/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/040923.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Thursday, September 23, 2004, Vol. 6, No. 189 Headlines BEAZER HOMES: Expects Higher Costs For Trinity Homes' Repairs BROOKLYN IMPORTS: Recalls Mushrooms Due To Undeclared Sulfites CANADA: Ex-Gambler Sues Nova Scotia, Atlantic Lottery Over VLTs DESLY INTERNATIONAL: Recalls Salad Due To Undeclared Sulfites DMM ENGINEERING: Recalls 1,000 Carabiners Due To Injury Hazard GEXA CORPORATION: TX Suit Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set October 4 GREENVILLE HOSPITAL: Faces Lawsuit For Uninsured Patients in SC GRUGA U.S.A.: Recalls 18T Office Chairs Due To Injury Hazard GUANTANAMO DETAINEES: 13 Cuban Detainees Commence Hunger Strike INCO LTD.: Ontario Court To Hear Appeal of Certification Denial IRELAND: Justice Minister Asserts Prisoner Compensation Unlikely MENORAH GARDENS: FL Desecration Suit Settlement Hearing Proceeds MICROSOFT CORPORATION: Payouts in "Permatemp" Settlement Delayed MOLSON INC.: Ontario Teachers Pension To Block Coors Merger Plan NEW YORK: Settlement Can Mean Insurance Benefits For Minorities PACKERLAND PACKING: Recalls Ground Beef For E.coli Contamination PIONEER NORTH: Handal & Associates Lodges CA Consumer Fraud Suit PIP.AMERICA: Asks IL Court To Dismiss Claims in Consumer Lawsuit SANSONE AUTOMOTIVE: Reaches $14M Settlement in NJ Consumer Suit SIOUX-PREME PACKING: Recalls Pork Containing Foreign Material SOUTH KOREA: Hearings On Collective Action To Be Held This Week TD WATERHOUSE: SEC Commences, Settles Civil Stock Fraud Charges TELRAD: To Pay NIS8M-Fine To Settle Antitrust Fraud Charges TOBACCO LITIGATION: Trial Begins in Racketeering Lawsuit in D.C. UNION RAILROAD: Attorneys Sift Through Eunice Settlement Claims UNITED STATES: Faces Five Mutual Fund Fraud Lawsuits in MD Court UNITED STATES: Black Farm Groups Form National Coalition V. USDA WIRELESS FACILITIES: Finalizing NY Securities Lawsuit Settlement New Securities Fraud Cases ALLIED WASTE: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Lawsuit in AZ BAXTER INTERNATIONAL: Stull Stull Files Securities Lawsuit in IL BAXTER INTERNATIONAL: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in IL BELO CORPORATION: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges TX Securities Suit BELO CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. TX BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in NY CONCORD CAMERA: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Fraud Suit in FL CONCORD CAMERA: Berger & Montague Files Securities Lawsuit in FL CONCORD CAMERA: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Lawsuit in FL CP SHIPS: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY FLIGHT SAFETY: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in CT Court INTERACTIVECORP: Brian M. Felgoise Lodges Securities Suit in NY INTERACTIVECORP: Charles J. Piven Files Securities Lawsuit in NY IMPAC MEDICAL: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Securities Suit in CA MAXIM PHARMACEUTICALS: Lerach Coughlin Lodges CA Securities Suit RADIATION THERAPY: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Lawsuit in FL RADIATION THERAPY: Schiffrin & Barroway Files FL Securities Suit TECO ENERGY: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Fraud Lawsuit in FL ZIX CORPORATION: Shepherd Finkelman Lodges Securities Suit in TX ZIX CORPORATION: Wolf Popper Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in TX ********* BEAZER HOMES: Expects Higher Costs For Trinity Homes' Repairs ------------------------------------------------------------- Beazer Homes USA, Inc. (NYSE: BZH), earlier reported as having reached a class action settlement with homeowners of Trinity Homes recently stated that the cost of making repairs in connection with homeowners' mold complaints would be greater than it originally perceived, the INDYchannel.com reports. In its quarterly report to the Securities and Exchange Commission, Atlanta-based Beazer Homes believes that repairs could cost up to $41,500 per home and not the previously announced $37,000 per home. The suit, which was filed in August 2003 after hundreds of homeowners' complaints, alleged that water seeped under some exterior brick veneers, causing extensive damage and mold. Once approved, the settlement would require Trinity Homes to pay for the repairs and allow the law firm representing the owners to hire an independent engineering company to oversee the work. The settlement would also require Trinity to guarantee all repairs for 2 years and if work extends beyond an agreed upon completion date, homeowners would receive $60 per day until it's done. Aside from the aforementioned prerequisites the settlement also calls for the establishment of a dispute resolution panel that would address any conflicts that develop between the builder and the homeowners. Those affected by the suit are scheduled to receive a 10-page synopsis of the settlement document with a full copy of the proposal available from Hamilton Superior Court No. 2 at a cost of $80. A hearing on the proposed settlement is scheduled October 18, 2004. According to company officials, Beazer, which has denied any wrongdoing in the suit, has set aside $24 million to address any problems in relation to the settlement. BROOKLYN IMPORTS: Recalls Mushrooms Due To Undeclared Sulfites -------------------------------------------------------------- BROOKLYN IMPORTS, INC., 175 Broad Street, Carlstadt, New Jersey 07072 is recalling "BELWEDER PICKLED MUSHROOMS" because they contain undeclared sulfites. People who have allergies to sulfites run the risk of serious or life-threatening allergic reactions if they consume this product. The recalled "BELWEDER PICKLED MUSHROOMS" were distributed in the New York State area in retail stores. The "BELWEDER PICKLED MUSHROOMS" come in 30.6 oz. clear glass jars marked with the UPC #6735385798764. The recall was initiated after it was discovered through routine sampling by New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets Food Inspectors. Subsequent analysis by Department Food Laboratory personnel confirmed the presence of sulfites in packaging that did not declare sulfites. No illnesses have been reported to date in connection with this problem. Consumers who have purchased "BELWEDER PICKLED MUSHROOMS" are urged to return them to the place of purchase for a full refund. Consumers with questions may contact the company at (201) 507-8818. CANADA: Ex-Gambler Sues Nova Scotia, Atlantic Lottery Over VLTs --------------------------------------------------------------- Attorneys for Bernie Walsh, executive director of the Video- Online Lottery Terminators Society in Nova Scotia and a former gambling addict filed a notice of intention to sue both the province and the Atlantic Lottery Corporation in Nova Scotia Supreme Court, the CBC New Brunswick reports. The lawsuit is alleging the government did not study, nor take into consideration the devastating impact that Atlantic Lottery Corporation's Video-Online Lottery Terminators (VLTs) have had on some people, which were legally introduced in the province in the early 1990s. According to Dick Murtha, a lawyer for Mr. Walsh, his client is seeking compensation for the money he lost while playing the machines compulsively, as well as punitive damages, court costs, and money to cover the cost of future care he will need to cope with his addiction. He further adds, that his client is hoping to turn the court action into a class-action suit on behalf of gambling addicts. In the suit, Mr. Murtha's client claims that the government failed to take into consideration the devastating impact that VLTs would have on some people, the province and the Atlantic Lottery Corporation failed to provide "adequate facilities and/or assistance for the treatment of addicted and/or problem gamblers" and that the government was motivated by financial gain when it allowed the lottery corporation to introduce the machines in high-traffic areas such as bars, laundromats and convenience stores. If it's allowed to proceed, the lawsuit would seek perhaps millions of dollars in damages on behalf of gambling addicts. A court hearing will be held within a few weeks to determine whether the case will go forward. DESLY INTERNATIONAL: Recalls Salad Due To Undeclared Sulfites ------------------------------------------------------------- Desly International Corporation, of 242 47th Street, Brooklyn, New York 11220, is recalling "SMAK MUSHROOMS SALAD" because it may contain undeclared sulfites. People who have severe sensitivity to sulfites run the risk of serious or life- threatening allergic reactions if they consume this product. The recalled "SMAK MUSHROOMS SALAD" is packaged in clear 350g glass jars with code 05.20.2006. They were sold throughout the United States. The recall was initiated after routine sampling by New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets food inspectors and subsequent analysis by Department food laboratory personnel revealed the presence of undeclared sulfites in "SMAK MUSHROOMS SALAD" in packages which did not declare sulfites on the label. The consumption of 10 milligrams of sulfites per serving has been reported to elicit severe reactions in some asthmatics. Anaphylactic shock could occur in certain sulfite sensitive individuals upon ingesting 10 milligrams or more of sulfites. Analysis of the "SMAK MUSHROOMS SALAD" revealed it contained 23.73 mg per serving. No illnesses have been reported to date in connection with this problem. Consumers who have purchased "SMAK MUSHROOMS SALAD" should return it to the place of purchase. Consumers with questions may contact the company at (718) 492-8492. DMM ENGINEERING: Recalls 1,000 Carabiners Due To Injury Hazard -------------------------------------------------------------- DMM Engineering, of Gwynedd, U.K., Wild Country Ltd., of Tideswell, Derbyshire, U.K. and Excalibur Distribution, of Sandy, Utah is cooperating with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission by voluntarily recalling about 1,000 Wild Country-brand Helium carabiners used in rock climbing. The carabiner gate may come open under a heavy load, which will significantly reduce the strength of the carabiner. The carabiner could break if the climber falls, posing a risk of serious injury or death to the climber. These are Wild Country-brand carabiners sold under the following model names: Helium Dyneema, Helium DYN QD 5 X 13, Helium Clean Wire, and Oxygen-Helium. They are marked with batch codes AAA, AAB, AAC, AAD, AAE, and AAF. "Wild Country" and the model name are written on the carabiners. Manufactured in the United Kingdom the carabiner were sold at recreational sports stores nationwide from April 2004 through July 2004 for between $11 and $25. Consumer should call the firm for instructions on returning these carabiners. The firm will reimburse shipping expenses and send the consumer a replacement. Consumer Contact: Call Wild Country toll free at (800) 997-HELI between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. MT Monday through Friday or visit the firm's Web site at www.wildcountry.co.uk GEXA CORPORATION: TX Suit Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set October 4 -------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP reminds investors that the deadline to apply for lead plaintiff in a previously filed complaint in the Southern District of Texas against Gexa Corporation ("Gexa" or the "Company") (Nasdaq:GEXA) for alleged acts in violation of U.S. securities fraud laws is October 4, 2004. The complaint alleges that, from August 14, 2003 through March 30, 2004 (the "Class Period"), Gexa, a Texas retail electricity provider, Neil Liebman (CEO), Marcie Zlotnik (Director) and Sarah Veach (Chief Accounting Officer) 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 throughout the Class Period, defendants materially overstated Gexa's financial results in connection with its power delivery business. On March 30, 2004, after the market closed, the Company issued a press release which admitted that its previously reported revenues had been overstated estimates, not measurable earned revenues based upon power delivered to customers or proceeds from energy sales as previously reported. Defendants also revealed that in connection with the completion of the audit for fiscal year 2003, the Company's independent auditors identified certain material weaknesses in the Company's systems of internal controls. Based upon this press release, the price of the Company's stock dropped more than 25% falling from a closing price of $6.64 per share on March 30, 2004 to a closing price of $4.90 per share on March 31, 2004. For more details, contact Eric J. Belfi or Aaron D. Patton of MURRAY, FRANK & SAILER LLP by Phone: (800) 497-8076 or (212) 682-1818 by Fax: (212) 682-1892 by E-mail: info@murrayfrank.com GREENVILLE HOSPITAL: Faces Lawsuit For Uninsured Patients in SC --------------------------------------------------------------- The Greenville Hospital System (GHS) in South Carolina faces a purported class action, charging it with "discriminatory pricing," The Greenville News reports. Columbia law firm McCutchen Blanton Johnson & Barnette filed the suit, on behalf of uninsured patients whom the hospital charged much more than insured patients, covered by private insurance, Medicare or Medicaid. The suit alleges that the hospital admitted uninsured individuals as "self-pay" patients. The patients allegedly agree to pay their bills without knowing what the charges will be. These charges end up being "exponentially greater than the actual cost of providing the rendered medical services and an unreasonable multiple of the amount" charged to insured patients, the suit asserts. The suit seeks to stop discriminatory pricing as well as the "abusive tactics to collect those exorbitant bills." It also seeks reimbursement of the difference between what patients were charged and what it calls a fair and reasonable rate, and reasonable attorneys fees. GHS is the latest of about a dozen hospitals across South Carolina to be sued, said attorney English McCutchen. "Our contention is that hospitals are overcharging people without insurance," he told Greenville News. Hospital officials said the lawsuit is without merit and that GHS's pricing policies are legal and consistent with industry practices, according to Greenville News. They also said GHS provides millions of dollars in charity care to patients who can't pay every year. Frank Pinckney, chief executive officer of GHS, couldn't be reached Monday to comment. GHS spokeswoman Robyn Zimmerman told Greenville News the suit is like many others being filed against hospitals across South Carolina and around the country, and that it is anticipated that most hospitals will be sued eventually. She said that the Company is confident that its pricing and collection policies meet legal requirements, that its agreements with Medicare, Medicaid and other insurers are in line with market practices, and that GHS works with uninsured patients to establish payment terms tailored to their specific situation. "GHS charges are the same for all patients and payors, however the amount actually received by GHS may vary depending on agreements with GHS and the patients, insurance companies, and federal and state government mandates," Ms. Zimmerman said in a prepared statement. She declined to elaborate. Ms. Zimmerman added that GHS provides medical care for all patients regardless of their ability to pay, Greenville News states. "This year alone, GHS will provide over $70 million in charity care," she said. "In addition, the Greenville Hospital System will provide more than $72 million in uncompensated care to patients who do not qualify for charity but will not pay for the care they receive." The lawsuits are a symptom of a broken healthcare system that needs to be fixed, said Jim Head, interim president of the South Carolina Hospital Association. "The number of uninsured Americans is a problem we need to come to grips with," he told Greenville News. Previously, according to The Associated Press, suits were filed against Palmetto Health Alliance, which owns Palmetto Baptist- Columbia, Palmetto Richland and Palmetto Baptist-Easley; Lexington Medical Association, which owns Lexington Medical Center, and Health Management Associates, a Naples, Fla.-based company that runs Upstate Carolina Medical Center in Gaffney and Carolina Pines Regional Medical Center in Hartsville. GRUGA U.S.A.: Recalls 18T Office Chairs Due To Injury Hazard ------------------------------------------------------------ Gruga U.S.A., dba Novimex Fashion Ltd., of City of Industry, California is cooperating with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission by voluntarily recalling about 18,000 Executive Office Chairs. The legs on the base of the chair can break, posing a risk of injury to the user. The recalled executive office chairs include the 795-0115 model with black leather and the 795-0228 model with black fabric. Underneath the seat cushion the name "Novimex Fashion Ltd." can be found on the large label and the model numbers and date codes can be found on a smaller label. Only chairs with a date code prior to April 1, 2004, are included in this recall. Manufactured in China, the chairs were sold at Staples stores nationwide from March 2004 through July 2004 for about $100. Consumers should stop using the chairs immediately and contact Gruga U.S.A. to receive a free replacement base repair kit. Consumer Contact: Consumers should call Gruga U.S.A. toll-free at (888) 833-4148 between 7:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. PT or e-mail the company at customerservice@novimexfashion.com GUANTANAMO DETAINEES: 13 Cuban Detainees Commence Hunger Strike --------------------------------------------------------------- A group of Cuban detainees began a hunger strike to protest their nearly three-year detention at Guantanamo Bay without charges lodged against them, the Associated Press reports. The group came from 38 Cubans who tried to make it to Florida aboard a boat made from a 1959 Buick. The migrants are being held on the Leeward side of the base away from the terror suspects. Some Haitians are also being held, although the U.S. government has not released numbers. 13 of the members started the hunger strike after being held at the U.S. outpost in eastern Cuba for months, William Sanchez, a Miami attorney for Luis Grass Rodriguez, one of the Cubans who made the trip in the makeshift boat in February, told AP. "What they're asking for is to be granted political asylum in the United States or for the United States to expedite political asylum, or for the minimum a third country, but to not keep them in Guantanamo any longer because that violates international law on political asylum and because the stay there is unbearable," he said. Reporters from The Associated Press visiting the base in July to cover the detention of prisoners accused of links to Afghanistan's fallen Taliban regime or al-Qaida terror network were turned away from the Cubans, saying journalists were not permitted to speak to them. "A small number of Cuban migrants at Guantanamo Naval Base who are waiting third country resettlement by the State Department are conducting a hunger strike to highlight their desire to be resettled rapidly," Darla Jordan, U.S. State Department spokeswoman, told AP. "The State Department is in active discussion with several potential resettlement counties with the goal of resettling all eligible migrants at Guantanamo as rapidly as possible." Luis Grass, who tried to speak to the AP reporters in July, was one of the migrants who attempted the U.S.-bound trip in a Buick sedan in February. His wife and child are being held at Guantanamo. Eight others who made the trip with them were returned to Cuba. It was unclear who else was on the hunger strike, or how long they had been held, AP reports. The Department of Homeland Security decided the Grass family had a credible fear of persecution if the were to be sent home, American officials said at the time. Under U.S. immigration policy, Cubans who reach U.S. shores generally are allowed to stay while those caught at sea are usually returned. The Cubans are reportedly only drinking water to protest their detentions, Mr. Sanchez told AP. Similar hunger strikes were launched in the past by some 550 terror suspects being held at the U.S. outpost in Cuba. Many have been held for nearly three years without charge. There have also been 34 suicide attempts among prisoners. Associated Press reporters Cathy Wilson in Miami and Anita Snow in Havana contributed to this report. INCO LTD.: Ontario Court To Hear Appeal of Certification Denial --------------------------------------------------------------- The Ontario Court of Appeal agreed to hear plaintiffs' appeal of a lower court ruling refusing to grant class certification to a lawsuit filed against Inco Ltd. over its nickel refinery operations in Port Colborne, The Star reports. The suit alleges that the refinery, which processed more than 2.5 million tons of nickel oxide between 1918 and 1984, caused health problems among the residents. A resident of the town on Lake Erie in southwestern Ontario launched the suit in 2001, alleging that properties of thousands of families were contaminated. In 2002, a judge refused to certify the class action and awarded legal costs to the defendants. A 2003 appeal of that ruling in Ontario Divisional Court was also denied. Lawyers for the residents said that the court is expected to hear the appeal early in 2005, the Star reports. An Environment Ministry survey in 1999 found 25 properties contaminated with nickel levels high enough to pose a potential health risk to toddler-aged children. Inco (TSX: N) is the last remaining defendant in the suit after the Ontario Environment Ministry, the Region of Niagara, the City of Port Colborne and the area's public and Catholic school boards settled out of court. IRELAND: Justice Minister Asserts Prisoner Compensation Unlikely ---------------------------------------------------------------- There will be no compensation for prisoners forced to "slop out" their cells, Ireland's Justice Minister Michael McDowell said, BreakingNews.com reports. The Irish Government faces claims from around 900 prisoners who say they have been traumatized and damaged as a result of being detained in cells that have no flush toilets, according to an earlier Class Action Reporter story (September 17,2004). 35 prison officers also filed a class action, seeking damages, for "slopping-out," - or the practice of using chamber pots, if they needed the toilet at night. The claimants allege that the practice violates their human rights. The class action suit, if successful, could see taxpayers pay out millions to convicted criminals and paramilitary figures. Mr. McDowell told BreakingNews.com he was confident of the strength of the Government's case. "There won't be any settlements. As a lawyer, I will see them in court," he said. He added that the recent decision of the European Court on Human Rights, which found in favor of a Scottish prisoner who had been forced to slop out, was a unique case. However, Mr. McDowell added that slopping would eventually end. "I have set my face against allowing that situation to continue. But it requires a considerable program of investment," he said. MENORAH GARDENS: FL Desecration Suit Settlement Hearing Proceeds ---------------------------------------------------------------- Four women whose loved ones were improperly buried at the two troubled Menorah Gardens cemeteries in Florida testified before Judge J. Leonard Fleet of the Broward Circuit Court in Florida, as he considers approval of the settlement of the class actions filed against Service Corporation International, operator of the cemeteries in Broward and Palm Beach counties and the nation's largest provider of funeral services, The South Florida Sun- Sentinel reports. The two cemeteries face accusations of burying people in the wrong places, breaking open vaults to squeeze in other bodies and, in a handful of instances, tossing bones into the woods. In December 2003, the Company reached a proposed $100 million settlement for the suit, with $65 million to be set aside for members of the class. A group of people who weren't part of the lawsuit, but whose relatives suffered severe after-death indignities, got $29 million, and the remaining $6 million went to those involved in related cases, such as employees suing SCI. Last year, the Company and its Florida subsidiary reached a a $14 million settlement with the state Attorney General's Office last year, as well as agreeing in April to pay a $1 million fine in exchange for dropping criminal charges, the Sun-Sentinel reports. Florida resident Shirley Eisenberg testified before the court, saying the "compensation is very nice, but nobody should have to go through this." Ms. Eisenberg's cousin and his wife were buried several plots apart, contrary to their wishes. "I mean when you are grieving, you don't think anybody is going to take advantage of you . The main thing is that the cemeteries are cleaned up," she said, the Sun-Sentinel reports. Joan Light, one of the lead plaintiffs in the case, testified she thinks the settlement is for the best. Her parents were buried end-to-end rather than side-by-side. "I felt everything was so horrific out there," the Hollywood woman said, according to the Sun-Sentinel. "I would be very happy to see everything righted at the cemetery." A certified public accountant testified Monday it will cost about $11 million to bring the cemeteries up to accepted national standards. A panel is now overseeing the cemeteries, in addition to a court-appointed examiner. "We've achieved a settlement that's fair and reasonable," said Coral Gables attorney Ervin Gonzalez, who has spearheaded the plaintiffs' case along with attorney Neal Hirschfeld, according to the Sun-Sentinel. However, a separate group of about 70 Menorah Gardens plaintiffs in a Palm Beach case are opposing the settlement, on the issue whether the class action settlement setting aside $25 million for punitive damages will preclude the attorneys in the second case from seeking such damages. According to SCI spokesman Don Mathis, it is critical that the class action be the only case with punitive damages, or else there would be no reason to settle, the Sun-Sentinel reports. West Palm Beach attorney Ted Leopold called the settlement "a collusive agreement" that would impinge on his clients' rights. He said $25 million in punitive damages is woefully insufficient and amounts to little more than a slap on the wrist for SCI. He also questioned how much each member of the class action would get, noting that as many as 33,000 families could eventually claim a stake in the settlement fund. MICROSOFT CORPORATION: Payouts in "Permatemp" Settlement Delayed ---------------------------------------------------------------- According to Rust Consulting, a Minnesota-based claims administrator, thousands of former Microsoft Corporation temporary workers, who are eligible for the company's $97 million "permatemp" settlement that was originally reached in December 2000, will most likely not receive their payments until sometime in 2005, the Seattle Post Intelligencer reports. The company administering the claims, which previously said it hoped to make the distribution this year attributes the current holdup to slower-than-expected progress by a federal court processing appeals by former "permatemps" whose claims were denied or who otherwise dispute Rust's conclusions about their eligibility. The lawyers in the case likewise say the delays are beyond their control and that Microsoft isn't to blame for the post- settlement delays. After the agreement was reached in the case, the company put the money into an escrow account, from which the payout is to be made after the resolution of the appeals and other issues, including a pending ruling from the Internal Revenue Service on how to tax the payouts. The class action settlement stems from claims in a lawsuit, Vizcaino v. Microsoft that was filed in 1992 by long-term temporary workers over their lack of eligibility for a Microsoft program in which permanent employees were able to buy company stock at a discount. With close to 9,000 people having been determined eligible to receive part of the settlement, individual payouts are expected to range from a few hundred dollars to tens of thousands of dollars per worker, based on a complicated formula taking into account factors including when and for how long each person worked at the company. However, Judith Bendich, of Bendich, Stobaugh & Strong, the law firm for the former "permatemps" points out that under the terms of the settlement, the fund, which as of August 31, contained about $78.5 million is to be distributed proportionately among everyone eligible, meaning the payouts can't begin until the list of eligible people is finalized. Another delay in the settlement's distribution is an unsuccessful appeal by two of the workers, who challenged the size of the fee received by Bendich, Stobaugh & Strong in the case. U.S. District Judge John Coughenour in Seattle is currently overseeing the case. MOLSON INC.: Ontario Teachers Pension To Block Coors Merger Plan ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Ontario Teachers Pension Plan Board intends to ask the Quebec Superior Court to block Molson, Inc.'s plan to allow its stock option holders to vote on its proposed merger with Adolph Coors Co., the Associated Press reports. In a filing late Friday with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Coors said Molson will allow option holders to vote in the same class as investors holding nonvoting class-A shares. According to the Canadian Business Corporations Act, all securities holders whose legal rights are affected by a proposed arrangement should be entitled to vote. Teachers Chief Executive Claude Lamoureux says the pension fund intends to block the plan, saying that the option holders, who are executives and directors of Molson, "have a totally different interest" than other public investors who own the company's shares. "This is ridiculous," Mr. Lamoureux said in an interview, according to AP. "From Teachers' standpoint, obviously we have to go to court and object to a number of features of this plan of arrangement." The practice of allowing stock option holders to vote on the merger has been used several times in Canada. For example, option holders at Alberta Energy Co. Ltd. were allowed to vote alongside shareholders on a proposal to merge with PanCanadian Energy Corporation to form EnCana Corporation. However, the practice has rarely received much attention because it has seldom been used in cases with close votes, AP states. Mr. Lamoureux said the pension fund is still developing its legal strategy, but may also object to the company's proposal to have all outstanding stock options vest immediately if the deal is approved, which he called "a lousy idea" because the executives will remain working at the company. He said he is also opposed to the generous "golden parachute" compensation plan for top executives, including Molson chief executive officer Dan O'Neill, AP reports. Mr. O'Neill will receive $2.3 million or three years' salary, if the merger goes ahead, because he will assume a different job. Molson executives will also have all performance provisions on their share units and stock options eliminated. NEW YORK: Settlement Can Mean Insurance Benefits For Minorities --------------------------------------------------------------- Minorities in New York and other states who purchased life insurance from Columbian Mutual Life Insurance Company or Golden Eagle Mutual Life Insurance Corporation may be eligible for policy adjustments or other benefits, the Press & Sun-Bulletin reports. According to the Kansas Insurance Department, a class action lawsuit filed in New York alleged that the companies knowingly and intentionally engaged in race-based pricing of their life insurance policies, charging minority customers significantly more than other customers. The terms of the settlement would require the companies to grants premiums or dividend adjustments, a three-year term insurance or other benefits to all affected policyholders. Lisa Young, associate general counsel and second vice president for Vestal-based Columbian Mutual Life Insurance stated that the Company denies any wrongdoing and that it settled the class action due to the significant expense and distraction that fighting it for the past four years has cost. Ms. Young further stated that approximately 139,000 policies would be adjusted with an estimated 120,000 of those policies in New York. PACKERLAND PACKING: Recalls Ground Beef For E.coli Contamination ---------------------------------------------------------------- Packerland Packing Company, a Green Bay, Wisconsin, firm, is voluntarily recalling approximately 59,000 pounds of ground beef products that may be contaminated with E. coli O157:H7, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service announced. The ground beef subject to recall was produced on September 2, 2004 and was shipped to distributors in Louisiana, Virginia, South Carolina, Indiana, Massachusetts, Wisconsin and Illinois for sale in restaurants and retail stores. The products subject to recall include: (1) 10-pound chubs of "IMPERIAL BEEF FINE GROUND 81/19." The chubs are packed four to a case and each case bears the code "G18148FR;" (2) 10-pound chubs of "PPC'S GROUND BEEF, FINE GROUND SIRLOIN 95/5." The chubs are packed four to a case and each case bears the code "G49548RO;" (3) 10-pound chubs of "PPC'S GROUND BEEF, COARSE GROUND SIRLOIN 95/5." The chubs are packed four to a case and each case bears the code "G49540PP." All of the boxes and the chubs bear the establishment code "Est. 562B," inside the USDA mark of inspection. On September 17, FSIS was notified by the company that the ground beef, which should have become cooked product, was mistakenly mixed with other beef produced on September 2. FSIS has received no reports of illnesses associated with consumption of this product. E. coli O157:H7 is a potentially deadly bacteria that can cause bloody diarrhea and dehydration. The very young, seniors and persons with compromised immune systems are the most susceptible to foodborne illness. Media and consumers with questions about the recall may contact company General Manager Steve Van Lannen at 920-406-2103. Consumers with food safety questions can phone the toll-free USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline at 1-888-MPHotline (1-888-674-6854). The hotline is available in English and Spanish and can be reached from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Eastern Time) Monday through Friday. Recorded food safety messages are available 24 hours a day. PIONEER NORTH: Handal & Associates Lodges CA Consumer Fraud Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law offices of Handal & Associates initiated a national class action lawsuit against Pioneer North America Inc., and Pioneer Electronics (USA), Inc. in the Superior Court of California in and for the County of San Diego. The suit alleges Pioneer actively promoted and sold to consumers its Pioneer Plasma Display Panel Television Sets, while knowing they were defective. The suit, brought by Glen Jaffe, a consumer who purchased a Pioneer PDP505 Plasma Television Set, alleges that Pioneer has violated the Consumer Legal Remedies Act as well as other California State statutes, amounting to unfair trade and business. Included in the suit are claims that Pioneer made false and misleading statements in advertising the quality of the Plasma Television and that Pioneer actively promoted and sold a product it knew was defective. The suit covers Pioneers complete Plasma Television line, which suffer from the same defect -- namely, that they abruptly turn off after an audible pop. The defect is linked to a faulty power supply. The suit seeks an injunction, requiring Pioneer to stop selling the affected Plasma Display Panel Televisions and to inform the public of the design defect. The suit further seeks a monetary judgment equal to a refund of the entire cost paid by consumers for the allegedly defective television sets. For more details, contact Anton N. Handal by Phone: (619) 544-6400 by E-mail: ca@handal-litigation.com or visit their Web site: http://www.handal-litigation.com PIP.AMERICA: Asks IL Court To Dismiss Claims in Consumer Lawsuit ---------------------------------------------------------------- PIP.America asked the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois to dismiss all but one claim in the consolidated amended class action filed against it for violations of state consumer laws. Five suits were initially filed on July 2003, namely: (1) Peggy Williams v. PIP/USA, Inc., Case No. 03 CH 9654, (2) Jessica Fischer Schnebel, et al. v. PIP/USA, Inc., Case No. 03CH07239, (3) Dawn Marie Cooper, et al. v. PIP/USA, Inc., Case No. 03CH11316, (4) Miriam Furman, et al. v. PIP/USA, Inc., Case No. 03CH10832 and (5) Karen S. Witt, et al. v. PIP/USA, Inc., Case No. 03CH12928 Counsel for Jessica Fischer Schnebel, et al. v. PIP/USA, Inc., Case No. 03CH07239 amended her class action complaint to include plaintiffs from the other four cases, and each of the others has been voluntarily dismissed. The consolidated amended complaint contains counts alleging product liability, breach of the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act and third-party beneficiary status. Unspecified monetary damages, exemplary damages and attorneys fees and costs are sought. The Company filed a motion seeking to dismiss all counts but the third-party beneficiary claim. Plaintiffs requested and received a two-month extension to tender written discovery to our witnesses before filing a response to the motion to dismiss. A ruling on the motion should come by the end of the year, the Company said in a disclosure to the Securities and Exchange Commission. SANSONE AUTOMOTIVE: Reaches $14M Settlement in NJ Consumer Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- Persons or individuals who purchased or leased a car or truck from any one of Sansone Automotive Group's dealerships between January 1996 through December 31, 2002 may be entitled to some cash and a discount offer, the law firm of Levy, Angstreich, Finney, Baldante, Rubenstein and Coren, P.C. announced in a statement. The money and discounts are part of a class action settlement that was reached in connection with a New Brunswick County lawsuit brought against the Sansone dealerships in Superior Court. That lawsuit alleges that Sansone-owned dealerships violated the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act by charging inflated prices for title and tag fees as well as for documentary and other dealership fees and services associated with new or used vehicle purchases and leases. On September 13, Superior Court Judge Alexander P. Waugh, Jr. entered an order directing that all class members be notified of the proposed settlement as well as of a hearing scheduled for December 10 on whether the Court should approve it. The settlement was negotiated after the Superior Court had certified a class of consumers to proceed against several Sansone dealerships, and was achieved through the assistance of a court- appointed mediator, retired Middlesex County Chancellery Judge C. Judson Hamlin. Under the proposed settlement all qualifying Sansone customers will be sent a transferable $275 coupon for each vehicle they purchased where a qualifying overcharge occurred. That coupon can be used directly towards the purchase or lease of any vehicle from any of Sansone's many Central New Jersey dealerships. It can also, as an alternative, be exchanged for an immediate $60 cash refund and a second coupon (with more limited transfer rights) in the amount of $215 that likewise is good towards the purchase or lease of any vehicle from the Sansone Dealerships. The coupons are valid for three years. Lead Class Counsel Steven E. Angstreich, from the Cherry Hill, New Jersey law firm of Levy, Angstreich, Finney, Baldante, Rubenstein and Coren, P.C., says that, "Under the terms of settlement there will be approximately $14 million in cash and coupons available for class members over a three-year period." According to Angstreich, "There were about 54,000 sales and lease transactions completed by the Sansone Automotive Group between 1996 and 2002. All people who are eligible to receive a refund and coupon will be notified in the mail. Sansone has also agreed to modify its sales documents to more clearly explain its title, registration, administrative and vehicle preparation fees so that consumers better understand what they are for and include." For more details, contact the law firm of Levy, Angstreich, Finney, Baldante, Rubenstein and Coren, P.C. by Phone: 800-601-1616 or visit their Web site: http://www.levyangstreich.com SIOUX-PREME PACKING: Recalls Pork Containing Foreign Material ------------------------------------------------------------- Sioux-Preme Packing Company, a Sioux Center, Iowa, firm, is voluntarily recalling approximately 1,110 pounds of pork products that may contain foreign material, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service announced. The products subject to recall are 110 pork shoulder butts that may contain small electronic transponders. The devices were inserted in the shoulders of the animals at a livestock production facility and the animals were inadvertently shipped to slaughter. The hogs were slaughtered on September 10 and were shipped to establishments in Colorado, Iowa and Mexico for further processing. The Company informed FSIS of the problem September 17. FSIS has not received any reports of illness associated with the products. Media and consumers with questions about the recall may contact company Vice-President Jim Malek at 712-252-0500. Consumers with food safety questions can phone the toll-free USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline at 1-888-MPHotline. The hotline is available in English and Spanish and can be reached from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Eastern Time) Monday through Friday. Recorded food safety messages are available 24 hours a day. SOUTH KOREA: Hearings On Collective Action To Be Held This Week --------------------------------------------------------------- South Korea's Ministry of Finance and Economy is set to hold a public hearing over allowing collective legal action by consumer associations this week in southern Seoul, Asia Pulse reports. The hearing will allow both advocates and critics of the measure to state their views. The South Korean business community opposed the measure for collective action, saying that it will be detrimental to the economy. The measure allegedly runs counter to the government- stated goal of creating a business-friendly environment, and that recent economic trends, the lack of expertise in civic groups and other concerns justified putting such a system on hold until these conditions were met. "As can be see[n] by the 'mandu' (dumpling) scandal several months ago, unverified reports and legal actions could wreak havoc with businesses, and allowing class actions to be permitted will invite similar problems," a spokesperson for the Federation of Korean Industries said, according to Asia Pulse. Advocates for the measure say that collective action is needed to protect consumers who had no way to fight minor damages in products and services in the past. Proponents further stated that the collective action is a "a toned-down version of the class action lawsuit because it allows only responsible and accredited consumer associations to start legal proceedings," Asia Pulse reports. Class actions are allowed in the United States, while the European Union uses the "milder" collective action system. These people also said that various safeguards limited the possibility of harm, and because claims can be raised against imported products and unfair practices, the measure is well- suited to protect the interests of South Korean consumers in the face of greater market liberalization, Asia Pulse states. The government said it is looking into the impact of allowing collective action so that it can protect consumer rights without hurting companies' business activities. TD WATERHOUSE: SEC Commences, Settles Civil Stock Fraud Charges --------------------------------------------------------------- The Securities and Exchange Commission filed settled civil charges against TD Waterhouse Investor Services, Inc., a national brokerage firm, for making undisclosed cash payments to three investment advisers to encourage them to use TD Waterhouse for their clients' brokerage business. In settling the matter, TD Waterhouse, without admitting or denying the Commission's findings, agreed to pay a $2 million penalty, among other remedies. The Commission filed related fraud actions against the three investment advisers and their principals for their failures to disclose the cash payments. The Commission's Order finds that TD Waterhouse knew its payments created potential conflicts of interest between the advisers and their clients. Each adviser that received compensation from TD Waterhouse compromised its ability to evaluate independently whether to recommend that its clients use TD Waterhouse to handle the clients' brokerage business. TD Waterhouse, which recognized that the advisers were required by law to disclose these conflicts to their clients, adopted written procedures that required TD Waterhouse personnel to ensure that the advisers made the proper disclosures, yet the firm failed to follow these procedures. TD Waterhouse made the payments to the advisers from its profits on the advisory clients' brokerage business. The payments, however, did not directly benefit the advisers' clients. Instead, the advisers used the money for their own purposes. The three registered independent investment advisers who received the payments are: (1) Kiely Financial Services, Inc. (based in Greenville, North Carolina), (2) Rudney Associates, Inc. (of San Ramon, California), and (3) Brandt, Kelly & Simmons, LLC (of Southfield, Michigan) New York-based TD Waterhouse has agreed to cease and desist from committing or causing violations of Section 206(2) of the Investment Advisers Act, an anti-fraud provision, and Section 207 of the Advisers Act, a disclosure provision. It will also pay a $2 million civil penalty and receive a Commission censure. Two of the investment advisers named in the Commission's actions have also agreed to settle the charges without admitting or denying the findings. Kiely Financial and its principal, Joseph K. Kiely, have agreed to disgorge the money they received from TD Waterhouse, plus interest - an amount totaling $54,256. They also agreed to pay a $100,000 civil penalty and to cease and desist from committing or causing violations of Sections 206(1), 206(2), and 207 of the Investment Advisers Act. Rudney Associates and its principal, Eric A. Rudney, have agreed to disgorge the money they received from TD Waterhouse, plus interest - an amount totaling $22,331. They also agreed to pay a $40,000 penalty and to cease and desist from committing or causing violations of Sections 206(1), 206(2), and 207 of the Investment Advisers Act. Finally, the Commission instituted litigated administrative and cease-and-desist proceedings against Brandt, Kelly & Simmons and its principal, Kenneth G. Brandt. The Order Instituting Proceedings alleges that the firm agreed to distribute a $7,500 cash payment from TD Waterhouse to its advisory clients to compensate them for fees they incurred when moving their accounts from another broker to TD Waterhouse. The Order alleges that the respondents did not inform their clients of the payment, but rather fraudulently misappropriated the money for their own uses. The Order alleges, among other things, that Brandt, Kelly & Simmons and Kenneth Brandt violated Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Advisers Act, and that Brandt, Kelly & Simmons also violated Section 207 of the Advisers Act. TELRAD: To Pay NIS8M-Fine To Settle Antitrust Fraud Charges ----------------------------------------------------------- Telrad and Tadiran Communications (TASE: TDCM) intend to pay an NIS8 million fine to the state of Israel to settle charges involving Bezeq's (TASE:BZEQ) purchase of digital switchboards in the mid-1990s, the Globes reports. Bezeq bought the switchboards from Telrad and Tadiran Communications, both of which were owned by Koor Industries (NYSE: KOR; TASE: KOR) at the time. The Antitrust Authority investigated suspicions that Bezeq had promised the two suppliers that it would not add a third manufacturer to the tender. Allegations that Bezeq had undertaken to divide its sales to Telrad and Tadiran Communications under a previous agreement between the parties were also investigated, The Globes reports. The companies then negotiated a plea bargain with Antitrust Authority director Dror Strum. TOBACCO LITIGATION: Trial Begins in Racketeering Lawsuit in D.C. ---------------------------------------------------------------- The trial in the civil racketeering lawsuit filed against the nation's biggest tobacco companies by the United States Department of Justice started this week in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, the Associated Press reports. The civil suit alleged violations of the civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), an earlier Class Action Reporter story (September 22,2004) states. The suit primarily alleges that the tobacco companies misled the public over the past fifty years, by saying that there was no evidence that smoking was linked to serious medical problems. The suit seeks around $280 billion in past profits - an amount that the industry says would drive it into bankruptcy and that is slightly more than the industry agreed to pay states in their 1998 settlement with attorneys general. The defendants in the case are: (1) Philip Morris USA Inc. and its parent, Altria Group Inc.; (2) R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; (3) Brown & Williamson Tobacco Co.; (4) British American Tobacco Ltd.; (5) Lorillard Tobacco Co.; (6) Liggett Group Inc.; (7) Counsel for Tobacco Research-U.S.A.; and (8) the Tobacco Institute The government is seeking $280 billion in "ill-gotten gains" earned by the industry. Justice lawyers also want new restrictions on the industry, which might include limiting in- store promotions or banning product descriptions such as "low tar" or light." In his opening statement, Justice Department attorney Frank Marine told the court that the nation's biggest tobacco companies worked together for decades to mislead the public about the dangers of smoking. Mr. Marine added that in the 1960s, the industry spent hundreds of millions of dollars on organizations set up to refute the growing scientific evidence linking smoking to cancer. Citing internal industry documents, he alleged that company executives knew they were trying to deceive the public. "The problem to them was that the public might stop smoking because of health concerns," he said. To counteract evidence linking smoking and second hand smoke to serious medical conditions, the industry created the Center for Tobacco Research and the Center for Indoor Air Research, Mr. Marine alleged. Big Tobacco also set up the Tobacco Institute to promote their findings and otherwise serve as a public relations and lobbying arm. Mr. Marine said the goal was to create a controversy where none existed. He said the "massive scheme" was successful and has had devastating consequences, citing the nearly half-million Americans who die from smoking- related illnesses each year, the Associated Press reports. It took the government around five years to bring the case to court. US District Judge Gladys Kessler is hearing the trial, which is expected to last six months. The government's opening statement was expected to take all day Tuesday. Industry lawyers were scheduled to make their opening statement Wednesday. In a statement issued just before the start of the trial, Attorney General John Ashcroft called the case "an important effort to prevent fraudulent activity and uphold corporate integrity," AP reports Industry lawyers have acknowledged tobacco executives may have expressed doubts about public health concerns in the past, but say that doesn't amount to fraud. "Fraud is, `I have a specific intention to mislead you or take money from you by deceiving you,'" said Philip Morris USA attorney William Ohlemeyer, according to AP. "Fraud is a very high bar." In the late 1990s, Big Tobacco reached a $246 billion settlement with states, over smoking related health costs. Under the settlement, the industry players agreed to close industry lobbying and research organizations and to place limits on advertising and marketing. In addition to disagreeing about whether fraud occurred in the past, cigarette makers and Justice lawyers also disagree on what the government must demonstrate about the future to win the case, AP reports. The industry says following the settlement with states companies significantly changed the way they sell and market cigarettes. They say that makes it impossible for the government to prove fraud is likely to occur in the future, something the government must show to win its case. Justice lawyers argue that evidence of past fraud is enough to conclude that future wrongdoing is likely to occur. David Bernick, attorney for Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., says the government's case ignores those reforms, AP reports. "It blinks away the reality of the profound changes that have taken place both within the tobacco industry and in how tobacco is perceived by people outside the industry," Bernick said. Like the states, the government initially sued to recover the costs of treating sick smokers. Judge Kessler ruled the government couldn't do that but did allow the Justice Department to sue under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. The government is relying on RICO, originally crafted to go after mobsters, because that law is designed to achieve remedies where there has been a group effort to violate fraud statutes, said William Schultz, a former Justice Department lawyer who headed the case during the Clinton administration, AP reports. The judge has said the government can go after the companies' old earnings, but the industry appealed that ruling. A higher court is considering the issue even as the trial gets under way, AP states. UNION RAILROAD: Attorneys Sift Through Eunice Settlement Claims --------------------------------------------------------------- Attorneys began sifting through 500 questionable claims for a share of the $65 million settlement in a May 2000 train derailment that forced an evacuation of Eunice after fumes leaked from wrecked rail cars carrying hazardous chemicals, the Opelousas Daily World reports. The settlement, which was agreed upon earlier this year between Plaintiffs and the Union Pacific Railroad Company, encompassed about 12,200 people. New Iberia attorney David Groner, who serves on the committee of attorneys that sued Union Pacific said that the hearings on the questionable claims were prompted after the railroad company did some research by comparing people who filed claims in the Eunice case to claimants in other class-action lawsuits in Louisiana. According to the Mr. Groner, the research revealed that there were indeed a number of people, whose names appeared in a number of class actions, thus prompting the group to scrutinize the claims a bit more. With the help of a detailed timeline of street and store closures during the evacuation of the city, two "special masters" namely Kenneth Dejean and Pat Juneau, who were appointed to oversee the pay-out grilled a group of mostly out- of-towners who claimed that they were in Eunice at the time of the derailment. Mr. Dejean, who was scheduled to review 50 claims, said 21 didn't show up, and out of the 29 he heard, he dismissed 16 and allowed 13 to stay in the case. While the second special master, Mr. Juneau, continued hearing claims into the evening. Both men focused their questions on discrepancies between forms the claimants filled out earlier this year and the timeline of the evacuation. UNITED STATES: Faces Five Mutual Fund Fraud Lawsuits in MD Court ---------------------------------------------------------------- The United States Trust Company of New York, along with certain of its affiliates, face five class action lawsuits, currently coordinated in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The suits allege that the Trust allowed certain parties to engage in illegal and improper trading practices which have caused financial injury to the shareholders of certain mutual funds that it managed. The Trust and certain affiliates have also been named in two derivative actions alleging breach of fiduciary duty in relation to allegedly illegal and improper mutual fund trading practices. The Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation transferred the class actions suits to Maryland, for coordinated or consolidated pre-trial proceedings. The Trust said in a disclosure to the Securities and Exchange Commission that it expects that the derivative actions will ultimately also be consolidated in the same matter before the District Court. UNITED STATES: Black Farm Groups Form National Coalition V. USDA ---------------------------------------------------------------- A variety of black farm groups recently created a national coalition to pursue claims that the federal government discriminates against them in loans and farm programs, the Associated Press reports. Known as the Congress of Black Farmer Organizations, the group contends that the Agriculture Department (USDA) has continued discriminatory practices, which were settled in a major civil rights case back in 1999. The newly formed coalition is composed of National Black Farmers Association, the Black Farmers and Agriculturalists Association, the Federation of Southern Cooperatives and the Arkansas Land Development Fund. According to the coalition, they based their claims on a recent report by the Environmental Working Group and the National Black Farmers Association that revealed a large majority of the 96,000 black farmers who sought restitution under the 1999 settlement were rejected. The move comes less than two weeks after the filing of a new class-action lawsuit, and just as the House Judiciary Committee prepares to hear testimony on the alleged failure of the earlier consent decree. In reaction to these moves by the groups, the USDA reiterated that its record on civil rights laws has been exemplary during the Bush administration. WIRELESS FACILITIES: Finalizing NY Securities Lawsuit Settlement ---------------------------------------------------------------- Settlement documents are being drafted for the consolidated securities class action filed against Wireless Facilities, Inc. and certain of its directors and officers in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. In June and July 2001, several shareholder class actions were filed on behalf of persons and entities that acquired the Company's common stock at various times on or after November 4, 1999. The respective complaints allege that the registration statement and prospectus issued by the Company in connection with the public offering of its common stock contained untrue statements of material fact or omissions of material fact in violation of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Specifically, these claims allege that the Company failed to disclose that the offering's underwriters had: (1) solicited and received additional and excessive compensation and benefits from their customers beyond what was listed in the registration statement and prospectus and (2) entered into tie-in or other arrangements with certain of their customers which were allegedly designed to maintain, distort and/or inflate the market price of the Company's common stock in the aftermarket. The complaints seek unspecified monetary damages and other relief. This case is among the over 300 class action lawsuits pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York that have come to be known as the IPO laddering cases. On October 9, 2002, the court signed Stipulations and Orders of Dismissal, which dismissed the Company's named individual officers and directors from the action, without prejudice, but the Company remained a defendant in the case. On February 19, 2003, the court issued its decision on the joint motion to dismiss the IPO laddering cases. The decision allowed the plaintiffs to pursue their claim against the Company based on its alleged issuance of a registration statement and prospectus that failed to disclose a fraudulent scheme by the offering's underwriters and dismissed, with leave to amend, the plaintiffs' claim against the Company based on its alleged knowledge and intent to defraud investors so as to benefit from an inflated price for the Company's common stock in the aftermarket. The plaintiffs, the Directors & Officers' insurance underwriters and the Company, among other issuer co-defendants, have agreed in principle to a form of settlement that would dismiss the Company and its individual directors and officers from the litigation without requiring that the Company fund the settlement. The settlement documents are presently being drafted, and will be submitted to the court for approval once they have been finalized. New Securities Fraud Cases ALLIED WASTE: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Lawsuit in AZ --------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona on behalf of all securities purchasers of Allied Waste Industries, Inc. (NYSE: AW) from February 10, 2004 through July 27, 2004, inclusive. The complaint charges Allied Waste, Thomas H. Van Weelden, Peter S. Hathaway, Thomas W. Ryan, and James E. Gray with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Allied Waste is a non- hazardous solid waste management company in the United States that provides collection, transfer, recycling and disposal services for approximately 10 million residential, commercial and industrial customers. 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 Company's internal growth, which the defendants touted as being strong, was lagging due to poor management execution and the loss of a large contract; (2) that defendants had failed to successfully implement the Company's "best practices" initiatives because the Company lacked adequate internal controls; (3) that defendants knew or recklessly disregarded the fact that much-anticipated cyclical volume pickup of trash was not materializing; and (4) that as a result of the above, the defendants' statements about the Company were lacking in any reasonable basis when made. On July 27, 2004, Allied Waste posted earnings, excluding special items, of 15 cents a share on revenue of $1.36 billion. Wall Street, on average, had expected earnings of 18 cents a share on sales of $1.39 billion. Including costs related to early retirement of debt, Allied Waste posted a net loss of 7 cents a share. Following this announcement, J.P. Morgan cut the stock to "neutral" vs. "overweight" on the news. "AW's big new focus on its `best practices' initiatives now makes the investment story one primarily about management execution," said analyst Amanda Tepper. News of this shocked the market. Shares of Allied Waste fell $2.55 per share, or 20.83 percent, on unusually high trading volume, to close at $9.69 per share. This was Allied Waste's biggest drop in five years. 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. BAXTER INTERNATIONAL: Stull Stull Files Securities Lawsuit in IL ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Stull, Stull & Brody initiated a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, on behalf of all purchasers of the publicly traded securities of Baxter International Inc. ("Baxter" or the "Company") (NYSE:BAX) between April 19, 2001 and July 21, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"). Also included in the Class are all those who acquired Baxter's shares through its acquisitions of Autros, Fusion Medical, ESI Lederle, Acambis, Alpha-1, Cook Pharmaceutical, and Icodextrin. The complaint charges Baxter, Robert Parkinson, Jr., Harry M. Jansen Kraemer, Jr., Brian Anderson, and John Greisch with violations of the securities laws. More specifically, the complaint alleges that during the Class Period defendants issued false and misleading statements concerning its business and financial condition. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose and/or misrepresented the following material adverse facts known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them: (1) that the Company's financial results during the Class Period were materially overstated; (2) that the overstatement occurred because the Company improperly and "incorrectly" recognized $40 million in revenues and maintained inadequate and "incorrect" provisions for bad debts relating to its Brazilian operations; (3) that as a result of this, the Company's financial results were in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"); (4) that the Company lacked adequate internal controls; and (5) that as a result of the above, the Company's financial results, including its net income figures, were materially and artificially inflated at all relevant times. On July 22, 2004, Baxter announced that it planned to restate its financial results for the years 2001 through 2003, and for the first quarter of 2004. The restatement was primarily the result of incorrect revenue recognition and inadequate provisions for bad debts in Brazil during that period, which would result in a decrease in net income over the restatement period by an amount expected to be no more than $40 million, or $0.07 per diluted share. The restatement was expected to result in adjustments to sales over the period of an amount not more than $70 million, representing less than 0.5 percent of sales in any year. News of this shocked the market. Shares of Baxter fell $1.48 per share, or 4.59 percent, to close at $30.79 per share on unusually heavy trading volume. For more details, contact Tzivia Brody, Esq. at Stull, Stull & Brody by Mail: 6 East 45th Street, New York, NY 10017 Phone: 1-800-337-4983 by Fax: 212/490-2022 by E-mail: SSBNY@aol.com or visit their Web site: http://www.ssbny.com BAXTER INTERNATIONAL: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in IL -------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the District of Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division on behalf of all purchasers of the publicly traded securities of Baxter International Inc. (NYSE: BAX) from April 19, 2001 through July 21, 2004, inclusive. The complaint charges Baxter, Robert Parkinson, Jr., Harry M. Jansen Kraemer, Jr., Brian Anderson, and John Greisch with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. More specifically, the complaint alleges that during the Class Period defendants issued false and misleading statements concerning its business and financial condition. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse facts known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them: (1) that the Company's financial results during the Class Period were materially overstated; (2) that the overstatement occurred because the Company improperly and "incorrectly" recognized $40 million in revenues and maintained inadequate and "incorrect" provisions for bad debts relating to its Brazilian operations; (3) that as a result of this, the Company's financial results were in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"); (4) that the Company lacked adequate internal controls; and (5) that as a result of the above, the Company's financial results, including its net income figures, were materially and artificially inflated at all relevant times. On July 22, 2004, Baxter announced that it planned to restate its financial results for the years 2001 through 2003, and for the first quarter of 2004. The restatement was primarily the result of incorrect revenue recognition and inadequate provisions for bad debts in Brazil during that period, which would result in a decrease in net income over the restatement period by an amount expected to be no more than $40 million, or $0.07 per diluted share. The restatement was expected to result in adjustments to sales over the period of an amount not more than $70 million, representing less than 0.5 percent of sales in any year. News of this shocked the market. Shares of Baxter fell $1.48 per share, or 4.59 percent, to close at $30.79 per share on unusually heavy trading volume. 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. BELO CORPORATION: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges TX Securities Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas on behalf of all securities purchasers of the Belo Corporation (NYSE:BLC) ("Belo" or the "Company") from May 12, 2003 and August 6, 2004 inclusive (the "Class Period"). The complaint charges Belo, Robert W. Decherd, and Barry Peckham with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. More specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Company failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse facts, which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them: (1) that defendants implemented a circulation sales rewards program designed to incentivise contractors to sell more of The Dallas Morning News newspapers to the general public; (2) that the contractors, in order to qualify for the circulation sales rewards, were overstating the true amounts of newspapers that were sold to the public; (3) that circulation managers failed to verify the contractors sales in order to take advantage of the rewards program; (4) that as a consequence of the foregoing, Belo's reported audited circulation numbers were materially inflated, which in turn allowed Belo to sell more advertisements thereby achieving higher advertizing revenues for the Company; and (5) that Belo's reported financial results, as a result of the aforementioned scheme, were materially inflated at all relevant times. On August 5, 2004, Belo announced that The Dallas Morning News, a wholly-owned subsidiary, reported a greater than expected decline in its September 2004 circulation. News of this shocked the market. Share of Belo fell $1.66 per share, or 7.15 percent, on August 6, 2004, to close at $21.55 per share. For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Darren J. Check, Esq. of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 or 1-610-667-7706 or by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com BELO CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. TX --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 purchasers of Belo Corporation (NYSE: BLC) common stock during the period between May 12, 2003 and August 6, 2004. The complaint charges Belo and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Belo is a media company which owns four daily newspapers, 19 television stations, 10 local and regional cable news channels and more than 30 Web sites. Belo's flagship property is The Dallas Morning News newspaper. The complaint alleges that beginning as early as 2003, defendants initiated and engaged in a scheme to defraud advertisers at The Dallas Morning News as well as Belo's investors by intentionally overstating the circulation of The Dallas Morning News in order to fraudulently extract higher incentive payments from the paper's advertisers. These fraudulent inflated circulation numbers were reported to investors and the market on a regular basis and the ill-gotten gains from the scheme artificially inflated Belo's financial results. As a result, defendants' scheme not only defrauded advertisers, but artificially inflated the value of Belo's stock, thus defrauding investors as well. According to the complaint, the scheme involved creating an incentive program for third-party vendors who sold The Dallas Morning News to the public. The more newspapers these vendors claimed to have to sold to the public, the larger the incentive payment and the purported circulation of the newspaper. The individuals who should have monitored this program for abuse were the circulation managers at The Dallas Morning News. Instead of encouraging the circulation managers to carefully audit the third-party vendors, however, Belo created an incentive program for the circulation managers as well. Thus, when third-party vendors reported fraudulent circulation numbers in order to receive incentive payments, the circulation managers themselves had an incentive to turn a blind-eye to the scheme. On August 5, 2004, Belo reported its circulation numbers for The Dallas Morning News were overstated by 1.5% for the daily paper and 5% for the Sunday paper. Belo also announced the resignation of defendant Barry Peckham, the Executive Vice President in charge of circulation at The Dallas Morning News. Belo announced it was conducting an internal investigation and that it would refund to advertisers all amounts that they had been overcharged. In response to this announcement, Belo's stock price plummeted from $23.21 at the close of business on August 5, 2004 prior to the announcement to a low of $18 the next day before finally settling at $21.55, on unprecedented volume of over 4.6 million shares traded. 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. BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in NY --------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all purchasers of securities of Bennett Environmental, Inc. (AMEX: BEL); (Toronto: BEV.TO) in the period from June 2, 2003 to July 22, 2004. The complaint alleges that the defendants made material misrepresentations and omissions of material facts concerning the company's business performance during the relevant time period. According to the complaint, throughout the relevant time period, defendants misrepresented the financial condition of the company by stating that the largest contract in the company's history was in full force and effect when, in fact, the contract had been substantially withdrawn almost immediately after its execution. The lawsuit includes American and Canadian investors. 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. CONCORD CAMERA: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Fraud Suit in FL ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Schatz & Nobel, P.C. initiated a lawsuit seeking class action status in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida on behalf of all persons who purchased the publicly traded securities of Concord Camera (Nasdaq: LENS) ("Concord") between August 14, 2003 and May 10, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"). Also included are all those who acquired Concord's shares through its acquisition of Jenimage Europe. The Complaint alleges that Concord, a company that designs, develops, manufactures and sells easy-to-use image capture products on a worldwide basis, and certain of its officers and directors issued materially false statements. Specifically, Concord failed to disclose and misrepresented the following facts: (1) that Concord's inventory levels were materially inflated; (2) Concord's financial results were materially impacted by the significant inventory provisions, ranging from $6 to $7 million; (3) Concord's net loss was artificially deflated through the application of manufacturing labor and overhead costs to inventory; and (4) that as a result, Concord's financial results were materially inflated at all relevant times. On May 11, 2004, Concord announced that it would file Form 12b- 25 with the SEC extending the Company's time to file a Form 10-Q for the period ended March 27, 2004. On this news, shares of Concord fell $1.58 per share or 34.20%, on May 11, 2004, to close at $3.04 per share. For more details, contact Nancy A. Kulesa by Phone: (800) 797-5499 by E-mail: sn06106@aol.com or visit their Web site: http:///www.snlaw.net CONCORD CAMERA: Berger & Montague Files Securities Lawsuit in FL ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Berger & Montague, P.C. initiated a class action suit against Concord Camera Corp. ("Concord" or the "Company") (Nasdaq: LENS) and certain of its current and former officers, Ira Lampert, Harlan Press and Richard Finkbeiner, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No. 04-61159-civ-Lenard, on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased Concord securities from August 14, 2003 through May 10, 2004 (the "Class Period"). On September 7, 2004, notice of the class action was given to Concord investors in "Investors Business Daily." The notice incorrectly stated that the deadline for filing to be lead plaintiff was November 1. Concord investors have 60 days from the date of the notice to file to be lead plaintiff, i.e., by November 8. 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 the SEC 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 the Company inflated its inventory during the Company's 2004 fiscal year and failed to disclose that as of August 14, 2003, the Company's excess, obsolete and impaired inventory exceeded $15 million. As incremental write-offs were taken over successive quarters and the true financial position of the Company emerged, the stock price declined from $13.95 on November 12, 2003 to close at $3.04 on May 11, 2004, damaging securities purchasers. For more details, contact Sherrie R. Savett, Esq., Robin Switzenbaum, Esq. or Diane Werwinski, Investor Relations Manager of Berger & Montague, P.C. by Mail: 1622 Locust Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103 by Phone: 888-891-2289 or 215-875-3000 by Fax: 215-875-5715 or by E-mail: InvestorProtect@bm.net CONCORD CAMERA: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Lawsuit in FL ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of Concord Camera Corporation (Nasdaq:LENS) between August 14, 2003 through May 10, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The action 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. No class has yet been certified in the above action. For more details, contact law offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A. by Mail: The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore, MD 21202 by Phone: 410/986-0036 or by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com CP SHIPS: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY --------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all securities purchasers of CP Ships Limited (NYSE: TEU) from April 23, 2003 through August 6, 2004, inclusive. The complaint charges CP Ships, Raymond Miles, Frank Halliwell, and Ian Webber with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. CP Ships is a container shipping company offering its customers door-to-door, as well as port-to-port containerized services for the international transportation of a range of industrial and consumer goods, including raw materials, semi- manufactured and finished goods. More specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Company failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse facts which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them: (1) that the Company overstated its net income figures by $22 to $27 million; (2) that the Company insufficiently accrued certain costs which caused the Company's net income figures to be materially inflated; (3) that the Company's financial results were in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP") and the Company's own accounting interpretations; and (4) that as a result of the above, the Company's financial results were materially inflated at all relevant times. On August 9, 2004, CP Ships announced that in conjunction with the release of second quarter 2004 results it would restate previously reported financial results, the Company insufficiently accrued certain costs which caused the Company's net income figures to be materially inflated. News of this shocked the market. Shares of CP Ships fell $3.70 per share or 22.36 percent, on August 9, 2004, to close at $12.85 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. FLIGHT SAFETY: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in CT Court ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut on behalf of purchasers of Flight Safety Technologies, Inc. (AMEX: FLT) publicly traded securities during the period between January 14, 2003 and July 16, 2004, inclusive, against defendants Flight Safety and certain of its officers and directors. The complaint charges that Flight Safety and certain of its officers and directors violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, and state common laws by making a series of materially false and misleading statements concerning the SOCRATES Wake Vortex Detector. 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. INTERACTIVECORP: Brian M. Felgoise Lodges Securities Suit in NY --------------------------------------------------------------- The law offices of Brian M. Felgoise, P.C. initiated a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who acquired IAC/InterActiveCorp (NASDAQ: IACI) securities between March 19, 2003 and August 4, 2004, inclusive (the Class Period). The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, against the company and certain key officers and directors. The action charges that defendants violated the 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. No class has yet been certified in the above action. For more details, contact Brian M. Felgoise, Esq. by Mail: 261 Old York Road, Suite 423, Jenkintown, PA 19046 by Phone: (215) 886-1900 or by E-mail: securitiesfraud@comcast.net INTERACTIVECORP: Charles J. Piven Files Securities Lawsuit in NY ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of IAC/InterActiveCorp (Nasdaq:IACI) between March 19, 2003 through August 4, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against defendant IAC and one or more of its officers and/or directors. The action 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. No class has yet been certified in the above action. For more details, contact law offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A. by Mail: The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore, MD 21202 by Phone: 410/986-0036 or by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com IMPAC MEDICAL: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Securities Suit in CA ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of all securities purchasers of IMPAC Medical Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq: IMPCE) ("IMPAC" or the "Company") between November 20, 2002 and May 13, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The complaint charges IMPAC, Joseph Jachinowski, Kendra Borrego, David Auerbach, and James Hoey with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. More specifically, the complaint alleges that the Company failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse facts, which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them: (1) that IMPAC had materially overstated its net income and earnings per share; (2) that the Company improperly recognized revenue in the form of licensing agreements, which had been materially overstated; (3) that IMPAC's financial results were in violation of GAAP; and (4) that IMPAC lacked adequate internal controls and was therefore unable to ascertain the true financial condition of the Company. On February 5, 2004, IMPAC announced that it was reviewing its financial statements relating to the timing of its recognition of revenues during prior periods. On March 1, 2004, IMPAC announced that it had determined that it would be required under generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP") to restate its financial statements for fiscal years 2000 through 2003 to shift some previously recognized revenues to later quarters or to defer previously recorded revenues and recognize them in periods subsequent to fiscal year 2003. Then, on May 13, 2004, IMPAC reported results for its second quarter of fiscal 2004. More specifically, the Company stated: "During the second quarter of fiscal 2004, our core oncology software license revenue was impacted by delays in implementations; however, the recently acquired pathology and cancer registry product lines contributed $2.0 million to net sales during the period. In addition, we deferred a net $1.8 million in software license revenue related to the oncology product lines due to multi-element contracts in the second quarter of fiscal 2004 as compared to a net $2.6 million deferral for the same period in fiscal 2003." This news shocked the market. Shares of IMPAC fell $10.23 per share or 41.17 percent, on May 14, 2004, to close at $14.62 per share. For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Darren J. Check, Esq. of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 or 1-610-667-7706 or by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com MAXIM PHARMACEUTICALS: Lerach Coughlin Lodges CA Securities Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP ("Lerach Coughlin") initiated a class action has in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California on behalf of purchasers of Maxim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("Maxim") (NASDAQ:MAXM) common stock during the period between November 11, 2002 and September 17, 2004 (the "Class Period"). The complaint charges Maxim and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Maxim is a global biopharmaceutical company focused on developing and commercializing therapeutic products for life- threatening cancers and chronic liver diseases. The Company's leading drug candidate during the Class Period was Ceplene, which Maxim claimed was designed to prevent or inhibit oxidative stress, thereby overcoming immune suppression and protecting critical immune cells. Maxim also claimed that Ceplene, used in combination immunotherapy with cytokines, was being tested as an investigational drug for a number of cancers, including malignant melanoma. In December of 2000, Ceplene was reviewed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") Oncology Drugs Advisory Committee ("ODAC") for approval as a treatment for malignant melanoma. The ODAC recommended against approval, based on the failure of a comprehensive multicenter randomized "MO1" Phase III study. In January of 2001, the FDA issued Maxim a rejection letter for the use of Ceplene as a treatment for malignant melanoma. The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants artificially inflated the price of Maxim shares by issuing a series of false and misleading statements about the utility of Ceplene in the treatment of malignant melanoma. Despite expert review by the FDA and others of the dismal results of their failed Phase III trial, defendants sought to convince investors that Ceplene still held promise as a treatment for malignant melanoma. According to the complaint, the true facts which were known by each of the defendants, but concealed from the investing public during the Class Period, were as follows: (1) positive reports of survival rates and the status of malignant melanoma patients treated with Ceplene during the original MO1 Phase III study were rooted in a failed, fundamentally flawed and deficient trial and were therefore false and misleading in nature; (2) defendants' representation during the Class Period that "Maxim Pharmaceuticals Receives FDA Approval" was intended to convey to the investing public the false and misleading impression that Ceplene was safe, effective and approved for use in accordance with detailed instructions for dosage and administration for a marketed drug; (3) under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, it was illegal to publicly promote Ceplene as a safe and effective treatment for any type of disease, including malignant melanoma; (4) even though the Company represented to investors that the FDA "Approved" Ceplene, no new clinical data or information demonstrating that the drug was effective in the treatment of malignant melanoma had been provided to the agency since it rejected the drug in 2001; (5) the later "confirmatory" Phase III study was in fact designed to refute key negative results in the MO1 study as interpreted by panel experts at the ODAC in December of 2000 (results that explained why the drug did not work); (6) negative results were again the likely outcome of the later "confirmatory" Phase III study, while positive results would create controversy and alone could not support approval of the drug for the treatment of malignant melanoma; and (7) disclosure of the highly material negative results of the later trial were delayed, affording insiders with knowledge of the undisclosed material information an opportunity for trading in Company securities. On September 19, 2004, defendants shocked the market by announcing the resounding failure of Ceplene to demonstrate an improvement in overall patient survival, the primary endpoint. Based on this disclosure, the stock imploded, closing the next trading day at $3.04, for a loss of $2.90 or 48.8% of its value, on volume of over 17 million shares. For more details, contact William Lerach or Darren Robbins of Lerach Coughlin by Phone: 800-449-4900 by E-mail: wsl@lerachlaw.com or visit their Web site: http://www.lerachlaw.com/cases/maximpharmaceuticals/ RADIATION THERAPY: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Lawsuit in FL ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Schatz & Nobel, P.C. initiated a lawsuit seeking class action status in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on behalf of all persons who purchased the common stock of Radiation Therapy Services (Nasdaq: RTSX) ("Radiation Therapy") between June 17, 2004 and September 8, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The Complaint alleges that Radiation Therapy and certain of its officers and directors issued materially false statements concerning its initial public offering ("IPO"). Specifically, Radiation Therapy failed to disclose that: (1) the IPO was purely a liquidity event for management/owners -- not a source of growth capital for the Company because 100% of the IPO proceeds went into the hands of Radiation Therapy's primary shareholders; (2) the numerous related party transactions by Radiation Therapy increased the risk of its business model running afoul of State and Federal laws governing corporate practice of medicine, fee splitting and physician-referrals; and (3) organic revenue growth had slowed dramatically and could be further disrupted in January due to changes in the way medical oncologists run their businesses. On September 9, 2004, Banc of America Securities ("Banc of America") initiated coverage of Radiation Therapy Services with a "sell" rating and an $11 target price. Banc of America said the Company's IPO "was purely a liquidity event for management/owners" and noted that following the IPO management "gifted itself another 5% of the company via new option grants." Banc of America said: "We simply cannot recommend purchasing the stock until the company's board structure (currently four insiders, just three independent directors) and extensive related party relationships are materially overhauled." On this news, Radiation Therapy fell $1.66 per share, or 11.98%, to $12.20 per share. For more details, contact Nancy A. Kulesa by Phone: (800) 797-5499 by E-mail: sn06106@aol.com or visit their Web site: http:///www.snlaw.net RADIATION THERAPY: Schiffrin & Barroway Files FL Securities Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida who purchased the common stock of Radiation Therapy Services, Inc. (Nasdaq: RTSX) ("Radiation Therapy" or the "Company") between June 17, 2004 and September 8, 2004, (the "Class Period"). The complaint charges Radiation Therapy, Daniel E. Dosoretz, Howard M. Sheridan, David M. Koeninger, Joseph Biscardi, James H. Rubenstein, and Michael J. Katin with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. Radiation Therapy is a provider of radiation therapy services to cancer patients. The Company owns, operates and manages treatment centers, focused exclusively on providing comprehensive radiation treatment alternatives ranging from conventional external beam radiation to newer, technologically advanced options. On June 18, 2004, the Company announced that the underwritten initial public offering ("IPO") of 5.5 million shares of its common stock had been priced at $13 per share. The shares of its common stock would trade on the Nasdaq under the symbol "RTSX." The Company would offer 4 million newly issued shares of common stock in the initial public offering, which would result in gross proceeds to the Company of approximately $52 million. In addition, certain shareholders would offer 1.5 million currently outstanding shares of common stock in the initial public offering at the same price. According to the complaint, the Company failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse facts, which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them: (1) that the Company's IPO was purely a liquidity event for management/owners - not a source of growth capital for the Company because 100% of the IPO proceeds went into the hands of the Company's primary shareholders; (2) that the numerous related party transactions by the Company increased the risk of its business model running afoul of State and Federal laws governing corporate practice of medicine, fee splitting and physician-referrals; and (3) that organic revenue growth had slowed dramatically and could be further disrupted in January due to changes in the way medical oncologists run their businesses. On September 9, 2004, Banc of America Securities ("Banc of America") initiated coverage of Radiation Therapy Services with a "sell" rating and an $11 target price. Banc of America said the Company's IPO "was purely a liquidity event for management/owners - not a source of growth capital for the company." The research house noted that following the IPO management "gifted itself another 5% of the company via new option grants." Banc of America also drew attention to the fact that in 2003, Radiation Therapy paid $6.6 million to outside companies controlled by senior management, underlining the increased regulatory risk of a business model that could "run afoul of State and Federal laws governing corporate practice of medicine, fee splitting and physician-referrals." In addition, Banc of America said that although revenue growth remained "impressive," organic revenue growth had slowed "dramatically" and could be further disrupted in January. In conclusion, the research house said: "We simply cannot recommend purchasing the stock until the company's board structure (currently four insiders, just three independent directors) and extensive related party relationships are materially overhauled." News of this shocked the market. Shares of Radiation Therapy fell $1.66 per share, or 11.98 percent, to close at $12.20 per share on unusually heavy trading volume. For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Darren J. Check, Esq. of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 or 1-610-667-7706 or by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com TECO ENERGY: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Fraud Lawsuit in FL ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP initiated a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the securities of TECO Energy, Inc. ("TECO" or the "Company") (NYSE: TE) between October 31, 2001 and February 4, 2004 inclusive, (the "Class Period"), seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"). The action is pending in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida against defendants TECO Energy, Inc, Robert D. Fagan (Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer) and Gordon L. Gillette (Chief Financial Officer). The complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants issued false and misleading statements in an effort to conceal the problems the Company was having with several non- regulated power production facility construction projects, as well as its exposure to the Enron bankruptcy and the material impact said bankruptcy would have on the Company's ability to maintain its rewarding cash dividend. Since the foundation of the Company's reputation with investors was the large and stable dividend, any disruption or reduction to the dividend would have a significant impact on the value of Company shares. Despite this risk, Defendants continued to shift the Company's operations away from its stable base of regulated energy markets into the unregulated energy market without properly advising the investing public that its large cash dividend could not be maintained. While Defendants were maintaining the dividend charade, TECO raised over $792 million selling securities to the investing public while at the same time, Defendants sold $4.2 million of their personal TECO holdings. TECO took over a billion dollars in impairment charges as a result, causing its stock to fall from a Class Period high of over $28 per share, to below $13 per share on February 4, 2003. For more details, contact Steven G. Schulman by Mail: One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl., New York, NY 10119-0165 by Phone: (800) 320-5081 or by E-mail: sfeerick@milbergweiss.com OR Maya Saxena or Joseph E. White III by Mail: 5355 Town Center Road, Suite 900, Boca Raton, FL 33486 by Phone: (561) 361-5000 by E- mail: msaxena@milbergweiss.com or visit their Web site: http://www.milbergweiss.com ZIX CORPORATION: Shepherd Finkelman Lodges Securities Suit in TX ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLC filed a class action on behalf of all purchasers of the stock and other publicly traded securities of Zix Corporation ("Zix" or "the Company") (Nasdaq: ZIXI) between October 30, 2003 and May 4, 2004, inclusive ("the Class"). The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Case No. 3:04-cv-2018-N) against Zix and seven members of the Company's senior management, including its Chief Executive Officer, its General Counsel, and several vice presidents. The Complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, Defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse facts, known or recklessly disregarded by them: (1) that Zix's recent expansion into e-prescription services was languishing; (2) that the Company seriously underestimated the hurdles of deploying e-prescription services in medical offices that lack up-to-date IT infrastructure; (3) as a result of these factors, the Company's deployment rate of 1,000 physicians a month was unattainable; and (4) as a consequence of the foregoing, Zix's projections lacked in any reasonable basis. On May 4, 2004, Zix announced financial results for the first quarter ended March 31, 2004. In the press release, the Company's numbers were well below expectations. In response, shares of Zix fell 15.58% on May 5, 2004, to close at $11.49 per share. On the following day, shares of Zix fell an additional 22.63 % to close at $8.89 per share. For more details, contact James E. Miller, Esq. Patrick A. Klingman, Esq. or James C. Shah, Esquire by Phone: 866/540-5505 or 877/891-9880 by E-mail: jmiller@classactioncounsel.com or pklingman@classactioncounsel.com or jshah@classactioncounsel.com or visit their Web site: http://www.classactioncounsel.com ZIX CORPORATION: Wolf Popper Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in TX --------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Wolf Popper LLP initiated a securities fraud class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas against Zix Corporation ("Zix") (Nasdaq: ZIXI) John A. Ryan, Daniel S. Nutkis and Steve M. York, on behalf of all persons who purchased Zix securities on the open market from October 30, 2003, through May 4, 2004 (the "Class" and the "Class Period"). Prior to the Class Period Zix made a significant effort to increase its revenue from sales of software that enables secure electronic communications in the medical profession, particularly "e-prescribing" -- a service that would allow doctors to write prescriptions, access drug interaction information and insurance formulary information using handheld devices and a wireless internet connection. The complaint alleges that during the Class Period defendants made repeated false statements about their success in selling and implementing e-prescription software and services. Most importantly, defendants misrepresented the number of physicians they had deployed e-prescription service with and failed to disclose the numerous problems that they knew of and which were preventing them from achieving their stated sales and deployment goals. On May 4, 2004, and thereafter, defendants' fraud was revealed - - causing Zix stock price to plummet by over 50% from their May 3, 2004 closing price of $14.43 per share to close on May 14, 2004 at $7.10 per share. For more details, contact James Harrod, Esq. of Wolf Popper LLP by Mail: 845 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10022-6689 by Phone: 212-451-9642 or 877-370-7703 by Fax: 212-486-2093 or 877-370-7704 by E-mail: irrep@wolfpopper.com or visit their Web site: http://www.wolfpopper.com ********* 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. Glenn Ruel Seorin, 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 * * *