, Darryl Bender of BENDER & AGBOOLA
LLC, 711 18th Street, North Birmingham, AL 35203,
Phone: 205-322-2500, Fax: 205-324-2120;
(2) Cheryl A Kidd, Simon & Associates, 1150 Financial
Center, 505 North 20th Street, Birmingham, AL 35203,
Phone: 205-324-2727, Fax: 205-324-2605; and
(3) Tyrone Quarles, UAB Office Of Counsel, 820
Administration Building, 1530 3rd Avenue, South
Birmingham, AL 35294-0108, Phone: 205-934-3474, Fax:
205-975-6079, E-mail: chill@uab.edu.
Representing the Company are:
(i) Mitchell G. Allen, Stephen E. Brown, N. Lee Cooper of
Maynard Cooper & Gale, PC, AmSouth Harbert Plaza, Suite
2400, 1901 6th Avenue North Birmingham, AL 35203-2618,
Phone: 205-254-1000, Fax: 205-254-1999, E-mail:
mallen@maynardcooper.com, sbrown@maynardcooper.com,
lcooper@maynardcooper.com and jlee@maynardcooper.com;
and
(ii) Kenneth O. Simon of Christian & Small, LLP, Financial
Center, Suite 1800, 505 North 20th Street, Birmingham,
AL 35203-2696, Phone: 205-250-6622, Fax: 205-328-7234,
E-mail: KOS@csattorneys.com.
PEPSI BOTTLING: Phil. Supreme Court Ends 14-Yr. 349 Controversy
---------------------------------------------------------------
A Supreme Court in the Philippines has nullified the bid of
contest 349 "winners" to collect their prizes from Pepsi-Cola
Philippines Inc.'s 1992 "Number Fever" sales campaign, the ABS
CBN News reports.
The High Court's third division said the security code on the
winning crowns other than that of Jaime Lacanilao's were
different from those on the winning crown as listed with the
Department of Trade and Industry. It found "no proof of
negligence" by Pepsi and said the company should not be held
liable for damages, according to Journal Online.
It also noted that Mr. Lacanilao, one of the claimants in the
contest, had already agreed to an out-of-court settlement.
In 1992, Pepsi Cola announced number "349" as the winning number
in their "Number Fever" sales campaign, but it turned out that
the draw was marred by a security code problem. The campaign
offered prizes of up to PHP1 million to holders of bottle caps
with winning numbers.
Tens of thousands of Filipinos claimed the prizes, but Pepsi
refused to pay all of them, saying the caps did not contain the
proper security codes. Pepsi Cola's marketing services manager,
Quintin J. Gomez, Jr., said a computer glitch picked the number
by mistake.
Pepsi's refusal to pay every claimant sparked riots and calls
for a boycott. To appease the holders of the non-winning "349"
crowns, Pepsi Cola offered to pay P500 for every non-winning
"349" crown that would be presented on or before June 12, 1992.
About 490,116 holders of the non-winning "349" crowns accepted
the offer, but others, including Mr. Lacanilao, filed complaints
against Pepsi Cola for recovery of the cash prize and damages.
According to Pepsi lawyer, Alexander Poblador, the company faced
more than 1,000 criminal and civil suits, most of which have
been dismissed. The company paid up to PHP250 million to nearly
500,000 non-winning claimants as a good-will gesture.
PIONEER ELECTRONICS: July Hearing Slated for Elite PRO-x30 Deal
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Superior Court of the state of California for the County of
Los Angeles will hold a fairness hearing on July 31, 2006, 9:30
a.m. for the proposed settlement in the matter: "In re Pioneer
Elite PRO-x30 Cases, Case No. JCCP 4390."
The case was brought on behalf of all persons in the U.S. who,
prior to May 12, 2006, purchased a Pioneer Elite High-
Definition, Rear-Projection Television Model No. PRO-530 HD;
PRO-530 HDI; PRO-630 HD; PRO-730 HD; or PRO-730 HDI (Elite PRO-
x30 Televisions).
Initially, several suits were filed against Pioneer Electronics
(USA) Inc., Pioneer North America, Inc., and Pioneer Corp.
Seven of these cases were consolidated for all purposes in the
Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los
Angeles under the caption, "In re Pioneer Elite PRO-x30 Cases,
Case No. JCCP 4390."
The consolidated case alleges that video and power problems
which cause Elite PRO-x30 Televisions to display colored lines
and assert causes of action for violation of the California
Consumers Legal Remedies Act, the California Song-Beverly
Consumer Warranty Act, the California Unfair Competition Law,
the unfair and deceptive practices statutes of various states
and the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and for breach of warranty
and unjust enrichment.
The court will hold the hearing on July 31, 2006, at 9:30 a.m.
at 600 South Commonwealth Avenue, Department 324, Los Angeles,
California 90005 before Judge Victoria G. Chaney, to determine
whether the proposed settlement should be approved as fair,
reasonable and adequate, and whether judgment should be entered
thereon.
Any objections to the settlement must be submitted on or before
July 17, 2006. To view the notice, visit:
http://researcharchives.com/t/s?c58.
For more details, contact:
(1) [Plaintiff] Jeff S. Westerman, Esq. of Milberg Weiss
Bershad & Schulman, LLP, 355 South Grand Avenue, Suite
4170, Los Angeles, California 90071, Phone: (800)-320-
5081 and 213-617-1200, Fax: 213-617-1975; and
(2) [Pioneer] William T. Bisset of Hughes Hubbard & Reed,
LLP, 350 South Grand Avenue, Suite 3600, Los Angeles,
California 90071-3442, (Los Angeles Co.), Phone: 213-
613-2800, Fax: 213-613-2950, Web site:
http://www.hugheshubbard.com.
PORTLAND GENERAL: No Electricity Rates Suit Filed Despite Notice
----------------------------------------------------------------
Portland General Electric Corp. said that no action has been
filed against it despite its receipt of a notice of potential
class action back in Feb. 14, 2005.
The Notice of Potential Class Action Lawsuit for Damages and
Demand to Rectify Damages came from counsel representing Frank
Gearhart, David Kafoury and Kafoury Brothers, LLC. It states
that potential plaintiffs intend to bring a class action against
the company.
Potential plaintiffs allege that for the period from Oct. 1,
2000 to the present, PGE's electricity rates have included
unlawful charges for a return on investment in the Trojan
Nuclear Plant in an amount in excess of $100 million.
Under Oregon law, there is no requirement as to the time the
lawsuit must be filed following the 30-day notice period. No
action has been filed to date, according to the company's May
15, 2006 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the period ended March 31, 2006.
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS: Ariz. City Approves LGIP Suit Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Holbrook City Council in Arizona has approved a settlement
with PricewaterhouseCoopers in a class action related to funds
lost in the Local Government Investment Pool, according to
AzJournal.com.
City Attorney Morgan Brown said, to date, nearly 50 percent of
the lost funds have been recovered from various entities. He
noted that Holbrook lost $25,000. According to him, the city
will only receive a few hundred dollars from this settlement.
The Local Government Investment Pool contain monies that Arizona
cities, towns, counties and political subdivisions have asked
the state treasurer to invest for them.
PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL: Sept. Hearing Set for Ind. Suit Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Porter County Superior Court, Indiana, Civil Division will
hold a fairness hearing on Sept. 20, 2006, 1:00 p.m. for the
proposed $11,750 settlement in the matter: "David Jackowski v.
Primary Residential Mortgage, Inc., Cause No. 64D02-0508-CT-
7033."
The case was brought on behalf of all natural persons who
purchased real property located in Indiana who paid a document
preparation fee to Primary Residential Mortgage, Inc. on or
after Aug. 19, 1999 to the present.
David Jackowski filed the action on behalf of a putative class,
seeking restitution for money obtained by Primary Residential
through the charging of allegedly unauthorized and unlawful
document preparation fees in connection with the closing of
residential mortgage loans.
Plaintiff also alleged that this practice was deceptive in
violation of the Indiana Deceptive Sales Act, IC Section 24-5-
0.5-10(a)(1).
The court will hold a hearing on the settlement in the Porter
County Superior Court, Indiana, 209 Courthouse, 16 E. Lincolnway
Street, Valparaiso, Indiana 46383, Courtroom 2 before the Hon.
William E. Alexa.
Deadline for submitting claim forms and objections to the
settlement is on Aug. 1, 2006.
For more details, contact:
(1) Michael P. McIlree of Michael P. McIlree, Attorney at
Law, 821 Lincolnway, Suite 1, Valparaiso, IN 46383,
Phone: (219) 548-1800, Fax: (219) 548-5905, E-mail:
mcilree1@aol.com; and
(2) Daniel A. Edelman and Heather Kolbus of Edelman, Combs,
Latturner & Goodwin, LLC, 120 S. LaSalle Street, 18th
Floor, Chicago, IL 60603, Phone: (312) 739-4200, Fax:
(312) 419-0379, Web site: http://www.edcombs.com.
ROLLING MEADOWS: Faces Ill. Suit Over Senior Housing Agreement
--------------------------------------------------------------
Viola Wohlferd, 84, a former resident of Rolling Meadows Homes
in Oregon has filed a purported class action over the payment
arrangement of its senior housing facility, The Capital Times
reports.
Ms. Wohlferd is suing Rolling Meadows for return of money that
she said should have been paid back to her when she moved out of
its facility.
The suit stems from a "residential agreement" Ms. Wohlferd
entered in 1999 with Rolling Meadows. Under it, she would pay a
"contract price" of $129,389 plus a monthly service fee and
utilities to live in a unit owned by Rolling Meadows. In the
instance she moves out, she would only get 90% of the amount
back.
Ms. Wohlferd accordingly got the 90% when she moved out in
February to an assisted living facility. Now, she contends in a
suit filed in April that Rolling Meadows' keeping part of her
"contract price" was illegal.
The residential agreements," the suit claims, are in effect
rental agreements and the "contract prices" are security
deposits, which under Wisconsin Administrative Code should be
repaid in full within 21 days of the premises being vacated,
less any amount withheld to cover damages or unpaid rent.
Ms. Wohlferd is asking double the amount she says was illegally
withheld from her, or $25,878, and double repayment of the
portion of the contract price withheld from other former
residents of the facility over the past six years.
Her suit has been consolidated with a similar one filed in
December by Sherry Schutz of Oregon, whose late mother was a
resident at Rolling Meadows. A pretrial conference in the
combined case is scheduled for July 5 with Dane County Chief
Judge Michael Nowakowski.
Representing the plaintiff is P. Jeffrey Archibald of Archibald
Consumer Law Office, 1914 Monroe St., Phone: (608) 661-8855,
Fax: (608) 661-0067, Email: archibaldlaw@tds.net.
Representing Rolling Meadows is Heather Curnutt of Lawton &
Cates, S.C., Ten East Doty Street, Suite 400, Madison, WI 53703,
Phone: (608) 282-6200, Fax: (608) 282-6252, Web site:
http://www.lawtoncates.com.
SOURCEONE HEALTHCARE: July Trial Set for Junk Fax Suit Deal
-----------------------------------------------------------
The Circuit Court Of Cook County, Illinois, County Department,
Chancery Division, will hold a fairness hearing on July 25,
2006, 11:00 a.m., for the proposed settlement in the matter:
"Scott R. Fladland, D.C. v. SourceOne Healthcare Technologies,
Inc., and John Does, 1-10, Case No. 05 CH 20090."
A settlement fund of not less than $150,000 or more than
$360,000 will be established.
The case was brought of all persons or entities with Illinois
fax numbers who on or after Nov. 22, 2000, were sent advertising
faxes by or on behalf of SourceOne Healthcare Technologies, Inc.
Plaintiff Scott R. Fladland, D.C., alleged that the defendant
violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C.
Section 227 (TCPA) by sending unsolicited facsimile
advertisements.
The court will hold a hearing on the settlement in the Circuit
Court of Cook County, Illinois, Daley Center, 50 W. Washington,
Chicago, Illinois, 60602, Courtroom 2308 before the Honorable
David R. Donnersberger.
Deadline for submitting claim forms and objections to the
settlement is July 10, 2006.
For more details, contact:
(1) [Plaintiff] Daniel A. Edelman and Heather Kolbus of
Edelman, Combs, Latturner & Goodwin, LLC, 120 S.
LaSalle Street, 18th Floor, Chicago, IL 60603, Phone:
(312) 739-4200, Fax: (312) 419-0379, Web site:
http://www.edcombs.com.
(2) [SourceOne] James A. Cherney and Deborah L. Steiner of
Latham & Watkins, LLP, 233 S. Wacker Drive, Suite 5800,
Chicago, Illinois 60606, Phone: 312-876-7700, Fax:
(312) 993-9767, Web site: http://www.lw.com.
SUMITOMO METAL: Investors File Suit Over Alleged Bid Rigging
------------------------------------------------------------
Shareholders of Sumitomo Metal Industries Ltd. filed a class
action with Kobe District Court against the management of
Sumitomo Metal over an alleged rigging of bids for steel bridge
construction public works projects, the Jiji Press reports.
According to the suit, Sumitomo Metal paid fines of JPY135
million in May for rigging bids for public bridge construction
projects between April 2002 and October 2004.
Shareholders allege management failed to establish an effective
inner control system to prevent their respective companies from
becoming involved in bid rigging.
The suit seeks payments of damages totaling JPY135 million from
three company executives, including Chairman Hiroshi Shimozuma.
A Sumitomo Metal spokesman said that the company cannot comment
on the issue as it has not received a written complaint from the
plaintiffs.
In March, similar bid-rigging cases have been filed against
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. and Hitachi Zosen Corp.
Sumitomo Metal -- http://www.sumitomometals.co.jp-- is one of
Japan's leading seamless pipe producers; it also makes steel
sheet, steel construction materials and industrial components.
It also manufactures wheels, axles, and other components in the
manufacturing of trains. SMI also offers engineering services
for construction, energy facilities, and environment
regenerating.
SWIFT: Belgian Banking Sued Over Alleged Conspiracy with U.S.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Chicago lawyer, Steven E. Schwarz, has filed a federal class
action against a Belgian banking consortium whose money
transfers are being tracked by the U.S. government as part of
the country's counter-terrorism efforts, according to The New
York Times.
The suit follows reports by The New York Times, The Los Angeles
Times and The Wall Street Journal that the U.S. is keeping
secret programs to monitor telephone calls and financial
transactions at the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial
Telecommunication or Swift.
In London, meanwhile, a human rights group said recently that it
had filed complaints in 32 countries against Swift. Privacy
International accuses the consortium of violating European and
Asian privacy laws by giving the U.S. access to its data. In
the class action, Swift is accused of violating U.S. financial
privacy statutes.
Further, Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt has asked the
Justice Ministry to investigate whether Swift violated Belgian
law by allowing the U.S. government access to its data,
according to the report.
In the U.S., Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts
had asked the director of national intelligence to assess any
damage to American counter-terrorism efforts after the
disclosure of the secret monitoring programs.
TRIPOS INC: Settlement Reached in Consolidated Stock Suit in Mo.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Parties in the consolidated securities fraud class action,
"Montalvo, et al. v. Tripos, Inc., et al.," reached a verbal
agreement to settle the litigation pending in the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.
On or about July 24, 2003, Tripos, Inc. and two of its executive
officers, Dr. John P. McAlister and Mr. B. James Rubin, were
sued in federal district court in St. Louis on behalf of
purchasers of the company's common stock during the first half
of 2002.
The consolidated class action complaint alleged that statements
made by the Company in press releases and other public
disclosures contained materially false and misleading
information in violation of the federal securities laws.
On or about May 5, 2004, plaintiffs filed a second amended
complaint on behalf of a purported class of purchasers of the
Company's common stock between Feb. 9, 2000 and July 1, 2002.
The second amended complaint generally alleges that, during the
class period, defendants made false or misleading statements of
material fact about the company's prospects and failed to follow
generally accepted accounting principles in violation of the
federal securities laws.
The second amended complaint also named Ernst & Young LLP, the
company's former independent registered public accounting firm,
as a co-defendant.
In August 2004, the company and the individual defendants and
Ernst & Young filed motions to dismiss the second amended
complaint.
On Sept. 30, 2005, the company was informed that its motion to
dismiss was denied, however, the motion to dismiss filed by
Ernst & Young was granted.
On March 21, 2006, the parties reached a verbal agreement to
settle the class action litigation. The total amount of the
settlement is $3,150, which is to be paid by the company's
insurers.
The settlement is subject to court approval after notice and an
opportunity to object is provided to the putative shareholder
class.
The suit is "Montalvo, et al. v. Tripos, Inc., et al., Case No.
03-CV-00995," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Missouri under Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh
Plaintiff firms named in complaint:
(1) Marcus N. Bozeman of Cauley and Bowman, 1101 Executive
Center Drive, Suite 200, P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock,
AR 72211, Phone: 501-312-8500, Fax: 501-312-8505, E-
mail: mbozeman@cauleybowman.com;
(2) Don R. Lolli of Dysart and Taylor, 4420 Madison Avenue,
Suite 200, Kansas City, MO 64111, Phone: 816-931-2700,
Fax: 816-931-7377, E-mail: dlolli@dysarttaylor.com; and
(3) Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman, LLP, Phone: 212-594-
5300 or 212-594-5300, Fax: 212-868-1229, E-mail:
info@milbergweiss.com.
Representing the defendants are, Steven M. Schatz, Diane M.
Walters and Lloyd Winawer of Wilson and Sonsini, 650 Page Mill
Road, Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050, Phone: 650-493-9300, Fax: 650-
565-5100, E-mail: sschatz@wsgr.com, dwalters@wsgr.com and
lwinawer@wsgr.com.
UST LIQUIDATING: Judge Mulls Parties' Positions in Veeder Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
A California judge continues to deliberate on each parties'
arguments in the purported shareholders' class action against
UST Liquidating Corp., which was litigated in March.
The suit was in relation to the September 2000, sale of all
company assets, net of certain liabilities, to Veeder-Root
Service Co., a wholly owned subsidiary of Danaher Corp.
In June 2000, a class action complaint against the company and
certain other parties on behalf of certain common shareholders
of the company.
It alleged that the company and other parties breached their
fiduciary duty to the company's common shareholders in
connection with the Veeder-Root sale transaction.
After filing the complaint, the plaintiffs sought a preliminary
injunction, which was denied. Subsequently, defendants'
demurrer to the complaint was sustained, without leave to amend.
The court of appeal reversed, though it did limit the scope of
the plaintiffs' case, and the parties have been litigating the
case following the appellate court reversal. The case was
litigated before a judge in March 2006. The judge is currently
deliberating.
WELDING FUME LITIGATION: Welder Loses Trial Over Health Ailments
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Plaintiffs' Executive Committee in the national welding fume
multidistrict litigation, a consolidation of thousands of
product liability lawsuits filed by neurologically impaired
welders, announced a defense verdict in a lawsuit filed by
Ernesto G. Solis, a former welder from Corpus Christi, Texas.
Like roughly 10,000 other welders nationwide, Mr. Solis filed
suit against a number of large welding-equipment manufacturers
after suffering brain damage caused by the inhalation of welding
fumes containing manganese, a known neurotoxin and an ingredient
common to the majority of welding rods sold throughout the
world.
Mr. Solis's case was handpicked by the welding-industry
defendants as their first showcase trial in the MDL
consolidation, and it followed their reported seven-figure
settlement with Mississippi welder Charles Ruth, whose case was
originally intended to be the first trial in the consolidated
litigation.
Though disappointed with the jury's verdict, attorneys
representing Mr. Solis feel that his defeat will prove to be a
victory for the thousands of other American welders who have
filed similar lawsuits against the Lincoln Electric Company,
Hobart Brothers Company, the ESAB Group, Inc., TDY Industries,
Inc., and all of the other welding-industry defendants in these
cases.
"First of all, we believe that this trial has firmly established
the very real danger of manganese-laced welding fumes," said
Drew Ranier, a partner with the Louisiana-based law firm Ranier,
Gayle and Elliot, LLC, and a member of the Plaintiffs' Executive
Committee in the MDL consolidation.
"Even the [chief executive officer] of the Lincoln Electric
Company, one of the world's leading manufacturers of welding
supplies, was forced under cross-examination to admit to this
hazard. Furthermore, the court ordered the defendants to
produce thousands of pages of new documents toward the end of
the trial, and scores of future welding cases will benefit from
this fresh evidence. We believe that these new documents
clearly show the danger posed by welding fumes and, in addition,
a longstanding corporate cover-up designed to suppress this
information."
Scott Bickford, a partner with the New Orleans law firm Martzell
& Bickford and an attorney for Mr. Solis, had this to add: "The
defendants handpicked this case out of the thousands currently
filed against the welding industry mainly because Mr. Solis is
in the early stages of what is unfortunately a progressive
illness. He has not yet developed many of the symptoms that
afflict thousands of this nation's welders. The vast majority
of the cases filed against the welding industry are far stronger
than this one, and, like previous mass-injury cases involving
well-funded corporate defendants, I'm confident that the
plaintiffs will ultimately prevail."
"It is not the large companies that move this country forward,
but the individual workers," said Don Barrett, co-lead counsel
for the plaintiffs in the MDL consolidation. "It is imperative
that their health and welfare is protected. We remain resolute
in our determination to hold these companies accountable for the
neurological injuries suffered by thousands of American workers
exposed to welding fumes."
Several more welding trials are scheduled for the near future.
A lawsuit filed by welder Ronald R. Calloway is set for trial in
Union County, Arkansas, on Aug. 14, 2006, and a seven-plaintiff
group trial is scheduled to begin in Jefferson County, Arkansas,
on Oct. 2, 2006.
The plaintiffs' lawyers in the MDL consolidation have proposed
that the next MDL trial, currently set for fall of 2006, also be
a group-plaintiff trial.
For further information, visit http://weldinglitigation.com. To
schedule attorney interviews or obtain documents filed in these
cases, contact Eric Wetzel at 512-474-7514 or
eric@shipleyassociates.net.
The suit is "Solis v. Lincoln Electric Company et al., Case No.
1:04-CV-17363," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Ohio under Judge Kathleen M. O'Malley
(MDL1535).
Representing the plaintiffs are:
(1) Russell T. Abney of Watts Law Firm, 14th Floor, 555
North Caranchaua, Corpus Christi, TX 78478, Phone: 713-
621-7944, Fax: 713-621-9638, E-mail: russ@abney.us;
(2) Lisa A. Gorshe of Climaco, Lefkowitz, Peca, Wilcox &
Garofoli, Ste. 1000, 1220 Huron Road, Cleveland, OH
44115, Phone: 216-621-8484, Fax: 216-771-1632, E-mail:
lagors@climacolaw.com; and
(3) Mikal C Watts of Watts & Heard, L.L.P., Tower II Bldg.
Suite 1400, 555 North Carancahua, Corpus Christi, TX
78478, Phone: 361-887-0500, Fax: 361-887-0500.
Representing the defendants are:
(1) Darrell L. Barger of Hartline, Dacus, Barger, Dreyer &
Kern, Ste. 2000, North Tower, 800 North Shoreline Blvd.
Corpus Christi, TX 78401, Phone: 361-866-8009, Fax:
361-866-8039, E-mail: dbarger@hdbdk.com;
(2) John G. Bissell, 1111 Bagby, Ste. 2300, Houston, TX,
Phone: 77002-2546 or 713-210-4366, Fax: 713-651-1920;
(3) R. Eric Kennedy of Weisman, Kennedy & Berris, 1600
Midland Bldg., 101 Prospect Avenue, W Cleveland, OH
44115, Phone: 216-781-1111, Fax: 216-781-6747;
(4) David C. Landever of Weisman, Kennedy & Berris, Ste.
1600, 101 Prospect Avenue, W Cleveland, OH 44115,
Phone: 216-781-1111, Fax: 216-781-6747, E-mail:
dlandever@wisemanlaw.com;
(5) Jessica D. Miller of O'Melveny & Myers, 555 13th
Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006, Phone: 202-383-5157,
Fax: 202-383-5414, E-mail: jmiller@omm.com;
(6) Richard E. Sarver of Barrasso Usdin Kupperman Freeman
Sarver, 1800 LL & E Tower, 909 Poydras Street, New
Orleans, LA 70112, Phone: 504-598-9700, Fax: 504-598-
9701, E-mail: rsarver@barrassousdin.com; and
(7) Charles Patrick Waites, 1111 Bagby, Ste. 2300 Houston,
TX 77002-2546, Phone: 713-210-4366, Fax: 713-651-1920.
New Securities Fraud Cases
GLOBETEL COMMUNICATIONS: Shalov Stone Files Stock Suit in Fla.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Shalov Stone & Bonner, LLP commenced a
securities fraud class action on behalf of those investors who
acquired the securities of GlobeTel Communications Corp. during
the period Dec. 30, 2005 to April 11, 2006. The lawsuit is
pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
Florida and names as defendants GlobeTel and certain of its top
ranking executives.
According to the complaint, the defendants issued several
statements during the Class Period, which touted the
consummation of a $600 million deal with a Moscow-based company
named LLC Internafta to install wireless networks in Russia's 30
largest cities.
It is alleged, however, that the defendants repeatedly described
the Russian deal in a false and misleading fashion. This is the
first complaint filed against GlobeTel for securities fraud
violations in connection with its purported deal with
Internafta.
Following the commencement of this action, additional
information came to light. On May 1, 2006, GlobeTel announced a
formal default with Internafta. Also, according to Russian
newspaper Vedomosti, as reported by Dow Jones, Internafta was
registered as a company on Nov. 30, 2005, exactly one month
before it entered into the deal with GlobeTel, and has only $369
in charter capital according to tax authorities.
According to Dow Jones, the address given for Internafta by the
Federal Tax Service contains only a warehouse of a metal-
producing company named Metalloinvest-Market, which claims to
never have heard of Internafta or its managers.
For more details, contact Thomas G. Ciarlone, Jr., at Shalov
Stone & Bonner, LLP, 485 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1000, New York,
New York 10018, Phone: (212) 239-4340, Fax: (212) 239-4310, E-
mail: tciarlone@lawssb.com.
HERLEY INDUSTRIES: Goldman & Scaralto Files Stock Suit in Pa.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Goldman Scarlato & Karon, P.C., filed a lawsuit in the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, on
behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired publicly
traded securities of Herley Industries, Inc. between Oct. 1,
2001 and June 14 2006, inclusive. The lawsuit was filed against
Herley and certain officers and directors.
The complaint alleges that Defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder.
Specifically, the complaint alleges that the company failed to
disclose or misrepresented these material adverse facts:
-- that Herley's financial results were achieved through
the misrepresentation of manufacturing costs on
contracts with the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Airforce;
-- that Herley lacked adequate internal controls;
-- that as a result of its dealing with the armed forces,
it would likely be subject to increased scrutiny and
potentially fines for potentially improper conduct.
On June 5, 2006, Herley announced that its fiscal 2006 third
quarter earnings would be below analyst expectations. In
reaction to this news, shares of Herley fell $1.88 per share, or
approximately 10%, to close at $17.50 per share.
The following day, on June 6, 2006, the company revealed that
the U.S. Attorney's office for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania had indicted the Company and its Chairman Lee N.
Blatt on multiple charges in connection with excessive profits
improperly earned by Herley on three contracts with the U.S.
Airforce and the U.S. Navy.
Herley shares reacted negatively to the news, falling $0.98 per
share, or approximately 6%, to close at $16.52 per share.
Subsequently, on June 9, 2006, the company announced that Lee N.
Blatt had resigned as chairman of the board and as a director of
the company on June 8, 2006.
On June 13, 2006, the company announced that its operations in
Lancaster, Pennsylvania, Woburn, Massachusetts, Chicago,
Illinois and Herley's subsidiary in Farmingdale, New York were
suspended from receiving new contract awards from the U.S.
Government. Herley shares reacted negatively to the news,
falling $5.19 per share, or 34%, to close at $10.06 per share.
Interested may move the Court no later than Aug. 14, 2006 to
serve as a lead plaintiff for the Class.
For more details, contact Mark S. Goldman, Esq. of The Law Firm
of Goldman Scarlato & Karon, P.C., Phone: 888-753-2796, E-mail:
info@gsk-law.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, Maria Cristina Canson, and Janice
Mendoza, Editors.
Copyright 2006. 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 * * *