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  * * *