CAR_Public/990309.MBX              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

               Tuesday, March 9, 1999, Vol. 1, No. 23

                           Headlines

AGRIBIOTECH, INC.: Wechsler Harwood Files Complaint in New Mexico
ALABAMA POWER: Power Company Appealing Appliance Warranty Suit
ALLIED PILOT: Stranded Passengers File Complaint in Fort Worth
AMERICA WEST: Milberg Weiss Files Complaint in Arizona
AMERICAN MANUFACTURERS: Independent Insurers Praise S.Ct. Ruling

ATLANTA MARRIOTT: Motion to Dismiss Partners' Suit Now Pending
BOEING CO.: Settles Race Suits for $15MM, Admitting No Liability
CELL PATHWAYS: Cohen Milstein Files Complaint in Pennsylvania
DATASTREAM SYSTEMS: Cauley Firm Files Complaint in South Carolina
E.I. DUPONT: Begins to Settle Claims from 1995 Acid Spill

ELI LILLY: Jury Empaneled in Forsyth Prozac Trial
ENGINEERING ANIMATION: Disputes Shareholder Class Action Suits
ERLY INDUSTRIES: Schatz & Nobel File Complaint in Texas
GENCOR INDUSTRIES: Bashian Firm Files Complaint in Florida
GREEN TREE: Continues to Deny & Defend Shareholder Complaints

INDIAN TRUST: Class Action Suit Filed Against Babbitt & Rubin
IRVINE APARTMENT: Shareholder Acquisition-Related Suits Continue
LTV CORP.: Retirees' Class Action Suit Dismissed
LYCOS, INC.: Berman DeValerio Files Complaint in Massachusetts
LYCOS, INC.: Wechsler Harwood Files Complaint in Massachusetts

MARCOS FAMILY: Philippine Tax Authority Seizing Swiss Accounts
MBNA AMERICA: Can't Predict Effect of Customer Suits on New Paper
ORBIT INTERNATIONAL: Takes $500,000 Charge for USA Classic Suit
PT-1 COMMUNICATIONS: $300,000 Settlement Fund Goes to US Treasury
RASTER GRAPHICS: Announces Settlement of Class Action Lawsuits

SNYDER OIL: Intends to Vigorously Defend Santa Fe Merger Suit
SPYGLASS, INC.: Weinstein Kitchenoff Files Complaint in Illinois
SWISHER INTERNATIONAL: Sues Former Auditors for Negligence
SWISHER INTERNATIONAL: Shareholder Defense Costs Depress Earnings
TOBACCO LITIGATION: Defense Underway in Ohio Labor Union Trial

TOTAL RENAL: Responds to SEC's Comment Letter
TWA FLIGHT 800: House Okays Crash Bill; Senate Not on Board
TWINLAB CORPORATION: Lowey Dannenberg Files Complaint in New York
TWINLAB CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Expands Class Period
XL CAPITAL: Prevails on Motion to Dismiss; Appeal Possible

UNITED COMPANIES: Loses Borrower Lawsuit; Turnaround Underway
Y2K LITIGATION: Information Technology Assoc. Backs Senate Bill

                           *********

AGRIBIOTECH, INC.: Wechsler Harwood Files Complaint in New Mexico
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Wechsler Harwood Halebian & Feffer, LLP, filed, on March 5, 1999,  
in the United States District Court for the District of New
Mexico on behalf of  purchasers of AgriBioTech, Inc. (Nasdaq:
ABTX) securities during the period September 24, 1997 through
January 22, 1999.

The Complaint charges AgriBioTech, certain of its officers and
directors, and its auditors KPMG Peat Marwick LLP, with violating
the federal securities laws.  The plaintiff claims that
defendants misrepresented and concealed material facts concerning
the Company's financial status and its efforts and plans to sell
the Company.


ALABAMA POWER: Power Company Appealing Appliance Warranty Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama Power Company and its parent, The Southern Company,
remind investors that, in 1996, a class action complaint was
filed against Alabama Power charging fraud and non-compliance
with regulatory statutes relating to the offer, sale, and
financing of "extended service contracts" in connection with the
sale of electric appliances. The plaintiffs seek damages in an
unspecified amount.  Alabama Power has offered extended service
agreements to its customers since January 1984, and approximately
175,000 extended service agreements could be involved in these
proceedings.  The trial court has granted partial summary
judgment in favor of the plaintiffs.  

Alabama Power has appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of
Alabama.  


ALLIED PILOT: Stranded Passengers File Complaint in Fort Worth
--------------------------------------------------------------
Two Fort Worth residents filed a class action lawsuit in Fort
Worth Thursday naming the Allied Pilots Association,  its
officers and several of its directors as defendants.  

Jim and JoEllen Cashion were trying to get to Miami to see his
sister before her scheduled surgery for cancer when their trip
was curtailed because of the American Airlines pilots sick-out
last month.

The sick-out was precipitated by American Airlines acquisition of
Reno Air, and the Allied Pilots dissatisfaction with American's
integration of 300 Reno pilots into the American system.

The lawsuit seeks at least a fifty percent refund of the cost of
American tickets for all passengers affected by the sick-out.
According to the Cashions' attorney, the damages **alleged**
could easily exceed $100,000,000.

While at least two other lawsuits have been filed by passengers
over the sick-out, this is the first known lawsuit to seek a
ticket refund from the Allied Pilots for all those affected by
the sick-out.  

According to the lawsuit, Allied Pilots set up a phone bank
between February 7, 1999 and February 10, 1999 to call American
Airlines pilots and encourage them to call in sick.  E-mail was
also sent to the American Airlines pilots suggesting that they
were "all feeling ill" and "a great deal of stress" because of
American Airlines handling of the Reno acquisition.  E-mail
messages then told the pilots that they were considered "sick" if
they were "sickened by strong emotion" or "lacking vigor" and
reminded the pilots that federal law prohibited them from flying
"if you are 'sick'."  The lawsuit alleges that the feigned sick-
out was part of a conspiracy to intentionally interfere with
American passengers' contractual rights with American Airlines.

"In pursuit of their own personal economic concerns, the pilots
completely disregarded the effect that their actions would have
on the lives of thousands of innocent people," said John
Malesovas, the Cashions' attorney.  "They knew that their actions
were wrong, yet they continued, despite a court order directing
them to stop.  "I am hopeful that the Allied Pilots will
recognize the errors in their ways and agree to do what's right
to attempt to rectify the situation, but given their actions to
date, I expect nothing less than continued denial of their  
responsibility for severely disrupting the lives of thousands,"
said Malesovas.


AMERICA WEST: Milberg Weiss Files Complaint in Arizona
------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss today announced that a class action has been
commenced in the United States District Court for the District of
Arizona on behalf of purchasers of America West Holdings Corp.
(NYSE:AWA) publicly traded Class B common stock during the  
period between November 19, 1997 and September 3, 1998.

The complaint charges America West and certain of its officers,
directors and its controlling shareholders with violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The complaint alleges that by
issuing false statements about America West's supposed
competitive advantages due to its exceptionally low operating  
costs, industry-leading aircraft utilization rates, cost-savings
outsourced  aircraft maintenance procedures, improving financial
results, record earnings per share and prospects for continued
EPS growth, and using $99 million of America West's cash to
repurchase 4.8 million shares of the Company's stock  on the open
market, defendants artificially inflated America West's stock to
a  Class Period and all-time high of $31-5/16 on 4/21/98. This
enabled America  West's insiders to sell 2.4 million shares of
their publicly traded America  West stock, 97% of the publicly
traded stock they owned, in just 90 days, i.e.,  between 4/23/98
and 7/24/98, for $67.8 million in proceeds. In late 6/98, when  
it became public that America West was under increased
surveillance by the Federal Aviation Administration, America West
assured investors this was "routine" and the FAA had discovered
no "significant maintenance or operational problems."  As a
result, America West's stock continued to perform well, trading
as high as $30 in early 7/98.

However, on 9/3/98, America West suddenly revealed that, due to
major operational disruptions resulting from serious maintenance
problems, its 3rdQ and 4thQ 98 EPS would be well below levels
previously forecast and that America West had to incur millions
of dollars in additional costs to purchase more spare planes and
spare parts, to build nine additional "overnight" maintenance  
facilities and hire hundreds of additional aircraft mechanics,
even offering to rehire the 375 aircraft mechanics America West
had fired in 12/95 as part of an attempt to lower its operating
costs. America West's stock declined by 31% from $20-5/16 on
9/2/98 to $14, on volume of almost 2.6 million shares, the
largest one-day stock price decline on the largest one-day
trading volume in America West's history.


AMERICAN MANUFACTURERS: Independent Insurers Praise S.Ct. Ruling
----------------------------------------------------------------
The National Association of Independent Insurers (NAII), an
organization representing 615 property-casualty companies  
countrywide, praised the U.S. Supreme Court's judgment released  
Wednesday reversing a lower court decision in the controversial
American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Company vs. Sullivan
(U.S. No. 97-2000) workers' compensation case, due to its
potential broad negative impact.

"We are pleased that the Court agreed that a private insurer's
decision to withhold payment and seek utilization review of the
reasonableness and necessity of particular medical treatments is
not state action and does not subject the insurer to the
Fourteenth Amendment's constraints," Nancy Schroeder, NAII's
assistant vice president of workers compensation, said today.
"The main reason the provider would not continue treatment is
that they may have some doubt about its effectiveness and whether
it would withstand review.  And the Pennsylvania law requires
insurers to pay a 10% annual interest on any claim that the
utilization review process upholds."

In this case several Pennsylvania workers filed a lawsuit against
workers' compensation insurers and state agencies claiming that
under a provision in the 1993 state workers compensation reform
legislation they were being unconstitutionally denied medical
benefits because insurers were permitted to suspend payments to
providers during a review of questionable claims and treatments.  
Also, the plaintiffs claimed that private insurers were working
as "state actors" when administering workers compensation claims
and should be subject to the constitutional due process
requirements of notice and an opportunity to air their
grievances.

The Third U.S. Circuit of Appeals sided with the plaintiffs and
ruled in April 1998, that insurers could not withhold payment of
disputed workers' compensation medical payments during
utilization review because they are an arm of the state.  The
Third Circuit's decision stated that because private insurers
perform a public function, the paying of workers compensation  
benefits, they become an arm of the state in implementing
legislation that administers constitutionally protected
entitlements which the Commonwealth (Pennsylvania) has enacted as
a matter of policy.

"If the court had upheld the Third Circuit Court decision it
would have had wide-reaching negative effects," Schroeder
continued.  "Not only would the millions of dollars businesses
have saved in Pennsylvania due in part to this provision be in
jeopardy, but it could have resulted in private insurance  
companies becoming subject to due process and equal protection
requirements in other states and other parts of their businesses.

"If the Third Circuit's decision had been upheld, it could have
opened the gates for litigation against private insurers in other
areas such as in the area of auto insurance," Schroeder said.
"And it would have generated similar suits concerning payment of
workers' compensation medical and indemnity benefits in other
states."

The NAII, founded in 1945, is the nation's largest full-service
property-casualty trade group representing 619 insurers across
the country.


ATLANTA MARRIOTT: Motion to Dismiss Partners' Suit Now Pending
--------------------------------------------------------------
On December 12, 1997 in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Georgia (the "Georgia Federal Court") and on
January 5, 1998 in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware
(the "Delaware Chancery Court"), certain limited partners of
Atlanta Marriott II Marquis Limited Partnership ("AMM II"), the
transferor of the real property interest in the Atlanta Marriott
Hotel Property to HMA Realty Limited Partnership (the "Atlanta
Marriott Borrower"), filed two purported class action and
derivative lawsuits.  These lawsuits were filed in connection
with the merger of Atlanta Marriott Marquis Limited Partnership
("AMM I") with and into AMM II (the "Merger"), and they allege,
among other things, that the defendants (which do not include the
Atlanta Marriott Borrower) violated their fiduciary duties in
connection with the Merger and that the defendants breached the
AMM I partnership agreement by agreeing to transfer the Atlanta
Marriott Hotel Property for inadequate consideration and by
agreeing to terminate the ground lease, which action plaintiffs
allege will deprive them of their sole source of distributions.
Such lawsuits seek, among other things, monetary damages,
rescission of the Merger and rescission of all transactions
consummated in connection with the Merger, including rescission
of the transfer of the land to the Atlanta Marriott Borrower and
the termination of the ground lease.  Although the complaints
could be amended, there are no allegations that the Atlanta
Marriott Hotel Loan is unfair or its terms improper.  

Asset Securitization Corp., in its prospectus filed with the SEC
on Form 424B5, suggests that, if a court were to rescind the
transfer of the land and reinstate the ground lease, the land
would be transferred to AMM II (or a recreated AMM I) and would
be subject to the reinstated ground lease to Ivy Street Hotel
Limited Partnership ("Ivy Street").  If this were to occur, ASC
continues, its lien on both the fee and leasehold interests most
likely would not be impaired.


BOEING CO.: Settles Race Suits for $15MM, Admitting No Liability
----------------------------------------------------------------
As previously reported, aerospace giant Boeing Co. announced
plans to pay $15 million to settle two class-action lawsuits
alleging discrimination against black workers.  The proposed
settlement was announced at a joint news conference by Boeing
Chairman Phil Condit, black civil-rights activist Jesse Jackson
and attorneys for the plaintiffs.  Under the proposed consent
decree, the settlement would be distributed among Boeing's 20,000
current and former black workers.  The aerospace giant employs
more than 225,000 people worldwide.  Boeing admits no liability
under the settlement.

Providing additional details, Florida Today reports that workers
will have until April 23 to file a claim or opt out of the
settlement.  Under terms of the settlement, which has yet to be
approved by a Seattle U.S. District Court, Boeing will set aside
about $15 million to settle these issues, with $7.3 million going
to those eligible.  Nearly $4 million will go to their lawyers,
while another $3.65 million will pay for improvements in Boeing
training and career advancement opportunities for all workers.

Seattle attorney Oscar Desper III, representing the plaintiffs,
tells Florida Today that anyone seeking a cash payment under
terms of the settlement needs to file a claim and prove they were
discriminated against, or passed over for promotion, because of  
their race.  "If they didn't apply for a promotion at that time,
it would be hard to prove," he said.  In addition, "They would
have to show that they had superior qualifications to the person
that received it."  The time frame for the settlement varies from
one to six years according to the statute of limitations for each
state.  Current and former Boeing employees  now living in
Florida who worked for the aerospace giant between June 6, 1994,  
and Jan. 25 of this year may be eligible for a monetary award.

Desper said about 233 of the estimated 20,000 current and former
Boeing African-American employees are eligible for a check under
the settlement have been identified so far.  These 233
individuals, who already were involved in litigation with Boeing,
will divide up to $3.77 million, with payments ranging between
$10,000 and $50,000 each.  Surplus funds will be returned to
Boeing.  Another $3.53 million is being set aside for remaining
workers who feel they qualify for cash under the settlement.
These people have until April 23 to either file a claim form; opt
out of the settlement and preserve their right to sue separately;
file an objection to the settlement; or do nothing and forfeit  
their right to sue on similar grounds covering the period
in question.  Those filing valid claims will divide the remaining
$3.53 million, if the court approves the settlement.  On that
approval, "Boeing will be absolved of past liability under terms
of the settlement," said Peter Conte, a Boeing spokesman in
Seattle.

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Seattle will
hear objections to the proposed settlement May 26.  Only
objections filed on or before April 23 will be considered. If the
court does not approve the agreement, the lawsuits against Boeing
are expected to proceed.


CELL PATHWAYS: Cohen Milstein Files Complaint in Pennsylvania
-------------------------------------------------------------
Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C., on behalf of its
client, filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on behalf of purchasers of
the common stock of Cell Pathways, Ins. (Nasdaq:CLPA) during the
period between November 11, 1998 through February 2, 1998
inclusive.

The complaint charges Cell Pathways, Inc. and certain officers of
the  Company during the relevant time period with violations of
Sections 10(b) and  20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The complaint alleges that defendants issued a series of
materially false and misleading statements regarding the efficacy
and near-term commercialization of the Company's cancer treatment
drug, PREVATAC(TM) (exisulind).


DATASTREAM SYSTEMS: Cauley Firm Files Complaint in South Carolina
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Steven E. Cauley, P.A. announced that a class
action has been filed in United States District Court, District
of South Carolina on behalf of all purchasers of Datastream
Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq:DSTM) common stock during the period April
1, 1998 to Oct. 20, 1998.

The complaint charges that Datastream and certain of its officers
and directors violated the federal securities laws, alleging that
defendants improperly inflated earnings from operations by
utilizing accounting treatments not in conformity with generally
accepted accounting practices.  As a result, the complaint
alleges that the price of Datastream common stock was
artificially inflated during the Class Period and when Datastream
surprised investors by issuing a press release on October 20,
1998 announcing disappointing earnings for the third quarter of
1998, Datastream stock collapsed $4-1/8 or 29%, to $10  per
share.


E.I. DUPONT: Begins to Settle Claims from 1995 Acid Spill
----------------------------------------------------------------
More than 3 1/2 years after an acid leak, the owner of a
Wurtland, Kentucky, chemical plant has settled with the first of
more than 250 people who claim in lawsuits to have health
problems related to the spill, according to a report appearing in
the Cincinnati Enquirier.  

Attorneys for E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., the plant's owner,
have contested the gravity of the leak-related injuries.  The
chemical giant, however, settled a suit last week with Jackie
Powell, a 41-year-old Worthington, Ky., woman who said her eyes,
nose, throat, larynx, esophagus and respiratory system were
injured in the aftermath of the leak.  Ms. Powell's doctors were
ready to testify that the acid leak had caused permanent
injuries.  DuPont argued her health problems were caused by a
viral  infection and that she had never come in contact with the
leak.

Terms of the agreement, which was reached Feb. 22 on the trial's
first day in federal court in Frankfort, are confidential.

"We're not unwilling to settle these cases. It's just a matter of
finding out what they're worth," said Robert C. Ewald, a
Louisville lawyer who represents the Delaware corporation.

This was the first of the sulfuric acid personal-injury cases to
go to trial in federal court, Mr. Ewald said.

About 23,800 gallons of sulfuric acid leaked out of a pipe during
the Aug. 20, 1995, incident, the Enquirer recalls.  The acid
combined with oxygen to create a cloud that caused more than
1,300 people to move leave their homes for shelters.  Greenup
County Disaster and Emergency Service records show 70 to 100
people were treated at area hospitals. Hundreds of automobiles
also needed new paint jobs.  State officials cited DuPont for the
leak -- and for waiting more than four hours to promptly notify
state environmental officials about the leak.  An investigation
showed the leak occurred after a gray cast-iron pipe broke.  The
pipe was supposed to have been made of steel -- a far sturdier
substance.  DuPont has since changed the piping to steel and
blames a contractor for the mistake.

Court records show more than 250 people have filed federal
lawsuits individually or as part of a class action proceeding
against DuPont.   Grayson lawyer William H. Wilhoit filed a class
action suit naming 200 local residents who he says were either
injured or now have a higher risk of future health problems
because of the leak.

The company contends, however, that all the health problems
caused by the leak were temporary. "Based upon the amount of
chemicals that were released, we don't believe at this time that
there have been any permanent injuries," Mr. Ewald said.


ELI LILLY: Jury Empaneled in Forsyth Prozac Trial
-------------------------------------------------
After an exhaustive selection process, which included personal
14-page questionnaires from eighty-two potential jurors, a  
seven-man, five-woman jury was selected in federal court in
Honolulu late last week to try the case of Susan and Bill Forsyth
v. Eli Lilly & Co.  The case involves the March 4, 1993, deaths
of June Forsyth and Bill Forsyth, Sr.

Federal Judge Alan C. Kay told the jurors that they were the
"cornerstone of our system of justice" empowered to "speak as the
conscience of our community."   He said that their task was to
"ferret out the truth" and "do justice."  The judge further
explained that sometimes this means that jurors must "resolve the  
most complex of scientific, medical and financial issues" and
"the most emotional and controversial issues of our day."

Forsyth lead trial counsel, Andy Vickery of Vickery & Waldner
LLP, Houston, Texas and co-counsel Karen Barth of Baum, Hedlund,
Aristei, Guilford & Downey PC, Los Angeles, California, said from
Honolulu, that they were very pleased with the jury selection
process and confident that the twelve jurors chosen would listen
carefully to evidence and "sort the wheat from the chaff."

For detailed information concerning the plaintiffs allegations
against Eli Lilly see http://justiceseekers.com/prozacinfo.htmto  
view a copy of the complaint for the Christian case which
allegations against Eli Lilly are identical to those of the
Forsyths'.  Frequent trial updates will be posted at
http://bhagd.comby the law firm of Baum, Hedlund, Aristei,  
Guilford & Downey.


ENGINEERING ANIMATION: Disputes Shareholder Class Action Suits
--------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering Animation, Inc., says in its latest annual report
filed with the SEC that it has "learned that complaints
purporting to be class action lawsuits on behalf of shareholders
who purchased EAI common stock between February 19, 1998 and
February 17, 1999 were filed in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Iowa against us and certain of our
executive officers.  The complaints allege various violations of
federal securities laws and seek unspecified damages.  Based upon
the information set forth in the complaints, the outcome of these
matters are currently not determinable.  We believe that the
allegations are totally without merit and intend to oppose the
actions vigorously."


ERLY INDUSTRIES: Schatz & Nobel File Complaint in Texas
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit was commenced on February 18, 1999 in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas,  
Civil Action No. H-99-0535, on behalf of all purchasers of
Erly Industries Inc. (NASDAQ:ERLY) (NASDAQ:ERLYE) common stock
from  November 14, 1996 to September 28, 1998, inclusive.  The
Plaintiffs are represented by the law firms of Schatz & Nobel,
P.C. and Weiss & Yourman, P.C.

The Complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, certain of
Erly's former officers and directors violated Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by, among other
things,  intentionally and/or recklessly issuing material
misrepresentations concerning  (i) the financial condition of
Erly, (ii) the nature and extent of litigation  against Erly,
(iii) the effect on Erly and its business of the termination of  
an agreement with a rice processor in Saudi Arabia and (iv)
related party  transactions. Some of these claims are also
asserted against Deloitte & Touche LLP, Erly's outside auditor.
The Complaint further alleges that the price of Erly common stock
was artificially inflated throughout the Class Period as a  
result of these misrepresentations, and that the individual
Defendants used inside information to sell significant amounts of
their own personal Erly holdings for significant proceeds.
Plaintiffs seek to recover damages on behalf of all class
members.


GENCOR INDUSTRIES: Bashian Firm Files Complaint in Florida
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit was filed by the Law Offices of James V.
Bashian, P.C. in the United States District Court for the Middle
District of Florida on behalf of purchasers of Gencor Industries,
Inc. (Amex: GX) common stock between February 5, 1998 and January
28, 1999.

On February 22, 1999, the American Stock Exchange  halted trading
in Gencor stock pending completion of the restatement and re-
audit of Gencor's financial statements for fiscal year 1998.
Gencor stock has  not yet resumed trading.

The complaint charges Gencor and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of Sections 10(b), 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder.  Among other things, plaintiff claims
that the defendants issued materially false and misleading
statements  regarding the company's true financial condition and
operating performance.


GREEN TREE: Continues to Deny & Defend Shareholder Complaints
-------------------------------------------------------------
Green Tree Financial Corp. tells investors that it has been
served with various lawsuits in the United States District Court
for the District of Minnesota.  These lawsuits were filed by
certain stockholders as purported class actions on behalf of
persons or entities who purchased common stock of the Company
during the alleged class periods.  In addition to the Company,
certain current and former officers and directors of the Company
are named as defendants in one or more of the lawsuits.  The
Company and the other defendants intend to seek consolidation
of each of the lawsuits in the United States District Court for
the District of Minnesota. Plaintiffs in the lawsuits assert
claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934.  In each case, plaintiffs allege that the Company
and the other defendants violated federal securities laws by,
among other things, making false and misleading statements about
the current state and future prospects of the Company
(particularly with respect to prepayment assumptions and
performance of certain of the Company's loan portfolios) which
allegedly rendered the Company's financial statements false
and misleading.  The Company believes that the lawsuits are
without merit and intends to defend such lawsuits vigorously.


INDIAN TRUST: Class Action Suit Filed Against Babbitt & Rubin
-------------------------------------------------------------
After being held in contempt of court by a federal judge for
failing to cooperate in discovery proceedings, see CAR 25-Feb-
1999, United Press International reports that a class-action suit
was filed last week in Rapid City, South Dakota, against Interior
Secretary Bruce Babbitt and Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin.  The
two Clinton Administration cabinet members aare accused of mis-
managing funds in the Nation's multi-billion-dollar Indian Trust
Fund.  On Wednesday, Babbitt appeared before a Congressional
committee under a threat of subpoena.  


IRVINE APARTMENT: Shareholder Acquisition-Related Suits Continue
----------------------------------------------------------------
Shortly after the public announcement of TIC Acquisition LLC's
offer to acquire the outstanding publicly held shares of the
Company, certain lawsuits were initiated by shareholders of
IRVINE APARTMENT COMMUNITIES, INC., against The Irvine Company,
TIC Acquisition LLC, the Company and the Company's Directors
alleging, among other things, that the price offered by TIC
Acquisition LLC for the shares held by the public shareholders of
the Company was inadequate, that the Directors failed to take
adequate steps to obtain the highest possible price for the
public shareholders of the Company and that negotiations were not
conducted at arm's-length.  As of February 16, 1999, four
purported class actions relating to this acquisition offer had
been served; each of these actions was filed in the Superior
Court of California, Orange County, on behalf of a plaintiff
shareholder of the Company and a purported class of all public
shareholders of the Company.  These lawsuits seek injunctive
relief and unspecified money damages.

On December 29, 1998, the four pending actions and all actions
subsequently filed in, removed to, or transferred to the Superior
Court of California for Orange County were consolidated.

All of the Company defendants intend vigorously to defend against
plaintiffs' claims.  IRVINE APARTMENT COMMUNITIES, INC., tells
investors that the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome cannot be
predicted at this time.


LTV CORP.: Retirees' Class Action Suit Dismissed
------------------------------------------------
In its latest annual report filed on Form 10-K405 with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, LTV CORP. advises that, in
January 1999, the Illinois Circuit Court (Tenth Judicial Circuit)
dismissed the purported class action filed on behalf of retirees
described in the Company's Report on Form 10-Q for the Second
Quarter of 1998 after the Company sent the notice to retirees
sought by plaintiffs and offered to such retirees the requested
retiree benefits.  In connection with the dismissal, the Company
agreed to pay plaintiffs' attorneys fees.


LYCOS, INC.: Berman DeValerio Files Complaint in Massachusetts
--------------------------------------------------------------
A lawsuit filed by Berman DeValerio & Pease, LLP, charges Lycos,
Inc. (Nasdaq: LCOS) with misleading investors with respect to its
acquisition by USA Networks, Inc.   The case was filed as a class
action in the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts on March 3, 1999 on behalf of all persons and  
entities who purchased the common stock of Lycos during the
period January 8,  1999 through and including February 9, 1999,
and who suffered losses on their investments.

The action charges that Lycos and its President/CEO Robert J.
Davis issued materially false and misleading financial statements
during the Class Period.  In particular, it is charged that Mr.
Davis repeatedly stated that Lycos intended to remain an
independent company despite that active, but undisclosed,
negotiations were ongoing with USA Networks and its intent to
acquire Lycos.  When Lycos revealed that it would be acquired by
USA Networks, its stock price plunged 31% in reaction to the
acquisition.


LYCOS, INC.: Wechsler Harwood Files Complaint in Massachusetts
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wechsler Harwood Halebian & Feffer, LLP, announce that it
commenced a class action lawsuit on March 4, 1999, in the United
States District Court for the District of Massachusetts on behalf  
of all persons and/or entities that purchased the common stock of
Lycos, Inc. (NASDAQ: LCOS), between January 25, 1999 and
February 9, 1999, inclusive.

The complaint charges Lycos with violations of Section 10(b), and
Robert C. Davis, its Chief Executive Officer, with violations of
Sections 10(b) and 20(a), of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.  Among other
things, plaintiff claims that defendants issued materially false
and misleading statements and failed to disclose  material
information regarding Lycos' plans to merge with USA Networks,
Inc.  The complaint charges that Davis misled investors when he
represented that Lycos was committed to an independent strategy
for the Company.  When Lycos announced the merger with USA
Networks, the price of Lycos common stock dropped  from $127-1/4
per share to $94-1/4 per share, causing investors enormous  
damages.


MARCOS FAMILY: Philippine Tax Authority Seizing Swiss Accounts
--------------------------------------------------------------
>From Manila, the Associated Press reports that the Philippine tax
agency will seize $590 million in Swiss bank accounts held by the
late President Ferdinand Marcos, according to an official
interviewed Friday.  The Philippine National Bank has held the
money in escrow since it was transferred by order of Swiss
courts. The courts said the money could only be released to the
Philippine government once it was proved to be part of Marcos'  
ill-gotten wealth and human rights victims were compensated.

The Philippine Supreme Court made public this week a Jan. 13
ruling ordering the Marcos family to pay a $602 million
inheritance tax.

"We have a legal right over the money because we believe it forms
part of the Marcos estate and assets," said Osias Baldovino,
chief of the prosecution division of the Bureau of Internal
Revenue.

Marcos died in exile in Hawaii after fleeing a civilian-backed
military uprising in 1986.  President Joseph Estrada has
estimated that Marcos' wealth exceeded $10 billion and might be
as high as $15 billion.  Only a fraction of Marcos' wealth has
been recovered after 12 years of litigation.

As previously reported, some $150 million of the Swiss money is
supposed to go to 9,539 Filipinos who won a class-action suit
against the estate in U.S. District Court in Hawaii for torture,
killings and the disappearance of dissidents during Marcos' rule.

Marcos' daughter, Imelda "Imee" Marcos-Manotoc, asserts that the
inheritance tax was excessive, adding that her family was unaware
how much wealth her father actually left behind.


MBNA AMERICA: Can't Predict Effect of Customer Suits on New Paper
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In May 1996, Andrew B. Spark filed a lawsuit against MBNA AMERICA
BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, MBNA and certain of its officers and
its subsidiary, MBNA Marketing Systems, Inc.  The case is pending
in the United States District Court for the District of
Delaware.  This suit is a purported class action.  The plaintiff
alleges that MBNA's advertising of its cash promotional annual
percentage rate program was fraudulent and deceptive.  The
plaintiff seeks unspecified damages including actual, treble and
punitive damages and attorney's fees for an alleged breach of
contract, violation of the Delaware Deceptive Trade Practices Act
and the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
Act.  In February 1998, a class was certified.  

In October 1998, Gerald D. Broder filed a lawsuit against MBNA
Corporation and MBNA in the Supreme Court of the State of New
York, County of New York.  This suit is a purported class action.
The plaintiff alleges that MBNA's advertising of its cash
promotional annual percentage rate program was fraudulent and
deceptive.  The plaintiff seeks unspecified damages including
actual, treble and punitive damages and attorneys fees for an
alleged breach of contract, common law fraud and violation of New
York consumer protection statutes.  MBNA Corporation believes
that its advertising practices are proper under applicable
federal and state law and intends to defend these actions
vigorously.

"It is not clear at this point in time what effect, if any, these
cases will have with respect to the Certificateholders'
interests," MBNA says in a Prospectus filed last week in
connection with the issuance of certain asset-backed securities.


ORBIT INTERNATIONAL: Takes $500,000 Charge for USA Classic Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Orbit International Corp. (NASDAQ: ORBT) announced results for
the year ended December 31, 1998. On net sales were $16,351,000,
Orbit posted $1,881,000 in net income.  Annual earnings were
depressed by $500,000 on account of a charge recorded in
connection with the resolution of the USA Classic class action
securities litigation.  


PT-1 COMMUNICATIONS: $300,000 Settlement Fund Goes to US Treasury
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Northern New Jersey Record reports that a company whose low-
priced, prepaid telephone cards are widely sold in North Jersey
has agreed to pay $300,000 to settle federal charges that it  
deceived consumers by imposing secret fees.  The Federal Trade
Commission accused PT-1 Communications Inc. of New York City of
failing to disclose a 19-cents-a-call "connect" fee and a monthly
25-cent maintenance fee.  The company promoted its card as being
the "lowest international rate card," and claimed that calls
within the United States were only "19 cents a minute."  With the
added fees, the card was no longer such a bargain, and the cost  
for short-term calls was as high as, or higher than, that of
cards issued by better-known companies such as AT&T or MCI.

As part of the settlement, which was announced Thursday, PT-1 is
required to disclose all charges, and would be prohibited from
charging more than the advertised rate.   PT-1 agreed to the
settlement without admitting any violations.

Because it is impossible to identify victims of the overcharging,
the $300,000 will go to the U.S. Treasury, said Ann Weintraub, an
attorney in the FTC's New York office.  "I wish there was a way
to get the money back to consumers, but there was no way to do
that in this case," Weintraub said.  "There are far too many
people out there."  

The FTC said that the PT-1 Card was sold at newsstands, grocery
stores, pharmacies, and convenience stores throughout the United
States in $5, $10, and $25 denominations.  The card is also
marketed on the Internet, the FTC said.

The settlement was filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York on Feb. 25.


RASTER GRAPHICS: Announces Settlement of Class Action Lawsuits
--------------------------------------------------------------
Raster Graphics (Pink Sheets: RGFX) announced the final judicial
approval of the settlement of certain class action lawsuits,
which were pending against the Company since March 1998.  The
lawsuits alleged that the Company and several of its officers  
and directors violated federal securities laws. Judicial approval
of the settlement of these lawsuits is a condition to the
proposed merger between Raster Graphics and Gretag Imaging Group,
Inc., a leading provider of imaging and photofinishing equipment.

The Final Judgement and Order of Dismissal was granted by the
United States District Court in the Northern District of
California on February 19, 1999.  Under the terms of the
settlement, the plaintiffs have received $4.5 million, of which
Raster Graphics paid $850,000; the remaining $3.65 million
has been paid by the Company's insurance carrier.  These sums had
been previously placed in an escrow account pending approval of
the settlement.

The settlement of these lawsuits was a condition to the
consummation of the merger between Raster Graphics and Gretag
Imaging, announced on October 6, 1998.  


SNYDER OIL: Intends to Vigorously Defend Santa Fe Merger Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
On January 15,  1999,  a SNYDER OIL CORP. stockholder filed a
putative class action complaint in the Delaware Court of
Chancery, No. 16900-NC,  seeking to enjoin the merger of the
Company into Santa Fe Energy Resources, Inc. ("Santa Fe")  on the  
proposed  terms  and  seeking  damages.  Defendants  named  in
the complaint  are the Company,  each of its  directors  and
Santa Fe.  The plaintiff alleges numerous  breaches of the duties
of care and loyalty owed by the Company and its  directors to the
purported  class in connection  with entering into the merger  
agreement  with Santa Fe.  The  plaintiff  further  alleges that
Santa Fe aided and abetted the Company and its  directors  in
their  alleged  breaches of fiduciary duty. The defendants
believe the complaint is without merit and intend to vigorously
defend the action.


SPYGLASS, INC.: Weinstein Kitchenoff Files Complaint in Illinois
----------------------------------------------------------------
Weinstein Kitchenoff Scarlato & Goldman Ltd. announces that a
class action lawsuit has been commenced on behalf of purchasers
of the common stock of Spyglass, Inc. (Nasdaq: SPYG),  between
October 20, 1998 and January 4, 1999.

The lawsuit has been commenced in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Illinois.  It charges Spyglass
and certain of its officers and directors with violating the
federal securities laws by misrepresenting and/or failing to
disclose material information about the Company's operations and
financial condition.  It alleges that the violations of law
caused the price of Spyglass stock to be artificially inflated
during the Class Period, and when defendants finally disclosed
that Spyglass' earnings would be  materially impacted because
certain contracts would not be signed, the stock dropped from $22
to $14.50 in a single day.  Prior to the announcement, however,
certain officers and directors of the Company sold more than
500,000 shares of their own stock, netting proceeds in excess of
$9.1 million.


SWISHER INTERNATIONAL: Sues Former Auditors for Negligence
----------------------------------------------------------
On September 18, 1998, Brian Cox, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, filed a class action law suit
(Case No. 3:98 CV403-MU) in the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of North Carolina, Charlotte Division, against
the Company and certain current or former officers and directors
of SWISHER INTERNATIONAL including Patrick L. Swisher, W. Tom
Reeder III, D. Chris Lazenby, Garnet R. Mucha and Charles H.
Cendrowski.  The Lawsuit was amended by the Plaintiffs on
February 19, 1999 to, among other things, add the Company's
former independent auditors, McGladrey & Pullen LLP, as a
defendant.  The Lawsuit, as amended, alleges violations of
Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
against the Company and the Individual Defendants and violations
of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act against the Individual
Defendants.  The Plaintiffs are seeking damages for the alleged
violations, attorneys fees in connection with their prosecution
of the Lawsuit and such other relief as a court may deem just and
proper.

The facts alleged by the Plaintiffs are substantially similar to
the matters that are asserted by the Company's former auditors in
their February 20, 1998 withdrawal letter, filed by the Company
on or about February 27, 1998 as an exhibit to a Current Report
on Form 8-K.

The Company intends to vigorously defend the litigation, and to
deny the occurrence and/or materiality of the events alleged
in the complaint.  Attorneys for the Company are still in the
preliminary investigation of the circumstances surrounding the
litigation and cannot determine the likelihood of any outcome
that would be material to the Company, or the magnitude of any
gain or loss arising from the litigation.  The Company has  
obtained an extension of time to respond to the Plaintiffs.

On February 17, 1999, the Company filed an action directly
against its former independent accountants, McGladrey & Pullen
LLP (Civil Action No. 3:99CV56-MU), alleging, among other things,
McGladrey & Pullen's negligence in the conduct of their audits of
the Company's financial statements and in the manner in which
they withdrew from their relationship with the Company.
McGladrey & Pullen has not yet filed a response to this action.


SWISHER INTERNATIONAL: Shareholder Defense Costs Depress Earnings
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Swisher International, the nations leading franchisor of
commercial hygiene services and products, reported a loss of
$2,681,767 for the fiscal year ended October 31, 1998, on total
revenues of $14.9 million.

There were several factors, the Company says, contributing to the
loss for fiscal 1998, many of them stemming from the withdrawal
of the Company's former auditors in February of 1998.  Both the
plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit pending against the
Company, and the Company itself, have filed legal actions against
McGladrey & Pullen LLP, the Company's former auditors.  The
Company had planned on aggressively expanding its Surface Doctor
division and its Pest Control division, which was in its
developmental stage, and were both heavily dependent  on the sale
of initial franchises.  The Company was unable to sell initial  
franchises for a six-month period in 1998 due to the
circumstances set forth above, which created a negative impact on
financial performance during this  period.  The Company also
recorded an increase of $663,000 above fiscal 1997 amounts for
professional (legal & accounting) fees, once again attributable
to  the circumstances set forth above.


TOBACCO LITIGATION: Defense Underway in Ohio Labor Union Trial
--------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs have rested their case in the first phase of a federal
trial of a $2 billion class-action lawsuit filed against the  
nation's major tobacco companies by more than 100 Ohio labor
union health and benefit funds, reports Jeffrey T. Ottenbacher,
providing gavel-to-gavel coverage of the trial from Akron, Ohio,
for United Press International.  The union funds want the jury to
award them compensation for money spent on smoking-related
illnesses suffered by their members.

Opening their defense, the tobacco companies presented Lynn
Beasley, the executive vice president of the R.J. Reynolds
Tobacco Co., for testimony.  Beasley told the jury she was
responsible for developing the "Joe Camel" campaign that started
in 1988 as part of the 75th anniversary of the company Camel
brand of cigarettes.  She said the Joe Camel ad campaign
increased market share in all age groups.  "Universally everyone
loved it. It was fun and irreverent and unique to Camel."  But
she said that of 44 million adult smokers, Reynolds has only 25
percent of the market.  She said the 33 million adults who don't
smoke her firm's products are the only people the company targets
in its advertising.  Beasley said only 2 percent of smokers are
underage and that means it's not economically worthwhile to
pursue that market group.

Before she took the stand, lawyers for the labor union funds
continued to present internal Reynolds documents indicating the
company tracked the smoking habits of the 14- to 17-year-old age
group.  The plaintiffs' lawyers contend Reynolds must have known
teenagers represented a significant market share.  Beasley,
however, said she never saw such data and repeatedly testified
the company never targeted teenagers.

Defense lawyers also called Nicholas Brookes, the CEO and
chairman of the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., a British
American Tobacco Co. subsidiary.  Brookes said his company had
"raised the bar" on voluntary ad restrictions, noting B&W only
uses models over the age of 30 in their ads, while federal  
guidelines call for models older than 25.  

Judge James Gwin directly questioned Brookes after the tobacco
company official failed to answer a question concerning whether
smoking causes serious illnesses, such as cancer.  "Do you
believe smoking causes cancer or not," Judge Gwin asked?  

Brookes replied: "Today, no one can tell us what the critical
link is between smoking and disease. . . .  And if you can't
identify one (cigarette smoke) ingredient as the cause of
smoking-related illnesses, then you can't remove that
ingredient."

The judge then ordered the lawyer representing the tobacco
industry to move on to another question.


TOTAL RENAL: Responds to SEC's Comment Letter
---------------------------------------------
Total Renal Care Holdings, Inc. (NYSE:TRL) confirmed last week
that it has been served with complaints in class action
securities lawsuits naming the Company and  certain  officers and
directors as defendants. The Company has reviewed the complaints  
and believes that the claims stated therein are without merit.
Total Renal Care  intends to vigorously defend itself against the
claims in the lawsuits.

In response to investor inquiries and several inaccurate news
articles, Total Renal Care also reiterated its previous
announcement that it has received a comment letter from the SEC
concerning the registration statement filed with respect to
resales of the Company's outstanding 7% Convertible Subordinated  
Notes.  The SEC reviews many filings under the Securities Act of
1933, such as the registration statement.  Contrary to several
published assertions, such review does not constitute an SEC
"investigation" of the Company.  The Company responded to the
SEC's comment letter on February 16, 1999.  


TWA FLIGHT 800: House Okays Crash Bill; Senate Not on Board
-----------------------------------------------------------
Newsday reports that A bill that would allow families of those
killed in the TWA Flight 800 air disaster to recover more money
from the airline breezed through the House last week but faces
opposition in the Senate, where a similar measure stalled two
years ago.  The bill, which the House passed 412-2, would fix
inequities that limit the legal damages available to survivors
and their families of air disasters that occur over water.

At issue, Newsday explains, is a 1920 maritime law -- the Death
on the High Seas Act -- that governs air accidents that occur
over the ocean.  It restricts surviving families and victims of
such disasters to legal damages equal to the anticipated lost
wages of those killed, an amount that falls far short of the  
more lucrative damages available to families of victims of air
disasters over land.

The bill would allow TWA Flight 800 victims to seek legal damages
for so-called non-economic losses, such as the loss of
companionship, pain and suffering as well as punitive damages.
Unlike victims of land crashes, which  are governed by the
Federal Aviation Act, TWA victims' families could sue only for
loss of expected income because the jet crashed about 10 miles
off Brookhaven's shore in 1996.

The bill was originally authored by former Rep. Joseph McDade (R-
Pa.) to help the families of 16 high school students from
Montoursville, Pa., who were killed in the TWA disaster.  It was
reintroduced this session by McDade's successor, Don Sherwood,
and considered yesterday under expedited procedures reserved for
bills that face little opposition.

It would be retroactive, covering suits against airlines that
were pending when the bill makes it into law.

Still, the bill is expected to encounter problems in the Senate,
where Slade Gorton (R-Wash.), whose district is home to Boeing,
the manufacturer of the TWA jet that exploded off Long Island's
coast, blocked the bill two years ago.  Gorton had voiced concern
about increasing legal liability to businesses.  This year,
Gorton, head of the transportation aviation subcommittee, has  
proposed provisions that would give the Federal Aviation Act
jurisdiction over off-shore plane disasters, but bar punitive
damages and cap awards of other damages at $750,000.  Those
provisions, inserted into the Federal Aviation Administration's
reauthorization bill, is the compromise arranged last year by  
Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), who supported the House bill.

The Death on the High Seas Act was originally drafted to help
widows of merchant mariners who died at sea.  But as the decades
passed, it became clear that plane victims' families could not
seek the same type of compensation open to victims in land
crashes.  The inequity was taken to the U.S Supreme Court by
families of the victims of the Korean Air Lines jet that was shot
down in 1983 by a Soviet pilot when it strayed into Soviet
airspace.  In 1996, Justice Anthony Scalia called the act  
"antiquated," but the court ruled against the families, saying
the act has jurisdiction over incidents in the ocean and
seas.


TWINLAB CORPORATION: Lowey Dannenberg Files Complaint in New York
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Lowey Dannenberg Bemporad & Selinger, P.C., on March 2, 1999,
filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of New York, on behalf of a class of  
purchasers of the common stock of Twinlab Corporation
(NASDAQ:TWLB) during the period from December 1, 1998 through and
including February 24, 1999.  

The suit names as defendants Twinlab, its President and  CEO Ross
Blechman, and its CFO John McCusker for violations of the federal  
securities laws.  This action relates to a more recent time
period than several class actions filed last year concerning
Twinlab, and alleges claims on behalf  of a different class of
Twinlab purchasers than the cases filed last year.

On February 24, 1999, Twinlab announced that it was restating its
interim financial results for the first three quarters of 1998.
Plaintiff alleges that she and other Class Members purchased
stock in Twinlab at artificially inflated prices due to the
improper overstatement of net sales, net income and net  
income per share, and that Twinlab overstated its net sales, net
income and net income per share by improperly recognizing
revenue.  Following the February 24 announcement, the market
price of Twinlab stock fell from $9.50 to $7, losing 26% of its
value in reaction to the news.  Plaintiff brings her claims under  
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.


TWINLAB CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Expands Class Period
-------------------------------------------------------
Class Counsel in the securities class action litigation involving
Twinlab Corporation (Nasdaq: TWLB), which was filed in early
December 1998, intends to extend the class period in an amended
complaint.  The extended class period will be March 17, 1998
through February 24, 1999.  The amended complaint will cover
the recent announcement by Twinlabs that it would be restating
its operating results for the first, second and third quarters of
1998 because it had improperly recognized revenues in connection
with sales of product for which sales orders had been received
but the product had not yet been shipped.  The amended complaint
will further allege that the Company's financial statements
issued  during the Class Period were materially false and
misleading and in violation  of Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles.

In early December 1998, two class action lawsuits were initiated
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
New York, on behalf of all persons who purchased the common stock
of Twinlab between March 17, 1998 and November 30, 1998,
inclusive, including a subclass of all persons who purchased  
Twinlab common stock in the Company's secondary offering on or
about April 8, 1998.  The complaints alleged that Twinlab was
engaging in channel stuffing to mask the decline in its sales.  
Twinlab's recent restatement announcement confirms that the
Company was attempting to mask the decline in its sales by  
engaging in channel stuffing and the premature recognition of
revenue.


XL CAPITAL: Prevails on Motion to Dismiss; Appeal Possible
----------------------------------------------------------
XL Capital, Ltd., Mid Ocean Limited and the directors of Mid
Ocean were named as defendants in a purported class action
lawsuit filed in connection with the Arrangements in the Supreme
Court, County of New York, State of New York.  Harbor Finance
Partners v. Newhouse, et al., C.A. No. 1998/601266.  The
Shareholder Action alleges that the defendants breached their
fiduciary duties to the Mid Ocean shareholders by failing to
exercise independent business judgment (due to their alleged
conflict of interest) and by agreeing to sell Mid Ocean at an
unfair and inadequate price.  The Shareholder Action is brought
on behalf of a purported class of persons consisting of Mid Ocean
shareholders other than the defendants.  As relief, the
Shareholder Action seeks, among other things, an order enjoining
consummation of the Arrangements, or, in the event the
Arrangements are consummated, rescission of the Arrangements, and
an award of compensatory damages in an unspecified amount, as
well as costs, including fees for plaintiff's counsel and
experts' fees and expenses.

On January 25, 1999, the Supreme Court granted the defendants'
motion to dismiss the Shareholder Action on the grounds that the
Shareholder Action (i) failed to state a claim upon which relief
may be granted under Cayman Islands law and (ii) was not brought
in an appropriate forum (forum non conveniens).  The Supreme
Court's decision is subject to appeal.


UNITED COMPANIES: Loses Borrower Lawsuit; Turnaround Underway
-------------------------------------------------------------
National Mortgage News reportst that United Companies Financial
Corporation (NYSE: UC) lost a lawsuit to plaintiffs that argued
the subprime lender failed to comply with disclosures required  
under the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act.  The company
lost four mortgages and $8,000 dollars to the plaintiffs (as well
as legal expenses), but won a battle for the industry since the
judge refused to grant a class action,  meaning that future HOEPA
cases will have to be decided on a case-by-case basis.

As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter, see TCR 04-Feb-
1999, United Companies Financial Corporation (NYSE: UC)
announced that J. Terrell Brown, Chief Executive Officer
and President, has been granted a requested 90-day leave of
absence. Mr. Brown requested the leave to pursue personal
interests, including his possible participation in offers
to purchase all or a portion of the Company and its
operations. Mr. Brown will continue to serve as a director.

Mr. Brown's responsibilities will be substantially assumed
by Deborah Hicks Midanek, who was named Executive Vice
President and Chief Restructuring Officer.  Ms. Midanek, a
principal of Jay Alix & Associates, formerly served as CEO
of Solon Asset Management, an institutional investment
management firm specializing in mortgage-related
instruments. Previously, she headed non-agency mortgage
finance at Drexel Burnham Lambert Group, Inc. Ms. Midanek
has been providing consulting services to the Company on a
full-time basis since December 1998. C. Geron Hargon, who
has succeeded John D. Dienes as Chief Operating Officer,
will continue in that position.

The Company also announced that it anticipates that it will
fail to be in compliance with financial covenants in its
$850 million bank credit facility and $375 million
aggregate principal amount of senior and subordinated notes
when its audited financial results for 1998 are finalized
and become available.  Such a failure would result in an
event of default under the related credit agreement and
indentures, unless, prior to the applicable cure periods,
such  defaults are cured or waivers were to be sought and
obtained.

The Company has not as yet engaged in any substantive
discussions with its bondholders concerning its compliance
with financial covenants and no assurances can be given
that the requisite waivers will be obtainable. The
Company said that the previously announced agreement in
principle with the agent bank for its bank group regarding
the restructuring of its credit facility has not resulted
in a definitive agreement. The Company is continuing
its discussions with the agent bank in an attempt to arrive
at a mutually acceptable restructuring of the facility.

The Company also stated that its bank credit facility
currently is fully drawn upon and recently it has been
experiencing difficulties in generating the liquidity
necessary to maintain home equity loan production at levels
contemplated by its previously announced restructuring
plan. The Company is  continuing to pursue all available
alternatives to improve its liquidity and financial
condition, including whole loan sales and alternate sources
of financing, as well as other extraordinary transactions
that could involve a sale of all or a substantial part of
the Company. The Company noted that there can be no
assurance that any such transactions or alternative
financing will be available to the Company.


Y2K LITIGATION: Information Technology Assoc. Backs Senate Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) praised
today's Senate Commerce Committee passage of the Y2K Act, S. 96.
ITAA called the Bill a necessary measure designed to encourage
businesses to remediate Year 2000 Computer problems but stressed
the need for concerted, bi-partisan action on the legislation.

"Sen. McCain has demonstrated commendable leadership on the Year
2000 issue, and we believe he understands the need to bring
together customers and companies in an approach which will
encourage remediation, not litigation," said Harris Miller, ITAA
President. "At the same time, we also feel confident that while
the Commerce Committee today passed S. 96 on a straight party
line vote, that Sen. McCain and his colleagues on both sides of
the aisle will work to assure broad based support and a
legislative solution that best meets the needs of all concerned."

The Senate Commerce Committee passed the measure on straight
party line vote of a vote of 11 to 9.

Among other important provisions, the Act would:

   * Preserve the enforceability of existing contracts;

   * Establish a cure period for Y2K disputes;

   * Require that plaintiffs specifically cite material Y2K
     defects;

   * Allow a reasonable efforts claim into evidence in
     contractual disputes;

   * Discourage frivolous class action lawsuits; and

   * Require the plaintiff to mitigate its damages.

ITAA consists of 11,000 direct and affiliate members throughout
the U.S., which produce products and services in the IT industry.
The Association plays a leading role in public policy issues of
concern to the IT industry, including taxes, intellectual
property, telecommunications law, encryption, securities
litigation reform, and human resources policy. ITAA members range
from the smallest IT start ups to industry leaders in the
software, services, systems integration, telecommunications,
Internet, and computer consulting fields.  


                           *********

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., Princeton, NJ, and Beard
Group, Inc., Washington, DC.  Peter A. Chapman, Editor.

Copyright 1999.  All rights reserved.  ISSN XXXX-XXXX.

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 301/951-6400.                         

                 * * *  End of Transmission  * * *