CAR_Public/990408.MBX              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

             Thursday, April 8, 1999, Vol. 1, No. 45

                            Headlines

AIDAUTO STORES: Day Edwards Files Complaint in New York
CAMBRIDGE TECHNOLOGY: Spector & Roseman File Massachusetts Suit
CENTOCOR INC.: Gross Firm and Abbey Gardy File Pennsylvania Suit
CHS ELECTRONICS: Pomerantz Haudek Files Complaint in Florida
CONVERGYS CORPORATION: Wiztec Tender Offer Prompts Class Claims

EXXON: Appeal of $5.3 Billion Judgment Hearing Set for May 3
FLORIDA TRUCKERS: If You Can Read This You May Qualify to Drive
MICROSOFT: Policy Sets Minimum Benefits for Temporary Workers
NORTH FACE: Wolf Haldenstein Files Complaint in Colorado
OKLAHOMA DRIVERS: Reinstatement Fee Claims to Proceed as Class

ORBITAL SCIENCES: Berman DeValerio Files Complaint in Virginia
PRESSTEK, INC.: Court Grants Partial Dismissal of Class Claims
RITE AID: Spector & Roseman File Complaint in Pennsylvania
SAFESKIN CORPORATION: Wechsler Harwood Files Suit in California
SECURE COMPUTING: Milberg Weiss File Complaint in California

STAGE STORES: Prepared to Defend Texas Securities Action
TRITEAL CORP.: Settlement, Liquidation, and Resignations
WWII VETERANS: Japanese Companies Sued for Forced Prison Labor


                            *********


AIDAUTO STORES: Day Edwards Files Complaint in New York
-------------------------------------------------------
Day Edwards Federman Propester & Christensen, P.C. filed a
securities class action on March 26, 1999, against AidAuto
Stores, Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board: AIDA) and certain officers and
directors in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of New York on behalf of purchasers of AidAuto Stores
common stock from March 16, 1997 through October 22, 1998.

The Complaint charges the Company and certain Officers and
Directors with violating the federal securities laws and common
law. The Plaintiff claims that the Defendants made a series of
materially false and misleading statements concerning the
business and financial operations of AidAuto with the intent and
having the effect of substantially inflating the price of
AidAuto common stock.

Specifically, the Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants
materially overstated the Company's results for fiscal 1997 and
the first and second quarters of fiscal 1998. AidAuto common
stock, which recently sold for over $4.00 per share, became
virtually worthless after Defendants' misrepresentations and
omissions were uncovered.


CAMBRIDGE TECHNOLOGY: Spector & Roseman File Massachusetts Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Spector & Roseman, P.C. has filed a class action in the United
States District Court for the District of Massachusetts on
behalf of persons who purchased the securities of Cambridge
Technology Partners, Inc. (Nasdaq: CATP) between November 25,
1998 and March 18, 1999.

The complaint alleges that Cambridge and its President and CEO,
James K. Sims, as well as its Executive Vice-President and CFO,
Arthur M. Toscanini, violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint charges that
defendants issued a series of materially false and misleading
public statements about Cambridge's operations, financial
condition and the failure of its reorganization plan which had
resulted in slow sales. Because of the issuance of these false
and misleading statements, the price of Cambridge's publicly
traded securities were artificially inflated.

The complaint alleges that after the market closed on March 18,
1999, Cambridge shocked the market by announcing for the first
time that its reorganization program was not having near term
benefits as previously stated and that sales growth would be
slower than expected for the First Quarter. As a result of this
revelation, on March 19, 1999 the price of Cambridge opened at
$11-3/8 per share, almost 46% below what it had closed at the
previous day and almost 65% below its recent high of $32-1/4 per
share.


CENTOCOR INC.: Gross Firm and Abbey Gardy File Pennsylvania Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Office of Bernard M. Gross, P.C. and Abbey Gardy &
Squitieri, LLP have filed a class action lawsuit in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
for all purchasers of common stock of Centocor, Inc. from
December 2, 1997 through December 16, 1997.

The Plaintiffs allege that Defendants made false and misleading
public statements concerning the signing of an European
marketing partner for Remicade, formerly known as Avakine, in
the fourth quarter of 1997 and its corresponding positive effect
on the financial results of the Company, which artificially
inflated the market price of the common stock and caused damage
in violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Defendants have answered the Complaint, denying the substantive
allegations of the Complaint and asserting affirmative defenses.
Defendants deny any wrongdoing and all material allegations of
the Complaint, including any and all allegations that Defendants
made false and misleading statements.


CHS ELECTRONICS: Pomerantz Haudek Files Complaint in Florida
------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP filed a class action
suit against CHS Electronics, Inc. (NYSE: HS) and certain of its
officers on March 25, 1999. The case was filed in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Florida on
behalf of all who purchased common stock between August 5, 1998
through March 22, 1999.

The Complaint charges that CHS and certain of its officers and
directors violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing materially false and misleading
statements concerning the Company's operating performance in
violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP").
Specifically, the Company announced on March 22, 1999 that it
would have to restate the second and third quarters of fiscal
1998, and that its fourth quarter 1998 results would be markedly
lower than previously announced.

The market reaction to the news was disastrous. In heavy volume
trading, the price of CHS common stock plunged by 37%, falling
from $6.00 a share on March 19, 1999 to $3.81 a share on March
22, 1999.


CONVERGYS CORPORATION: Wiztec Tender Offer Prompts Class Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
Convergys Corporation (NYSE: CVG) has begun a tender offer for
all of the outstanding shares of Wiztec Solutions Ltd.,(NASDAQ:
WIZTF) at a price of $18.30 per share net to seller in cash. The
offer price represents a 10 percent premium over the closing
price of Wiztec on March 25. It also represents a 20 percent
premium over the $15.25 per share price negotiated in February
with Wiztec's controlling shareholder group and paid on March 2
for 50 percent of the shares.

Since the announcement by Convergys and its subsidiary of the
offer, two lawsuits have been filed in the Court of Common
Pleas, Hamilton County, Ohio: Carrazza, et al., vs. Wiztec
Solutions, Ltd., et al., and Tucker vs. Wiztec Solutions, Ltd.,
et al. Each of the actions purports to be a class action and
alleges that, through the conduct of the defendants, Convergys
has proposed to acquire the shares at an unfair and inadequate
price. Convergys believes the suits to be without merit and will
contest them vigorously.

Convergys' tender offer is being made through its wholly-owned
subsidiary, Convergys Israel Investments Ltd. The offer is
scheduled to expire at midnight, Wednesday, April 28, 1999.

Wiztec Solutions Ltd., develops, markets and supports computer
software that provides multi-channel subscription television
system operators with customer care and billing systems. The
Company's software is marketed under the WIZARD trade name and
incorporates subscriber management functions such as billing,
collection, customer service, work order processing, equipment
inventory control and customer analysis for target marketing.
Wiztec Solutions' customer care and billing systems are used in
eight languages by close to one hundred cable, wireless and
satellite TV operations worldwide, including large operators,
such as Telecom Australia, Deutsche Telekom and Bell Atlantic.

Convergys Corporation provides outsourced, integrated, customer
care and billing services. Convergys software produces more than
one million bills each day, and Convergys call centers handle
more than one million calls each day. Convergys serves a wide
range of industries, including communications, technology, cable
and broadband services, consumer products, financial services,
utilities, healthcare, hospitality, and direct response.
Headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio, Convergys employs over 33,000
people at its more than 30 call centers, data centers, and other
offices in the United States, Canada, and Europe.


EXXON: Appeal of $5.3 Billion Judgment Hearing Set for May 3
------------------------------------------------------------
The Anchorage Daily News reported that oral arguments in the
$5.3 billion Exxon oil spill appeal, nearly five years after the
verdict was rendered, will be held in Seattle on May 3 before a
panel of three 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judges. The
case has been pending since 1994 when a federal court jury in
Anchorage awarded 35,000 fishermen, Natives, cannery workers and
landowners $5.3 billion for the damages done by the 1989 Exxon
Valdez oil spill.

The story noted that Exxon had vowed to fight the decision all
the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Exxon contends the award is
excessive, considering it spent $2 billion on spill cleanup and
another $300 million reimbursing fishermen for their lost
harvest that summer.

The Anchorage Daily News reported that the judges who will hear
the case have been selected, but in keeping with the appellate
court's tradition, their names will not be made public until a
week before the hearing. Plaintiffs' attorney David Oesting of
Anchorage reportedly said he expects a packed courtroom because
the judges will be deciding whether to uphold or throw out the
largest punitive damage award in U.S. history.

More than 600 pages of briefs and a four-foot stack of court
records and transcripts have been filed by the plaintiffs and
Exxon, Oesting said in the report. On May 3, each side will have
a total of one hour to make their cases on three different
appeal issues. A decision isn't expected until six months to a
year after the hearing.

According to the Anchorage Daily News, the first appeal issue is
whether a group of Seattle seafood processors known as the
"Seattle Seven" is entitled to a share of the $5 billion
punitive damage award. Prior to the start of the 1994 trial, the
Seattle Seven settled part of its case out of court with Exxon
for $70 million. The confidential settlement agreement required
the seafood processors to pursue their share of any punitive
damages in the massive class action suits and then to turn the
proceeds over to Exxon.

The Seattle Seven's share comes to more than $700 million,
according to the report. The plaintiffs contend Exxon would
hardly be punished -- the purpose of punitive damages -- if it
could pay a share to itself. District Judge Russel Holland
agreed in 1996 and called the maneuver by Exxon to lay claim to
part of the punitive damages an "astonishing ruse." He rejected
Exxon's claim to the money and Exxon appealed.

The Anchorage Daily News referred to the second appellate issue
as the "main appeal." Among other issues, Exxon is appealing the
way the $287 million in compensatory damages was calculated. The
company is also challenging the $5 billion verdict as excessive
and unwarranted.

The third issue deals with jury tampering and coercion,
according to the report. Exxon contends that one juror gave into
the $5 billion punitive damages after being intimidated and
threatened by other jurors. Holland rejected that charge in
July. The Anchorage Daily News reported that he wrote that the
juror's memory of the trial was "not credible" and that the
story she told the court during a deposition was "shocking and
bizarre."


FLORIDA TRUCKERS: If You Can Read This You May Qualify to Drive
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United Press International (UPI) reported that a Florida
state law requiring all truck drivers to be fluent in English is
not being enforced, and it may soon be wiped from the books.

According to UPI, South Florida Attorney Valenteen Rodriquez is
continuing with a class action lawsuit on behalf of Hispanic
drivers to remove the law from Florida's books. Rodriquez says
drivers don't need to speak English to understand universal road
signs.


MICROSOFT: Policy Sets Minimum Benefits for Temporary Workers
-------------------------------------------------------------
The News Tribune Tacoma (WA) reported that Microsoft has
outlined new policies for working with temporary employees,
saying the workers will receive a minimum set of benefits, will
have more options as to which temporary agency they work for,
and will not be penalized if Microsoft hires them permanently.

While the company touted the changes as a way to improve working
conditions for its roughly 6,000 temporary workers in the Puget
Sound region, the News Tribune Tacoma noted that a union that is
organizing high-tech temps, and lawyers who have sued the
company on behalf of those workers, said the changes didn't go
far enough. "It doesn't seem all that new to me," said Stephen
Strong, who filed a class- action lawsuit against the company in
1992. The suit, which is pending, contends the people Microsoft
classifies as "temporary workers" are actually Microsoft
employees and should receive the same lucrative benefits as the
company's full-time workers. "The company is trying to improve
its public image by offering cosmetic improvements and benefits
without addressing the real point - that they're Microsoft
employees," he reportedly said. Strong said Microsoft did not
consult with him in its reassessment of temporary worker
policies. He has offered suggestions in the course of the
lawsuit, however. "I think it's just cosmetic stuff," he said.
"I'm sure it won't have any impact on our claims in our case."

The News Tribune Tacoma also quoted Marcus Courtney, a founder
of the Washington Alliance of Technology Workers, which is
organizing high-tech workers into a union, as saying the changes
are a step in the right direction but don't go far enough. "This
doesn't end the fundamental problem of people working for the
company for two years and still (being) classified as temporary.
Microsoft makes all these decisions but claims agencies have all
this power," he said.

Microsoft officials in the past have defended its use of
temporary workers, a group that makes up a whopping 28 percent
of Microsoft's local work force. The company says it uses
temporary workers to give it the flexibility it needs to compete
in the fast-paced world of high-tech.

The story reported that the Microsoft policy changes will take
effect May 3. Among the changes is the way Microsoft chooses the
agencies it works with. Under the new policy, agencies will have
to submit bids. To be approved, they will have to offer a
minimum number of benefits outlined by Microsoft:

     * At least 13 days of paid leave must be offered each year.
The days could be in the form of vacation, sick leave, holidays
or other compensatory time. Agencies can determine how to
structure the leave and can add to it.

     * Agencies must pay at least 50 percent of medical, dental
and vision care for the employee.

     * Agencies must offer at least $500 a year toward employee
training.

     * Agencies must offer a retirement plan with some sort of
matching contribution.

According to the News Tribune Tacoma, Strong said the benefits
are still inferior to those Microsoft gives its permanent
employees. He especially wants temporary workers to be able to
buy Microsoft stock at a discount.

The report explained that Microsoft also changed its policy to
make it easier for temporary workers to choose which agency they
will work for. They had the choice in the past, but Microsoft
said it will make that choice more clear to promote competition
among agencies. Microsoft reportedly also has made it easier for
temporary workers to apply for permanent jobs at Microsoft by
allowing them to get out of any limiting contracts they may have
signed with an agency. If Microsoft hires a temporary worker for
a permanent job within nine months, Microsoft will pay the
agency a fee.

According to the News Tribune Tacoma, the new policy did nothing
to increase the number of temporary worker positions that would
be converted to permanent jobs, something many of the temporary
workers had hoped for. Sharon Decker, Microsoft's head of
temporary staffing, reportedly said the company has 2,000
openings. Some additional jobs could become available as the
company goes through the massive reorganization that was
recently announced.

Andy Knudson, division manager with Comforce, one of the
agencies that supplies temporary workers to Microsoft, was
reported to say the new policy would have little effect on his
workers, other than improving their benefits. Donna Sakson,
owner of S&T Onsite, another firm that provides temporary
workers, said she expects to see more competition for employees.
The News Tribune Tacoma wrote that her agency outlined a new
benefits package to employees on Friday; they will now receive
more paid time off and a better retirement plan. "We support the
choice model. It means we're competing to keep our people.
That's always a good thing," she said in the report.

While Microsoft works internally to revise its policies for
temporary workers, the News Tribune Tacoma noted that lobbyists
have been discussing the issue with the state's congressional
delegation. Lobbyists have met with representatives and senators
to explain Microsoft's position on the temporary worker issue
and to say that Microsoft does not use temporary workers to
deprive workers of benefits. The issue was reported to be
advancing in Olympia; the state Senate just passed a bill that
would create a task force to study the whole issue of temporary
workers. It has yet to pass the House, but bill sponsor Sen.
Rosa Franklin (D-Tacoma) was reported to say she's optimistic it
has enough support to pass.


NORTH FACE: Wolf Haldenstein Files Complaint in Colorado
--------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP filed a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of
Colorado on behalf of investors who bought The North Face, Inc.
(NASDAQ: TNFI) stock between April 25, 1997 and March 4, 1999.

The lawsuit charges North Face and several of its top officers
with violations of the securities laws and regulations of the
United States. The complaint alleges that defendants falsely
reported the Company's financial results and overstated its
sales growth causing the Company's stock price to trade at an
artificially high price of $29. On March 5, 1999 the Company
announced that its audited 1998 results would be delayed and
that its 1997 results might need to be restated. On the release
of this news the stock price dropped to as low as $10 7/8.


OKLAHOMA DRIVERS: Reinstatement Fee Claims to Proceed as Class
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Journal Record summarized a recently filed opinion of the
Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals. In a case called Michael
Sholer, Sharon Morales, Anastasia E. Dalton, and Calvin
McCaskell Jr., vs. State of Oklahoma, ex rel. Department of
Public Safety (DPS), No. 91,620, the Appellate Court upheld the
trial court's decision to certify a class for persons who paid
multiple reinstatement fees, additional fees or incorrect fees
for suspended licenses after July 7, 1993. However, the
Appellate Court also ruled that the trial court abused its
discretion by denying class certification for persons who paid
such fees between July 6, 1990, and July 3, 1993. Accordingly,
the case was reversed in part and remanded.

According to the Journal Record, the DPS plan to provide
voluntary refunds to some potential class members did not
undercut the superiority or necessity of a class action for
adjudication of the dispute. The Court reportedly held that a
class member's dispute over the attorney fee agreement does not
prevent the member from protecting the best interests of the
class. Whether to extend the fee agreement to all class members
is an issue for the trial court.

Additionally, the report explained that Oklahoma has abandoned
the rule that statutes imposing costs on the State must
expressly mention the State. According to the story, DPS offered
no rational basis for disparate treatment of the two groups of
drivers.

The Journal Record noted that a dissenting judge reasoned that
the plaintiffs could not establish that the class members had
common questions of law or fact.


ORBITAL SCIENCES: Berman DeValerio Files Complaint in Virginia
--------------------------------------------------------------
Berman, DeValerio & Pease LLP filed a class action suit in the
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on
behalf of all who purchased the common stock of Orbital Sciences
Corp. [ORB] from April 21, 1998 through Feb. 16, 1999.

The case alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Plaintiffs claim Orbital
Sciences and its officers violated U.S. securities laws by
making misrepresentations or omitting material facts in
describing the company's operations, finances and performance.
This caused the stock price to rise as high as $49.12 a share,
before falling to $28 a share after the problems were disclosed.


PRESSTEK, INC.: Court Grants Partial Dismissal of Class Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Presstek, Inc. (Nasdaq: PRST), announced that the United States
District Court for the District of New Hampshire dismissed
several of the claims brought against the company in pending
class action lawsuits. The company stated that it was extremely
pleased with the Court's action and that it will continue to
vigorously defend the remaining claims.

Founded in 1987, Presstek, Inc. is a developer and international
marketer of non-photographic, non-toxic digital imaging and
printing plate technologies for the printing and graphic arts
industries.


RITE AID: Spector & Roseman File Complaint in Pennsylvania
----------------------------------------------------------
Spector & Roseman, P.C. filed a class action in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
on behalf of persons who purchased the common stock of Rite Aid
Corporation (NYSE: RAD) between December 14, 1998 and March 11,
1999. The complaint alleges that Rite Aid and its Chairman and
CEO, Martin L. Grass, violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The Complaint charges that Rite Aid issued a series of
materially false and misleading statements concerning Rite Aid's
operating results and business prospects. Because of the
issuance of these false and misleading statements, the price of
Rite Aid common stock was artificially inflated. The Complaint
alleges defendants hid the fact that the costs of store openings
and closings were far greater than Rite Aid led the investing
public to expect, that there were software start up problems at
its new distribution center, that the implementation of a
revised merchandising strategy would lead to markdowns that
would negatively impact earnings, and that the early closing of
the PCS Health Systems acquisition would contribute to a fourth
quarter earning shortfall.

On March 12, 1999, Rite Aid shocked the market by announcing its
true operating results and business prospects, and that earnings
for the fourth quarter ended February 28, 1999 would be
approximately $.30 to $.32 per share, well below Wall Street
expectations of $.52 per share. This revelation caused the price
of Rite Aid common stock to plummet $14 7/16 per share to $22
9/16 per share - a plunge of more than 39% - on a volume of 47
million shares.


SAFESKIN CORPORATION: Wechsler Harwood Files Suit in California
---------------------------------------------------------------
Wechsler, Harwood, Halebian and Feffer LLP filed a class action
lawsuit on March 26, 1999, in the United States District Court
for the Southern of California on behalf of all persons who
purchased Safeskin Corporation call options or sold SFSK put
options (NASDAQ: SFSK) from February 19, 1998 through March 11.

The complaint charges SFSK and certain of its officers with
violations of the federal Securities laws which inflated the
market price of SFSK stock. The complaint alleges that
defendants issued a series of false and misleading statements
that overstated SFSK's income, gross margins and future
prospects. Defendants further represented that the Company's
growth was due to SFSK's increased production after having
solved its manufacturing problems and that this increased
production was needed to meet increasing customer demands.

In fact, SFSK was selling its customers more products than they
needed or wanted by offering extended and favorable payment
terms, actions which defendants repeatedly publicly denied. As a
result of such conduct, defendants knew that they could not
continue to report record earnings and income in future
quarters.

On March 11, 1999, after the market closed, defendants announced
that revenues for its first quarter ending March 31, 1999 were
expected to be $28 million below what defendants led the market
to believe they were expecting, and that the Company was
reducing its sales and earnings expectations in light of higher
than estimated distributor inventory levels. Moreover, the
Company announced that its sales for the year would be lower by
$25 million.


SECURE COMPUTING: Milberg Weiss File Complaint in California
------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP filed a class action in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California on behalf of purchasers of Secure Computing Corp.'s
(Nasdaq: SCUR) publicly traded securities between November 10,
1998 and March 31, 1999.

The complaint charges Secure Computing and certain of its
executive officers with violations of the federal securities
laws by making misrepresentations about Secure Computing's
business operations and earnings growth and its ability to
continue to achieve profitable growth. By issuing these
allegedly false and misleading statements, defendants
artificially inflated Secure Computing's stock price from $14-
1/8 on November 9, 1998 to a recent high of $28 in January 1999,
allowing Secure Computing's top insiders to sell 366,001 shares
of their stock worth more than $6 million, before the true facts
about the company's troubled operations, large losses and failed
sales strategy were revealed and its stock collapsed to as low
as $5-9/16 per share.


STAGE STORES: Prepared to Defend Texas Securities Action
--------------------------------------------------------
Stage Stores Inc. (NYSE:SGE) issued a strong denial of
allegations of securities laws violations contained in a class
action lawsuit filed on March 30, 1999 in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Texas. The complaint
against Stage and certain of its officers, directors,
underwriters and controlling shareholders seeks class action
certification on behalf of persons who purchased Stage Stores
Inc. common stock.

The suit alleges generally that the defendants made false or
misleading statements or omissions relating to Stage's
acquisition of C.R. Anthony Company as well as Stage's business
and prospects and seeks unspecified damages. Carl E. Tooker,
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, stated, "The
claims contained within the suit are completely without merit
and have no basis in law or fact. Stage will vigorously contest
all allegations contained in the complaint and we categorically
deny that any securities laws were violated by the Company or
any of its officers or directors."

Stage Stores Inc. brings nationally recognized brand name
apparel, accessories, cosmetics and footwear for the entire
family to small towns and communities throughout the United
States. The company operated 679 stores in 34 states at the end
of the fourth quarter, primarily under the Stage, Bealls and
Palais Royal trade names.


TRITEAL CORP.: Settlement, Liquidation, and Resignations
--------------------------------------------------------
TriTeal Corporation announced that it has received court
approval of the settlement of a class action securities
litigation. Under the settlement, the plaintiffs and their
attorneys were paid $12 million (of which $10 million was paid
by the Company), and the plaintiffs dismissed with prejudice all
claims pending in the actions against the Company, certain of
its current and former officers and directors and the
underwriters of the Company's public offerings.

The Company also announced that it has filed a voluntary chapter
11 petition under the United States Bankruptcy Code in the
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of
California on April 2, 1999. The Company filed a plan of
liquidation with the court providing for the liquidation of the
Company's assets, payment to its creditors and the distribution
of any remaining cash to the stockholders of the Company. In its
bankruptcy petition, the Company indicated that it held $5.5
million of cash and cash equivalents and estimated its
liabilities at $2.6 million, although some additional
liabilities were listed in an "unknown" amount.

The chapter 11 filing came after extensive efforts to achieve
profitability and find a suitable acquirer proved unsuccessful.
The decision reflects the Board of Directors' efforts to
preserve value for creditors and shareholders. In connection
with the chapter 11 filing, the directors of the Company, Jeff
Witous, Richard Noling and Dennis Morin, submitted their
resignations.

Headquartered in Carlsbad, California, TriTeal Corporation was a
provider of mission-critical desktop solutions for Global 1000
enterprise environments. Except for the liquidation of its
assets, the Company has ceased doing business.


WWII VETERANS: Japanese Companies Sued for Forced Prison Labor
--------------------------------------------------------------
On March 31, 1999, in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, a class action complaint was
filed on behalf of United States veterans of World War II,
against Japanese companies who used United States prisoners as
forced laborers during the war, including Nippon Sharyo, Ltd.;
Mitsubishi Corp.; Showa Denko, Ltd.; Sumitomo Corp.; Yodogawa
Steel Works, Ltd.; Nippon Steel Corp.; and Mitsui and Co., Ltd.

The complaint seeks money damages and other relief on behalf of
former United States prisoners of Japan, who were forced to
labor for Japanese industry during World War II, in violation of
international law and under inhumane conditions. The complaint
asserts claims for violations of international law, for unjust
enrichment, for injuries in tort, and for unlawful, unfair, and
fraudulent business practices.

Plaintiff Ralph Levenberg, a resident of Reno, Nev., is a
retired United States Air Force major. As an Army Air Corps
sergeant, Mr. Levenberg was a member of the United States and
Filipino forces on Bataan resisting the Japanese invasion of the
Philippines. Outnumbered, outgunned, and starving, Sergeant
Levenberg and the other defenders of Bataan were ordered by
their superiors to surrender on April 9, 1942. Sergeant
Levenberg then survived the infamous "Bataan Death March," in
which thousands of the prisoners died during a six-day forced
march at the hands of the Imperial Japanese Army.

Sergeant Levenberg and other prisoners were later shipped from
the Philippines to Japan (while packed in the cargo hold of a
freighter with neither ventilation nor sanitation), and confined
at a prison camp near the city of Nagoya. There, the prisoners
were hired out as a slave labor force to Nippon Sharyo, a
railroad equipment manufacturer. (Like many other Japanese
companies that used American slave labor during World War II,
Nippon Sharyo does business in the United States today.)

Sergeant Levenberg was forced to perform hard labor seven days a
week on a starvation diet. While performing coerced labor for
Nippon Sharyo, he suffered permanent injuries from a clubbing by
a company guard. When he was liberated by United States forces
in August 1945, Sergeant Levenberg weighed 70 pounds and was
near death. Today, Mr. Levenberg serves on a volunteer basis as
the Prisoner of War Consultant at the Veteran's Administration
Hospital in Reno. Mr. Levenberg is also the Executive Secretary
of the National Advisory Committee on Former Prisoners of War, a
congressional committee appointed by the Secretary of Veterans'
Affairs. He was formerly the National Commander of the American
Defenders of Bataan and Corregidor, Inc. and currently serves as
the organization's Chairman for Special Projects.

Mr. Levenberg's attorney, Daniel Girard, said, "In the United
States, we have acknowledged errors in the treatment of American
citizens of Japanese descent during World War II. It is fitting
that Japanese businesses which benefited from the exploitation
and abuse of captured Americans be similarly asked to square-up
with the survivors or their family members."



                            *********

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  * * *