CAR_Public/040428.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Wednesday, April 28, 2004, Vol. 6, No. 83

                         Headlines

ALLSTATE CORPORATION: High Court Refuses Motion To Limit Lawsuit
AMAZON.COM: Plaintiffs File Consolidated Securities Suit in WA
AT&T CORPORATION: Supreme Court Rejects Appeal of OK Tax Lawsuit
AUSTRALIA: Former Officers Considering Lawsuit V. Defence Force
CDH & AFFILIATES: SEC Launches Administrative Proceedings in GA

DOLLAR FINANCIAL: Working To Arbitrate Canadian Consumer Suits
DOLLAR FINANCIAL: Faces Four Overtime Wage Lawsuits in CA Court
ERNST & YOUNG: SEC Upholds Ruling in Auditor Independence Suit
FRANK GRUTTADAURIA: OH Court Grants Summary Judgment in Lawsuit
INDEPENDENCE BLUE: PA Court Approves Insurance Suit Settlement

KAWASAKI MOTORS: Recalls 5,850 Motorcycles Due To Muffler Defect
LARRY TYLER: TX Court Returns Two-Count Stock Fraud Indictment
MAZDA (NORTH AMERICA): Recalls 15T Cars For Airbag Malfunction
MAZDA (NORTH AMERICA): Recalls 29,300 Cars Due To Airbag Defect
MAZDA (NORTH AMERICA): Recalls Cars For Heat Insulator Defect

MEDCO HEALTH: Enters $20 Million Settlement With Nineteen States
MITSUBISHI MOTORS: Recalls SUVs Due to Child Safety Seat Defect
PORSCHE CARS: Recalls 10,637 Cayenne S Cars Due To Fire Hazard
SHELL: Big Bosses Named in Multi-Billion Securities Fraud Suit
WEALTH INTERNATIONAL: SEC Files Order To Show Cause in GA Suit

WORLD WRESTLING: Negotiating Settlement of NY Securities Lawsuit

              Meetings, Conferences & Seminars

* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
* Online Teleconferences

                 New Securities Fraud Cases

ABATIX CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Files Stock Lawsuit in N.D. TX
EL PASO: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. TX
INTERPOOL INC.: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Fraud Suit in NJ
McDONALD'S CORPORATION: Schatz & Nobel Lodges Stock Suit in IL
NDCHEALTH CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in GA

ODYSSEY HEALTHCARE: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in CA
QUALITY DISTRIBUTION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in FL
SEMICONDUCTOR TECHNOLOGIES: Cauler Geller Files Stock Suit in CA
TITAN PHARMACEUTICALS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in CA
VASO ACTIVE: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in MA

                         *********

ALLSTATE CORPORATION: High Court Refuses Motion To Limit Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Supreme Court refused AllState Corporation's
motion to limit a class action, charging it with using
customers' credit records to overcharge African Americans and
Latin Americans for home and automobile insurance, the Los
Angeles Times reports.

The suit, filed in the United States District Court in Texas,
alleges that the Company used credit histories to set rates that
had a disproportionate effect on minorities, even if it was
unintentional.  The suit, filed by six black or Latino customers
who bought auto or homeowners' insurance from Allstate, seeks
nationwide class-action status and makes claims under the
federal Fair Housing Act.

The federal court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, allowing
them to pursue their claim.  The Company appealed to the 5th
Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld the judge's ruling in
September.  The appeals court ruled that the Company didn't
identify any state policy that would be harmed by the federal
suit.  

The Company argued the disproportionate-effect claim doesn't
belong in federal court because it would interfere with states'
authority to regulate insurance.  The Company stated that
customers' credit histories are a "race-neutral insurance tool
that has gained broad acceptance as a strong predictor of risk
of loss," the Los Angeles Times reports.  Studies show that
people with poor credit ratings are more likely to suffer an
insurance loss, Allstate's lawyers said in court papers filed in
Washington.   The Company further said that letting customers
pursue a disproportionate-effect claim under the civil rights
law would cause "a dramatic and disruptive change in the way
that insurance rates are regulated."


AMAZON.COM: Plaintiffs File Consolidated Securities Suit in WA
--------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended securities class action
against Amazon.com, Inc., its directors and certain of its
senior officers in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Washington, alleging violations of the
Securities Act of 1933 and/or the Securities Act of 1934.

The suit claimed that the Company, together with certain of its
officers and directors, made false or misleading statements
during the period from October 29, 1998 through October 23, 2001
concerning the Company's business, financial condition and
results, inventories, future prospects, and strategic alliance
transactions.  The 1933 Act complaint alleges that the
defendants made false or misleading statements in connection
with the Company's February 2000 offering of the 6.875% PEACS.  
The complaint seeks recissionary and/or compensatory damages and
injunctive relief against all defendants.


AT&T CORPORATION: Supreme Court Rejects Appeal of OK Tax Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday denied an appeal by telecom
giant AT&T to overturn an Oklahoma state court's ruling
regarding a lawsuit on the company's collection of taxes on long
distance phone usage, Dow Jones Business News reports.

The case specifically involves AT&T users who live near
Muskogee, Okla., who claim that the company charges them with
municipal phone tax even they are not within city limits.  The
lawsuit was filed in Oklahoma state court and was seeking class
action status for other AT&T users that have the same problem.
It also included users that live in 27 other states.  As the
Oklahoma court allowed the lawsuit to proceed, AT&T vehemently
opposed it saying that the state does not have jurisdiction over
claims outside the state.

"The power to assess taxes and administer laws is an inherent
attribute of state sovereignty," AT&T as quoted by the Dow Jones
Business News. The company further says that it gains nothing
from overcollection of phone taxes, since all collections are
forwarded to the state that imposes them.


AUSTRALIA: Former Officers Considering Lawsuit V. Defence Force
----------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 200 former members of the Australian Defence Force is
contemplating filing a class action against the force, alleging
it wrongfully discharged personnel, the Daily Telegraph reports.

Former army officer, Major Maryann Martinek, was medically
discharged after 19 years in the army.  She told the Telegraph
she received her military medical records last year under a
Freedom of Information request and learned there was no specific
diagnosis to warrant her medical discharge.

"My medical records in my opinion were adjusted to suit a
medical discharge," she told ABC Radio.   "And because they were
adjusted in that way to suit a medical discharge, I was
discharged."

The ABC said Army, Navy and RAAF personnel had told it they were
also wrongfully discharged.  The ADF was unavailable to comment
on the allegations this morning, the Telegraph reports.


CDH & AFFILIATES: SEC Launches Administrative Proceedings in GA
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission instituted administrative
proceedings against CDH & Affiliates, Inc. (CDH) and C. David
Hallman, based on the entry, on October 23, 2003, of an
injunction by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of Georgia, Newnan Division.   

Subsequently, on April 1, 2004, the Court entered a Final
Judgment of Permanent Injunction in that civil action, entitled
SEC v. CDH & Affiliates, Inc., and C. David Hallman, Civil
Action File Number 3:02-CV-17-JTC, which enjoined CDH and
Hallman from future violations of Sections 10(b) and 15(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder,
and set disgorgement and prejudgment interest at $4,207,616.95
and ordered CDH and Hallman to pay civil penalties in the amount
of $110,000 each.  

The Commission's complaint alleged that Hallman controlled CDH
and that from September 1997 through at least June 1999, Hallman
and CDH engaged in the business of effecting transactions in
securities and fraudulently raised more than $2.2 million in
transaction-related fees from at least 27 customers, purportedly
to prepare corporate bond offerings for those customers and then
to sell those bonds for the customers.  The complaint further
alleged that in an effort to avoid detection of their scheme,
until at least July 2001, Hallman and CDH continually told their
victims that their bond issues would be funded and made other
misrepresentations to encourage the victims to believe that
funding was imminent.  

The complaint also says that CDH never sold bonds for any
customer and that no such high-yield investment program exists.  
Hallman made numerous misrepresentations to his victims,
including false claims that some victims' bonds had been
successfully sold, that bond sales were imminent and that the
proceeds of the bond sales would be invested in a high-yield
investment program that would pay 30%-40% every ten days.

A hearing will be scheduled before an administrative law judge
to determine whether the allegations contained in the Order are
true, to provide the Respondents an opportunity to dispute these
allegations, and to determine what, if any, remedial sanctions
are appropriate and in the public interest.
     
The Order requires the Administrative Law Judge to issue an
initial decision no later that 210 days from the date of service
of this Order, pursuant to Rule 360(a)(2) of the Commission's
Rules of Practice.  


DOLLAR FINANCIAL: Working To Arbitrate Canadian Consumer Suits
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dollar Financial Group, Inc. is pursuing arbitration for several
class actions filed against its Canadian subsidiary on behalf of
Canadian borrowers who are subjected to usurious charges in
payday loan transactions.

On October 21, 2003, a former customer, Kenneth D. Mortillaro,
commenced an action against the Company's Canadian subsidiary on
behalf of a purported class of Canadian borrowers (except those
residing in British Columbia and Quebec) who, Mortillaro claims,
were subjected to usurious charges in payday-loan transactions.  
The action, which is pending in the Ontario Superior Court of
Justice, alleges violations of a Canadian federal law
proscribing usury and seeks restitution and damages in an
unspecified amount, including punitive damages.  

On November 6, 2003, the Company learned of substantially
similar claims asserted on behalf of a purported class of
Alberta borrowers by Gareth Young, a former customer of its
Canadian subsidiary.  The Young action is pending in the Court
of Queens Bench of Alberta and seeks an unspecified amount of
damages and other relief.  On December 23, 2003, the Company was
served with the statement of claim in an action brought in the
Ontario Superior Court of Justice by another former customer,
Margaret Smith.  The allegations and putative class in the Smith
action are substantially the same as those in the Mortillaro
action.  Mortillaro, Smith and Young have agreed to arbitrate
all disputes with the Company.

On January 29, 2004, a former customer, Kurt MacKinnon,
commenced an action against the Company's Canadian subsidiary
and 26 other Canadian lenders on behalf of a purported class of
British Columbia residents who, Mr. MacKinnon claims, were
overcharged in payday-loan transactions.  The action, which is
pending in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, alleges
violations of laws proscribing usury and unconscionable trade
practices and seeks restitution and damages, including punitive
damages, in an unknown amount.  On February 3, 2004, the
Company's motion to stay the action and to compel arbitration of
MacKinnon's claims, as required by his agreement with the
Company, was denied; the Company is appealing this ruling.

Similar class actions have been threatened against the Company
in other provinces of Canada, but it has not been served with
the statements of claim in any such actions to date.  The
Company believes that any possible claims in these actions, if
they are served, will likely be substantially similar to those
of the Ontario actions referred to above.


DOLLAR FINANCIAL: Faces Four Overtime Wage Lawsuits in CA Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
Dollar Financial Group, Inc. faces four putative class actions,
filed by the same plaintiffs' law firm, alleging violations of
California's wage-and-hour laws, in the Superior Court of the
State of California.  The named plaintiffs in these suits are
the Company's former employees:

     (1) Vernell Woods (commenced August 22, 2000),  

     (2) Juan Castillo (commenced May 1, 2003),  

     (3) Stanley Chin (commenced May 7, 2003) and  

     (4) Kenneth Williams (commenced June 3, 2003)

Each of these suits seeks an unspecified amount of damages and
other relief in connection with allegations that:

     (i) the Company misclassified California store (Woods) and
         regional (Castillo) managers as "exempt" from a state
         law requiring the payment of overtime compensation,

    (ii) the Company failed to provide employees with meal and
         rest breaks required under a new state law (Chin) and

   (iii) the Company computed bonuses payable to the Company's
         store managers using an impermissible profit-sharing
         formula (Williams)

In January 2003, without admitting liability, the Company sought
to settle the Woods case, which it believes to be the most
significant of these suits, by offering each individual putative
class member an amount intended in good faith to settle his or
her claim.  These settlement offers have been accepted by 92% of
the members of the putative class.  Woods' counsel is presently
disputing through arbitration the validity of the settlements
accepted by the individual putative class members.


ERNST & YOUNG: SEC Upholds Ruling in Auditor Independence Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission entered an order making
final the initial decision of the administrative law judge that
was issued on April 16 in the Ernst & Young LLP auditor
independence case.  

The order was issued in response to a joint motion of Ernst &
Young LLP, the Division of Enforcement and the Office of the
Chief Accountant, seeking expedited entry of an order making the
initial decision final and stating that no petition for review
would be filed.  In its order, the Commission stated that the
initial decision of the administrative law judge has become the
final decision of the Commission with respect to Ernst & Young
LLP, and ordered that Ernst & Young:

     (1) cease and desist from committing or causing any future
         auditor independence  violations;  

     (2) disgorge $1,686,500 in audit fees it received for its
         audits of PeopleSoft Inc. during the time period in
         which it was found to have lacked independence from
         PeopleSoft, together with $478,050 in prejudgment
         interest thereon;

     (3) retain an independent consultant acceptable to the
         Commission to review its policies and procedures
         governing business relationships with audit clients;
         and

     (4) be suspended from accepting audit engagements for new
         Commission registrant audit clients for a period of six
         months, commencing today

The Commission order further provides that, pursuant to a
voluntary undertaking of Ernst & Young LLP, to the extent that
the firm is permitted to audit any new registrant during the
six-month suspension period (e.g., a pre-existing private Ernst
& Young LLP audit client making an initial public offering),
Ernst & Young LLP shall provide, prior to the effective date
(unless it obtains an exception from the Office of the Chief
Accountant), sworn declarations by both its Chief Executive
Officer and its Vice  Chair for Quality and Risk Management
certifying that Ernst & Young LLP is independent, under SEC
rules, PCAOB standards, GAAS and all other applicable standards,  
with respect to each such new registrant.  The final order
concludes the litigation of this matter.
     
The proceedings commenced on November 13, 2002, when the
Commission instituted an Order Instituting Proceedings (OIP)
against Ernst & Young LLP for violations of the auditor
independence requirements imposed by the Commission's rules and
by GAAS.  The OIP alleged that, despite having substantial joint
business relationships with PeopleSoft Inc. during the period
1994 through 2000, the firm claimed to be "independent" from
Peoplesoft in audit reports it issued on PeopleSoft's financial
statements throughout the relevant period, each of which was
included in PeopleSoft's public filings with the Commission.  
The matter was tried before Chief Administrative Law Judge
Brenda Murray in March and April 2003.  

On April 16, 2004, the chief administrative law judge issued an
initial decision, finding, among other things, that
"overwhelming evidence" demonstrated that the firm had committed
all the violations alleged in the OIP and that the firm's
conduct was "reckless, highly unreasonable and negligent."
     

FRANK GRUTTADAURIA: OH Court Grants Summary Judgment in Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Honorable Patricia A. Gaughan, U.S. District Court Judge for
the Northern District of Ohio, granted the Commission's motion
for summary judgment and permanently enjoined Frank D.
Gruttadauria, the former Cleveland broker, and two entities that
he created to facilitate his fraud from violating certain
antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws.  Judge
Gaughan also ordered Mr. Gruttadauria to disgorge monies he
misappropriated and compensation he received during the fraud.  
Mr. Gruttadauria is presently in federal custody serving a
seven-year jail term.
     
The Commission's lawsuit was filed in February 2002, alleging
that Gruttadauria defrauded scores of his customers over a
fifteen-year period.  The Commission also alleged that
Gruttadauria misappropriated millions of dollars and sent
falsified account statements that, at the time the fraud ended
in January 2002, overstated the actual holdings in customer
accounts by over $280 million.
     
In her March 11 Order, Judge Gaughan found that, from 1987
through January 2002, Mr. Gruttadauria engaged in a massive
scheme to defraud many of his customers.  The court found that,
among other things, Mr. Gruttadauria lied to customers about
purchases and sales of securities in their accounts, falsely
told customers that he used the funds deposited into their
accounts to buy securities, and created false customer account
statements that reflected account values far in excess of their
actual balances.  

Judge Gaughan also found that, to disguise his fraudulent
scheme, Gruttadauria misappropriated funds from the accounts of
some customers to meet withdrawal requests from other customers.  
Judge Gaughan permanently enjoined Gruttadauria and two entities
he created, DH Strategic Partners, Inc. and JYM Trading Trust,
from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and
Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule
10b-5 thereunder.

The Court also ordered Mr. Gruttadauria to disgorge the monies
that he misappropriated, totaling almost $105 million, and $20.8
million in compensation (salaries, bonuses, and commissions)
that he received from his employers while committing his fraud.   
The Court found that Mr. Gruttadauria had received this
compensation as a direct result of his fraudulent activities.
     
The suit is styled "SEC v. Frank D. Gruttadauria, DH Strategic
Partners, Inc., JYM Trading Trust, Laurene English, Defendants,
and Sarah Z. Emamy, Charlie Whiskey, LLC, and Margo
Gruttadauria, Relief Defendants, Civil Action No. 1:02CV324."


INDEPENDENCE BLUE: PA Court Approves Insurance Suit Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------------
Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Albert W. Sheppard, Jr.
has approved a settlement of the class action litigation
brought by the Pennsylvania Orthopaedic Society and several
healthcare providers in connection with their payment and
reimbursement for services, procedures and products from
Independence Blue Cross (IBC).

In addition to approving the settlement, Judge Sheppard has
also invalidated all timely opt-outs that had been submitted by
class members on the grounds that "certain communications [to
providers] had misled class members and caused them to file opt-
outs."  The Court has required that a new notice of the
settlement and opt-out procedure be disseminated to such class
members who had previously opted out and that they be given a
new opportunity to opt-out if they wish.

The notice, a letter from the Court directed to class members,
and opt-out procedure may be accessed at http://www.ibx.comor  
http://www.paorthosociety.org.

Independence Blue Cross is represented by Akin, Gump, Strauss,
Hauer & Feld, L.L.P.  The Pennsylvania Orthopaedic Society and
provider representatives are represented by the law firms of
Billet & Connor, P.C. and Berger & Montague, P.C.


KAWASAKI MOTORS: Recalls 5,850 Motorcycles Due To Muffler Defect
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kawasaki Motors Corporation, U.S.A. is cooperating with the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration by recalling
5,850 motorcycles, namely Kawasaki VN1600-A1/A1L, Model 2003 and
Kawasaki VN1600-A2/A2L Model 2004.

On certain motorcycles, the muffler brackets could crack,
allowing the muffler to become loose and potentially separate
from the main exhaust pipes, which could result in a crash.

Dealers will reinforce the muffler brackets. The manufacturer
has reported that owner notification began on Feb. 17, 2004.  
Owners may contact Kawasaki at 1-949-770-0400.

  
LARRY TYLER: TX Court Returns Two-Count Stock Fraud Indictment
--------------------------------------------------------------
A federal grand jury in Dallas, Texas returned a two-count
indictment against Larry W. Tyler charging him with securities
fraud and wire fraud.  The indictment charges Mr. Tyler with
deceiving his clients in connection with the offer and sale of
securities.  It is anticipated that Mr. Tyler, a former
stockbroker, will surrender to federal authorities in Dallas
within the next week.
     
Previously, the Commission filed a civil suit against Mr. Tyler
on February 11, 2002.  In its complaint, the Commission alleged
that Mr. Tyler raised at least $30 million from investors, and
personally realized over $5.2 million in undisclosed
commissions, by fraudulently enticing more than 480 mostly
elderly investors into purchasing investments issued by his
company, Advanced Financial Services, Inc.

According to the complaint, Mr. Tyler deceived the elderly
investors with false guarantees about the investment's
liquidity, above-market interest rates and "fixed" maturity
dates.  Mr. Tyler used investors' funds to buy viaticals, which
rendered the guarantees false because viaticals are illiquid
investments with no fixed maturity dates and uncertain rates of
return.  Tyler hid the fact that the underlying viaticals could
not fulfill the promises that he had made to investors and that
the investors had to rely on him and his company to carry
through on the promises of guaranteed returns, fixed maturities
and liquidity.  Two weeks before the Commission filed its suit,
Tyler and his company both filed for bankruptcy.
     
On February 21, 2002, Judge Jorge Solis of the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of Texas granted the
Commission's application for a preliminary injunction and the
appointment of a receiver against Mr. Tyler and his company,
Advanced Financial Services, Inc.  The Commission's case against
Tyler is pending and litigation is ongoing.  

The suit is styled "SEC v. Larry W. Tyler, et al., USDC ND/TX,
Dallas Division, Civ.  3:02-CV-0282-P."


MAZDA (NORTH AMERICA): Recalls 15T Cars For Airbag Malfunction
--------------------------------------------------------------
Mazda (North America), Inc. is cooperating with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration by voluntarily recalling
15,800 Mazda MPV, model 2004, manufactured from August 2003 to
February 2004.

Certain minivans fail to comply with the requirements of Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208, "Occupant Crash
Protection."  The front passenger air bag was not correctly
wired and could fail to operate properly. In the event of a
crash, the air bag will not provide adequate protection.

Dealers will install a new wiring harness in the front passenger
air bag system.  The manufacturer has reported that owner
notification is expected to begin during April 2004. Owners may
contact Mazda at 1-800-222-5500.

  
MAZDA (NORTH AMERICA): Recalls 29,300 Cars Due To Airbag Defect
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mazda (North America), Inc. is cooperating with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration by recalling 29,300 Mazda
RX8, model 2004, manufactured from April 2003 to January 2004.

During a New Car Assessment Program testing, it was found that
some passenger vehicles have front passenger air bags that were
improperly wired and could fail to operate properly.  The air
bag will not provide adequate protection if the vehicle is
involved in a frontal crash.

Dealers will install a new wiring harness in the front passenger
air bag system.  The manufacturer has reported that owner
notification is expected to begin during April 2004. Owners may
contact Mazda at 1-800-222-5500.

  
MAZDA (NORTH AMERICA): Recalls Cars For Heat Insulator Defect
-------------------------------------------------------------
Mazda (North America), Inc. is cooperating with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration by recalling 12,000 Mazda
RX8 Model 2004, manufactured from April to August 2003.

On certain passenger vehicles with manual transmissions, the
heat insulator may be cracked. Continued operation of the
vehicle could cause the insulator to separate from the vehicle,
posing a hazard to following vehicles. Remedy:  Dealers will
replace the heat insulator. The manufacturer has reported that
owner notification is expected to begin during April 2004.
Owners may contact Mazda at 1-800-222-5500.


MEDCO HEALTH: Enters $20 Million Settlement With Nineteen States
----------------------------------------------------------------
North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper announced a major
pharmaceutical pricing settlement worth more than $20 million
with the nation's largest drug benefits company.

AG Cooper joined Attorneys General from 19 other states to
announce that Medco Health Solutions, Inc., a pharmaceutical
benefits management company for more than 62 million consumers,
has agreed to pay $20.2 million, a press release from the
Attorney General's office stated.  "Today's settlement resolves
charges that Medco violated state unfair trade practice laws by
encouraging doctors to switch their patients to different
prescription drugs, then failing to pass on the resulting
savings to patients or their health care plans," the statement
asserted

"This company switched patients' drugs so that it could win
rebates from drug makers," said AG Cooper, who leads the
National Association of Attorneys General's Pharmaceutical
Pricing Task Force with two other attorneys general.  "Doctors
and patients, not a drug benefit company, should decide what
medicine is right for patients."

As a pharmaceutical benefits management company, Medco contracts
with health plans to process prescription drug payments for
drugs provided to patients enrolled in the plan.  The states
allege that Medco engineered drug switches to benefit the
company despite its claims that patients and health plans would
save money.  Medco did not tell doctors or patients that
changing drugs would increase the rebate payments that Medco got
from drug manufacturers. Changing drugs often led to higher
costs for patients and health plans due to added follow-up
doctor visits and tests.  For example, Medco switched patients
from certain cholesterol lowering medications to Zocor, a switch
that usually meant patients had to receive follow-up blood
tests.

Under the settlement, Medco will pay $20.2 million to the states
to benefit low income, disabled, or elderly consumers of
prescription medications and to promote lower drug costs.  North
Carolina?s share is more than $1 million.  Medco will pay
another $2.5 million to patients who incurred expenses when they
switched cholesterol drugs. The settlement also prohibits Medco
from soliciting drug switches when the net cost of the new drug
exceeds the cost of the current drug, when the current drug has
a generic equivalent and the new drug does not, when the switch
would be made to avoid competing with a generic, and when a
patient's drug is switched more than once within two year's
time.

In addition, Medco will now promote pricing transparency by
telling doctors and patients the minimum or actual cost savings
if they choose to change drugs.  The settlement requires the
company to disclose financial incentives it receives for drug
switches and to adopt a code of ethics and professional
standards.  Doctors will have to authorize all drug switches and
patients will be told that they can decline to switch drugs.  If
they do switch, Medco is required to let patients know that the
company will reimburse them for any related out-of-pocket health
care costs.  Medco must also notify doctors about the difference
in side effects between drugs and monitor the health effects of
drug switches.  

The states' investigation of Medco began more than two years
ago.  Joining North Carolina in the settlement are: Arizona,
California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Iowa,
Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New York,
Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Vermont, Virginia and Washington.

For more details, contact Noelle Talley, Public Information
Officer, N.C. Department of Justice by Phone: (919) 716-6484 or
(919) 716-6413 by Fax: (919) 716-0803 or by E-mail:
ntalley@ncdoj.com


MITSUBISHI MOTORS: Recalls SUVs Due to Child Safety Seat Defect
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mitsubishi Motors North America is cooperating with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration by recalling 134,000
Mitsubishi Diamante 2000-2003, Mitsubishi Montero 2001, and
Mitsubishi Outlander 2003.

Certain sport utility and passenger vehicles fail to comply with
the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No.
225, "Child Restraint Anchorage Systems." The owner's manual
does not contain a step-by-step description for headrest
adjustment when installing a child restraint system (CRS) tether
strap. If the tether strap is improperly installed to the tether
anchor, the child safety seat may not be sufficiently
restrained. In the event of a crash, the child could be injured.

A letter describing the problem will be sent to owners along
with a sticker containing the correct instructions as well as
instructions on where to affix the sticker in the owner's
manual. The manufacturer has reported that owner notification is
expected to begin during April 2004. Owners may contact
Mitsubishi at 1-8888-648-7820.


PORSCHE CARS: Recalls 10,637 Cayenne S Cars Due To Fire Hazard
--------------------------------------------------------------
Porsche Cars North America, Inc. is cooperating with the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration by recalling
10,637 Porsche Cayenne S, Model 2003-2004, manufactured from
January 2002 to July 2003.

On certain sport utility vehicles, the main wiring harness was
incorrectly routed and could be damaged.  Damage to the wiring
harness can lead to the failure of various electrical systems or
to a fire.

Dealers will inspect and repair or replace the wiring harness,
as necessary. The manufacturer has reported that owner
notification is expected to begin during April 2004. Owners may
contact Porsche at 1-800-545-8039.


SHELL: Big Bosses Named in Multi-Billion Securities Fraud Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Oil giant Shell's chairman and vice chairman were named as
defendants in the class actions filed in various United States
courts, alleging securities fraud, the Knight-Ridder / Tribune
Business News reports.

Chairman Jeroen van der Veer and Vice-Chairman Malcolm Brinded
are named as defendants in the suits, alleging they issued
"false and misleading" statements, which boosted company shares
but at the same time costing shareholders around GBP 8 billion.

The Company also faces investigations for the U.S. Justice
Department, the Securities & Exchange Commission and UK and
Dutch Regulators due to admissions that the company was
overbooking oil and gas reserves for two years before telling
investors.

According to American legal experts such disclosures suggest
that Shell might be forced to settle shareholder class action
lawsuits amounting to billions of dollars. Other sectors though
suggest that Shell is ready to fight the lawsuits if the hiring
of law firm Debevoise Plimpton is any indication.


WEALTH INTERNATIONAL: SEC Files Order To Show Cause in GA Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed an application for
an order to show cause why defendant Andre Brady should not be
held in civil contempt in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Georgia, based on his failure to pay
disgorgement as directed by the Court's March 19, 1998, order.  

That order enjoined Brady from further violations of Sections 5
and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and
Sections 203, 206(2) and 206(4) of the Investment Advisers Act
of 1940.  The Court also ordered Brady to pay disgorgement in
the amount of $4,031,110.65 plus prejudgment interest.

On July 5, 1995, the Commission alleged in its complaint that
Wealth International Network (WIN) was a "pyramid" or "Ponzi"
scheme and that WIN, Discovery Financial Investments (DFI) and
Brady attracted investments in DFI with false claims that such
investments earned from 8 to 20 percent per month, with minimal
risk of loss of principal.  DFI claimed to be investing in
"triple AAA rated" securities backed by gold bullion, gold and
numismatic coins and foreign currencies.   

The suit is styled "SEC v. Wealth International Network, Andre
Brady, et al., USDC NDGA, Civil Action No. 1:95-CV-1722-CAM."

     
WORLD WRESTLING: Negotiating Settlement of NY Securities Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. is working to settle the
consolidated securities class action filed against it in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York, alleging violations of the federal securities laws.  The
suit also names as defendants:

     (1) Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc.,

     (2) Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Incorporated,

     (3) Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation,
  
     (4) WIT Capital Corporation,

     (5) Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Securities Corporation,

     (6) Chase H&Q (Hambrecht & Quist LLC),

     (7) Vincent K. McMahon,

     (8) Linda E. McMahon and

     (9) August J. Liguori

The complaint alleges, inter alia:

     (i) claims under Section 11 of the Securities Act against
         all defendants,
  
    (ii) claims under Section 12(2) of the Securities Act
         against the Underwriter Defendants,

   (iii) claims under Section 15 of the Securities Act against
         the Company and the Individual Defendants,

    (iv) claims under Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule
         10(b)(5) against all defendants, and

     (v) claims under Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act against
         the Individual Defendants

According to the Complaint's allegations, the Underwriter
Defendants allegedly engaged in manipulative practices by, inter
alia, pre-selling allotments of shares of the Company's stock in
return for undisclosed, excessive commissions from the
purchasers and/or entering into after-market tie-in arrangements
which allegedly artificially inflated the Company's stock price.

The plaintiff further alleges the Company knew or should have
known of such unlawful practices.  As relief, the Complaint
seeks a ruling that the suit is properly maintainable as a class
action, unspecified class damages and statutory compensation
against all defendants, jointly and severally, an award of
attorneys' fees and costs, and such other relief as the court
deems proper.

Nearly 1,000 suits with similar claims and/or allegations have
been filed over the past couple of years against companies which
have gone public in that general time period.  All of these
claims have been consolidated before the same judge in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York.

The Company was a part of a motion to dismiss filed on behalf of
all issuers on July 15, 2002.  On February 19, 2003, the court
issued its ruling granting in part and denying in part the
issuers' motion.  Specifically, the court granted the motion
dismissing the Section 10(b) claims against the Company and
denied the motion as to Section 11 claims against it.  A
settlement between the class plaintiffs and the issuer
defendants, including WWE and the Individual Defendants,
currently is being contemplated.



              Meetings, Conferences & Seminars


* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
-------------------------------------------------

May 6-7, 2004
FEN-PHEN LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 6-7, 2004
CONSUMER FINANCIAL SERVICES LITIGATION 2004
Practicing Law Institute
San Francisco
Contact: 800-260-4pli; info@pli.edu

May 6-7, 2004
CONFERENCE ON LIFE AND HEALTH INSURANCE LITIGATION
ALI-ABA
Washington, D.C. Tuition $995
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

May 10-11, 2004
THE ROLE OF PARALEGALS IN MASS TORT LITIGATION
Mealey Publications
The San Diego Marina Marriott, San Diego
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 11, 2004
EPHEDRA LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The San Diego Marina Marriott, San Diego
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 20-21, 2004
ACCOUNTANTS' LIABILITY
ALI-ABA
Chicago
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

May 24-25, 2004
ADDITIONAL INSURED CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Boston Common, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 25, 2004
D&O INSURANCE CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Boston Common, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 7-8, 2004
ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Four Seasons Hotel, Chicago
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 10-11, 2004
SECURITIES, DRUGS & ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION
MassTortsMadePerfect.Com
Atlantis, Paradise Island, Bahamas
Contact: 1-800-320-2227; register@masstortsmadeperfect.com

June 10-11, 2004
LITIGATING DISABILITY INSURANCE CLAIMS
American Conferences
Boston
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

June 16, 2004
BUSINESS INTERRUPTION INSURANCE CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Pentagon City
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 17, 2004
E-DISCOVERY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Pentagon City
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 17-18, 2004
LITIGATING BRAIN AND SPINAL CORD INSURANCE CLAIMS
American Conferences
Chicago
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

June 21-22, 2004
REINSURANCE CLAIMS AND COLLECTION
American Conferences
New York
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

June 22-23, 2004
NATIONAL MOLD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Grande Lakes Resort, Orlando, FL
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 22-23, 2004
ASBESTOS 101 CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Chicago River North, Chicago
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

July 16, 2004
PRODUCTS LIABILITY
ALI-ABA
Chicago
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

September 20-21, 2004
REINSURANCE SUMMIT
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Boston Common, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 20-21, 2004
NATIONAL ASBESTOS LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 21, 2004
E-DISCOVERY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 27-28, 2004
BAD FAITH CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

October 4-5, 2004
INSURANCE COVERAGE DISPUTES CONCERNING CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS
CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Chicago River North, Chicago
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

October 25-26, 2004
SILICA LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, New Orleans
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

October 26, 2004
PVC LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, New Orleans
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 8-9, 2004
CALIFORNIA SECTION 17200 CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena, CA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 9, 2004
ANTI-SLAPP CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena, CA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 11-12, 2004
ASBESTOS LITIGATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY
ALI-ABA
New Orleans
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

December 9-10, 2004
ASBESTOS PREMISES LIABILITY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena, CA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 9-10, 2004
CONSTRUCTION DEFECT & MOLD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Lake Las Vegas, Las Vegas
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

TBA
FAIR LABOR STANDARDS CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

TBA
AIRLINE BANKRUPTCY LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

TBA
FASTFOOD INDUSTRY LIABILITY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com



* Online Teleconferences
------------------------

April 05-30, 2004
DAMAGES IN TEXAS INSURANCE LITIGATION:
EVALUATING, PLEADING, AND PROVING
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

April 05-30, 2004
NBI PRESENTS "EMERGING ISSUES IN CALIFORNIA
INDOOR AIR QUALITY AND TOXIC MOLD LITIGATION
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

April 05-30, 2004
NBI PRESENTS "LITIGATING THE CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT IN FLORIDA
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

May 6-7, 2004
CONSUMER FINANCIAL SERVICES LITIGATION 2004
Practicing Law Institute
Contact: 800-260-4pli; info@pli.edu

ADVERSARIAL PROCEEDINGS IN ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCIES
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Online Streaming Video
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCY - PANEL OF CREDITORS COMMITTEE MEMBERS
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Online Streaming Video
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

EXPERT WITNESS ADMISSIBILITY IN MOLD CASES
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Online Streaming Video
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

INTRODUCTION TO CLASS ACTIONS AND LARGE RECOVERIES
Big Class Action
Contact: seminars@bigclassaction.com

NON-TRADITIONAL DEFENDANTS IN ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

PAXIL LITIGATION
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS INVOLVING BAYCOL
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

RECOVERIES
Big Class Action
Contact: seminars@bigclassaction.com

SELECTION OF MOLD LITIGATION EXPERTS: WHO YOU NEED ON YOUR TEAM
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

SHOULD I FILE A CLASS ACTION?
LawCommerce.Com / Law Education Institute
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

THE EFFECTS OF ASBESTOS ON THE PULMONARY SYSTEM
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

THE STATE OF ASBESTOS LITIGATION: JUDICIAL PANEL DISCUSSION
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

TRYING AN ASBESTOS CASE
LawCommerce.Com
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

THE IMPACT OF LORILLAR ON STATE AND LOCAL REGULATION OF TOBACCO
SALES
AND ADVERSTISING
American Bar Association
Contact: 800-285-2221; abacle@abanet.org

________________________________________________________________
The Meetings, Conferences and Seminars column appears in the
Class Action Reporter each Wednesday.  Submissions via e-mail to
carconf@beard.com are encouraged.


                 New Securities Fraud Cases


ABATIX CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Files Stock Lawsuit in N.D. TX
----------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities
class action on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Abatix
Corporation (Nasdaq: ABIX) between 5:05 p.m. Eastern Standard
Time (EST) on April 14, 2004 and 8:24 a.m. EST on April 21,
2004, inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.

The action is pending before the Honorable Sidney A. Fitzwater
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Texas, case no. 3 04 CV - 872, against defendants Abatix, Terry
Shaver (President and CEO), Frank Cinatl, IV (CFO and Vice
President), and Gary Cox (COO). According to the complaint,
defendants violated sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange
Act, and Rule 10b-5, by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market during the Class Period.

The complaint alleges that on April 14, 2004, at 5:05 p.m. EST,
Abatix issued a press release announcing it had entered into an
agreement with Goodwin Group LLC ("Goodwin Group") for the
exclusive rights to distribute Goodwin Group's RapidCool T line
of products worldwide. In the release, Abatix claimed that
RapidCool T products "actually removes heat from fire, metal,
wood, skin, and other surfaces--fires are suppressed with less
water and manpower; skin treated with the FDA approved RapidCool
TM burn cream heals more quickly; trees and other combustibles
treated with RapidCool TM refuse to ignite; expensive tool
components in the industrial segment that are treated with
RapidCool TM generally have an extended life." Moreover, in the
release, defendant Terry Shaver claimed that "RapidCoolT is part
of our growth strategy. The exclusive distribution rights to
this product line are exciting because it has the potential to
be revolutionary. We are beginning the process of third party
testing that will remove any questions as to the efficacy of the
product". In reaction to this release, the price per share of
Abatix common stock on the following day skyrocketed 214.5%, or
$11.39, from the closing price of $5.31 on April 14, 2004 to a
closing price of $16.70 on April 15, 2004.

Unbeknownst to investors, however, Abatix's claims were
materially false and misleading. On April 19, 2004, the NASDAQ
Stock Market r issued a press release at 10:30 a.m. EST
announcing that as of 9:26 a.m. EST, trading of Abatix common
stock was halted at $16.70 per share, its closing price on April
15, 2004, while the NASDAQ investigated Abatix's agreement with
Goodwin Group. On April 21, 2004, Abatix issued a press release
at 8:24 a.m. EST in which defendants "clarified" that:

     (1) the RapidCool T burn cream is not FDA approved;

     (2) Abatix failed to verify the efficacy and uniqueness of
         the RapidCool T products;

     (3) Abatix had only conducted limited due diligence prior  
         to entering into the agreement with Goodwin Group;

     (4) Abatix failed to verify whether Goodwin Group had been  
         assigned the patents on the RapidCool T products and
         therefore, whether Goodwin Group was authorized to
         enter into the exclusive distribution agreement with
         Abatix;

     (6) Abatix failed to verify the ownership of any patent
         applications filed with respect to the RapidCool T
         product line; and

     (7) Abatix nor Goodwin Group have ever sold any RapidCool
         T products.

On April 21, 2004, once trading of Abatix stock on NASDAQ
resumed, the price of Abatix stock plummeted as fast and as far
as it had risen in reaction to the April 14, 2004 press release,
falling $6.93, or 41.4%, from its halted price of $16.70 per
share to close at $9.77.

For more details, contact Steven G. Schulman, Peter E. Seidman,
Andrei V. Rado by Mail: One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl. New
York, NY, 10119-0165 by Phone: (800) 320-5081 or by E-Mail:
abatix@milberg.com


EL PASO: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. TX
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Texas on behalf of all persons who purchased or
acquired securities of El Paso Corporation (NYSE: EP) between
February 22, 2000 and February 17, 2004 inclusive.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market during the Class Period thereby
artificially inflating the price of El Paso securities. More
specifically, the Complaint alleges that during the Class Period
defendants caused El Paso to report in its public filings, press
releases and other public statements favorable financial results
by, among other things, artificially inflating the Company's
reported reserves as it relates to oil and natural gas. The
Complaint alleges, among other things, that defendants failed to
disclose that the Company's estimates were based on improperly
manipulated reported reserve estimates that deviated from
industry standards and resulted in a knowingly false high
estimate of reported reserves.

On February 17, 2004, El Paso announced, that the Company had
overstated its reported reserves by 41% or 1.8 trillion cubic
feet and warned of a $1 billion pretax charge triggered by the
revision. On this news, El Paso shares fell 18% and traded as
low as $7.26 per share.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com      


INTERPOOL INC.: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Fraud Suit in NJ
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of
New Jersey, Trenton Division, against defendants Interpool, Inc.
(Other OTC:IPLI.PK) and Martin Tuchman (CEO and President),
Raoul J. Witteveen (former COO and President) and Mitchell I.
Gordon (CFO, Executive Vice President) on behalf of all persons
who purchased the securities of Interpool, Inc. between March
27, 2001 and December 29, 2003, seeking remedies under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated the Exchange Act
by issuing material misrepresentations concerning its reported
financial results between March 27, 2001 and December 29, 2003.
The Company has seriously deficient or non-existent internal
controls relating to the accounting for direct finance leases,
the policies for complex transactions, communications of complex
transactions, adequate staffing within the accounting
department, accounting for income taxes, communication of
information regarding related party transactions, security of
information technology, accounting for inter-company
eliminations, and record keeping by various internal
departments.

As result of the Company's numerous accounting improprieties,
Interpool had overstated its net income during the Class Period
as well as had overstated its shareholders' equity during the
Class Period. Therefore, its reported financial results did not
fairly present the results of its operations and were not
prepared in accordance with GAAP. On December 29, 2003,
Interpool announced an additional delay in the completion of its
restated 2000 and 2001 and first three quarters of 2002
financial statements and 2002 financial statements.

The additional delay was necessary to complete further analysis
of the accounting for a pending claim by Interpool under its
insurance policy covering leaded faults. Due to this delay, the
Company stated that it did not know if it would meet certain
covenants and waivers as well as the potential to have a greater
reduction on Interpool's restated stockholders equity. Also on
this date, the New York Stock Exchange announced that it would
suspend trading in Interpool's common stock and commenced
delisting proceedings. As a result of this announcement,
Interpool common stock dropped from $19.26 adjusted close on
December 26, to an adjusted close on December 29 of $12.00, a
37% drop.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com       


McDONALD'S CORPORATION: Schatz & Nobel Lodges Stock Suit in IL
--------------------------------------------------------------
Schatz & Nobel, P.C. initiated a securities class action status
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois on behalf of all persons who purchased the publicly
traded securities of McDonald's Corporation (NYSE: MCD)
("McDonald's") from December 14, 2001 through January 22, 2003
inclusive.

The Complaint alleges that McDonald's and certain of its
officers and directors issued materially false and misleading
statements during the Class Period concerning McDonald's
business condition. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose
that hundreds of restaurants were under performing and that
McDonald's had incurred hundreds of millions of dollars in
unrecorded asset impairment and other charges.

For more details, contact Nancy A. Kulesa by Phone:
(800) 797-5499 or by E-mail: sn06106@aol.com


NDCHEALTH CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in GA
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United Stated District Court for the Northern
District of Georgia on behalf of purchasers of the securities of
NDCHealth Corporation (NYSE: NDC) between October 1, 2003 and
March 31, 2004, inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The complaint charges NDC, Walter M. Hoff and Randolph L.M.
Hutto with violations of Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder. Throughout the Class Period, defendants issued
quarter after quarter of strong financial results. Defendants
failed to disclose that these stellar financial results were
only made possible through improper revenue recognition
practices in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles ("GAAP").

On April 1, 2004, before the market opened, defendants shocked
the market by announcing that NDC would delay it will delay the
release of its fiscal third-quarter financial results as it
"reviews some aspects of how it records revenue." The Company
said the review relates to the timing of sales recognition in
its value-added reseller channel in NDC's physician business
unit.

In response to the news concerning NDC's previously undisclosed
accounting issues, the price of NDC stock dropped nearly 20% to
close at $22.70 on unusually large trading volumes of nearly 4.8
million shares traded - - far greater than NDC's average daily
trading volume of about 298,000 shares.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com       


ODYSSEY HEALTHCARE: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Texas on behalf of all purchasers of the securities
of Odyssey Healthcare, Inc. (Nasdaq: ODSY) between May 5, 2003
and February 23, 2004, inclusive.

The complaint charges that Odyssey, Richard R. Burnham, David C.
Gasmire, and Douglas B. Cannon violated sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by
issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market
between May 5, 2003 and February 23, 2004.

More specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants'
statements during the Class Period failed to disclose and
misrepresented the following material adverse facts which were
then known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them:

     (1) that the Company's financial results were materially
         inflated because at least six of its Hospice programs
         exceeded the amounts they were entitled to receive in
         Medicare reimbursements;

     (2) that the Company admitted patients to its Hospice
         programs who were not eligible for Medicare yet claimed
         that such patients were;

     (3) the Company's financial results were a result of
         providing a level of care and services below the
         standards set forth under government guidelines because
         the Company's caseloads were heavier than industry
         norms;

     (4) that the Company could not keep up with its heady
         growth due to higher labor costs - especially in
         California, which represented 13 percent to 15 percent
         of Odyssey's revenues;

     (5) that higher drug costs were hurting the Company's
         margins; and

     (6) that Odyssey was suffering from negative cash-flows

On February 23, 2004, Odyssey announced that its first-quarter
profits would be below analysts' estimates. According to the
Company, it expected its 2004 earnings per share results to
reflect a 23 to 25 percent increase over 2003, or $1.03 to $1.05
for the year. For the first quarter of 2004, Odyssey expected
earnings per share of $0.20 to $0.22, (analysts' expected the
Company to earn earnings per share of $0.25) compared to $0.19
for the first quarter of 2003. News of this shocked the market
with shares of Odyssey falling $7.11 per share, or 26 percent,
to close at $20.32 per share on February 24, 2004.

In its April 12, 2004 edition, Barron's published an article
highlighting the Company's operational issues. Therein, Barron's
articulated that there are signs that the Company can't keep up
with its heady growth. "Higher labor costs -- especially in
California, which represents 13%-15% of its revenues -- as well
as higher drug costs hurt Odyssey's margins in last year's
fourth quarter. In reporting those results on Feb. 23, the
company forecast lower- than-expected earnings for this year.
Another red flag: Odyssey disclosed that, in its most recent
quarter, six of its programs exceeded the amounts they were
entitled to receive in Medicare reimbursements, raising
questions about whether patients admitted to its programs are
truly eligible." Additionally, the article pointed out: "There
are also suggestions that some of Odyssey's strong growth is the
result of providing a level of care and services below the
standards set forth under government guidelines, including
providing adequate bereavement services for patients' families."

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com       


QUALITY DISTRIBUTION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in FL
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Middle
District of Florida on behalf of purchasers of Quality
Distribution, Inc. (Nasdaq: QLTY) common stock during the period
between November 7, 2003 and February 2, 2004, inclusive.

The complaint charges Quality Distribution, Thomas L. Finkbiner
and Samuel M. Hensley with violations of Sections 11 and 15 of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1933. On or about November 7,
2003, Quality Distribution commenced an initial public offering
of 7 million of its shares of common stock at an offering price
of $17.00 per share (the "IPO"), thereby raising approximately
$110.7 million.  In connection therewith, Quality Distribution
filed a registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus
(the "Prospectus"), with the SEC.

The complaint alleges that the Prospectus was materially false
and misleading because Quality Distribution materially
overstated its financial results and its financial statements
were not prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles ("GAAP").

On February 2, 2004, the Company announced that it expected to
take a fourth-quarter charge and restate its results back to
2001 after discovering insurance law violations at Power
Purchasing Inc. ("PPI"), one of its subsidiaries. The Company
announced that it expects to take fourth-quarter 2003 charges of
between $3 million and $6 million and it forecast net income for
the same period would be negatively impacted by the problems at
the subsidiary, along with other one-time expenses.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com       


SEMICONDUCTOR TECHNOLOGIES: Cauler Geller Files Stock Suit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Rudman, LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Central
District of California on behalf of purchasers of Superconductor
Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCON) common stock during the period
between January 9, 2004 and March 1, 2004, inclusive.

The complaint charges that Superconductor, M. Peter Thomas and
Martin S. McDermut, violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations
to the market between January 9, 2004 and March 1, 2004, thereby
artificially inflating the price of Superconductor's common
stock.

More specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Company failed
to disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse
facts known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them:

     (1) that the Company could not meet its projected first
         quarter revenues of $10 million and $13 million due to
         changes in demand made by two of the Company's
         customers;

     (2) that the defendants knew of the decreased demand for
         its product well in advance; and
     
      3) that, as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a
         reasonable basis for their positive statements about
         the Company and their earnings projections.

On March 1, 2004, Superconductor announced that it expected
first quarter 2004 total net revenues to be $4 million to $5
million. News of this shocked the market. Shares of
Superconductor fell $1.86 per share, or 45.4 percent to close at
$2.23 per share.

For more details, contact CAULEY GELLER BOWMAN & RUDMAN, LLP
(Samuel H. Rudman, Esq. or David A. Rosenfeld, Esq.) by Mail:  
P.O. Box 25438 Little Rock, AR 72221-5438 by Phone:
1-888-551-9944 by Fax: 1-501-312-8505 or by E-Mail:
info@cauleygeller.com


TITAN PHARMACEUTICALS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California on behalf of purchasers of Titan
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (AMEX: TTP) common stock during the period
between December 1, 1999 and July 22, 2002.

The complaint charges Titan Pharmaceuticals and certain of its
officers and directors with violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. During the Class Period, Titan
Pharmaceuticals sought to develop Iloperidone (Zomaril), a
potential new drug for the treatment of schizophrenia.

The complaint alleges that from the very beginning of the Class
Period, defendants declared that the development program for
Iloperidone was making steady progress through Phase III
clinical trials and towards drug approval in the U.S. Defendants
expressed excitement over the safety and efficacy of Iloperidone
and with the Phase III study results, particularly the
statistically significant reduction in the symptoms of
schizophrenia in patients. Defendants concluded that the
positive late-stage development results pointed to an important
role for Iloperidone as an important new option for the
treatment of schizophrenia.

Heightened expectations for the success of Iloperidone stood in
contrast to an ongoing process of U.S. Food and Drug
Administration review of serious unaddressed safety issues
facing older, established antipsychotic drugs. This process has
resulted in the imposition of severe marketing restrictions for
a number of established antipsychotic drugs.

However, during the Class Period, defendants artificially
inflated the price of Titan Pharmaceuticals shares by issuing a
series of materially false and misleading statements about the
Company's Investigational New Drug and New Drug Applications for
Iloperidone (Zomaril).

As a result of the defendants' alleged false statements, Titan
Pharmaceuticals stock traded at inflated prices during the Class
Period, causing millions of dollars of damages to the Class.
However, based on the disclosures made in defendants' press
release of July 22, 2002, pointing to the ability of Iloperidone
to prolong the QT interval and raising serious questions about
Iloperidone cardiovascular safety and marketability, the price
of Titan Pharmaceuticals' shares fell a precipitous 58%, to
$1.63, its lowest level ever, on volume of 3.8 million shares.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com       


VASO ACTIVE: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in MA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP filed a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts, on behalf of all persons who purchased the
securities of Vaso Active Pharmaceuticals, Inc. [OTC Bulletin
Board: VAPH.PK] between December 11, 2003 and March 31, 2004,
inclusive, against defendants Vaso Active and certain officers
and directors of the Company.

The complaint 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.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
misrepresented that the New England Medical Center in Boston,
Massachusetts had conducted "independent" clinical trials
confirming that its foot cream product, Termin8, was a
"remarkably effective cure." Vaso Active then based their
financial projections upon such misrepresentations, leading to
an artificial inflation of the Company's future financial
prospects. In truth, the New England Medical Center only
analyzed the study for a fee and did not actually conduct it,
and the sole researcher who conducted the research was a lone
podiatrist who was hand-picked by Vaso Active's parent company,
BioChemics.

On April 1, 2004, the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC")
announced that it was suspending the trading of Vaso Active
stock due to questions regarding the accuracy of assertions made
by Vaso Active in press releases, its annual report, its
registration statement and public statements to investors.

On April 16, 2004, the SEC permitted the stock to resume
trading. It resumed trading on the over-the-counter bulletin
board exchange (the "OTC-BB market") at $1.99, a 73.8% drop in
share price.

For more details, please contact Fred Taylor Isquith, Esq.,
Gregory M. Nespole, Esq., Christopher S. Hinton, Esq., George
Peters, or Derek Behnke by Mail: 270 Madison Avenue, New York,
New York 10016 by Phone: (800) 575-0735 or by E-Mail:
classmember@whafh.com.  All e-mail correspondence should make
reference to Vaso Active.

                            *********


A list of Meetings, Conferences and Seminars appears in each
Wednesday's edition of the Class Action Reporter. Submissions
via e-mail to carconf@beard.com are encouraged.

Each Friday's edition of the CAR includes a section featuring
news on asbestos-related litigation and profiles of target
asbestos defendants that, according to independent researches,
collectively face billions of dollars in asbestos-related
liabilities.

                            *********


S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Frederick, Maryland
USA.   Roberto Amor, Aurora Fatima Antonio and Lyndsey Resnick,
Editors.

Copyright 2004.  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  * * *