/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/020711.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Thursday, July 11, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 136 Headlines ABC CHECK: Customer Files Suit Alleging Illegally High Interest Rates CENTERPULSE LTD.: No Appeals Filed V. $725M Faulty Implants Settlement DOLLAR TREE: Recalls 294,000 Kitchen Range Drip Pans For Fire Hazard ENTERASYS NETWORKS INC.: Expects Securities Suits To Be Consolidated GREAT ATLANTIC: Consents To $3 Million Settlement of Wage Suits in NY GREAT ATLANTIC: Faces Several Suits For Securities Violations in NJ GREAT ATLANTIC: Faces Shareholder Derivative Suit in NJ State Court JAPAN: A-Bomb Victims Seek Recognition As Radiation Sickness Sufferers NEBRASKA: Federal Judge Refuses to Stop Cuts In Child-Care Subsidies NORTHWEST AIRLINES: GA Court Approves Settlement of Race Bias Lawsuit PENNSYLVANIA: ACLU Fights Pittsburgh Police Dept On Profanity Arrests SOUTH KOREA: Delay In Introduction Of Securities Suits Into Economy STRAWSER INC.: Motorists Sue For Unfinished Repair on Interstate 95 UNITED STATES: USDA Seeks Stay of Order Halting Beef Checkoff Program VERIZON WIRELESS: Says CA Suit Settlement Will Have Nationwide Effect WAR VETERANS: Fight For Compensation For British Veterans Gains Ground New Securities Fraud Cases AMDOCS LTD.: Stull Stull Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS: Chimicles & Tikellis Files PA Securities Suit CRYOLIFE INC.: Holzer & Holzer Commences Securities Suit in Georgia CRYOLIFE INC.: Mark McNair Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. GA INTERLIANT INC.: Brualdi Law Firm Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY MERCK & CO.: Wechsler Harwood Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey MERRILL LYNCH: Stull Stull Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY PERKINELMER INC.: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in MA Court RELIANT RESOURCES: Wolf Haldenstein Launches Securities Suit in S.D. TX ********* ABC CHECK: Customer Files Suit Alleging Illegally High Interest Rates --------------------------------------------------------------------- ABC Check Cashiers faces a class action in Crawford County Circuit Court, alleging the Company charged illegally high interest rates disguised as service charges, the Southwest Times Record reports. Fort Smith resident LaDonna Payte filed the suit. Ms. Payte received a cash loan from the Company in May 2001 after she presented the Company with a personal check for $122.22, which the Company agreed to hold until her next payday. In exchange, she received $100 cash from the company. When she returned on her payday, she was given the option of paying off the loan and the service charge or "renew" the loan by simply paying a portion of the debt against the personal check. Ms. Payte opted to renew the loan and subsequently agreed to following renewals, the lawsuit states. The suit alleges that "the terms of these loans resulted in an effective annual percentage rate in the minimum amount of 405.57 percent...After several months of conducting this type of business with the defendant, the plaintiff finally reached a point where she could not continue to pay the defendants' fees ... The interest rates charged by the defendant for loans to its customers constitute a gross and flagrant violation of the usury laws of Arkansas." Todd Turner, the Arkadelphia attorney who filed the lawsuit, told the Times Record the Company has closed their doors. "It appears they have gone out of business," he said. That will not stop Ms. Payte and other class-action litigants from collecting from the firm, however. The Times Record could not reach the Company for comment. A recording at the business's telephone number stated the number had been disconnected. CENTERPULSE LTD.: No Appeals Filed V. $725M Faulty Implants Settlement ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Swiss medical technology company Centerpulse Ltd. recently said that no appeal has been filed by patients against a $725 million class action settlement over faulty knee and hip implants, Dow Jones International News reports, as the appeal period expired on July 5. While no appeal was filed, 12 patients who underwent revision surgery still decline to accept the agreement, a number down from around 16 a month ago. Company spokeswoman Beatrice Tschanz said the Company continues to negotiate out of court settlements with these patients. The number of opt-outs is expected to drop to around eight soon. "No individual lawsuits have been filed so far, but these patients clearly prefer settlements to lawsuits," the spokeswoman said. The Company has said that it will fight any individual lawsuits the opt-outs may bring. Under the terms of the settlement, the Company will pay patients who went through revision surgery after receiving faulty knee or hip implants, an average of $200,00 each over the next six to 18 months. Costs for the revision surgeries as well as legal fees are included in the compensation. DOLLAR TREE: Recalls 294,000 Kitchen Range Drip Pans For Fire Hazard -------------------------------------------------------------------- Dollar Tree Stores, Inc. is cooperating with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) by voluntarily recalling about 294,000 drip pans. These drip pans are used under the burners of kitchen ranges to catch food that drips while cooking. The hot burners can ignite the drip pans and pose a fire hazard. The Company has received seven reports of the drip pans catching fire. No injuries have been reported. The recalled drip pans were sold in various sizes, ranging from 6- to 9- inches in diameter. The SKU Number 845289 is either on the pan or on a cardboard insert in the package. All of the drip pans are black. Dollar Tree Stores sold these drip pans nationwide from April 2002 to May 2002 for about $1. For more details, contact the Company by Phone: 800-876-8077 between 9:00 am and 5:00 pm ET Monday through Friday. ENTERASYS NETWORKS INC.: Expects Securities Suits To Be Consolidated -------------------------------------------------------------------- Six investor lawsuits accusing Enterasys Networks Inc. and two top executives of fraud will be consolidated into a single class action, The Union Leader (N.H.) reported recently. The Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Association, which claims it lost more than $2 million on Enterasys stock between August 1, 2001 and February 1 of this year, will lead the suit. Three of the lawsuits had been filed in US District Court in February, after the US Securities and Exchange Commission announced it was investigating the company. Another was filed in March and two in April. The plaintiffs have been negotiating the consolidation for two months. The suits accuse the Company, former chief executive officer Enrique Fiallo and current chief financial officer Robert Gagalis of deceiving investors about the Company's revenues and earnings in order to keep its stock artificially high. They also accuse Mr. Fiallo of benefiting personally by selling his shares at inflated prices. Court documents allege Company officials used accounting principles that were contrary to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and the Company's own policies. Company stock has lost 85 percent of its value since it disclosed on February 4 that it found discrepancies in how it recorded a $4 million sales contract in Asia. Company officials have said the Company is conducting an internal investigation. Mr. Fiallo and two other top executives resigned in April, and hundreds of employees were laid off. Also, the company has delayed its release of fourth-quarter and full-year financial results. The Company, based in Rochester, is a spinoff of the former Cabletron Systems Inc. Cabletron co-founder and former chief executive Craig Benson said the Company's management has acted honestly. Mr. Benson, who continues as an Enterasys director and member of the directors' audit committee, said the Company simply lost money as a result of a downturn in the high-tech industry. Lawyers for the plaintiffs said they plan to take testimony under oath from Mr. Benson, to find out what he knew about Company finances, and when. Mr. Benson is not named in the lawsuit, however. GREAT ATLANTIC: Consents To $3 Million Settlement of Wage Suits in NY --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., Inc. reached an memorandum of understanding (MOU) to settle for US$3 million two lawsuits, one a class action and the other filed by the Attorney General of the State of New York. The Attorney General's suit was filed in the New York Supreme Court, County of New York, while the class action is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The suits alleged alleging that the Company and its subsidiary Shopwell, Inc., together with the Company's outside delivery service Chelsea Trucking, Inc., violated New York law by failing to pay minimum and overtime wages to individuals who deliver groceries at one of the Food Emporium's stores in New York City. The federal suit makes similar minimum wage and overtime pay allegations under both federal and state law and extends the allegations to various stores operated by the Company. In May 2001, the federal court granted plaintiffs' motion for certification of a class action. On June 18, 2002, the plaintiffs, the Attorney General and the Company entered into the MOU providing for a settlement of the actions brought by the plaintiff class and by the Attorney General. Under the proposed settlement, the Company would pay approximately $3 million in full settlement of the actions and would receive releases from the class and the Attorney General, and the actions would be dismissed with prejudice. The proposed settlement remains subject to, among other things, execution of a definitive settlement agreement and the approval of the federal court. GREAT ATLANTIC: Faces Several Suits For Securities Violations in NJ ------------------------------------------------------------------- Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., Inc. faces several securities class actions pending in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The suits name as defendants the Company and certain of its officers and directors. The suits purport to assert claims under Sections 10(b) (and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 arising out of the Company's accounting practices, and allege that the Company made material misrepresentations and omissions concerning its financial results. The Company intends to vigorously oppose the suits, and is confident that they will not have a materially adverse effect on its financial position or business operations. GREAT ATLANTIC: Faces Shareholder Derivative Suit in NJ State Court ------------------------------------------------------------------- The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., Inc. faces a shareholder derivative suit filed in the Superior Court of New Jersey in Bergen County against the Company's Board of Directors and certain of its executive officers in an action. The suit alleges that the defendants violated their fiduciary obligations to the Company and its stockholders by failing to establish and maintain adequate accounting controls and mismanaging the assets and business of the Company, and seeks unspecified money damages, costs and expenses. While the outcome of this suit cannot be predicted with certainty, the Company does not believe that the outcome will have a material adverse effect on its consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows. JAPAN: A-Bomb Victims Seek Recognition As Radiation Sickness Sufferers ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A total of 19 victims of the 1945 atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagsaki asked three prefectural governments recently to recognize them as sufferers of radiation sickness, in the first such group application and bid to seek a more lenient recognition system, the Kyodo News reports. The applications in Aichi, Ishikawa and Kumamoto prefectures came in line with policies of the Japan Confederation of A-bomb and H-bomb Sufferers' Organizations, which terms the current recognition system "too severe and inhumane." "Many A-bomb victims gave up hopes to be officially recognized as sufferers under the current severe system, but they have decided to apply as they have suffered more as they are getting older," said an official of the confederation. Other A-bomb victims plan to file the same application with five other prefectural governments, bringing the total number of applicants to more than 70. The applicants would be eligible for special medical benefits worth 139,600 yen per month if the governments recognize that their diseases were caused by exposure to radiation from the atomic bombings on August 6 and August 9, 1945. They said they will file a class action if their applications are rejected. 80 A-bomb victims whose applications were previously rejected, are also ready to join if they are rejected again, the confederation said. Some 30 percent of the applications have been approved since fiscal 1993. Of 285,620 A-bomb victims as of the end of March, only 2,169, or 0.76 percent are recognized as sufferers of radiation sickness, according to the health ministry. Regarding the group application, Health, Labor and Welfare Minister Chikara Sakaguchi told a news conference that although he recognizes some say the current recognition system is too severe, he does not believe it is necessary to revise it at present. NEBRASKA: Federal Judge Refuses to Stop Cuts In Child-Care Subsidies -------------------------------------------------------------------- Lancaster County District Judge John Colburn, in Nebraska, recently denied a request that would have halted temporarily a move by the state that cut funding for child-care subsidies for poor people, the Associated Press Newswires reports. The request for the temporary injunction was filed by the Nebraska Appleseed Center for Law in the Public Interest on behalf of three mothers. Judge Colburn said the women failed to show that they would suffer immediate, irreparable harm if he denied the request for an injunction. Judge Colburn's order, however, does not preclude the class action, filed earlier, from proceeding. Three mothers had filed the lawsuit last month, alleging that the cuts, spearheaded by Gov. Mike Johanns, were illegal. Gov. Johanns changed the rules for child-care subsidies in an April veto of legislation. It reduced the income cut-off for working families who are not coming off welfare from 185 percent of the federal poverty level to 120 percent. Under the old rules, a family of four could earn up to $32,652 a year and qualify for the subsidy. That dropped to 21,180 on July 1. This will save the state about $4.6 million a year. Becky Gould, a lawyer with the Appleseed Center, said that the Governor's line-item veto of a budget appropriation for the child-care subsidies was a major policy change not directed by the Legislature. She also said it is unconstitutional to take away subsidies for some families while keeping them for families in an identical low-income situation. Governor Johanns has defended the cut, saying the money was not there to keep the program running at its current level and that funding had been generous in the past. The subsidy program has grown over the last five years, from serving about 9,000 children in 1997 to more than 16,000 this year. The cut in child-care subsidies affects at least 1,000 low-income working families and 1,500 children throughout the state. Ms. Gould said the center will continue to pursue the lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Kendra Johnsen and Jamie Longwell of Lincoln and Jamie Koch of Scottsbluff. Ms. Longwell, for example, will face an increase of between $606 and $861 per month in her child-care costs, Ms. Gould said. NORTHWEST AIRLINES: GA Court Approves Settlement of Race Bias Lawsuit --------------------------------------------------------------------- An Atlanta federal court granted approval to a settlement of a racial discrimination suit filed against Northwest Airlines, on behalf of the African-American employees at its Atlanta maintenance hangar, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports. The suit alleged that the Company subjected the plaintiffs to "the presentation of nooses, Confederate flags, misogynist or racist graffiti, jokes and comments which debase, degrade and demean them." The suit initially sought class-action status, but the court said there was "a strong likelihood" that class certification would be denied. The Company has denied the accusations in the lawsuit and said it does not tolerate harassment. US District Judge Charles Pannell approved the settlement, under which 50 of the airline's 292 African-American employees in Atlanta have agreed to go through arbitration hearings in which each worker could receive up to $300,000. "We worked extremely hard to resolve the case," Company attorney Al Pearson told the Journal-Constitution. "We got a good settlement." A Northwest spokesman said the airline is pleased with the agreement, adding arbitration will provide a "fair and expeditious framework for the consideration, and if necessary, resolution of individual claims from eligible parties." Mr. Pearson added the settlement is limited to monetary damages, which could total up to $15 million. He and two other plaintiffs' attorneys will split an additional $150,000. PENNSYLVANIA: ACLU Fights Pittsburgh Police Dept On Profanity Arrests --------------------------------------------------------------------- The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) recently filed two lawsuits, one on behalf of Erica Upshaw, against two Pittsburgh-area police departments, accusing officers of violating Ms. Upshaw's right to free speech, the Associated Press Newswires reports. Ms. Upshaw, 28, a mother of three children, was pulled over by a police officer who told her she had made an incomplete stop. After checking her record by computer, the officer told Ms. Upshaw that her driver's license was suspended. She was under stress and cursed, ending up in jail for her choice of words. As it happens, her license had not been suspended, there had been a temporary computer glitch. The ACLU wants the lawsuits to warn police across the nation that they should not arrest people simply because they do not like someone's language, said Witod Walczak, executive director of the ACLU's Pittsburgh chapter. He said that officers need to understand that when person is stopped by the police, tremendous tension and stress is created and emotions spill over. Police dismiss the accusation that they are misusing disorderly conduct laws, saying officers are just trying to do their job. Officers may feel it is necessary to arrest someone on a minor charge to prevent the person from committing a more serious crime, said Jim Pasco, executive director of the National Fraternal Order of Police. "The police don't write the laws, they don't prosecute the laws, they just enforce the laws," said Mr. Pasco. "Perhaps, they (the ACLU) would address changing the law rather than harassing the police." The ACLU's initiative stems from a 1996 class action against the Pittsburgh police department over alleged widespread abuse and misconduct. Mr. Walczak said that at least a dozen of those complaints involved profanity arrests. The police department agreed to federal oversight and the city agreed to settle the lawsuits for a total of $275,000 last month, in an endeavor to persuade the court and the Department of Justice that the Pittsburgh Police were ready to function without federal oversight. The ACLU said it was receiving five or six complaints a year from western Pennsylvanians who were arrested for swearing, said Mr. Walczak. Ms. Upshaw's arrest was one of them. Most municipalities have some provision that allows police to arrest rowdy individuals, said Mr. Pasco. The ACLU's second lawsuit last week stems from the arrest of Amy Johnson, 27, a Chatham University student, and Gregory Lagrosa, 29, a University of Pittsburgh student. According to the lawsuit, Ms. Johnson swore at a passing Homestead police patrol car, which Ms. Johnson said came dangerously close to the couple as they walked through a crosswalk. The charges were subsequently dismissed. Homestead Mayor Betty Esper is standing firmly by the town's officers, who handle approximately 900 calls a month. She says preventing officers from making arrests could have an adverse effect on society, particularly in teaching children about manners. SOUTH KOREA: Delay In Introduction Of Securities Suits Into Economy ------------------------------------------------------------------- Securities-related class actions, which were to be introduced in April, likely will not be introduced any time this year, reports the Korea Herald, citing the Ministry of Finance and Economy. According to a report by the Dow-Jones International News, the National Assembly has not looked over the necessary bills, and, in fact, many lawmakers are opposed to class actions, because of their sympathy to big corporations, said a ministry official. Another influential factor barring introduction of class actions this year, is the upcoming presidential election in December. Political parties are unlikely to take actions that could arouse the ire of the business community, said the same official, according to the Herald. The People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPD), a civic group in support of the class action lawsuit system, has been collecting signatures from citizens to prod lawmakers to act on the necessary legislation leading to introduction. "The system should be introduced to protect investors and realize economic justice," an official of the civic group said. "Stock market institutions, including the Korea Stock Exchange, the Kosdaq market and the Korea Futures Exchange, are also looking forward to an early implementation of the class-action lawsuit system, because it could invigorate the stock market by offering better protection to investors," said Korea Stock Exchange Chairman and CEO Kang Yung-joo. He added, "To protect investors, enhance corporate transparency and improve corporate governance structures, it is necessary to introduce class-action lawsuits." STRAWSER INC.: Motorists Sue For Unfinished Repair on Interstate 95 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Strawser, Inc. faces a class action after motorists damaged their vehicles after driving through a newly-paved stretch of the Interstate 96, where the tar had not yet set properly, the Detroit News reports. An estimated 2,000 to 3,000 people drove through the I-96 on May 30 and 31 and found their vehicles stained with a tar-like substance that couldn't be removed by scrubbing. Bits of aggregate stuck in the tar also reportedly damaged their vehicles. Detroit law firm Macuga and Liddle filed the suit, accusing the Company of being responsible for tarring that section of the road. The suit claims the Strawser company allowed the road to be re-opened to traffic even though the tar it laid had not set properly. Brian Einhorn, a Company attorney told the Detroit News that the damage occurred to the vehicles after the last 1,000 to 1,500 feet of a road-overlay project failed to set properly. The Company has been working with the Michigan Department of Transportation to get claims settled and to figure out what went wrong. "We're trying to come up with a procedure where people can come in and have their cars inspected," Einhorn said. "If there's no question the damage was caused by the road, we'll work something out." The project involved a technique called microsurfacing, where aggregate is mixed with chemicals and used to seal the road, repelling water. Unexpected downpours on May 31 may have contributed to the breakdown, Ari Adler, a state transportation department spokesman, told the Detroit News. "It could have been a combination of the weather, the stuff didn't set all the way and there's some question if we opened the lanes too soon," he said. UNITED STATES: USDA Seeks Stay of Order Halting Beef Checkoff Program --------------------------------------------------------------------- The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) filed a motion seeking a stay of a federal judge's decision to halt collections made in conjunction with a beef checkoff program, pending an appeal by the department of the judge's decision, the Associated Press Newswires reports. US District Judge Charles B. Kornmann, in South Dakota, ruled recently that the national beef checkoff program violated the First Amendment rights of cattle producers and called for USDA to halt collection for that program starting July 15. USDA has filed an appeal of the decision and USDA is seeking a stay of the halt on collections, pending that appeal, from the US Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. Since 1985, livestock producers have had to pay a mandatory $1-per-head fee on cattle sold in the United States. Half of that money goes to the Cattlemen's Beef Promotion and Research Board and half to qualified state beef councils. The groups came up with the popular slogan, "Beef: It's What's for Dinner." Collection of the fee is done by collectors during a checkoff of each head of cattle. Those opposed to the checkoff are upset by, among other things, that the advertisements promote beef in general, not American beef. In his opinion, Judge Kornmann said cattlemen should not be required to pay for commercials, which are a form of speech they are opposed to. USDA said the nationwide order to halt collections was too broad, and gave as a reason, for example, that collection of the entire one dollar checkoff was halted, even though only about half of each dollar goes to generic advertising. USDA's motion for the stay halting cessation of the program said cattle producers would suffer minimal harm if required to take part in the beef checkoff program while the appeal is pending. VERIZON WIRELESS: Says CA Suit Settlement Will Have Nationwide Effect --------------------------------------------------------------------- Verizon Wireless attorneys have filed new motions to dismiss a Louisiana lawsuit accusing the company of misleading customers, arguing that a proposed class action settlement in California would cover alleged victims nationwide, according to a report by Associated Press Newswires. Like the Louisiana lawsuit, the California case involves allegations that the Company took steps to prevent people from using their cell phones with other carriers, but did not disclose that to customers before they bought the phones. The class defined in the California case covers about 40 million people who had contracts in an 11-year span with the Company and cell-phone companies it bought, said Nancy Stark, Company spokeswoman. If approved by a state judge in San Diego, the settlement could mean new customer service agreements and $15 coupons for allegedly deceived customers. The Company has not admitted any wrongdoing. Ms. Stark said she did not know how many people in Louisiana could be affected by the proposed settlement. Attorney Randy Estes, who represents Shane O'Quin in one of two Baton Rouge lawsuits against the Company, said he also was unsure how many Louisiana cellular phone customers would be affected. "For whatever reason, Verizon has not told us how many customers they have here," Mr. Estes said. US District Judge James Brady is considering whether the California settlement would cover the alleged victims in the O'Quin lawsuit. The judge has ordered all written arguments on the issue to be submitted by August 2. Mr. O'Quin sued the Company in state District Court in Baton Rouge in September 2001, but the suit was later moved to federal court. Ms. Georgianne Mire has a lawsuit similar to Mr. O'Quin's pending in federal court in Baton Rouge. It was not immediately clear how that case may be affected. The Company sold Mr. O'Quin a cellular phone and a monthly service contract, Mr. O'Quin's lawsuit says. The phone has a "subsidy lock" on it, something the Company failed to disclose would render the phone useless with any other cellular system, Mr. Estes said. When customers asked about removing the lock, the Company said they had to pay to get the code to unlock it, or, in some cases, they refused to hand over the code at all, Mr. Estes said. "That phone you thought you owned cannot be used with anybody else," he added. Attorney Thomas Roberts, who represents the Company, filed the motion to throw out Mr. O'Quin's lawsuit in light of the proposed California settlement. Nearly everyone who could collect from any settlement of the Baton Rouge cases can collect in the California settlement, Mr. Roberts wrote in his motion to stop Mr. O'Quin's case while the California settlement is decided. The California settlement affects anyone who had cellular or wireless service nationally with the Company or one of 12 other companies, from January 1, 1991, through April 12, 2002. The proposed settlement would affect customers of: (1) Verizon Wireless, (2) Airtouch Cellular, (3) Ameritech Cellular Services, (4) Bell Atlantic Mobile, (5) Bell Atlantic Nynex Mobile, (6) GTE Wireless, (7) Metro Mobile, (8) Nynex Mobile, (9) Primeco, (10) Southwestco Wireless d/b/a Cellular One, (11) Comm Net, (12) Frontier Cellular and (13) US West Cellular Mr. O'Quin's lawsuit affects essentially the same group, Mr. Roberts wrote. Mr. Estes disagreed, saying, "I hope he's dead wrong...It will certainly have an effect on our case, but what that is, I do not know." WAR VETERANS: Fight For Compensation For British Veterans Gains Ground ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Two law firms have received public funding to look into the filing of a class action on behalf of veterans and civilians exposed to British nuclear tests in the South Pacific half a century ago, the Associated Press reports. Alexander Harris and Clarke Willmott & Clarke law firms received funding from the Legal Services Commission to investigate the strength of five test cases before considering the launching of a compensation class action on behalf of veterans and civilians from Britain, New Zealand and Fiji. According to AP, Thousands of British and Commonwealth troops, and local civilians, were exposed to atomic radiation from nuclear test explosions in the Pacific between 1952 and 1963, the year that the International Nuclear Testing Ban was signed. Britain's Ministry of Defense has always denied the level of exposure was sufficient to cause the illnesses cancer, muscular diseases, gastrointestinal problems, heart conditions, asthma and loss of teeth and hair, that those exposed later complained of. The firms said they received new medical evidence linking the tests to several illnesses, including cancer. Mervyn Fudge, a partner at law firm Clarke Willmott & Clarke, told AP recently published research shows "that the stance taken by the Ministry of Defense is incorrect and that the veterans have sustained injuries which should allow them to claim compensation from the British government." "From the information which is available to both ourselves and Alexander Harris, we are at this time satisfied that such an action is sustainable and would be successful," he said. A Ministry of Defense spokesman told AP, however, independent studies had shown no evidence of excess illness or mortality among the veterans. "We refute very strongly any suggestion that these veterans were used as guinea pigs," he said on customary condition of anonymity. New Securities Fraud Cases AMDOCS LTD.: Stull Stull Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY ------------------------------------------------------------------- Stull, Stull & Brody initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of all persons who purchased securities of Amdocs Limited (NYSE:DOX) common stock between July 18, 2000 and June 20, 2002, inclusive, against the Company and certain of its senior officers and directors. The complaint charges Amdocs, Ltd., Amdocs, Inc. and certain of its officers, during the specified time period, with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Among other things, plaintiff claims that defendants' material omissions and materially false and misleading statements regarding the nature of the Company's revenue and business prospects caused the Company's stock price to become artificially inflated, inflicting damages on investors. The complaint alleges that, during the class period, defendants overstated the Company's orders backlog and misrepresented or failed to fully disclose the full extent of the Company's problems, including a declining backlog, declining customer demand, inadequate Company technology, accounting irregularities and problem acquisitions. For more information, contact Tzivia Brody by Mail: 6 East 45th Street New York NY 10017 by Phone: 800-337-4983, or by Fax: 212-490-2022 or by E-mail: SSBNY@aol.com ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS: Chimicles & Tikellis Files PA Securities Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Chimicles & Tikellis LLP initiated a securities class action Friday on behalf of purchasers of the 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes due 2006 issued by Adelphia Communications Corporation. The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The complaint alleges that Defendants violated Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and 10(b) and 20 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by misrepresenting or omitting material facts in the Registration Statement and Prospectus used to sell the 6% Convertible Subordinated Notes as well as in other public filings and statements made during the class period. The suit names as defendants: (1) John J. Rigas, (2) Timothy J. Rigas, (3) James P. Rigas, (4) Michael J. Rigas, (5) Perry S. Patterson, (6) Pete J. Metros, (7) Dennis P. Coyle, (8) Leslie J. Gelber, (9) Peter L. Venetis, (10) Daniel R. Millard, (11) Erland E. Kailbourne, (12) Deloitte & Touche LLP, (13) Salomon Smith Barney, Inc. and (14) Banc of America Securities LLC The Company petitioned for protection from its creditor under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Act on June 25, 2002. The Company is not a defendant to this action. The complaint alleges that the defendants misrepresented or failed to disclose that, between March 27 and June 10, 2002, the Company overstated its revenues, income and the number of basic cable television subscribers it served. On March 27, 2002, the Company announced that it would restate its financial results for years 1999, 2001 and 2002 because of previously undisclosed off-balance sheet loans to the Rigas family, the Company's then controlling shareholders. The defendants did not disclose until June 10, 2002 that the Company's revenues, income and number of cable subscribers were also inflated. For more information, contact Nicholas E. Chimicles or Denise Davis Schwartzman by Phone: 888-805-7848 or by E-mail: deniseschwartzman@chimicles.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.chimicles.com CRYOLIFE INC.: Holzer & Holzer Commences Securities Suit in Georgia ------------------------------------------------------------------- Holzer & Holzer initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia on behalf of purchasers of CryoLife, Inc. (NYSE:CRY) publicly traded securities during the period between August 11, 2000 and June 26, 2002, inclusive. The complaint charges that the Company, although purporting to be a "leader in the development and commercialization of implantable human tissue" and that "patient safety is of paramount concern to us" was, in reality not in compliance with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines. Inherent in those representations is that the Company abides by and follows all FDA rules, regulations, and guidelines. The complaint alleges that on June 17, 2002, the FDA sent a letter to the Company detailing a laundry list of deficiencies and safety hazards at the Company's Kennesaw, Georgia facility. The suit alleges that on June 24, 2002, the Company issued a press release, which stated that "since its inception, it has never before received a warning letter." The complaint alleges that this statement was blatantly false as the Company received a similar FDA warning letter in 1997 which detailed "serious regulatory problems." The complaint further alleges that the effect on the Company's stock price was significant and dramatic as the stock fell 18% on June 25, 2002 and an additional 16% on June 26, 2002. After trading as high as $31.31 on May 3, 2002, the stock dipped below $16.00 per share on June 27, 2002. For more details, contact Michael I. Fistel, Jr. by Phone: 404-847-0085 if in Atlanta or 888-508-6832 if outside Atlanta or by E-mail: michaelfisteljr@msn.com CRYOLIFE INC.: Mark McNair Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. GA --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Office Of Mark McNair initiated a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who acquired CryoLife, Inc. (NYSE:CRY) securities between August 11, 2000 and June 26, 2002, inclusive, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, against the Company and: (1) Steven G. Anderson and (2) Albert E. Heacox The suit charges that defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements to the market throughout the class period which statements had the effect of artificially inflating the market price of the Company's securities. For more details, contact Mark McNair by Mail: 1101 30th St N.W. Suite 500, Washington, D.C 20007 by Phone: 877-511-4717 or 202-872-4717 by E-mail: mcnair@justice4investors.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.justice4investors.com INTERLIANT INC.: Brualdi Law Firm Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Brualdi Law Firm initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Interliant, Inc. (Nasdaq: INIT) between the period of August 4, 1999 and April 8, 2002, inclusive against Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. and its former Internet analyst, Henry M. Blodget. The suit alleges that to obtain and enhance Merrill Lynch's lucrative investment banking relationship with Interliant, Inc., defendants issued analyst reports and positive ratings on Interliant, Inc. which were materially false and misleading in that they were inconsistent with the defendants' own private assessments of the Company, omitted to disclose material, non-public, adverse information that defendants possessed about Interliant, Inc. and failed to disclose significant, material conflicts of interest. For more details, contact Richard B. Brualdi by Mail: 29 Broadway, Suite 1515, New York, New York 10006 by Phone: 212-952-0602 by Fax: 212-952-0608 or by E-mail: rbrualdi@earthlink.net. MERCK & CO.: Wechsler Harwood Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey --------------------------------------------------------------------- Wechsler Harwood Halebian & Feffer LLP initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, on behalf of all investors who bought Merck & Co., Inc. (NYSE:MRK) common stock between July 1, 1999 and June 21, 2002, inclusive against the Company and certain of its senior officers and directors. According to the complaint, the Company overstated revenues by billions of dollars from its subsidiary Merck-Medco Managed Care, L.L.C. by including customer co-payments for prescription drugs in its revenues. During the class period, co-payments comprised approximately 10% of the Company's total revenues. The lawsuit claims that the Company violated Generally Accepted Accounting Practices because neither company bills for the co-payments, gets billed for them, or otherwise comes into contact with co-payment money. Patients make co-payments directly to pharmacies when they purchase medicine. On June 21, 2002, The Wall Street Journal reported on the Company's accounting practices and estimated that the Company and Merck-Medco may have overstated their 2001 revenues by as much as $4.6 billion. On July 8, 2002, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Company's revenues for 1999 and 2000 were overstated by approximately $12.6 billion. According to the complaint, the Company admitted that the Company had been recording prescription drug co-payments as revenue since it acquired Merck-Medco in 1993. On June 21, 2002, Company stock fell precipitously from its closing price of $52.20 on June 20, 2002 to a closing price of $49.98 on June 21, 2002, its lowest closing price since late 1997. On the heels of the July 8, 2002 revelations, the price of the Company's common stock dipped further and closed at $47.81 per share on the same day. For more details, contact David Leifer by Mail: 488 Madison Avenue, 8th Floor, New York, New York 10022 by Phone: 877-935-7400 or by E-mail: dleifer@whhf.com MERRILL LYNCH: Stull Stull Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY --------------------------------------------------------------------- Stull, Stull & Brody LLP initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of purchasers of Merrill Lynch Internet Infrastructure Holdrs depository receipts issued by the Merrill Lynch Internet Infrastructure Holdrs/SM Trust (AMEX:IIH) between February 24, 2000 and April 8, 2002, inclusive. The suit names as defendants, Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., Merrill Lynch Pierce, Fenner & Smith, the Trust and signatories of the Registration Statement and Prospectus issued on behalf of the Trust. The suit alleges that defendant violated Sections 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 by issuing a series of false and misleading statements, and omissions of material fact contained in the Prospectus filed with the SEC on February 24, 2000, for the issuance and initial public offering of one billion Internet Infrastructure HOLDRS. In particular, it is alleged that the prospectus was materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose that defendants recommended the purchase of and set price targets for stocks of certain of the companies that were included as assets of the Trust without any reasonable factual basis therefore failed to disclose significant material conflicts of interest to obtain investment banking business for Merrill Lynch and failed to disclose material, non-public, adverse information which they possessed about such companies, as well as their true opinion about such companies. It is further alleged that the prospectus failed to disclose that, consequently, stocks of the underlying securities covered by Merrill Lynch traded at artificially inflated prices, which in turn artificially inflated the price of the Internet Infrastructure Holdrs throughout the class period, causing plaintiff and the other members of the class to suffer damages. For more details, contact Tzivia Brody by Mail: 6 East 45th Street, New York NY 10017 by Phone: 800-337-4983 by Fax: 212-490-2022 by E-mail: SSBNY@aol.com PERKINELMER INC.: Charles Piven Commences Securities Suit in MA Court --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who acquired PerkinElmer, Inc. (NYSE:PKI) securities between July 15, 2001 and April 11, 2002, inclusive, in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, against the Company and: (1) Gregory L. Summe and (2) Robert F. Friel The suit charges that defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements to the market throughout the class period which statements had the effect of artificially inflating the market price of the Company's securities. For more information, contact Charles J. Piven by Mail: The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202 by Phone: 410-986-0036 or by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com RELIANT RESOURCES: Wolf Haldenstein Launches Securities Suit in S.D. TX ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Reliant Resources, Inc. between May 1, 2001 and May 10, 2002, inclusive, against the Company, and certain of its officers and directors. The suit alleges that defendants violated the federal securities laws by issuing materially false and misleading statements throughout the class period that had the effect of artificially inflating the market price of the Company's securities. During the class period, defendants released statements concerning the Company's quarterly and annual financial performance and filed reports substantiating such performance with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The suit alleges that these statements were materially false and misleading because 10% of the Company's confirmed and represented revenues in 1999 and 2000 were composed of purchases and sales referred to as "round trip trades, " transactions involving the simultaneous buying and trading of power in the same price and same amount and provide no economic benefit to the Company. The suit further alleges that some transactions in the Company's conventional accrual accounts were improperly described as cash flow hedges. On May 10, 2002, the Company announced to the investing public that a $500 million private placement debt offering, priced on May 9, 2002, would be withdrawn, affected by their "round trip" trades. Pursuant to this statement, the Company's common stock underwent a single-day reduction of more than 25% on high trading volume and a decline of more than 55% from the class period high. For more details, contact Fred Taylor Isquith, Gregory Nespole, Gustavo Bruckner, Michael Miske, George Peters or Derek Behnke by Mail: 270 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016 by Phone: 800-575-0735 by E-mail: classmember@whafh.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.whafh.com. All e-mail correspondence should make reference to Reliant Resources. ********* 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., Trenton, New Jersey, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C. Enid Sterling, Aurora Fatima Antonio and Lyndsey Resnick, Editors. Copyright 2002. All rights reserved. ISSN 1525-2272. This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior written permission of the publishers. Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but is not guaranteed. The CAR subscription rate is $575 for six months delivered via e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof are $25 each. For subscription information, contact Christopher Beard at 240/629-3300. * * * End of Transmission * * *