CAR_Public/990420.MBX              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Tuesday, April 20, 1999, Vol. 1, No. 53

                            Headlines

ADVANCED LIGHTING: Yates Firm Files Complaint in Ohio
CHS ELECTRONICS: Hoffman & Edelson File Complaint in Florida
COMPAQ COMPUTER: Kantrowitz Goldhamer Files Suit in New Jersey
COMPAQ COMPUTER: Lawyers Identify More Defrauded Investors
COMPLETE MANAGEMENT: Weiss & Yourman File Complaint in New York

EXIDE CORPORATION: Shareholder Suit Settles for $10.25 Million
FVC.COM: Kaplan Kilsheimer Files Complaint in California
MONARCH DENTAL: Cohen Milstein Files Complaint in Texas
NEXTLEVEL SYSTEMS: Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is Denied
NICE SYSTEMS: Weiss & Yourman File Complaint in New Jersey

PERFECTION CORP.: Dip Tube Case has Tank Industry in Hot Water
PLUM CREEK: Company Settles Litigation Blocking REIT Conversion
RIAU OIL: Indonesian President Sued for Failing to Pay Royalties
RITE AID: Donovan Miller Files Complaint in Pennsylvania
SECURE COMPUTING: Greenfield Firm Files Securities Complaint

SOFTWARE AG: Wolf Haldenstein Files Complaint in Virginia
TCC INDUSTRIES: Berger and Vinton Firms File Colorado Complaint
TOBACCO LITIGATION: Atlantic City Casino Workers Out of Luck
TURBODYNE: Delisted from Nasdaq, Looking to List on the OTC


                            *********


ADVANCED LIGHTING: Yates Firm Files Complaint in Ohio
-----------------------------------------------------
The Law Office of Alfred G. Yates Jr filed a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Ohio on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock
of Advanced Lighting Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq: ADLT) between
December 30, 1997 and September 30, 1998. The complaint charges
Advanced Lighting and its CEO, Wayne T. Hellman, with issuing a
series of materially false and misleading statements of its
sales, growth and financial results, in violation of Sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 as
well as Rule 10b-5.

To learn more, call Alfred G. Yates, Jr., Esq. at 800-391-5164
or 412-391-5164, or write yateslaw@aol.com via email.


CHS ELECTRONICS: Hoffman & Edelson File Complaint in Florida
------------------------------------------------------------
Hoffman & Edelson has filed a complaint against CHS Electronics
Corp. (NYSE: HS) in United States District Court, Southern
District of Florida on behalf of all purchasers of CHS common
stock between Dec. 18, 1997 through March 22, 1999. The Amended
Complaint charges that CHS Electronics and certain of its
officers and directors violated the federal securities laws by
submitting false financial statements and false earnings.

The complaint alleges that: a) defendants' financial statements
were based, in large measure, upon forged documents and false
customer orders; b) defendants had inaccurately described the
amount of its vendor rebates; c) defendants had improperly kept
certain assets (primarily accounts receivable) off its balance
sheet; d) CHS routinely shifted inventory from country to
country in Europe to avoid the 18% value added tax; e) a CHS
executive officer who was involved in CHS' scheme to avoid value
added taxes had fled the country under fear of indictment; f) as
a result of the value added tax avoidance, CHS' operating profit
margins were overstated; g) as a result of the foregoing, CHS's
assets and earnings were materially overstated; and h) as a
result of the foregoing, CHS was performing far worse than
publicly represented and its operating performance measures
(particularly its account receivable/turnover ratio) were
materially overstated. When certain of this information was
disclosed on Feb. 24, 1999 and March 22, 1999, the price of CHS
collapsed, and currently trades far below its recent highs.

For more information, call Marc H. Edelson or Jerold B. Hoffman
at 877-537-6532 or write Hofedlaw@aol.com via email.


COMPAQ COMPUTER: Kantrowitz Goldhamer Files Suit in New Jersey
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Kantrowitz, Goldhamer & Graifman filed a lawsuit
on behalf of two Plaintiffs and a proposed class of purchasers
of Compaq common stock and purchasers of options for common
stock and sellers of put options against Compaq Computer
Corporation (NYSE: CPQ) and certain officers and directors for
the period January 27, 1999 through April 9, 1999. The suit is
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
Texas where Compaq maintains its U.S. headquarters.

The complaint alleges that Compaq and certain officers and
directors violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 by making false and
misleading statements concerning the company's financial
condition, particularly with respect to earnings and revenue
during the first quarter of 1999, and that as a result of these
alleged violations, the price of common shares of Compaq was
artificially inflated. Furthermore, the complaint alleges that,
during the period defendants made false and misleading
statements, certain Compaq officers and at least one director of
Compaq sold shares at artificially inflated prices, using
material inside information.

For additional details, call Gary S. Graifman at 800-660-7843 or
write KGLAW1@aol.com via email.


COMPAQ COMPUTER: Lawyers Identify More Defrauded Investors
----------------------------------------------------------
Three more law firms that commenced securities class action
suits on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Compaq
Computer Corporation (NYSE: CPQ) intend to extend the class
period in amended complaints to include those trading between
January 27, 1999 through April 9, 1999. The firms include
Hoeffner, Bilek & Eidman, LLP, and Bernstein, Liebhard &
Lifshitz, LLP, and The Law Offices of Dennis J. Johnson.

After the close of trading on Friday April 9, 1999, Compaq
announced that it would post a first quarter profit of about
$0.15 per share, less than half of what analysts expected from
the Company. On Monday April 12, 1999, in response to this
shocking disclosure, the price of Compaq stock plummeted more
than 25% to as low as $23-1/8 per share from its previous close
of $30-15/16.

To learn more, call Thomas E. Bilek, Esq., at 713-227-7720 or
write to hbellp@aol.com by email, and Mel E. Lifshitz, Esq., or
Florence Cavanna Lehavi, Esq., at 800-217-1522 or 212-779-1414
or at lehavi@bernlieb.com or lifshitz@bernlieb.com by email, and
Dennis J. Johnson, Esq., or Jacob B. Perkinson, Esq., at 888-
459-7855 or at LODJJ@aol.com via email.


COMPLETE MANAGEMENT: Weiss & Yourman File Complaint in New York
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit against Complete Management, Inc. (OTC:
CPMI) and certain associated individuals was filed by Weiss &
Yourman in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York on behalf of investors who purchased CMI
debentures during the period May 1, 1996 through August 13,
1998. The complaint charges that CMI and certain officers and
directors knowingly and recklessly made false and misleading
representations about the Company's financial condition.

The complaint alleges that these false and misleading statements
caused the price of CMI debentures to be artificially inflated
in violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. The Complaint also alleges that CMI
improperly recognized revenue on uncollectible receivables from
its largest customer, Greater Metropolitan Medical Services, in
violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

For more details, contact Mark D. Smilow at 888-593-4771 or 212-
682-3025, or write wynyc@aol.com via email.


EXIDE CORPORATION: Shareholder Suit Settles for $10.25 Million
--------------------------------------------------------------
Exide Corporation (NYSE: EX) has reached an initial agreement on
a shareholder lawsuit and will settle all claims for $10.25
million, payable by its insurance carrier. Final settlement is
subject to court approval.

The class action shareholder suit is a consolidation of five
lawsuits which were originally filed in federal court in
Michigan, in the spring of 1998, against the company and three
of its former senior officers. The complaint alleges that market
price of the company's stock was artificially inflated over the
period June 27, 1995 through April 4, 1998 as a result of
misstatements and omissions.

James M. Diasio, Chief Financial Officer at Exide Corporation,
said, "We are extremely pleased to have this issue behind us.
The settlement is well within the range we expected and, since
it is fully insured, was achieved at minimal cost to the
company." Exide Corporation, with operations in 19 countries, is
a manufacture of automotive and industrial lead acid batteries.


FVC.COM: Kaplan Kilsheimer Files Complaint in California
--------------------------------------------------------
Kaplan, Kilsheimer & Fox LLP filed a Class Action against
FVC.COM, INC. (Nasdaq: FVCX) and certain of its officers and
directors in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California. The suit is brought on behalf of all who
acquired common stock of FVC.COM between January 21, 1999 and
April 6, 1999. The lawsuit charges FVC and several of its top
officers with violations of the securities laws and regulations
of the United States.

The complaint alleges that defendants issued a series of false
and misleading statements concerning the Company's fourth
quarter 1998 results. Specifically, the complaint alleges that
FVC.COM knowingly or recklessly overstated the Company's results
for the fourth quarter of 1998 by engaging in improper
accounting practices in violation of generally accepted
accounting practices ("GAAP"). The complaint further alleges
that certain defendants used their inside knowledge to take
advantage of the Company's inflated share price by selling
535,000 of their own shares for gross proceeds of over $7.3
million. Upon the announcement that results for the fourth
quarter would be far below expectations, FVC.COM common stock
plunged 59% on eight times average volume.

For additional details, call Frederic S. Fox, Esq. Stephen M.
Sohmer, Esq., or Adrienne L. Valencia, Esq., at 800-290-1952 or
212-687-1980, or write lawkkf@aol.com via email.


MONARCH DENTAL: Cohen Milstein Files Complaint in Texas
-------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. on
April 13, 1999 filed a lawsuit in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Texas on behalf of purchasers
of the common stock of Monarch Dental Corporation (Nasdaq: MDDS)
between Feb. 24, 1998, and Dec. 22, 1998. The complaint charges
Monarch and certain of its officers and directors with
violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.

The complaint alleges that the defendants stated that Monarch
continued to make strategic acquisitions of quality practices
and experience solid internal growth as its business
fundamentals remained strong and would successfully execute its
growth plans for 1998 and beyond as they were pleased with
Monarch's financial performance and confident that Monarch would
earn $0.58 in 1998. These statements caused the price of
Monarch's common stock to increase to a high of nearly $20 per
share and permitted the defendants to use Monarch's artificially
inflated stock as a currency to acquire numerous dental
practices and permit Monarch's venture capital investor to
distribute one million Monarch shares to the limited partners of
the various entities it controlled who could then sell Monarch
shares before they collapsed in price.

However, internally at Monarch, the defendants knew that
Monarch's business fundamentals were anything but strong, as
Monarch had acquired low quality practices, three of its Houston
offices were running cash flow negative and its infrastructure
was insufficient to competently manage or synthesize the
numerous practices it had acquired and that, because of these
and other negative factors, Monarch would badly miss its
earnings projections of $0.18 and $0.58 for the fourth quarter
and year 1998 respectively. When the defendants revealed to the
securities markets on Dec. 22, 1998, and March 11, 1999, that
Monarch would post a huge $0.38 loss in the fourth quarter as a
result of $7.7 million in charges that would nearly wipe out all
of Monarch's earnings for the entire year 1998, the price of
Monarch stock collapsed and traded below $3 per share,
approximately 90% below its recent highs.

For additional details, contact Steven J. Toll or Emma Larson at
888-240-1238 or 206-521-0080 or at stoll@cmht.com or
elarson@cmht.com via email.


NEXTLEVEL SYSTEMS: Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is Denied
----------------------------------------------------------
Judge Ann C. Williams of the Northern District of Illinois
(Eastern Division) denied the defendants' motion to dismiss a
class action lawsuit against NextLevel, which changed its name
to General Instrument Corp. (NYSE: GIC). The class action
lawsuit, filed on October 21, 1997 and amended on February 20,
1998, names NextLevel and certain officers and directors as
defendants.

The complaint alleges that in order to artificially inflate the
price of NextLevel common stock, defendants violated the federal
securities laws by misrepresenting NextLevel's existing
financial and business conditions, as well as its future
business prospects, in press releases and other publicly
disseminated materials. Among other things, the complaint
alleges that defendants misrepresented NextLevel's true
financial condition by failing to separately state the revenues
and expenses of NextLevel's three separate and distinct lines of
business, Satellite Data Networks Group, NextLevel
Communications and Broadband Networks Group.

The complaint alleges that the failure to segregate its
operations allowed NextLevel to conceal the fact that, in stark
contrast to its public representations that the Company was made
up of three global leaders in their respective fields, Satellite
Data Networks Group was suffering from escalating production
costs and other internal problems, including a substantial
decrease in orders from its primary customer, that would
ultimately cause a reorganization of that unit and NextLevel
Communications was accumulating a substantial operating loss due
to rising research and development costs.

To learn more, contact James E. Tullman at 800-437-7918 or 310-
208-2800 or wyinfo@wyca.com by email, or David Kessler at 888-
299-7706 or 610-667-7706 or dkessler@sbclasslaw.com by email.


NICE SYSTEMS: Weiss & Yourman File Complaint in New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit against the American Depository Shares of
Nice Systems, Ltd. (Nasdaq: NICE) (Nasdaq: NICEY) and certain
individuals associated with the Company was filed by Weiss &
Yourman in the United States District Court for the District of
New Jersey on behalf of investors who purchased Nice ADSs during
the period February 4, 1998 through September 4, 1998.

The complaint alleges that defendants issued a series of
materially false and misleading financials and public statements
concerning the Company's operations, technologies, products and
prospects. These false and misleading statements caused the
price of Nice ADSs to be artificially inflated in violation of
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

For more details, call Weiss & Yourman at 888-593-4771 or 212-
682-3025, or write wynyc@aol.com via email.


PERFECTION CORP.: Dip Tube Case has Tank Industry in Hot Water
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Ishbia & Gagleard, P.C. announced that hundreds
of thousands of consumers across the nation may benefit from a
class action lawsuit (Wheeler et al v Perfection Corp., et al,
99-906781) filed last month in the Wayne County Circuit Court
against six hot water tank manufacturers, and two manufacturers
of dip tubes and three Michigan distributors of hot water tanks.
A request has been made and is pending for the court to certify
the case as a class action suit.

A polypropylene dip tube -- located within a hot water tank --
delivers cold water to the bottom of the water tank where it is
heated and converted into hot water. The lawsuit charges that
polypropylene dip tubes are subject to breakdown, deterioration
and dissolution. The dip tubes, which deteriorate into a gel-
like substance or plastic particles, may mix with hot water
supplied throughout the household, potentially damaging
appliances such as dishwashers and washing machines and
infiltrating the household plumbing systems. The polypropylene
dip tubes were installed in hot water heaters which were sold
and distributed throughout the country, including the state of
Michigan since approximately 1993.

Michigan's Attorney General Jennifer Granholm recently leveled
charges against several manufacturers. Specifically, the
Attorney General alleged that one manufacturer of dip tubes,
Perfection Corporation, produced more than 23 million dip tubes,
between 1993-1996, that are subject to breakdown, dissolution
and deterioration inside the water tank. She also alleged that
the companies knew of the problems with dip tubes but did not
reasonably disclose the nature of the problem to consumers and
to an extent engaged in a silent warranty program for
complaining consumers. Granholm filed a Notice of Intended
Action against and opportunity to cease and desist against
several manufacturers.

"In the past, these dip tubes were made of copper," said Michael
Gagleard, the attorney who filed the suit. "However, in 1993 the
industry used a polypropylene material (plastic) to manufacture
dip tubes. The polypropylene dip tube doesn't hold up in the hot
water tank environment and is subject to premature
deterioration. "Although the six hot water tank manufacturers
and the two dip tube manufacturers have not filed an Answer to
our Complaint, the company believed that the polypropylene dip
tubes did not receive a particular chemical treatment and was
thus subject to premature deterioration. Whether the problems
are due to the use of polypropylene in the manufacture of dip
tubes or the polypropylene was improperly chemically treated,
the bottom line remains: The dip tubes are subject to premature
breakdown, deterioration and dissolution." Gagleard estimates
that millions of consumers nationwide could be affected. "Anyone
with a hot water tank manufactured by any of these companies
should check the date of manufacture and the name of the
manufacturer," Gagleard said.

According to the suit, the polypropylene dip tubes may break
away, intact, from the cold water inlet valve, and breakdown,
deteriorate, or dissolve within the hot water heater. The dip
tube may remain connected to the cold water inlet valve and
continue to breakdown or dissolve over time. The deterioration,
breakdown and dissolution of the dip tube within the hot water
heater may cause damage such as:
   * dip tube particles mixing with the household water supply;
   * costs associated with the replacement of the hot water
     heater;
   * costs associated with the flushing and/or cleaning of the
     water supply system, including the hot water distribution
     system;
   * costs associated with replacing and repairing damaged
     aerators, filters and screens connected to the water supply
     plumbing system;
   * costs associated with replacement and repair of damage to
     appliances including faucets, shower heads, dishwashers and
     clothes washing machines.

The manufacturers involved in the litigation involve two dip
tube manufacturers, Apcom, Inc., of Tennessee and Perfection
Corporation, of Delaware. The hot water tank manufacturers named
in the lawsuit include the following:
   * Smith Corporation of South Carolina
   * American Water Heater, Inc. of Nevada
   * Lochinvar Corporation of Tennessee
   * Rheem Manufacturing Company, Inc. of Delaware
   * State Industries, Inc. of Tennessee
   * Bradford White Corporation of Delaware

For more details, call Ishbia & Gagleard, at 800-647-6269.


PLUM CREEK: Company Settles Litigation Blocking REIT Conversion
---------------------------------------------------------------
States News Service reports that Plum Creek TimberCompany, L.P.,
of Delaware, has filed an SEC form 8K following the resolution
of lawsuits. The report says that the company and its general
partner have entered into an agreement settling all litigation
relating to the proposed conversion of the Company into a real
estate investment trust.


RIAU OIL: Indonesian President Sued for Failing to Pay Royalties
----------------------------------------------------------------
The China Daily reported that in the first case of its kind in
Indonesia, people in the oil-rich province of Riau are suing
President B J Habibie for $22.5 billion in compensation for lost
oil revenues. Co-defendants included the Minister of Mines and
Energy Kuntoro Mangkusubroto, the state oil company Pertamina,
PT Caltex Pacific Indonesia -- a subsidiary of US-based Caltex
Petroleum Corp -- and the minister of home affairs. But only two
of the defendants showed up for the hearing: PT Caltex and the
local office of the mines and energy ministry. "We will summon
other defendants, including President Habibie. If they still
fail to show up, the trial will still be convened," presiding
judge T Simanjuntak was quoted as saying.

According to the China Daily, plaintiffs allege that Habibie,
who took office in May, ordered the minister of mines and energy
to exploit oil in the province, in co-operation with Caltex and
Pertamina, which resulted in a revenues worth 2.004 trillion
rupiah ($2.3 billion). Habibie, they said, promised in July to
give a 10-per-cent share of the revenues to the plaintiff within
two months. To date, almost nine months after he made the
promise, they have not received their share, they said.

The China Daily explained that plaintiffs' primary demands were
for Habibie's policy to be declared a "mistake" and for a halt
to oil exploitation by Caltex and Pertamina. Another demand was
freedom for the province to exploit local natural resources, or
to form an independent state.

Riau Province, on the island of Sumatra, is described by the
China Daily as home to Indonesia's giant Minas oil field, which
is operated by Caltex and produces 750,000 barrels of oil a day,
or about half of Indonesia's daily crude oil output. Tabrani
Rab, representing the plaintiffs, "the people of Riau," is
chairman of the Institute of Social and Cultural Studies in the
province, and has in the past aired the possibility of an
independent Riau.


RITE AID: Donovan Miller Files Complaint in Pennsylvania
--------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Donovan Miller, LLC filed a class action lawsuit
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania on behalf of purchasers of Rite Aid Corporation
(NYSE: RAD) common stock from December 14, 1998 through March
11, 1999. The Complaint alleges that Rite Aid and certain of its
officers and directors violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by, among other things, issuing
materially false and misleading statements to the investing
public regarding Rite Aid's financial results.

For more information, telephone Michael D. Donovan at 800-619-
1677 or 215-732-6020, or write mdonovan@dmlaw.com or
dmlaw@erols.com via email.


SECURE COMPUTING: Greenfield Firm Files Securities Complaint
------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Firm of Harvey Greenfield filed a class action lawsuit
on behalf of purchasers of Secure Computing Corporation (NASDAQ:
SCUR) common stock between Nov. 10, 1998 and March 31, 1999
alleging violations of federal securities laws. The defendants
include Secure Computing and certain officers and directors.

The Complaint charges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10-
b(5) by, among other things, issuing false and misleading
statements that demand was strong, that backlog had never been
better, and that it was on track to report growing revenues. The
complaint alleges that defendants issued the false and
misleading statements in an effort to artificially inflate
Secure Computing's stock price, allowing insiders to sell stock
valued at more than $6 million. On April 1, 1999, just weeks
after reiterating that the company was on target to report its
usual revenue and earnings growth, defendants disclosed Secure
Computing's terrible operating results and diminishing
prospects.

For more information, call Harvey Greenfield, Esq. at 212-949-
5500 or 877-949-5500 or write hgreenf@banet.net via email.


SOFTWARE AG: Wolf Haldenstein Files Complaint in Virginia
---------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP filed a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia on behalf of investors who bought Software
AG Systems, Inc. (NYSE: AGS) stock between November 17, 1997 and
April 5, 1999. The lawsuit charges Software AG, several of its
top officers and Thayer Equity Investors III, LP 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 and allowing defendants to use inside information to
sell their shares of Software AG common stock for millions of
dollars of personal profit. On April 5, 1999 the Company
disclosed that its revenues and earnings were well below
analysts expectations. On the release of this news the Company's
stock price dropped 29%.

To learn more, call Michael Miske, Gregory Nespole, Esq., Fred
Taylor Isquith, Esq., or Shane T. Rowley, Esq., at 800-575-0735
or write classmember@whafh.com or whafh@aol.com via email.


TCC INDUSTRIES: Berger and Vinton Firms File Colorado Complaint
---------------------------------------------------------------
Berger & Montague, P.C. and Vinton Nissler Allen & Vellone,
P.C., have filed a Complaint alleging violations of Sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against
TCC Industries, Inc. and several of its officers and directors.
The action, seeking class action status, was filed in the United
States District Court for the District of Colorado on behalf of
purchasers of TCC Industries (NYSE: TEL) (OTCBB: TELC) common
stock during the period from September 3, 1997, through January
25, 1999.

The Complaint alleges that defendants inflated the price of TCCI
stock artificially by knowingly or recklessly disregarding that
TCCI was unable to execute a plan to transform itself from a
manufacturing company to a financial services company.

To learn more, call Jacob A. Goldberg, Esq., at 888-891-2289, or
write investorprotect@bm.net via email, or call Patrick Vellone,
Esq., at 303-534-4499 or at pvellone@vnavlaw.com via email.


TOBACCO LITIGATION: Atlantic City Casino Workers Out of Luck
------------------------------------------------------------
Dealers, supervisors and bartenders in Atlantic City casinos
were denied the chance to sue tobacco companies as a class for
harm from second-hand cigarette smoke. Judge Marina Corodemus's
decision permits individual suits for health claims, but she
refused to certify a class action.

The lawsuit was brought by non-smoking casino workers "who
desire to participate in a program to monitor their medical
condition from diseases caused by exposure to second hand
smoke." In the opinion, Judge Corodemus (Superior Court of New
Jersey Law Division: Middlesex County) noted: "The basic problem
... is that there is no common nucleus of operative facts in
this litigation." The judge wrote: "there are simply too many
variations in products and people to permit class certification.
This litigation does not involve one product that was produced
and purchased in one given year. These cases potentially cover
fifty years of various brands and product designs. Additionally,
each plaintiff has a disparate work and health history. Because
the quality and, to an extent potential quantity, of individual
issues predominate over common issues of law and fact, this
court cannot grant plaintiffs' application for certification."

Judge Corodemus' decision was one of two recent rulings that
denied class certification in cases against the tobacco
industry. In the other case, a U.S. District Court judge in Ohio
denied class certification in a suit alleging that the tobacco
industry tried "to deceive and addict smokers to cigarettes."

The tobacco industry is delighted that the millions of people
dead or dying of cigarette smoke will have to sue individually,
if at all. "These back-to-back denials of class certification by
a federal court and a state court vividly underscore the fact
that it is inappropriate to treat smoking and health cases as
class actions," said Daniel W. Donahue, senior vice president
and deputy general counsel for Reynolds Tobacco. "We remain
confident that the minority of state court decisions to certify
classes in these types of cases will be overturned on appeal."


TURBODYNE: Delisted from Nasdaq, Looking to List on the OTC
-----------------------------------------------------------
In a story copyrighted by Phillips Publishing, Inc., the Diesel
Fuel News reported that the Nasdaq Listing Qualifications Panel,
the oversight panel for many publicly-traded U.S. stocks,
delisted the shares of diesel emissions reduction technology
developer Turbodyne for engaging in a "pattern of issuing
misleading and incomplete news releases." As a result of the new
Nasdaq delisting, Turbodyne is trying to list its securities on
the OTC (over-the-counter) Bulletin Board.

The Diesel Fuel News reported that the delisting follows a
similar controversy in Europe, where the Easdaq Market Authority
complained Turbodyne issued news releases "that were alleged to
have contained false or misleading price-sensitive information."
While Easdaq later reinstated Turbodyne trading, it issued a
report stating that Turbodyne's "news releases were not
intentionally misleading but may have given an overly optimistic
impression of certain of the company's prospects."

Several law firms have class-action suits pending against
Turbodyne. For instance, the law firm of Lionel Z. Glancy told
the Diesel Fuel News that Turbodyne has issued statements
"portraying Turbodyne as a booming company which was
experiencing and would continue to experience rapidly rising
sales and profits on its core products and new product
offerings, " which Glancy termed as "false and misleading."



                            *********

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  * * *