/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/081117.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Monday, November 17, 2008, Vol. 10, No. 228 Headlines AMERICAN INT'L: Siskinds LLP Files CDN550M Investor Litigation ARTHUR J. GALLAGHER: April '09 Hearing Set for Settlement Appeal CA INC: Briefing on Wyly Litigants' Appeals to Settlement Ended CONSTELLATION ENERGY: Charles H. Johnson Files ERISA Litigation FAXTON-ST. LUKE'S: Faces ERISA, FLSA Violations Lawsuit in N.Y. FIFTH THIRD: Settles Ill. Lawsuit Over Fees on Closing Mortgages GENERAL ELECTRIC: Faces N.Y. Suit Over Sept. 25 Conference Call GENERAL ELECTRIC: To Defend Shareholders' Securities Lawsuits HARTFORD FINANCIAL: Faces Conn. Suit Alleging ERISA Violations LOUISIANA CITIZENS: Board Approves Paying $35M Suit Settlement MEDICIS PHARMACEUTICAL: Firm Sets Dec. 2 Lead Plaintiff Deadline N.Y. HOSPITALS: Crouse, St. Joesph Hourly Workers File Lawsuit NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL: Settles Calif. Policy Owner's Suit for $92M NOVASTAR FINANCIAL: Firms File Motion to Dismiss 401(k) Lawsuit OMNICARE INC: Arguments on Appeal to Junked Suit Held in Sept. ORACLE CORP: Ninth Circuit Reverses Ruling in "Sullivan" Lawsuit TERIS LLC: Ariz. Court Affirms Ruling in Suit Over 2005 Accident WACHOVIA CORP: Directors Face Ehrenhaus Breach Complaint in N.C. WACHOVIA CORP: Evergreen Units Face Mass. Fund Investors' Suits WACHOVIA CORP: Faces Suits Over Sale of Auction Rate Securities WACHOVIA CORP: Jan. 2009 Settlement Fairness Hearing Set in Pa. New Securities Fraud Cases ANADIGICS INC: Federman & Sherwood Announces Securities Filing ANADIGICS INC: Izard Nobel LLP Announces Securities Suit Filing CONSTELLATION ENERGY: Charles H. Johnson Announces Suit Filing ELAN CORP: Scott+Scott LLP Files Securities Fraud Litigation NOAH EDUCATION: Dyer & Berens Files Securities Fraud Litigation ********* AMERICAN INT'L: Siskinds LLP Files CDN550M Investor Litigation -------------------------------------------------------------- LONDON, ON, Nov. 13, 2008 -- The law firm of Siskinds LLP today announced that it has filed a proposed CDN550 million class action against American International Group, Inc. ("AIG"), AIG Financial Products Corp. ("AIGFP"), and various current and former directors and officers of AIG and AIGFP. The proposed class action has been filed under Ontario's investor protection law, Part XXIII.1 of the Ontario Securities Act. The AIG class action arises out of AIGFP's credit default swaps and the crippling decline in AIG's stock price when the true effect of those credit default swaps became known to the investing public. The AIG disclosures out of which the class action arises are currently the subject of investigation by law enforcement authorities, and are alleged in the class action to have caused massive losses to Canadian investors. Dimitri Lascaris, a Siskinds lawyer prosecuting the AIG class action, stated "for many years, Canadian corporations have had to confront the long arm of America's justice system. But with the enactment of Part XXIII.1 of the Ontario Securities Act, Canadian investors can finally pursue remedies in our own Courts against American corporations that fail to respect Canada's securities laws. Canadian investors are entitled to have Canadian Courts hear their claims." The AIG class action is brought on behalf of all persons and entities resident in Canada who acquired AIG securities during the period from November 10, 2006 to and including September 16, 2008. ARTHUR J. GALLAGHER: April '09 Hearing Set for Settlement Appeal ---------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey will hear on April 20, 2009, an appeal challenging the final approval of a US$28 million settlement of a Multi-District Litigation proceeding pending that names Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. as one of the defendants. On Oct. 19, 2004, Gallagher was joined as a defendant in a purported class action suit originally filed in August 2004 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by OptiCare Health Systems Inc. against various large insurance brokerage firms and commercial insurers. The suit is "OptiCare Health Systems Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., et al., Case No. 04 CV 06954 (DC))." An amended complaint alleges that the defendants used the contingent commission structure of placement service agreements in a conspiracy to deprive policyholders of "independent and unbiased brokerage services, as well as free and open competition in the market for insurance." Since the fourth quarter of 2004, nine other similar purported class actions have been filed alleging claims similar to those alleged by the plaintiff in the OptiCare litigation and such cases have been included in the MDL proceeding before the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. On Dec. 29, 2006, Gallagher reached an agreement to resolve all claims in the MDL and related matters. Gallagher admitted no wrongdoing, but chose to conclude its involvement, rather than prolong what could have been a costly and burdensome lawsuit. On April 17, 2007, the court granted preliminary approval of the Gallagher Settlement. On Sept. 4, 2007, the court granted final approval of the Gallagher Settlement. The Settlement provides for Gallagher to distribute US$28 million to current and former clients and others that purchased retail insurance through Gallagher or other brokers named as defendants in the MDL during the period beginning on Aug. 26, 1994, and ending on Dec. 31, 2005. Gallagher also agreed to pay up to US$8.9 million in attorney fees. A notice of appeal was filed challenging the final approval of the Settlement. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 11, 2008) A hearing on the appeal is scheduled to be heard on April 20, 2009, according to the company's Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. -- http://www.ajg.com/-- is engaged in providing insurance brokerage, risk management, and related services to clients in the U.S. and abroad. Its principal activity is the negotiation and placement of insurance for its clients. CA INC: Briefing on Wyly Litigants' Appeals to Settlement Ended --------------------------------------------------------------- Briefing on the appeals by Sam Wyly and certain related parties from the court-approved settlement of stockholder class-action lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York is complete, according to CA, Inc.'s Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. The company, its former Chairman and CEO Charles B. Wang, its former Chairman and CEO Sanjay Kumar, its former Chief Financial Officer Ira Zar, and its Vice Chairman and Founder Russell M. Artzt were defendants in one or more stockholder class action lawsuits filed in July 1998, February 2002, and March 2002 in the Federal Court, alleging, among other things, that a class consisting of all persons who purchased the Company's Common Stock during the period from Jan. 20, 1998 until July 22, 1998 were harmed by misleading statements, misrepresentations, and omissions regarding the Company's future financial performance. In addition, in May 2003, a class-action lawsuit captioned, "John A. Ambler v. Computer Associates International, Inc., et al.," was filed in the Federal Court. The complaint in this matter, a purported class action on behalf of the CA Savings Harvest Plan (the CASH Plan) and the participants in, and beneficiaries of, the CASH Plan for a class period from March 30, 1998 through May 30, 2003, asserted claims of breach of fiduciary duty under the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The named defendants were the Company, the Company's Board of Directors, the CASH Plan, the Administrative Committee of the CASH Plan, and certain current or former employees and/or former directors of the Company: Messrs. Wang, Kumar, Zar, Artzt, Peter A. Schwartz, and Charles P. McWade; and various unidentified alleged fiduciaries of the CASH Plan. The complaint alleged that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties by causing the CASH Plan to invest in Company securities and sought damages in an unspecified amount. On Aug. 25, 2003, the Company announced the settlement of the class-action lawsuits against the Company and certain of its present and former officers and directors, alleging misleading statements, misrepresentations, and omissions regarding the Company's financial performance, as well as breaches of fiduciary duty. As part of the class action settlement, which was approved by the Federal Court in December 2003, the Company agreed to issue a total of up to 5.7 million shares of Common Stock to the stockholders represented in the three class action lawsuits, including payment of attorneys' fees. The Company has completed the issuance of the settlement shares as well as payment of US$3.3 million to the plaintiffs' attorneys in legal fees and related expenses. On Dec. 7, 2004, a motion to vacate the Order of Final Judgment and Dismissal entered by the Federal Court in December 2003 in connection with the settlement of the 1998 and 2002 stockholder lawsuits was filed by the Wyly Litigants. The motion sought to reopen the settlement to permit the moving stockholders to pursue individual claims against certain present and former officers of the Company. The motion stated that the moving stockholders did not seek to file claims against the Company. In a memorandum and order dated Aug. 2, 2007, the Federal Court denied all of the 60(b) Motions and reaffirmed the 2003 settlements. On Aug. 24, 2007, the Wyly Litigants filed notices of appeal of the August 2 decision. On Aug. 16, 2007, the Special Litigation Committee filed a motion to amend or clarify the August 2 decision, and the Company joined that motion. On Sept. 12 and Oct. 4, 2007, the Federal Court issued opinions denying the motions to amend or clarify. On Sept. 18, 2007, the Wyly Litigants filed notices of appeal of the September 12 decision. The Company filed notices of cross-appeal of the September 12 and October 4 decisions on Nov. 2, 2007. On July 28, 2008, the Wyly Litigants served their opening briefs. On Sept. 11, 2008, the Company filed its brief in opposition to the Wyly Litigants' appeals. Also on Sept. 11, 2008, current CA director The Honorable Alfonse M. D'Amato and former CA directors Richard Grasso, Shirley Strum Kenny, Jay Lorsch, Roel Pieper, Lewis Ranieri, Walter Schuetze, Willem F.P. de Vogel and Charles Wang filed briefs in opposition to the Wyly Litigants' appeals. On Oct. 9, 2008, the Wyly Litigants filed a reply brief in support of their appeals in the class actions. Islandia, N.Y.-based CA, Inc. -- http://www.ca.com/-- provides tools for managing networks, databases, applications, storage, security, and other systems. CONSTELLATION ENERGY: Charles H. Johnson Files ERISA Litigation --------------------------------------------------------------- MINNEAPOLIS, Nov. 13, 2008 -- Charles H. Johnson & Associates announces that a class action has been commenced against Constellation Energy Group, Inc. ("Constellation") (NYSE:CEG) for violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended ("ERISA"). The Complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland on behalf of a class of all persons who were participants in or beneficiaries of the Employee Savings Plan and the Represented Employee Savings Plan for Nine Mile Point (the "Plans") between January 30, 2008 and the present (the "Class Period") and whose Plan accounts included investments in Constellation common stock. The Complaint alleges that certain Defendants, each having certain responsibilities regarding the management and investment the of Plans' assets, breached their fiduciary duties to the Plans and proposed Class by failing to prudently and loyally manage the Plans' investment in Company securities by: -- continuing to offer Constellation common stock as an investment option when it was imprudent to do so; -- failing to provide complete and accurate information to the Plans participants regarding the Company's financial condition and the prudence of investigating in Company stock; and -- maintaining the Plans' pre-existing investments in Constellation stock when Company stock was no longer a prudent investment for the Plans. For more details, contact: Neal Eisenbraun, Esq. (cjohnsonlaw@gmail.com) Charles H. Johnson & Associates 2599 Mississippi Street New Brighton, MN 55112 Phone: (651) 633-5685 FAXTON-ST. LUKE'S: Faces ERISA, FLSA Violations Lawsuit in N.Y. --------------------------------------------------------------- Faxton-St. Luke's Healthcare faces a purported class-action lawsuit in New York generally alleging violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and the Fair Labor Standards Act, Joleen Ferris of WKTV reports. The suit was filed by Dawn Hamelin, Julie Flint, and Rakiesha Griffin in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York on Nov. 13, 2008. It was brought on behalf of 89 current and former employees of the healthcare provider. Captioned, "Hamelin et al v. Faxton-St. Luke's Healthcare et al., Case No. 6:08-cv-01219-DNH-GJD," the suit is claiming that the healthcare organization's payroll system automatically and repeatedly deducted 30 minutes for lunch periods that the busy healthcare workers never took, according to WKTV. The suit is "Hamelin et al v. Faxton-St. Luke's Healthcare et al., Case No. 6:08-cv-01219-DNH-GJD," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York, Judge David N. Hurd, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs are: J. Nelson Thomas, Esq. (nthomas@theemploymentattorneys.com) Dolin, Thomas Law Firm 693 East Avenue Rochester, NY 14607 Phone: 585-272-0540 Fax: 585-272-0574 FIFTH THIRD: Settles Ill. Lawsuit Over Fees on Closing Mortgages ---------------------------------------------------------------- Fifth Third Mortgage Co. settled a purported class-action suit that was filed in the Madison County Circuit Court by The Lakin Law Firm, Steve Korris of The Madison County Record reports. The lawsuit was filed in 2003, as one of about 30 proposed class-action lawsuits over fees that lenders charged when closing mortgages. It was filed by Michael Stevens and Helen Stevens, whom Fifth Third Mortgage charged $100 for a credit report. On Nov. 7, 2008, the plaintiffs dismissed a claim that Fifth Third charged them more for a credit report than the report cost, according to The Madison County Record report. The Madison County Record reported that at a hearing in 2007, Mark Brown of the Lakin firm told Circuit Judge David Hylla his clients could recover damages if Fifth Third added one cent to the cost of the report. Judge Hylla ruled that Mr. Brown's clients could pursue claims of unjust enrichment and breach of contract, but they did not pursue the claims. The case remained idle until the parties reached agreement. The stipulation of settlement that they presented to Judge Hylla did not reveal terms, The Madison County Record reported. GENERAL ELECTRIC: Faces N.Y. Suit Over Sept. 25 Conference Call --------------------------------------------------------------- A purported class-action suit naming General Electric Co. as defendant, as well as GE's chief executive officer and chief financial officer is at the earliest stage, according to the company's Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. In October 2008, shareholders filed the purported class-action suit under the federal securities laws in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleges that during a conference call with analysts on Sept. 25, 2008, defendants made false and misleading statements concerning: (i) the state of GE's funding, cash flows, and liquidity and (ii) the question of issuing additional equity, which caused economic loss to those shareholders who purchased GE stock between Sept. 25, 2008 and Oct. 2, 2008, when GE announced the pricing of a common stock offering. The case seeks unspecified damages. Conn.-based General Electric Co. -- http://www.ge.com/-- is a diversified technology, media and financial services company. With products and services ranging from aircraft engines, power generation, water processing and security technology to medical imaging, business and consumer financing, media content and industrial products, it serves customers in more than 100 countries. GENERAL ELECTRIC: To Defend Shareholders' Securities Lawsuits ------------------------------------------------------------- General Electric Co. intends to defend itself in lawsuits filed by shareholders under the federal securities laws, according to the company's Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. In July and September 2008, shareholders filed two purported class-action lawsuits under the federal securities laws in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut naming GE as defendant, as well as GE's chief executive officer and chief financial officer. The complaints allege that GE and GE's chief executive officer made false and misleading statements that artificially inflated GE's stock price between March 12, 2008 and April 10, 2008, when GE announced that its results for the first quarter of 2008 would not meet GE's previous guidance and GE also lowered its full year guidance for 2008. In addition, shareholders have filed two purported derivative actions in New York State court against GE's chief executive officer and chief financial officer, the members of GE's board and GE (as nominal defendant) for alleged breach of fiduciary duty and other claims in connection with these events. These four cases, which seek unspecified damages, are in their earliest stages. Conn.-based General Electric Co. -- http://www.ge.com/-- is a diversified technology, media and financial services company. With products and services ranging from aircraft engines, power generation, water processing and security technology to medical imaging, business and consumer financing, media content and industrial products, it serves customers in more than 100 countries. HARTFORD FINANCIAL: Faces Conn. Suit Alleging ERISA Violations -------------------------------------------------------------- The Hartford Financial Services Group Inc. is facing a purported class-action lawsuit in Connecticut, alleging violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, Diane Levick of The Hartford Courant reports. The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, and assigned to Judge Peter C. Dorsey. It was filed by by employees, who, according to The Hartford Courant, have lost hundreds of millions of dollars in their retirement savings plan by investing in the company's stock. The Hartford Courant reported that the plan had total assets of $3.04 billion at the end of 2007, and current and former employees had $650.9 million, or 21.4 percent, of that invested in The Hartford's stock. However, since Dec. 31, 2007 the stock price has plummeted 88 percent, from $87.19 to $10.46 a share, as investors reacted to soured investments, depressed variable annuity profits and a disappointing 2009 outlook. Robert A. Izard, a partner in the Hartford law firm Izard Nobel told The Hartford Courant, "The losses certainly have been dramatic over the past year; a lot of people have lost a lot of money." Mr. Izard and his firm is local counsel for the civil suit proposed as a class action. The allegations in the suit include mismanagement of the 401(k) retirement plan and failure to disclose the company's true financial condition to participants. The suit says employees weren't warned about The Hartford's "excessively risky investment practices" and trouble in the annuity business. It alleges that the defendants failed to prudently manage or oversee the plan as required by the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act. LOUISIANA CITIZENS: Board Approves Paying $35M Suit Settlement -------------------------------------------------------------- The board of Louisiana Citizens Insurance Corp. approved paying up to $35 million to settle a class-action lawsuit, alleging that the firm took too long to pay off policyholders' claims after the 2005 hurricanes, The Associated Press reports. The board of Louisiana's last-resort insurance company vote decision means that the settlement could get its final approval in a hearing Dec. 15, 2008 from state District Judge Kern Reese in New Orleans, according to The Associated Press. The roughly 30,000 claimants could get up to $1,000 each, depending on how many are approved to join the class-action lawsuit, The Associated Press reported. MEDICIS PHARMACEUTICAL: Firm Sets Dec. 2 Lead Plaintiff Deadline ---------------------------------------------------------------- NEW YORK, Nov. 13, 2008 -- Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP ("Pomerantz" or the "Firm") remind investors of Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation ("Medicis" or the "Company") that December 2, 2008 is the deadline to request that the Court appoint you as Lead Plaintiff in the class action. Pomerantz filed an action against the company and certain officers of the Company on behalf of purchasers of Medicis' common stock during the period from October 30, 2003 to September 23, 2008, both dates inclusive, (the "Class Period"). The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court, District of Arizona for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Medicis develops and markets products for the treatment of dermatological, aesthetic, and podiatric conditions. The complaint alleges that during the class period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business and financial results. Specifically, defendants overstated the Company's revenues and earnings by failing to properly account for returns in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"). The complaint specifically alleges that on September 24, 2008, the Company announced that its Audit Committee concluded that the Company's financial statements for fiscal years 2003 through 2007 and the first and second quarters of 2008, would need to be restated due to improper return reserve calculations. Medicis admitted that it had improperly "accrued returns at replacement cost rather than deferring the gross sales price," and that it would have to revise "its reserve calculations to defer the gross sales value of the returned product." On this news, Medicis' stock dropped $2.34 per share to close at $15.58 per share, a one-day decline of 13%. As a result of the challenged statements Medicis' common stock traded at artificially inflated prices throughout the Class Period, resulting in damage to class members who had purchased at prices inflated by defendants' materially false and misleading statements. For more details, contact: Teresa L. Webb (tlwebb@pomlaw.com) Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP Phone: 888.476.6529 N.Y. HOSPITALS: Crouse, St. Joesph Hourly Workers File Lawsuit -------------------------------------------------------------- Crouse and St. Joseph's hospitals are named in a class-action lawsuit filed in a New York court, which accuses them of failing to pay hourly employees for missed lunch breaks while they were caring for patients, WSYR-TV reports. According to WSYR-TV, the firm that filed the lawsuit says a software program used to manage workers hours automatically deducted a half an hour for a lunch break, even if it was missed or interrupted. If you worked at Crouse or St. Joseph's as an hourly employee anytime in the past six years, you may be able to participate in the suit, WSYR-TV reported. In response to the suit, Crouse told WSYR-TV that their payroll policies and practices have been found by the Department of Labor to be in full compliance. To get more information go to http://www.hospitalovertime.com. NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL: Settles Calif. Policy Owner's Suit for $92M ---------------------------------------------------------------- Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Co. has agreed to pay up to $92 million to settle a class-action lawsuit accusing it of failing to pay dividends on certain term life policies and using improper sales and marketing practices, Paul Gores of The Journal Sentinel reports. The case was filed in Los Angeles, California in 2004 by a customer who alleged the sales material used by the Milwaukee- based insurer misled him about whether dividends would be paid on term life and disability insurance. In the litigation, plaintiff Nicholas Papadakis alleged fraud, deceptive marketing and sales practices, breach of fiduciary duties, breach of contract and unfair competition by the company, according to The Journal Sentinel. The Journal Sentinel reported that the proposed settlement covers about 1.3 million current and 1.6 million former policy owners who purchased term life or disability coverage since 1981. The $92 million will settle the term life dividend issue in the lawsuit, while the suit's concerns about disability dividends will be settled by distribution of a brochure that explains how Northwestern Mutual develops its dividends. Checks with the term life settlement payouts are expected to be mailed next spring if the agreement receives final approval from California Superior Court in Los Angeles next month. The settlement is scheduled for a final hearing Dec. 24, 2008, according to The Journal Sentinel report. NOVASTAR FINANCIAL: Firms File Motion to Dismiss 401(k) Lawsuit --------------------------------------------------------------- NEW YORK, Nov. 13, 2008 -- Stull, Stull & Brody and Gainey & McKenna have filed a Class Action Complaint for Violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (the "Complaint") against NovaStar Financial, Inc. ("NovaStar" or the "Company") (Pink Sheets:NOVS) and certain individuals who are believed to have been fiduciaries of the NovaStar Financial, Inc. 401(k) Plan (the "Plan") during the period May 4, 2006 through November 15, 2007, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The Complaint alleges that Defendants allowed the imprudent investment of the Plan's assets in NovaStar common stock throughout the Class Period despite the fact that they knew or should have known that such investment was unduly risky and imprudent due to the Company's serious mismanagement and improper business practices. The Complaint further alleges that the Plan's fiduciaries also failed to disclose information about NovaStar to the Plan's participants in violation of ERISA. On November 12, 2008, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Complaint, arguing that, among other things, the current named plaintiff is not a proper party to bring claims on behalf of the Plan and the Plan's participants. The deadline for opposing this motion is November 24, 2008. For more details, contact: Edwin J. Mills, Esq. Michael J. Klein, Esq. Stull, Stull & Brody 6 East 45th Street, New York, NY 10017 Phone: 1-800-337-4983 Fax: 212-490-2022 e-mail: SSBNY@aol.com - and - Gainey & McKenna, Esq. Thomas J. McKenna, Esq. Gainey & McKenna 295 Madison Avenue 4th Floor New York, NY 10017 Phone: (212) 983-1300 Fax: (212) 983-0383 e-mail: tjmckenna@gaineyandmckenna.com OMNICARE INC: Arguments on Appeal to Junked Suit Held in Sept. -------------------------------------------------------------- Oral argument on the plaintiffs' appeal from their dismissed consolidated putative class action lawsuit was held on Sept. 18, 2008, according to Omnicare, Inc.'s Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. On Feb. 2, 2006, a putative class-action lawsuit entitled, "Indiana State Dist. Council of Laborers & HOD Carriers Pension & Welfare Fund v. Omnicare, Inc., et al., No. 2:06cv26" was filed against Omnicare and two of its officers in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. On Feb. 13, 2006, a substantially similar putative class action lawsuit was filed, entitled, "Chi v. Omnicare, Inc., et al., No. 2:06cv31." The suits purport to assert claims for violation of Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and seek, among other things, compensatory damages and injunctive relief. The complaints, which purported to be brought on behalf of all open-market purchasers of Omnicare common stock from Aug. 3, 2005 through Jan. 27, 2006, alleged that Omnicare had artificially inflated its earnings by engaging in improper generic drug substitution and that defendants had made false and misleading statements regarding the company's business and prospects. On April 3, 2006, plaintiffs in the HOD Carriers case formally moved for consolidation and the appointment of lead plaintiff and lead counsel under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. On May 22, 2006, that motion was granted, the cases were consolidated, and a lead plaintiff and lead counsel were appointed. On July 20, 2006, plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint, adding a third officer as a defendant and new factual allegations primarily relating to revenue recognition, the valuation of receivables and the valuation of inventories. On Oct. 31, 2006, plaintiffs moved for leave to file a second amended complaint, which was granted on Jan. 26, 2007, on the condition that no further amendments would be permitted absent extraordinary circumstances. Plaintiffs then filed their second amended complaint on Jan. 29, 2007. The second amended complaint: (i) expands the putative class to include all purchasers of (ii)Omnicare common stock from Aug. 3, 2005 through July 27, 2006, (iii) names two members of the company's board of directors (iv)as additional defendants, (v) adds a new plaintiff and a new claim for violation of (vi)Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 based on alleged false and misleading statements in the registration (vii)statement filed in connection with the company's December 2005 public offering, (viii) alleges that the company failed to timely disclose its (ix)contractual dispute with UnitedHealth, and (x) alleges that the company failed to timely record certain (xi)special litigation reserves. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint on March 12, 2007, claiming that plaintiffs had failed adequately to plead loss causation, scienter or any actionable misstatement or omission. That motion was fully briefed at May 1, 2007. In response to certain arguments relating to the individual claims of the named plaintiffs that were raised in defendants' pending motion to dismiss, plaintiffs filed a motion to add, or in the alternative, to intervene an additional named plaintiff, Alaska Electrical Pension Fund, on July 27, 2007. On Oct. 12, 2007, the court issued an opinion and order dismissing the case and denying plaintiffs' motion to add an additional named plaintiff. On Nov. 9, 2007, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit with respect to the dismissal of their case. The suit is "Indiana State District Council of Laborers and HOD Carriers Pension and Welfare Fund, et al. v. Omnicare, Inc., et al., Case No. 2:06-cv-00026-WOB," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, Judge William O. Bertelsman. Representing the plaintiff are: Richard A. Maniskas, Esq. (rmaniskas@sbclasslaw.com) Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP 280 King of Prussia Road Radnor, PA 19087 Phone: 610-667-7706 Fax: 610-667-7056 - and - Kevin L. Murphy, Esq. (kmurphy@graydon.com) Graydon, Head & Ritchey, LLP 2500 Chamber Center Drive, Suite 300, P.O. Box 17070 Ft. Mitchell, KY 41017 Phone: 859-344-0330 Fax: 859-344-0886 Representing the defendant is: Richard W. Reinthaler, Esq. (lpmco@dbllp.com) Dewey Ballantine LLP 1301 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10019-6092 Phone: 212-258-8000 Fax: 212-259-6333 ORACLE CORP: Ninth Circuit Reverses Ruling in "Sullivan" Lawsuit ---------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a summary judgment ruling in the matter, "Donald Sullivan et al v. Oracle Corporation et al., Case No. 8:05-cv-00392-AHS-MLG," according to Mondaq News Alerts. The plaintiffs, three non-residents of California, brought a putative class-action lawsuit against their employer, software giant Oracle Corp., for failing to pay overtime as required by California law. The plaintiffs, Donald Sullivan, Deanna Evich, and Richard Burkow, were employed as "Instructors" who traveled to California and other locations throughout the U.S. to provide software support and training, according to Mondaq News Alerts. Two of the three were residents of Colorado which has its own state overtime law, and the third was a resident of Arizona, where the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is the governing wage-hour law. According to Mondaq News Alerts, the plaintiffs mostly worked in their home states; their annual employment in California ranged only from 5 to 33 days. Though Oracle paid these employees overtime in accordance with Colorado law and the FLSA respectively, due to the enhanced benefits provided under the California Labor Code, the plaintiffs earned less overtime pay under these statutes than they would have under California law. Believing they were entitled to overtime pay under the California Labor Code for days worked in California, plaintiffs filed a complaint in California state court in which (among other things) they sought to recover the overtime to which they would have been entitled under the California Labor Code. After removing the case to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Oracle Corp. obtained summary judgment, according to Mondaq News Alerts. On appeal, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit unanimously reversed. They held that the California Labor Code extends to non-resident employees who perform work in California, even when that work is performed only on a temporary basis, according to Mondaq News Alerts. The suit os "Donald Sullivan et al v. Oracle Corporation et al., Case No. 8:05-cv-00392-AHS-MLG," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Judge Alicemarie H. Stotler, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs are: Robert Walter Thompson, Esq. (robert_thompson@cmwlaw.net) Callahan McCune & Willis 111 Fashion Lane Tustin, CA 92780-3397 Phone: 714-730-5700 Representing the defendants are: Stephen L. Berry, Esq. (stephenberry@paulhastings.com) Paul Hastings Janofsky & Walker 695 Town Ctr. Dr. 17th Fl. Costa Mesa, CA 92626-1924 Phone: 714-668-6200 TERIS LLC: Ariz. Court Affirms Ruling in Suit Over 2005 Accident ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decision in a class-action lawsuit against Teris LLC, Op-Tech Environmental Services Inc. and CSX Transportation Inc. over an evacuation after a 2005 explosion and chemical fire in El Dorado, The Associated Press reports. In a recently issued decision, justices affirmed a Union County judge's ruling allowing those suing the defendants to name who could join their lawsuit. Under the terms, any adult from a home or business forced to evacuate from certain areas around the Teris facility could join the suit. The companies appealed the judge's decision. However, justices' dismissed the companies' claims that the definition of who could join the suit was too broad and other issues, according to The Associated Press report. The Associated Press reports that nearly 2,500 people were evacuated Jan. 2, 2005, after an explosion at the Teris hazardous-waste storage warehouse. No one was injured and the evacuees were allowed to return to their homes and businesses a day later. The fire smoldered for days after firefighters chose not to fight it for fear that water would react dangerously with some of the stored chemicals. WACHOVIA CORP: Directors Face Ehrenhaus Breach Complaint in N.C. ---------------------------------------------------------------- A purported class-action complaint captioned, "Irving Ehrenhaus v. John D. Baker, et al.," was filed on Oct. 8, 2008, according to Wachovia Corp.'s Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. The complaint, filed in the Superior Court for the County of Mecklenburg in the State of North Carolina, names as defendants Wachovia, Wells Fargo, and the directors of Wachovia. The complaint alleges that the Wachovia directors breached their fiduciary duties in approving the merger with Wells Fargo at an allegedly inadequate price, and that the Wells Fargo directors aided and abetted the alleged breaches of fiduciary duty. The action seeks to enjoin the Wells Fargo merger, or to recover compensatory or rescissory damages if the merger is consummated, as well as an award of attorneys' fees and costs. The plaintiffs have asked the Court for expedited discovery and to set a hearing date for a preliminary injunction motion to enjoin the shareholder vote and the closing of the transaction. Wachovia Corp. -- http://www.wachovia.com/-- is a financial holding company and a bank holding company. It provides commercial and retail banking, and trust services through full- service banking offices in Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Washington, D.C. It also provides various other financial services, including mortgage banking, investment banking, investment advisory, home equity lending, asset-based lending, leasing, insurance, international and securities brokerage services, through other subsidiaries. The company's retail securities brokerage business is conducted through Wachovia Securities, LLC, and operates in 49 states. WACHOVIA CORP: Evergreen Units Face Mass. Fund Investors' Suits --------------------------------------------------------------- Various Evergreen Investment entities are facing three purported class-action lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, according to Wachovia Corp.'s Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. Evergreen Investments is the brand name under which Wachovia conducts its investment management business. The suits are: -- Keefe v. EIMCO , et al.; -- Krantzberg v. Evergreen Fixed Income Trust, et al.; and -- Mierzwinski v. EIMCO , et al. All suits relate to the same events. The cases generally allege that investors in the Evergreen Ultra Short Opportunities Fund suffered losses as a result of: (i) misleading statements in the Fund's prospectus, (ii) the failure to accurately price securities in the Fund at different points in time, and (iii) the failure of the Fund's risk disclosures and description of its investment strategy to inform investors adequately of the actual risks of the fund. Wachovia Corp. -- http://www.wachovia.com/-- is a financial holding company and a bank holding company. It provides commercial and retail banking, and trust services through full- service banking offices in Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Washington, D.C. It also provides various other financial services, including mortgage banking, investment banking, investment advisory, home equity lending, asset-based lending, leasing, insurance, international and securities brokerage services, through other subsidiaries. The company's retail securities brokerage business is conducted through Wachovia Securities, LLC, and operates in 49 states. WACHOVIA CORP: Faces Suits Over Sale of Auction Rate Securities --------------------------------------------------------------- Wachovia Corp. is a facing three new purported class-action suits relating to its sale of auction rate securities, according to the company's Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. The action styled, "Baytide Petroleum v. Wachovia Securities, LLC, et al.," was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma. The other two cases, "Mayfield v. Wachovia Securities, LLC, et al. and Mayor and City of Baltimore v. Wachovia Securities, LLC, et al.," were both filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and allege identical antitrust related claims. On Aug. 15, 2008, the company announced it had reached settlements in principle with the Secretary of State for the State of Missouri (as the lead state in the North American Securities Administrators Association task force investigating the marketing and sale of auction rate securities), with the New York State Attorney General's Office and with the SEC of their respective investigations of sales practice and other issues related to the sales of ARS by certain affiliates and subsidiaries of Wachovia. Wachovia Corp. -- http://www.wachovia.com/-- is a financial holding company and a bank holding company. It provides commercial and retail banking, and trust services through full- service banking offices in Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Washington, D.C. It also provides various other financial services, including mortgage banking, investment banking, investment advisory, home equity lending, asset-based lending, leasing, insurance, international and securities brokerage services, through other subsidiaries. The company's retail securities brokerage business is conducted through Wachovia Securities, LLC, and operates in 49 states. WACHOVIA CORP: Jan. 2009 Settlement Fairness Hearing Set in Pa. --------------------------------------------------------------- A fairness hearing on the settlements of two putative class- action lawsuits filed against Wachovia Corp. is scheduled for January 2009, according to the company's Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. On Feb. 17, 2006, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania filed a civil fraud complaint against a former Wachovia Bank, N.A. customer, Payment Processing Center. PPC was a third party payment processor for telemarketing and catalogue companies. On April 12, 2007, a civil class-action suit, "Faloney et al. v. Wachovia," was filed against Wachovia in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by a putative class of consumers who made purchases through telemarketer customers of PPC. The suit alleges that between April 1, 2005 and February 21, 2006, Wachovia conspired with PPC to facilitate PPC's purported violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. On Feb. 15, 2008, a second putative class-action suit, "Harrison v. Wachovia," was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by a putative class of consumers who made purchases through telemarketing customers of three other third party payment processors which banked with Wachovia. On Aug. 14, 2008, Wachovia reached agreements to settle the Faloney and Harrison class-action lawsuits. The settlements have received preliminary approval from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Wachovia Corp. -- http://www.wachovia.com/-- is a financial holding company and a bank holding company. It provides commercial and retail banking, and trust services through full- service banking offices in Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Washington, D.C. It also provides various other financial services, including mortgage banking, investment banking, investment advisory, home equity lending, asset-based lending, leasing, insurance, international and securities brokerage services, through other subsidiaries. The company's retail securities brokerage business is conducted through Wachovia Securities, LLC, and operates in 49 states. New Securities Fraud Cases ANADIGICS INC: Federman & Sherwood Announces Securities Filing -------------------------------------------------------------- OKLAHOMA CITY, OK, Nov 13, 2008 -- On November 11, 2008, a class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey against Anadigics, Inc. The complaint alleges violations of federal securities laws, Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5, including allegations of issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market which had the effect of artificially inflating the market price. The class period is from July 25, 2007 through February 12, 2008. Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of the Class. For more details, contact: William B. Federman, Esq. (wfederman@aol.com) Federman & Sherwood 10205 North Pennsylvania Avenue Oklahoma City, OK 73120 Web site: http://www.federmanlaw.com ANADIGICS INC: Izard Nobel LLP Announces Securities Suit Filing --------------------------------------------------------------- HARTFORD, CT., Nov. 13, 2008 -- The law firm of Izard Nobel LLP, which has significant experience representing investors in prosecuting claims of securities fraud, announces that a lawsuit seeking class action status has been filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of those who purchased the common stock of Anadigics, Inc. ("Anadigics" or the "Company") between July 25, 2007 and February 12, 2008, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The Complaint charges that Anadigics and certain of its officers and directors violated federal securities laws. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose the following: -- the Company was experiencing manufacturing inefficiencies associated with increased production levels and would not be able to meet its stated guidance; -- Anadigics was at risk of losing customers due to its inability to meet demand; and -- as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company and its prospects. For more details, contact: Nancy A. Kulesa, Esq. Wayne T. Boulton, Esq. Izard Nobel LLP Phone: (800) 797-5499 e-mail: firm@izardnobel.com Web site: http://www.izardnobel.com CONSTELLATION ENERGY: Charles H. Johnson Announces Suit Filing -------------------------------------------------------------- MINNEAPOLIS, Nov. 13, 2008 -- Charles H. Johnson & Associates announces that a class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland on behalf of purchasers of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. ("Constellation" or the "Company") publicly traded securities during the period January 30, 2008 through September 16, 2008 (the "Class Period"). The suit alleges that during the Class Period, Constellation Energy issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's operations and financial performance. Defendants failed to disclose that the Company's financial results were inflated by questionable accounting practices. In addition, the Company concealed the extent of its credit exposure to failing trading partners, particularly Lehman Brothers Holding Inc., which would affect the Company's ability to engage in energy-related trades. As a result of Defendants' false statements and omissions during the Class Period, Constellation Energy common shares traded at artificially inflated prices. In August 2008, Constellation Energy's share prices softened as analysts began to question certain aspects of the Company's accounting, particularly the Company's questionable characterizations of depreciation, cash flow and mark-to-market adjustments. Shortly thereafter, on September 15, 2008, Lehman Brothers, a key trading partner of Constellation Energy, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. On that day, investors were stunned as Constellation's business exposure to the Lehman bankruptcy was revealed. By the close of the Class Period, the Company's shares traded at $24.77 per share, a 75% loss from the Class Period high. For more details, contact: Neal Eisenbraun, Esq. (cjohnsonlaw@gmail.com) Charles H. Johnson & Associates 2599 Mississippi Street New Brighton, MN 55112 Phone: (651) 633-5685 ELAN CORP: Scott+Scott LLP Files Securities Fraud Litigation ------------------------------------------------------------ NEW YORK, Nov. 13, 2008 -- Scott+Scott LLP filed a class action lawsuit against Elan Corporation, plc ("Elan" or the "Company") and certain officers and directors of the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The action is on behalf of those purchasing American Depository Receipts ("ADRs") of Elan during the period beginning June 17, 2008 through July 29, 2008, inclusive (the "Class Period''), for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. According to the complaint, during the Class Period, Elan issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Phase II clinical results of the Company's investigational treatment for Alzheimer's disease, bapineuzumab. As a result of defendants' false statements and omissions during the Class Period, Elan ADRs traded at artificially inflated prices. Specifically, Elan failed to disclose unfavorable results from the bapineuzumab trial in a June 17, 2008 press release regarding the study, misrepresenting the safety and efficacy of the drug to investors and analysts. As a result of the press release, Elan ADRs surged upward nearly 11% in one day. However, when the detailed Phase II results were finally disclosed, the Company's prior representations on the safety and efficacy of bapineuzumab were shown to be overblown. On that day, the price of Elan's ADRs plunged from $33.75 to $19.63. For moee details, contact: Scott+Scott, LLP 108 Norwich Avenue P.O. Box 192 Colchester, CT 06415 Phone: (800) 404-7770 or (860) 537-5537 e-mail: scottlaw@scott-scott.com NOAH EDUCATION: Dyer & Berens Files Securities Fraud Litigation --------------------------------------------------------------- DENVER, Nov. 13, 2008 -- Dyer & Berens LLP today announced that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of certain investors of Noah Education Holdings, Ltd. ("Noah Education" or the "Company") (NYSE:NED) who purchased the American Depositary Shares ("ADSs") of Noah Education in or traceable to the Company's initial public offering on or about October 19, 2007 (the "IPO") to November 19, 2007. The complaint charges Noah Education and the lead underwriters for the IPO with violations of the federal securities laws. The class action complaint alleges that the public filings made in connection with the IPO were false and misleading and failed to disclose to the market certain material facts about the Company's business operations and financial performance. According to the complaint, the defendants were responsible for the content and dissemination of these public filings, which positively described the Company's business and its abilities in managing raw materials supplies. Contrary to these statements, by the time of the IPO, Noah Education had completed its first fiscal quarter and the Company was already experiencing an increase in raw materials costs which had negatively impacted its earnings. As a result of these alleged omissions, the ADSs offered in connection with the IPO were artificially inflated and allowed the Company to raise more than $137 million. On November 19, 2007, Noah Education revealed to the public that its gross profit margins had dramatically declined due to an increase in the purchasing cost of certain raw material components. In response to this disclosure, the price of Noah Education ADSs declined substantially from $12.46 per ADS to $6.72 per ADS. Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of certain purchasers of Noah Education ADSs pursuant and/or traceable to the IPO. For more details, contact: Jeffrey A. Berens, Esq. (jeff@dyerberens.com) 682 Grant Street Denver, CO 80203 Dyer & Berens LLP (888) 300-3362 (303) 861-1764 Web site: http://www.DyerBerens.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 research, 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 S. Senorin, Stephanie T. Umacob, Gracele D. Canilao, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 2008. 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 * * *