CAR_Public/060503.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

             Wednesday, May 3, 2006, Vol. 8, No. 87

                            Headlines

APOLLO PRESENTATION: Provides Safety Belts to Audio-Visual Carts
ARIZONA: Tucson City Lawyer to Receive $1.38M in CAP Water Suit
BAXTER HEALTHCARE: FDA Warns of Volumetric Infusion Pumps' Flaws
CALIFORNIA: Realtor Loses Lawsuits After Missing Court Deadlines
CARIBOU COFFEE: Faces Managers' FLSA Violations Lawsuit in Minn.

EDWARD D JONES: Continues to Face Securities Suit in E.D. Mo.
EDWARD D JONES: Faces Calif. Preferred Family Mutual Fund Suit
EDWARD D JONES: Faces Investment Representatives' Suit in Calif.
EDWARD D JONES: Faces Mo. Suit Over Preferred Family Mutual Fund
FERRO CORP: Continues to Face Consolidated Stock Lawsuit in Ohio

FERRO CORP: Continues to Face ERISA Violations Suit in N.D. Ohio
GAINSCO INC: Discovery Underway in Tex. Securities Fraud Lawsuit
ILLINOIS: Villages Settle Infrastructure Maintenance Fee Lawsuit
INDIAN TRUST: Gov't Challenges Orders in "Cobell v. Norton" Suit
IPALCO ENTERPRISES: Appeals Deadline Expires for Ind. Stock Suit

IPALCO ENTERPRISES: Continues to Face ERISA Fraud Suit in Ind.
IPALCO ENTERPRISES: Continues to Face Landowners' Suit in Ind.
LIVEDOOR CO: Investors Sue to Recoup Loss from Accounting Fraud
MERCK & CO: To Face Additional Lawsuit Over Osteoporosis Drug
MONTANA: District Judge Orders Billings City to Pay Firefighters

NETFLIX INC: Court Approves Settlement of DVD Renters' Lawsuit
OHIO: Appeals Court Sides with ACLU in Punch-Card Ballot Lawsuit
PENNSYLVANIA: Judge Mulls Engaging Advisory Jury in Suits
PUBLIC STORAGE: Continues to Face Calif. Property Managers' Suit
ROHM & HAAS: Penn. Lawsuits Claim Pollution Causes Brain Cancer

SEARS CANADA: Facing Lawsuits Over Tire Pricing, Sears Card
SELECTED TRADING: Recalls Kids' Jewelry on Lead Poisoning Risk
SOFT DRINK MAKERS: Kan. Woman Files Suit Over Benzene in Juice
SYCAMORE KIDS: Expands Recall of Mountain Buggy Urban Strollers
TRAVELERS LIFE: Conn. Court Cancels Annuities Suit Certification


               Meetings, Conferences & Seminars


* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
* Online Teleconferences

                   New Securities Fraud Cases

ASTEA INT'L: Kahn Gauthier Files Securities Fraud Suit in Pa.
ASTEA INT'L: Schiffrin & Barroway Files Securities Suit in Pa.
CHINA ENERGY: Labaton Sucharow Files Securities Lawsuit in N.Y.
CHINA ENERGY: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.Y.
DISCOVERY LABORATORIES: Squitieri & Fearon Files Securities Suit

ESTEE LAUDER: Pomerantz Haudek Files Securities Lawsuit in N.Y.
FAIRFAX FINANCIAL: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Suit in N.Y.
GLOBETEL COMMUNICATIONS: Sarraf Gentile Files Stock Suit in Fla.
NEWPARK RESOURCES: Kaplan Fox Files Securities Fraud Suit in La.
SEA CONTAINERS: Christopher J. Gray Files Stock Fraud in N.Y.


                            *********


APOLLO PRESENTATION: Provides Safety Belts to Audio-Visual Carts
----------------------------------------------------------------
Apollo Presentation Products of Lincolnshire, Illinois, in
cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Protection Safety Commission
is recalling about 960 Apollo steel wide-body carts.

The Company said these audio-visual carts were sold without a
safety belt which helps prevent heavy equipment from becoming
unstable and falling from the cart's upper shelf.  Equipment
falling on nearby consumers can cause serious injuries and
death.  Apollo is not aware of any incidents involving this
audio-visual cart.

Apollo Item no. VWBUL44 (Office Depot Model no. 177-446) is
steel, has a pyramid design, three shelves, stands 44 inches
high and comes with a three-outlet electrical assembly,
including a cord-winding bracket.  The affected Model VWBUL44
Carts have a model number tag on the underside of the top shelf
that reads: "SC: 18" and a date code "REF" date code of 07/26/05
or later.

The cart was made in China and sold by Office Depot catalog and
Web site, from September 2005 through February 6, 2006 for
between $200 and $240.

Consumers are advised to stop using these carts immediately, but
not return them to Office Depot stores.  Owners are being sent a
free kit, including a safety belt and hardware needed for
assembly.

Picture of the recalled carts:
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml06/06548.jpg

For more information, contact Apollo at (800) 777-3750 between 7
a.m. and 5 p.m. CT Monday through Friday.  On the Net:
http://www.apolloavproducts.com.


ARIZONA: Tucson City Lawyer to Receive $1.38M in CAP Water Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pima County Superior Judge Carmine Cornelio ordered the city of
Tucson to pay $1.38 million in attorney's fees in the class
action against the city over its Central Arizona Project water,
Associated Press reports.

The suit, filed in 1995, claimed the CAP water, which is treated
Colorado River water that the city started delivering in 1992,
corroded pipes and ruined appliances.  The city paid $250 per
appliance and $2,000 for plumbing, costing it nearly $2 million
in compensation.  It settled larger claims filed in court by
some city residents in two phases: creating a $1.5 million fund
to settle about 3,800 claims of less than $5,000 each, and
paying larger claimants for another $800,000.

Representing the city is private lawyer Gary J. Cohen.
Representing claimants is lawyer David Toone.


BAXTER HEALTHCARE: FDA Warns of Volumetric Infusion Pumps' Flaws
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is recommending that all
healthcare providers take important safety steps when using the
COLLEAGUE Volumetric Infusion Pump manufactured by Baxter
Healthcare Corp.

The FDA said the COLLEAGUE pump has exhibited a variety of
problems, including under-infusion, battery failures, false
alarms and failure to alarm.  Over the past year, Baxter has
issued four urgent safety notices and recalls for COLLEAGUE
infusion pumps.

In addition to the recommendations made by Baxter Healthcare
Corporation when using the COLLEAGUE Volumetric Infusion Pump,
FDA is strongly recommending these measures:

     -- not to use the COLLEAGUE pumps in situations where
        delaying or interrupting therapy in order to reprogram
        or replace a malfunctioning pump may be life
        threatening, if possible;

     -- have a contingency plan to mitigate any disruption of
        infusion therapy (e.g., have a back-up pump available);

     -- monitor patients and check the pumps frequently;

     -- report any problems as soon as possible to Baxter and
        FDA; and

     -- consider evaluating other options for infusion therapy
        if the facility relies primarily or entirely on
        COLLEAGUE Pumps.

Other short-term options that may be appropriate for certain IV
therapies include gravity drip and flow control devices (e.g.,
buretrol, volutrol, micro tubing, and flow control tubing
devices).  FDA is mindful of concerns about the availability of
replacement units and is working with Baxter to resolve problems
with the COLLEAGUE pump as quickly as possible.


CALIFORNIA: Realtor Loses Lawsuits After Missing Court Deadlines
----------------------------------------------------------------
Embattled Palm Desert realtor, Haydee Verdugo, has lost two
separate class actions by default after missing two court
deadlines in April, News Channel 3 reports.

On April 18, Ms. Verdugo had until four o'clock to respond to a
class action filed by 42 Coachella Valley resident, claiming she
owes them a total of more than $400,000.

Another nine Coachella Valley residents testified at the Larson
Justice Center on April 26, saying they are trying to get back
between $5,000 to $20,000 from the realtor.

They all say she stole their real estate down payments and had
them sign invalid contracts and then skipped town.  But a family
member said Ms. Verdugo is still in Mexico for medical
treatment.

According to the plaintiff's attorney, John Gallegos and the
court's own Web site, Ms. Verdugo missed those deadlines.

The judge in Mr. Gallegos' suit said he will review the claims
and make a decision in the next few days.

The Riverside County Sheriff's Department is investigating the
case and has executed two search warrants, one at Ms. Verdugo's
Palm Desert home and one at her office.

Representing plaintiffs are Palm Spring lawyers David Lynch,
Lance Archer and John Gallegos.


CARIBOU COFFEE: Faces Managers' FLSA Violations Lawsuit in Minn.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Caribou Coffee Co., Inc. is defendant in a purported class
action in U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota
alleging violations of the Minnesota Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA), or the Minnesota FLSA, the federal FLSA, and state
common law.

Initially, on July 26, 2005, three former employees of the
Company filed a lawsuit in the State of Minnesota District Court
for Hennepin County seeking monetary and equitable relief.

The suit primarily alleges that the Company misclassified its
retail coffeehouse managers and managers in training as exempt
from the overtime provisions of the Minnesota FLSA and the
federal FLSA and that these managers and managers in training
are therefore entitled to overtime compensation for each week in
which they worked more than 40 hours from May 2002 to the
present with respect to the claims under the federal FLSA and
for weeks in which they worked more than 48 hours from May 2003
to the present with respect to the claims under the Minnesota
FLSA.

The plaintiffs are seeking to represent themselves and all of
the Company's allegedly similarly situated current and former
(within the foregoing periods of time) coffeehouse managers.

In addition, they are also seeking payment of an unspecified
amount of allegedly owed and unpaid overtime compensation,
liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, civil penalties under
the Minnesota FLSA, a full accounting of the amount allegedly
owed to the putative class, temporary and injunctive relief,
attorney's fees and costs.

On August 15, 2005, the Company removed the lawsuit to the U.S.
District for the District of Minnesota and filed its answer to
the complaint.

On October 31, 2005, the court granted the plaintiffs' motion to
conditionally certify an alleged nationwide class of current and
former coffeehouse managers since May 25, 2002 for purposes of
pursuing the plaintiffs' claim that the coffeehouse managers
were and are misclassified as exempt under the FSLA.

By order dated December 21, 2005, the court approved a notice to
be sent to all members of the conditionally certified class,
setting a deadline of April 10, 2006 for such members to elect
to opt into the case.

The suit is "Nerland, et al. v. Caribou Coffee Company, Inc.,
Case No. 0:05-cv-01847-JMR-FLN," filed in the U.S. District
Court for the District of Minnesota under Judge James M.
Rosenbaum with referral to Judge Franklin L. Noel.  Representing
the plaintiffs are:

     (1) Jonathan W. Cuneo of Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP, 507
         C. St., NE Washington, DC 20002, Phone: 202-789-3960,
         E-mail: jonc@cuneolaw.com;

     (2) Clayton D. Halunen of Halunen & Associates, 220 South
         6th Street, Ste. 2000, Minneapolis, MN 55402, Phone:
         (612) 605-4098, Fax: (612) 605-4099, E-mail:
         halunen@halunenlaw.com; and

     (3) Charles N. Nauen of Lockridge Grindal Nauen, P.L.L.P.,
         100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200, Minneapolis,
         MN 55401, Phone: 612-339-6900, Fax: 612-339-0981, E-
         mail: cnnauen@locklaw.com.

Representing the defendants are:

     (i) Peter N. Hall of King & Spalding, LLP, 191 Peachtree
         St., Atlanta, GA 30303-1763, Phone: 404-572-4698, E-
         mail: phall@kslaw.com; and

    (ii) Joseph M Sokolowski of Parsinen Kaplan Rosberg &
         Gotlieb, 100 S. 5th St., Ste. 1100, Minneapolis, MN
         55402-1298, Phone: 612-333-2111, Fax: 612-333-6798, E-
         mail: jsokolowski@parlaw.com.


EDWARD D JONES: Continues to Face Securities Suit in E.D. Mo.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P., a principal subsidiary of The Jones
Financial Companies, L.L.L.P., is defendant in a consolidated
class action "Spahn IRA, et al. v. Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P.,
et al." filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Missouri.

The case, along with five other companion cases filed in January
or February 2004, were consolidated under this case caption
before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Missouri.

The Amended and Consolidated Complaint alleges that the Company
violated Sections 10(b), 12(2), and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, by failing to
adequately disclose its revenue sharing arrangements to
customers.

Plaintiffs seek to represent a class of all persons who
purchased shares of the Preferred Family mutual funds from
January 25, 1999 through December 2004.

After the Company filed a Motion to Dismiss the Amended and
Consolidated Complaint, the Court granted the plaintiffs leave
to file a Second Amended Complaint, which is currently due to be
filed on April 15, 2006.  No class has been certified in these
cases.

The suit is "Spahn v. Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P., et al., Case
No. 4:04-cv-00086-HEA," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Missouri under Judge Henry E. Autrey.
Representing the plaintiffs are:

     (1) Martin W. Blanchard of Sauerwein and Blanchard, P.C.,
         147 N. Meramec, Suite 200, Clayton, MO 63105, Phone:
         314-863-9100, Fax: 314-863-9101, E-mail:
         mwb@sauerwein.com;

     (2) Richard A. Acocelli of Weiss and Yourman, 551 Fifth
         Ave., Suite 1600, New York, NY 10176, Phone: 212-682-
         3025, Fax: 212-682-3010, E-mail: racocelli@wllawny.com;
         and

     (3) Andrei V. Rado of Milberg and Weiss, One Pennsylvania
         Plaza, Suite 4915, New York, NY 10119-0165, Phone: 212-
         594-5300, Fax: 212-868-1229.

Representing the defendants is Lisa A. Nielsen of Greensfelder
and Hemker, 10 S. Broadway, Suite 2000, Equitable Building, St.
Louis, MO 63102, Phone: 314-241-9090, Fax: 314-241-3643, E-mail:
lan@greensfelder.com.


EDWARD D JONES: Faces Calif. Preferred Family Mutual Fund Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Proceedings in a consolidated class action, captioned,
"Bressler, et al. v. Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P.," which is
pending in the Superior Court for Los Angeles, California
against Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P. (EDJ), a principal
subsidiary of The Jones Financial Companies, L.L.L.P., were
recently stayed.

The case, along with another, was consolidated under the caption
before the Superior Court for Los Angeles, California.  The case
was filed in February 2004.

Plaintiffs, in their Amended and Consolidated Complaint, allege
that the Company violated Section 17200 of the California
Business and Professions Code by failing to disclose the receipt
of revenue sharing associated with customers' holding of mutual
fund shares under management at the Company.

In addition, Plaintiffs allege that the Company breached
fiduciary duties by accepting account fees and revenue sharing
incident to the holding of mutual fund shares without adequate
disclosures, as well as alleging unjust enrichment.

The Plaintiffs only seek to represent California resident
customers of the Partnership who held Preferred Family mutual
fund shares from January 1999 through 2004.

It is estimated that California residents account for
approximately 5% to 5.5% of the Company's business.

The Company has filed a Motion to Dismiss the Amended and
Consolidated Complaint, which has yet to be heard by the Court.
No class has yet been certified.  Pursuant to an agreement of
the parties, the Case has been stayed until June 2006.


EDWARD D JONES: Faces Investment Representatives' Suit in Calif.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P. (EDJ), a principal subsidiary of The
Jones Financial Companies, L.L.L.P., is defendant in a purported
class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California.  The suit was brought on behalf of all
present and former California investment representatives since
2001.

The case was filed by a former investment representative as a
putative class action in November 2005.   The case was filed in
state court, but was removed to the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California.  Plaintiff did not ask to
remove the case.

Although the lawsuit consists of eight separate causes of
action, all of the causes of action arise from claims that EDJ
failed to pay California investment representatives in
compliance with California state wage and hour laws and the
federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

More specifically, it is alleged that EDJ failed to treat the
investment representatives as exempt employees under both
federal and state law and, therefore, that those employees are
entitled to overtime pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 in
a workweek (federal and state law) and weekend hours and hours
worked in excess of eight in one day (California law).

In addition, it is alleged that EDJ unlawfully deducted business
expenses from the wages of investment representatives and failed
to provide mandatory meal periods in violation of California
state law.

Finally, it is alleged that as a result of the above referenced
practices, EDJ failed to properly compensate (by not paying all
wages due) former employees upon their separation from
employment and, therefore, that EDJ is responsible for a waiting
period penalty of 30 days additional salary for each former
employee who was not paid in full all wages due at the time of
his or her separation from employment.

The Company has answered the complaint denying the Plaintiff's
allegations.  No discovery has commenced and no schedule has
been set for the case.  No class has been certified.

The suit is "Thill v. Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P., Case No.
3:05-cv-04893-JCS," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California under Judge Joseph C. Spero.
Representing the plaintiffs are:

     (1) James F. Clapp of Dostart Clapp Gordon & Coveney, LLP,
         4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 970, San Diego, CA,
         2122, Phone: 858-623-4200, Fax: 858-623-4299, E-mail:
         jclapp@sdlaw.com; and

     (2) Mark R. Thierman of Thierman Law Firm, P.C., 7287
         Lakeside Drive, Reno, NV 89511, Phone: (775) 284-1500,
         Fax: (775) 703-5029, E-mail: laborlawyer@pacbell.net.

Representing the Company are:

     (i) Tracy L. Cahill of Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp, LLP,
         11377 West Olympic Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90064,
         Phone: (310) 312-2000, Fax: (310) 312-3100, E-mail:
         tlc@msk.com; and

    (ii) Amy Louise Blaisdell of Greensfelder, Hemker & Gale,
         P.C., 2000 Equitable Building, 10 S. Broadway, St.
         Louis, MO 63102, Phone: 314-241-9090, Fax: 314-241-
         3643, E-mail: apb@greensfelder.com.


EDWARD D JONES: Faces Mo. Suit Over Preferred Family Mutual Fund
----------------------------------------------------------------
Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P., a principal subsidiary of The Jones
Financial Companies, L.L.L.P., is defendant in a purported class
action "Enriquez, et al. v. Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P., et al."
filed in the Circuit Court for the City of St. Louis, Missouri.

The suit, filed on January 2004, alleges that the Company
breached fiduciary duties to its customers by receiving revenue
sharing payments in exchange for the mere holding of mutual fund
shares under management without making a disclosure to those
customers.

In addition, the suit alleges that the Company was unjustly
enriched by the receipt of revenue sharing associated with those
customers' mutual fund shares held under management.

Plaintiffs seek to represent a class of all Company customers
who held Preferred Family mutual fund shares during the period
of January 1999 through December 2004.

The Company filed a Motion to Dismiss the Petition, which was
denied in January 2005.  Although a motion for class
certification has been filed, no class has yet been certified in
this case.


FERRO CORP: Continues to Face Consolidated Stock Lawsuit in Ohio
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ferro Corp. is defendant in a consolidated putative securities
class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Ohio.

The suit arises from and is related to the July 23, 2004,
announcement by the Company wherein it stated that its Polymer
Additives business performance in the second quarter fell short
of expectations and that its Audit Committee would investigate
possible inappropriate accounting entries in the Company's
Polymer Additives business.

The suit is currently pending in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Ohio against the Company, its deceased
former Chief Executive Officer, its Chief Financial Officer, and
a former operating Vice President of the Company.  The class
period is from October 28, 2003 to August 22, 2004.

This claim is based on alleged violations of federal securities
laws.  The Company and the named executives consider these
allegations to be unfounded, are vigorously defending this
action and have notified its directors and officers liability
insurer of the claim.

The first identified complaint is "Greenhouse Partners, LLP, et
al. v. Ferro Corporation, et al., Case No. 1:04-cv-01440-JMM,"
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Ohio.  Plaintiff firms in this or similar case are:

     (1) Brian Felgoise, 230 South Broad Street, Suite 404,
         Philadelphia, PA, 19102, Phone: 215.735.6810, Fax:
         215-735-5185;

     (2) Brodsky & Smith, LLC, 11 Bala Avenue, Suite 39, Bala
         Cynwyd, PA, 19004, Phone: 610.668.7987, Fax:
         610.660.0450, E-mail: esmith@Brodsky-Smith.com;

     (3) Charles J. Piven, World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401
         East Pratt, Suite 2525, Baltimore, MD, 21202, Phone:
         410.332.0030, E-mail: pivenlaw@erols.com;

     (4) Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins,
         (Philadelphia), 1845 Walnut St., Suite 945,
         Philadelphia, CA, 19103, Phone: 215.988.9546, Fax:
         215.988.9885, E-mail: info@lerachlaw.com;

     (5) Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman, LLP, (New York), One
         Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, New York, NY, 10119,
         Phone: 212.594.5300, Fax: 212.868.1229, E-mail:
         info@milbergweiss.com;

     (6) Schatz & Nobel, P.C., 330 Main Street, Hartford, CT,
         06106, Phone: 800.797.5499, Fax: 860.493.6290, E-mail:
         sn06106@AOL.com;

     (7) Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala Cynwyd,
         PA, 19004, Phone: 610.667.7706, Fax: 610.667.7056, E-
         mail: info@sbclasslaw.com;

     (8) Spector, Roseman & Kodroff, (Philadelphia), 1818 Market
         Street, Suite 2500, Philadelphia, PA, 19103, Phone:
         215.496.0300, Fax: 215.496.6610, E-mail:
         classaction@srk-law.com; and

     (9) Smith & Smith, LLP, 3070 Bristol Pike, Suite 112,
         Bensalem, PA, 19020, Phone: (866) 759-2275, E-mail:
         howardsmithlaw@hotmail.com.


FERRO CORP: Continues to Face ERISA Violations Suit in N.D. Ohio
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ferro Corp. is defendant in a purported class action in the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Ohio alleging
violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.

On June 10, 2005, Jon Mark Duquette filed a putative class
action against the Company, and certain former and current
employees alleging breach of fiduciary duty with respect to
ERISA plans.

The Company considers these allegations to be unfounded, is
vigorously defending this action, and has notified the Company's
fiduciary liability insurer of the claim.

The suit is "Duquette v. Ferro Corporation, et al., Case No.
1:05-cv-01594-JMM," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Ohio under Judge John M. Manos.
Representing the plaintiffs are:

     (1) Patrick J. Perotti of Dworken & Bernstein, 60 South
         Park Place, Painsville, OH 44077, Phone: 440-352-3391,
         Fax: 440-352-3469, E-mail: pperotti@dworkenlaw.com;

     (2) Ronen Sarraf of Sarraf Gentile, Ste. 1005, 485 Seventh
         Avenue, New York, NY 10018, Phone: 212-868-3610, Fax:
         212-918-7967; and

     (3) Ralph M. Stone of Shalov Stone & Bonner, Ste. 1000, 485
         7th Street, New York, NY 10018, Phone: 212-239-4340,
         Fax: 239-4310, E-mail: rstone@lawssb.com.

Representing the defendants is Steven A. Friedman of Squire,
Sanders & Dempsey, 4900 Key Tower, 127 Public Square, Cleveland,
OH 44114, Phone: 216-479-8327, Fax: 216-479-8777, E-mail:
sfriedman@ssd.com.


GAINSCO INC: Discovery Underway in Tex. Securities Fraud Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Discovery is proceeding in a purported class action "Earl Culp,
et al. v. Gainsco, Inc., Glenn W. Anderson, and Daniel J. Coots,
Civil Action No. 4:04-CV-723-Y," which is pending in the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth
Division.

Defendant Anderson is the Company's President and Chief
Executive Officer, and Defendant Coots is the Company's Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer.

In the suit, which was initially filed in Federal District Court
in Florida and is a consolidation of two previously separately
pending actions filed at approximately the same time and
involving essentially the same facts and claims, the plaintiff
alleges violations of the Federal securities laws in connection
with the Company's acquisition, operation and divestiture of its
former Tri-State, Ltd. (Tri-State) subsidiary, a South Dakota
Company selling non-standard personal auto insurance.

On March 29, 2004, plaintiff filed a Second Consolidated Amended
Class Action Complaint (the Second Amended Complaint) that is
based on the same claims as the previously consolidated
proceedings.

The alleged class period begins on November 17, 1999, when the
Company issued a press release announcing its agreement to
acquire Tri-State, and ends on February 7, 2002, when the
Company issued a press release warning investors that it
"expect[ed] to report a significant loss for the fourth quarter
and year ended December 31, 2001."  The Second Amended Complaint
seeks class certification for the litigation.

In general, the Second Amended Complaint alleges that during the
class period the Company's press releases and filings with the
SEC contained non-disclosures and deceptive disclosures in
respect of Tri-State, that the Company's press releases and
filings with the SEC disclosing the Company's losses in 2000 and
2001 failed to disclose the alleged declining financial
condition and declining profitability of Tri-State, and that the
Company's financial statements were not prepared in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles, all in violation
of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC
Rule 10b-5 there under.

More particularly, the Second Amended Complaint includes
allegations that:

     -- the Company issued a press release on November 17, 1999
        announcing the acquisition of Tri-State and stating that
        the Tri-State acquisition was "expected to be minimally
        accretive to earnings" in 2000;

     -- the Company failed to disclose that it had imposed more
        lenient underwriting and claims procedures on Tri-
        State's book of nonstandard personal automobile
        insurance policies than Tri-State's former owners,
        causing a reduction in Tri-State's net income;

     -- the Company hid problems it was having at Tri-State and
        failed to disclose that Tri-State had lost profitability
        almost immediately after the Company acquired Tri-State
        in January 2000;

     -- the Company "buried" Tri-State's financial performance
        in its Lalande business segment or in the reporting of
        the Company's overall financial performance;

     -- the Company failed to disclose in a Form 8-K a lawsuit
        it had filed on July 7, 2001 against Herb Hill, the
        founder of Tri-State, contending that the Herb Hill
        lawsuit was a material pending legal proceeding;

     -- Defendant Anderson hid Tri-State's performance from the
        Company's board of directors; and

     -- the Company violated generally accepted accounting
        principles by failing to record an impairment in or
        write-down of approximately $5.4 million in goodwill
        attributable to the Tri-State acquisition until the
        Company announced the sale of Tri-State in August 2001
        back to Herb Hill for $900,000.

The Second Amended Complaint does not specify the amount of
damages plaintiff seeks.  Discovery in the case is underway.

The suit is "Culp v. Gainsco, Inc., et al., Case No. 4:04-cv-
00723," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Texas under Judge Terry R. Means.  Representing the
plaintiffs are:

     (1) Roger F. Claxton of Claxton & Hill, 3131 McKinney Ave.,
         Suite 700 LB 103, Dallas, TX 75204-2471, Phone:
         214/969-9029, Fax: 214/953-0583, E-mail:
         claxtonhill@airmail.net;

     (2) Jack Reise of Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman &
         Robbins - Boca Raton, 197 S. Federal Highway, Suite 200
         Boca Raton, FL 33432, Phone: 561-750-3000, Fax: 561-
         750-3364, E-mail: jreise@lerachlaw.com; and

     (3) Kenneth J Vianale of Vianale & Vianale, 2499 Glades
         Rd., Suite 112, Boca Raton, FL 33431, Phone: 561-392-
         4750, Fax: 561/392-4775, E-mail: e-file@vianalelaw.com.

Representing the Company is Mark T. Josephs of Jackson Walker -
Dallas, 901 Main St., Suite 6000, Dallas, TX 75202-3797, Phone:
214/953-6000, Fax: 214/953-5822, E-mail: mjosephs@jw.com.


ILLINOIS: Villages Settle Infrastructure Maintenance Fee Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Attorneys for municipalities being sued in McHenry County Court
over infrastructure maintenance fee collected from
telecommunications customers have passed a motion to enter
settlement, according to the Pioneer Press.

Defendants in the suit are municipalities that opted out of a
July 2005 settlement of a similar suit against Cook County.  The
settlement required municipalities that imposed an
infrastructure maintenance fee to pay out 70% of the amount
collected.  Later, it was decided that because reimbursement to
customers is impractical, the funds will be distributed to
emergency 911 programs, hospitals, trauma centers and emergent
care facilities.

"We opted out of the Cook County case because we thought we
could handle it locally," Algonquin Village Manager Bill Ganek
said.  "It turned out opting out was better for us."  The
villages are Algonquin, Lake in the Hills, Fox River Grove,
Lakewood, Woodstock, McHenry, Harvard, Johnsburg and Hebron.

The pending settlement in the McHenry County Court proposes that
the villages pay only 50%, and the money goes directly to
customers, said Carlos Arevalo, attorney for Algonquin.
Eligible claimants are cell phone owners between Jan. 1, 1998
and Feb. 7, 2002, who are at the same time residents of a
village that imposed the infrastructure maintenance fee at that
time.  Mr. Ganek estimates the refund will cost Algonquin
between $50,000 and $60,000.

In 2001, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled the infrastructure
maintenance fee authorized by state law as unconstitutional.
The fee -- which was imposed on land line as well as cell phone
and pager users -- was meant to compensate municipalities for
the cost of maintaining equipment, such as telephone poles, in
public right-of-ways.  The problem, however, is wireless
providers don't own, operate or maintain equipment in public
right-of-ways.


INDIAN TRUST: Gov't Challenges Orders in "Cobell v. Norton" Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Government lawyers have argued motions in the Individual Indian
Money trust suit, including a proposal to hold the presiding
judge accountable for his aggressive language, according to
Indian Country Today.

On April 11 in appeals court, the lawyers also argued motions
asking that Judge Royce Lamberth of the District of Columbia
federal circuit to reconnect computers of the government's
delegate agency, the Department of Interior; and end
notifications to the IIM beneficiaries that the figures recorded
in their accounts may not be credible.  Judge Lamberth, who
presided over the case for 10 calendar years, has forbidden the
statistical accounting methods favored by the Interior, and
ordered the disconnection of Interior computers over security
concerns.

The government particularly notes a passage from a decision in
which Lamberth characterized Interior as "the morally and
culturally oblivious hand-me-down of a disgracefully racist and
imperialist government that should have been buried a century
ago."

According to the report, the government hopes to remove him from
the case because his language in court orders and opinions
suggests he cannot be impartial.  As of April 19, the court has
not established a date for its decision.

The issues before the court in the "Cobell v. Norton" suit is
now over the accounting of the deposits and withdrawals in the
trust for more than a century, for which the government has
received much criticism.  According to the report, the
plaintiffs have requested the courts to restate the accounts in
an effort to restore the sum that Indian beneficiaries are
entitled to.  Plaintiffs are demanding some $27.5 billion.

Filed in 1996 by Blackfeet Indian Elouise Cobell, the case
became the longest and largest class action brought against the
government, involves royalties for farming, grazing, mining,
logging and other economic activities on tribal lands.  The suit
dates back to the 1880s, when the government, trying to break up
reservations, "allotted" some Indian lands, giving 40 to 160
acres to some individual Native Americans.  Back then the
government leased the lands for oil, gas, timber, grazing and
coal, and collected the fees to put into trust funds for Indians
and their survivors.

The suit is "Elouise Pepion Cobell, et al., on her own behalf
and on behalf of all those similarly situated v. Gale Norton,
Secretary of the Interior, et al., Case No. 96-1285 (RCL),"
filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia,
under Judge Royce C. Lamberth.

Representing the defendants are Robert E. Kirschman, Jr. and
Sandra Peavler Spooner of the U.S. Department of Justice, 1100 L
Street, NW Suite 10008, Washington, DC 20005, Phone: (202) 616-
0328, E-mail: robert.kirschman@usdoj.gov or
sandra.spooner@usdoj.gov.

Representing the plaintiffs are:

     (1) Mark Kester Brown, 607 14th Street, NW Washington, DC
         20005-2000, Phone: (775) 542-4938, Fax: 202-318-2372,
         E-mail: mkesterbrown@attglobal.net

     (2) Dennis M. Gingold, 607 14th Street, NW 9th Floor,
         Washington, DC 20005, Phone: (202) 824-1448, Fax: 202-
         318-2372, E-mail: dennismgingold@aol.com

     (3) Richard A. Guest and Keith M. Harper, Native American
         Rights Fund, 1712 N Street, NW Washington, DC 20036-
         2976, Phone: (202) 785-4166, Fax: 202-822-0068, E-mail:
         richardg@narf.org or harper@narf.org

     (4) Elliott H. Levitas, Kilpatrick Stockton, LLP, 607 14th
         Street, NW Suite 900, Washington, DC 20005 Phone: (202)
         508-5800, Fax: 202-508-5858, E-mail:
         elevitas@kilpatrickstockton.com.

For more details, contact The Committee on Indian Affairs,
Phone: 202-224-2251, Web site: http://indian.senate.gov;and
House Resources Committee, Phone: 202-225-2761, Web site:
http://resourcescommittee.house.gov.


IPALCO ENTERPRISES: Appeals Deadline Expires for Ind. Stock Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The plaintiffs' right to file an appeal for the dismissal of the
securities fraud class action against IPALCO Enterprises, Inc.
and certain of its former officers and directors in connection
with the Company's acquisition by AES Corp. expired on August 8,
2005.

Filed on September 24, 2002, the lawsuit was brought on behalf
of all persons who exchanged their shares of IPALCO common stock
for shares of AES common stock.

On July 7, 2005, the court dismissed all claims against all
remaining defendants in this matter.  The plaintiffs' right to
file an appeal expired on August 8, 2005.

The suit is "Cole, et al. v. IPALCO Enterprises Inc., et al.,
Case No. 1:02-cv-01470-DFH-TAB," filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of Indiana.  Plaintiff firms in
this or similar case:

     (1) Hagens Berman, LLP, 1301 Fifth Avenue Suite 2900,
         Seattle, WA, 98101, Phone: 206.623.7292, E-mail:
         info@hagens-berman.com; and

     (2) John R. Price and Associates of 9000 Keystone Crossing
         - Suite 150, Indianapolis, IN, 46240, Phone: 317-844-
         8822, Fax: 317-844-7766.


IPALCO ENTERPRISES: Continues to Face ERISA Fraud Suit in Ind.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana has
yet to rule on the claim of breaches of fiduciary duties in a
class action against IPALCO Enterprises, Inc. and certain of its
former officers and directors under the Employment Retirement
Income Security Act (ERISA) regarding matters arising from the
acquisition of the Company by AES Corp.

The suit, filed in March 2002, alleges breach of fiduciary
duties with respect to shares held in the Company's subsidiary
Indianapolis Power and Light Co.'s (k) thrift plan.

The Company filed a motion for summary judgment suit in October
2003, as did the plaintiffs.  On August 11, 2005, an Order was
entered denying both motions for summary judgment.  The Order
indicates that the court will meet with counsel in the near
future to schedule a bench trial addressed to the fiduciary duty
issues, (Class Action Reporter, Feb. 24, 2006).

A bench trial was held in February 2006 to determine whether
there were any breaches of fiduciary duties.  The court took the
matter under advisement and has not yet ruled.

The suit is, "Nelson, et al. v. Ipalco Enterprises, Inc., et
al., Case No. 1:02-cv-00477-DFH-TAB," filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of Indiana under Judge David
Frank Hamilton.

Representing the plaintiffs is Steve W. Berman, John R. Price,
Nicholas Styant-Browne, Andrew M. Volk, Hagens Berman Sobol
Shapiro LLP, 1301 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900, Seattle, WA 98101,
Phone: (206) 623-7292, Fax: (206) 623-0594, E-mail:
steve@hbsslaw.com, john@johnpricelaw.com, nick@hagens-
berman.com, andrew@hbsslaw.com.


IPALCO ENTERPRISES: Continues to Face Landowners' Suit in Ind.
--------------------------------------------------------------
IPALCO Enterprises, Inc. is defendant in purported class action
in Morgan County Superior Court over the sale of lands it
acquired several years back.

Many years ago, the Company obtained, through purchases from
several owners, a substantial tract of land as a potential site
for a future power plant.  The Company later determined it no
longer intended to build a power plant on that land and sold it
in 2004.

In September 2004, a former owner of a parcel included within
the IPALCO's land sued the Company in Morgan County Superior
Court in a purported class action to force IPL to pay any profit
on the sale to the various former owners, as well as profits
received from ground leases and timber sales.

The plaintiff contended, in essence, that the Company obtained
the various parcels through eminent domain or the threat of
eminent domain and alleged violations of Indiana's eminent
domain statute, conversion and unjust enrichment.

The Company believes that the suit is without merit.  At this
time discovery has not yet begun and the court has not certified
a class.


LIVEDOOR CO: Investors Sue to Recoup Loss from Accounting Fraud
---------------------------------------------------------------
A group of around 100 shareholders of Livedoor Company Limited
filed damages suit with the Tokyo District Court against the
Internet firm, it's former President Takafumi Horie and other
former executives, seeking compensation for losses caused by an
accounting scandal, the Japan Economic Newswire reports.

The suit represents the first class action by those who suffered
losses in connection with the Company's erroneous accounting.
According to the an April 18, 2006 report of the Troubled
Company Reporter, unnamed sources say the shareholder group is
seeking to recover up to JPY2 billion in damages.

The Troubled Company Reporter - Asia Pacific reported in March
2006 that more than 500 shareholders of Livedoor Company met in
Tokyo to file a civil suit and seek damages for losses incurred
when the Company's stock price plunged as a result of an
accounting scandal.  The shareholders may also demand
compensation from auditing firm Koyo & Co. and certified public
accountants that were responsible for auditing Livedoor, the
report said.

In 2005, prosecutors raided Livedoor's office on suspicions of
accounting fraud.  Company executives were alleged to have
relayed false information on a merger, with the intent to boost
the stock price of a Company subsidiary.  Livedoor's stock price
plunged on allegations that the Company concealed a JPY1 billion
loss for the financial year ended September 2004 (Troubled
Company Reporter, April 27, 2006).

A separate group of 1,000 shareholders are planning to file
another damages lawsuit against Livedoor by the end of the
month, according to the Japan Economic Newswire.

Headquartered in Tokyo, Japan, Livedoor Company Limited --
http://corp.livedoor.com/en/-- is involved in out portal site
"livedoor", financial business, corporate web solutions, data
center and IP telephony business.


MERCK & CO: To Face Additional Lawsuit Over Osteoporosis Drug
-------------------------------------------------------------
The law offices of Hughes and Coleman will represent some
clients who have suffered from the "dead jaw" caused by Fosamax,
an osteoporosis drug prescribed to treat patients with bone loss
but that has been found to eat away the jawbone, WBKO reports.

Fosamax is manufactured by Merck & Co.  The Company is already
facing several class actions carrying similar allegations.

According to attorney J. Marshall Hughes, drug manufacturers
know the side effects and problems associated with this drug but
have not informed people.  Fosamax's damage is reportedly
irreversible that's why it is recommended that users contact
their doctor or dentist if they notice any problems with their
jaw.

Doctors who prescribe the drug stand behind its effectiveness.

New Jersey-based Merck & Co. -- http://www.merck.com-- is the
maker of hypertension drug Cozaar and Hyzaar, cholesterol
combatant Vytorin, and Zetia and Zocor.  Merck also makes
painkillers such as Arcoxia, male pattern baldness treatment
Propecia, and asthma drug Singulair.

Hughes and Coleman on the Net: http://www.hughesandcoleman.com/.


MONTANA: District Judge Orders Billings City to Pay Firefighters
----------------------------------------------------------------
Billings, Montana District Judge G-Todd Baugh ruled that the
city must pay firefighters $625,000 and another $81,000 in back
pay, Kajl8 News Station reports.

In November, Baugh ruled the city owed the firefighters close to
$3 million in back pay.  He also ordered the city of Billings to
pay $253,000 in penalties, bringing the damages and penalties
owed to just under $4 million.

About six years ago, a group of 119 firefighters filed a class
action against the city of Billings, claiming that they'd been
working more than 40 hours a week for years, but are only
receiving an annual wage equivalent to a 40-hour work week.


NETFLIX INC: Court Approves Settlement of DVD Renters' Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco Superior Court Judge Thomas Mellon Jr. finally
approved the settlement of a class action requiring Netflix Inc.
to offer a free month of DVDs to current and former subscribers,
Associated Press reports.

In March, Judge Mellon postponed approval of the settlement
pending decision on attorney's fees.  His final order now
provides $1.3 million payment to plaintiff lawyers Adam Gutride
and Seth Safier, and another $60,000 to lawyers whose objections
to an earlier agreement helped shape the final settlement.

Netflix expects to begin sending out notices of the final
settlement later this month, the report said.  To learn more
about the settlement, visit: http://www.netflix.com/settlement

Netflix was sued for allegedly exaggerating the speed at which
it delivers movies to subscribers.  It was accused of delaying
shipments to frequent renters to accommodate customers who do
not return DVDs quickly.  The scheme helps Netflix because the
Company charges a flat monthly fee and provides postage-paid
envelopes for DVD returns.

Netflix reached agreement in the class action five months ago,
but the Federal Trade Commission and several attorneys objected
to a provision that would have allowed the Company to
automatically charge people after the free month of DVD rentals
expires.  The revised settlement allows Netflix to charge only
people who notify the Company that they want to continue the
service.  It raised the estimated cost of the settlement to
$8.95 million from $4 million, assuming Netflix pays $2.53
million in attorney fees.

The agreement provides that eligible subscribers under an
original plan of paying $17.99 per month to keep up to three
DVDs at time, may check out four DVDs at a time for a month at
no additional charge; and about 3.7 million former subscribers
will be offered a free month of the $17.99 rental plan.  The
agreement covers subscribers through Jan. 15, 2005, when the
Company changed its service terms to prioritize customers who
keep their movies longer.

For more information, contact:

     (1) Mr. Gutride of Gutride Safier, LLP 835 Douglass Street,
         San Francisco, CA 94114 (San Francisco County), Phone:
         415-271-6469, Fax: 415-438-1285, E-mail:
         gutridelaw@earthlink.net; and

     (2) Mr. Seth A. Safier of Gutride Safier, LLP, 835 Douglass
         Street San Francisco, CA 94114 (San Francisco County),
         Phone: 415-336-6545, Fax: 415-876-4345, E-mail:
         safier@post.harvard.edu.


OHIO: Appeals Court Sides with ACLU in Punch-Card Ballot Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Ohio's use of
punch-card ballot voting technology in some counties violates
the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,
according to American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio.

The Sixth Circuit also found that punch-card ballots deprive
voters of their due process right to have their votes counted
accurately.  The rulings arose out of a class action "Stewart v.
Blackwell" filed by the advocacy group in October 2002.

A study conducted by the ACLU of Ohio and the ACLU's Voting
Rights Project showed that Ohio voters using punch-card ballots
were, on average, four times as likely to have their votes go
uncounted as voters using electronic voting equipment.  Thus,
the appeals court ruled the punch card voting unconstitutional
because of the high frequency of voting errors that it is prone
to.

The appeals court also rejected the district court's dismissal
of the ACLU's claim that the use of punch-card ballots in
Hamilton, Montgomery, and Summit Counties violates the Voting
Rights Act because of their disparate impact on African-American
voters.  The case will now return to the U.S. District Court in
Akron.

To see the decision: http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?87c

The suit is "Effie Stewart et al. v. J. Kenneth Blackwell, et
al. (05-3044)" under appeal from the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Ohio at Akron (02-02028), David D. Dowd,
Jr., District Judge.  It was decided and filed April 21, 2006
before Circuit Judges Martin Cole.

Representing the appellants is Daniel P. Tokaji, Ohio State
University Moritz College of Law, Columbus, Ohio.  Represeing
the appellees are Richard N. Coglianese, Office of teh Attorney
General, Columbus, Ohio; Jeffrey A. Stankunas, Isaac, Brant,
Ledman & Teetor, Columbus, Ohio.


PENNSYLVANIA: Judge Mulls Engaging Advisory Jury in Suits
---------------------------------------------------------
Venango County President Judge H. William White postponed a
decision on whether he will engage in an advisory jury in two
suits against the operators of Two Mile Run County Park,
TheDerrick.com reports.  On April 7, Judge White ruled out a
jury trial in each of the case.

Filed in December 2004, the suit by Donald M. Plumer Jr. and
Joyce S. Plumer of Oil City and Richard A. and Annette K.
Burgert of Myerstown was brought on behalf of all those who were
granted land for the 2,700-acre park in Oakland Township and
Sugarcreek Borough.  The suit named as defendants the Venango
Park and Natural Resources Authority, and Parks Unlimited, the
firm owned by Marty and Ann Rudegeair, which has managed the
park since 1998.  The suit requests:

     (1) A permanent injunction voiding the transfer of the park
         property to the authority or a ruling invoking the
         penalties for improper transfer of Project 70 lands

     (2) That all "commercial activities" associated with oil,
         gas, and timbering operations be prohibited at the park

     (3) That the use of the gate and gate fees be prohibited

     (4) Attorney's fees and costs.

The other suit was filed Dec. 30, 2004 by Ray Beichner against
the Venango Park and Natural Resources Authority and Parks
Unlimited.  It claims the park's cabin rentals and proposed tree
house project pose unfair competition to existing businesses
such as Beichner's Turtle Bay Lodge.  It asks permanent
injunction against the provision of such overnight
accommodations at the park.

Judge White ruled out the requested jury trial because they
remedy sought by both actions is an injunction, which is a
remedy in equity rather than a remedy at law, such as money
damages.

In an April 25 order Judge White notes that while the plaintiffs
might have a remedy in money damages, it would be "an inadequate
remedy" because it would not "prevent the defendants from what
the plaintiffs perceive as a continual wrongdoing."

Representing the Plumers and Burgerts is lawyer Michael Hadley
of 420 Meadowlark Rd., Santa Ynez, California, (Santa Barbara
Co.).  The operators of Two Mile Run County Park are represented
by lawyer Jim Greenfield.


PUBLIC STORAGE: Continues to Face Calif. Property Managers' Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Public Storage, Inc. is defendant in a purported class action
filed against it in the California Superior Court for Los
Angeles County, entitled, "Brinkley, et al. v. Public Storage,
Inc."

The Brinkley plaintiffs are suing the Company on behalf of a
purported class of California property managers who claim that
they were not compensated for all the hours they worked.

Filed on April 2005, the suit is based upon California wage and
hour laws.  The maximum potential liability cannot be estimated,
but would be increased if a class or classes are certified or,
if claims are permitted to be brought on behalf of others under
the California Unfair Business Practices Act.

The Company is vigorously contesting the claims and intends to
resist any expansion beyond the named plaintiffs on the grounds
of lack of commonality of claims.


ROHM & HAAS: Penn. Lawsuits Claim Pollution Causes Brain Cancer
---------------------------------------------------------------
Two McHency County, Illinois men who allegedly suffered brain
cancer due to exposure to toxic substances from chemical
companies near their Ringwood residences filed state and federal
suits against these companies, the Chicago Tribune reports.

The suits were lodged in Pennsylvania courts against Rohm and
Haas Chemicals LLC, which has a plant near Ringwood that makes
plastics, adhesives and sealants.  They alleged chemicals
including trichloroethylene and vinyl chloride "invaded" the air
and water of the men's homes.  Rohm and Haas spokesman Syd
Havely said the plaintiffs live more than a mile away from the
plant.  He also said the cleanup of groundwater near the plant
has been under way for about 20 years.

The suit also named:

     -- Morton International, which was based in Chicago and
        once ran the Ringwood plant, which Rohm and Haas
        purchased in 1999;

     -- Huntsman Corp. of Salt Lake City, which owns the
        Huntsman Polyurethanes plant near Ringwood; and

     -- Modine Manufacturing Co., of Racine, Wis., which has a
        plant near Ringwood.

The suit in state court was filed on behalf of the plaintiffs
Bryan Freund and Kurt Weisenberger who allegedly developed brain
cancer because of the companies' actions.

The suit is "Gates et al. v. Rohm and Haas Company et al. (2:06-
cv-01743-GP)," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District Court of Pennsylvania under Judge Gene E.K. Pratter.
Representing the plaintiffs is Aaron J. Freiwald of Layser &
Freiwald PC, 1500 Walnut St., 18th Fl Philadelphia, PA 19102,
Phone: 215-875-8000, E-mail: ajf@layserfreiwald.com.


SEARS CANADA: Facing Lawsuits Over Tire Pricing, Sears Card
-----------------------------------------------------------
Sears Canada Inc. was named in three class actions in the
provinces of Quebec, Saskatchewan and Ontario in 2005 arising
out of Sears' pricing of tires.

The Company believes these allegations are without merit.  The
outcome of these actions is indeterminable, and the monetary
damages, if any, cannot be reliably estimated.  Therefore, the
Company has not made a provision for any potential liability.

A class action with respect to the Sears Card was filed against
the Company pursuant to Quebec law in 2000.  The Company
believes these allegations are without merit.  The outcome of
this action is indeterminable, and the monetary damages, if any,
cannot be reliably estimated.  Therefore, the Company has not
made a provision for any potential liability.

Sears Canada -- http://www.sears.ca-- is a multi-channel
retailer with a network of 188 corporate stores, 181 dealer
stores, 66 home improvement showrooms, over 2,100 catalogue
merchandise pick-up locations, 107 Sears Travel offices and a
nationwide home maintenance, repair, and installation network.
The Company also publishes Canada's most extensive general
merchandise catalogue and offers shopping online.


SELECTED TRADING: Recalls Kids' Jewelry on Lead Poisoning Risk
--------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Selected Trading Corp., of Miami, Florida, is recalling about
55,000 children's necklaces.

The Company said the recalled necklaces contain high levels of
lead, posing a serious risk of lead poisoning and adverse health
effects to young children.  No injuries have been reported.

The recalled choker-style necklaces are silver-colored hearts,
crosses and clovers that hang from a blue, maroon or black
velvety cord.  The jewelry's packaging is white cardboard with
"In Style" printed on the front, and UPC number 041838140766 on
the back.

The children's necklaces were made in China and sold at Dollar
General Stores from January 2003 through December 2005 for about
$1.

Consumers are advised to immediately return the recalled jewelry
to the nearest Dollar General Store for a refund.

Picture of the recalled necklaces:
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml06/06150.jpg

For more information, contact Selected Trading at (800) 336-
6292.  On the Net: http://www.selected-trading.com;E-mail:
mrubin@selected-trading.com.


SOFT DRINK MAKERS: Kan. Woman Files Suit Over Benzene in Juice
--------------------------------------------------------------
Producers of fruit drink BellyWashers 2/3 Less Sugar and Talking
Rain's pink grapefruit-flavored sparkling water with juice face
a potential class action in Kansas over a Johnson County woman's
quest to keep carcinogen out of her child's fruit juice, the
Kansas City Channel reports.

According to Neil Sader, lawyer representing plaintiffs in
Kansas, the low-sugar drink contained high levels of benzene, a
chemical than can form when vitamin C and a preservative in the
drink are exposed to heat or light.  Studies show that benzene
can cause immune system problems and cancer.

Both companies named in the Kansas suit said they are
reformulating to ensure safety.  But Mr. Sader and his clients
are not only asking for safer drinks, they're asking for
damages.

Similar lawsuits were also filed in Boston, Florida and
Washington, D.C. The lawsuits were filed against Talking Rain
Beverage, of Washington; Zone Beverages, of Georgia; and Polar
Beverages, of Massachusetts.  They were lodged in U.S. District
Court in Kansas City, Kansas.

The suit is "Gonzalez v. In-Zone Brands, Inc. et al. (2:06-cv-
02163-KHV-JPO)," filed in the U.S. District Court of Kansas
under Judge Kathryn H. Vratil, with referral to James P. O'Hara.

Representing the plaintiff, MeLisa Gonzales, are Gregory M.
Garvin and Neil S. Sader of Sader & Garvin LLC, 4739 Belleview
Ave.-Ste. 300, Kansas City, MO 64112-1364, Phone: 816-561-1818,
Fax: 816-561-0818, E-mail: ggarvin@sadergarvin.com, E-mail:
nsader@sadergarvin.com.


SYCAMORE KIDS: Expands Recall of Mountain Buggy Urban Strollers
---------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Sycamore Kids Inc., of Fort Collins, Colorado, voluntarily
recalled 4,000 units of Mountain Buggy Urban Single and Urban
Double breeze strollers.

This expansion of the Sycamore Kids Inc. jogging strollers
recall announced July 2005 and November 2005 involves units
previously repaired under earlier recall announcements.

The handlebar can crack or break causing the handlebar to detach
while in use, posing a risk of injury to young children.

Sycamore Kids received 49 reports of the handlebars either
cracking or breaking when the stroller was pulled up or taken
down stairs.  This resulted in five reports of bruises and
scrapes.

The recalled strollers have a metal frame and a cloth seat with
a sun canopy.  The strollers were sold in a variety of colors
including: midnight blue, navy, red, black, silver and orange.

A metal plate above the footrest shows the Mountain Buggy logo
with "Mountain Buggy," and "Urban," or "Breeze" written
underneath on the metal plate.

The recalled Mountain Buggy Urban Single strollers have item
number U1204-002, and serial numbers between 000000 and 015276.

The recalled Mountain Buggy Urban Double strollers have item
number U2204-002, and serial numbers between 000000 and 009221.

The recalled Mountain Buggy Breeze strollers have item number
B1204-001, and serial numbers between 000000 and 000191.

The serial number and model number are on the back of the metal
plate.

The strollers were manufactured in New Zealand and sold at
juvenile furniture retailers and baby product stores and Web
retailers nationwide from December 2004 through September 2005
for between $400 and $640.

Consumers are advised to contact Sycamore Kids to find an
authorized repair center to receive a free replacement handlebar
ratchet.

Picture of the recalled strollers:
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml05/05226a.jpg
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml05/05226b.jpg
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml06/06030.jpg.

Consumer Contact: Sycamore Kids Inc., Phone: (866) 524-8805
anytime, E-mail: support@mountainbuggyusa.com, Web site:
http://www.mountainbuggyusa.com.


TRAVELERS LIFE: Conn. Court Cancels Annuities Suit Certification
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Connecticut Supreme Court reverses a trial court's class
certification of a lawsuit against Travelers Life and Annuity
Company (TLAC), Travelers Equity Sales, Inc. and certain former
affiliates.

In August 1999, an amended putative class action complaint was
filed, which alleges that Travelers Property Casualty
Corporation, a former Company affiliate, purchased structured
settlement annuities from TLAC and spent less on the purchase of
those structured settlement annuities than agreed with
claimants, and that commissions paid to brokers for the
structured settlement annuities, including an affiliate of TLAC,
were paid in part to Travelers Property Casualty Corporation.

On May 26, 2004, the Connecticut Superior Court certified a
nationwide class action involving the following claims against
TLAC:

      -- violation of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practice
         Statute;

      -- unjust enrichment; and

      -- civil conspiracy.

On June 15, 2004, the defendants appealed the class
certification order.  The Company has recently learned that the
Connecticut Supreme Court has reversed the trial court's
certification of a class.

Plaintiff may file a motion with respect to the order and may
seek upon remand to the trial court to file another motion for
class certification.



Meetings, Conferences & Seminars




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

May 8-9, 2006
VIOXX LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Amelia Island, FL
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 8-9, 2006
HURRICANE AND NATURAL DISASTER CONFERENCE SERIES
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Amelia Island, FL
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 8-9, 2006
CATASTROPHIC LOSS CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton, Amelia Island, FL
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 18, 2006
MEALEY'S EMAIL DISCOVERY & RETENTION POLICIES CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Fairmont San Francisco
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 23-24, 2006
12TH ANNUAL D&O LIABILITY INSURANCE
American Conference Institute
Marriott East Side Hotel, New York, NY
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 25-26, 2006
INSURANCE COVERAGE 2006: CLAIM TRENDS & LITIGATION
Practising Law Institute
New York
Contact: 800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu

June 5-6, 2006
ADDITIONAL INSURED CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton (Arlington St.) Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 5-6, 2006
LEAD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton (Arlington St.) Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 6, 2006
REINSURANCE LAW & PRACTICE 2006: NEW LEGAL & BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENTS IN A CHANGING GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT
Practising Law Institute
New York, NY
Contact: 1-800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu

June 8-9, 2006
RETAIL & HOSPITALITY LIABILITY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Intercontintental Buckhead, Atlanta
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 8-9, 2006
ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Chicago
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 12-13, 2006
BENZENE LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton, Marina del Rey
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 15-16, 2006
WATER CONTAMINATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The University of Chicago, Gleacher Center
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 15-16, 2006
LITIGATING, SETTLING AND MANAGING ASBESTOS CLAIMS
American Conference Institute
Mandalay Bay Resort & Casino , Las Vegas, NV
Contact: https://www.americanconference.com; 1-888-224-2480

June 20-21, 2006
12TH NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES LIABILITY
INSURANCE
American Conference Institute
Crowne Plaza Union Square , San Francisco, CA
Contact: https://www.americanconference.com; 1-888-224-2480

June 20-22, 2006
PREVENTING, MANAGING AND DEFENDING CLAIMS OF OBSTETRIC
MALPRACTICE
American Conference Institute
Park Hyatt, Philadelphia, PA
Contact: https://www.americanconference.com; 1-888-224-2480

June 22-23, 2006
PACIFIC NORTHWEST CONSTRUCTION DEFECT CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Hotel Monaco, Seattle
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 22-23, 2006
5TH INTERNATIONAL GUIDE TO REINSURANCE CLAIMS AND COLLECTIONS
American Conference Institute
Park Central, New York, NY
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 29 - 30, 2006
DRUG AND MEDICAL DEVICE LITIGATION
American Conference Institute
Swiss”tel Chicago , Chicago, IL
Contact: https://www.americanconference.com; 1-888-224-2480

June 13-14, 2006
INTERACTIVE MASTER CLASS ON TRIAL ADVOCACY FOR PRODUCTS
LIABILITY
American Conference Institute
The Westin New York at Times Square, New York, NY
Contact: https://www.americanconference.com; 1-888-224-2480

July 19-20, 2006
LITIGATION MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Battery Park, New York
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

July 19-20, 2006
CLASS ACTION LITIGATION 2006: PROSECUTION AND DEFENSE STRATEGIES
Practising Law Institute
Chicago, IL
Contact: 1-800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu

July 27-28, 2006
CLASS ACTION LITIGATION 2006: PROSECUTION AND DEFENSE STRATEGIES
Practising Law Institute
New York, NY
Contact: 1-800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu

September 28-30, 2006
LITIGATING MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CLAIMS
ALI-ABA
Boston
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

October 12-13, 2006
MASS TORTS MADE PERFECT SEMINAR
Mass Torts Made Perfect
Wynn, Las Vegas, Nevada
Contact: 1-800-320-2227; 850-916-1678

November 16-17, 2006
CONFERENCE ON LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRODUCTS: CURRENT
SECURITIES, TAX, ERISA, AND STATE REGULATORY AND COMPLIANCE
ISSUES
ALI-ABA
Washington, D.C.
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

November 30-December 1, 2006
ASBESTOS LITIGATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY
ALI-ABA
New Orleans
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

March 2007
MASS TORTS MADE PERFECT SEMINAR
Mass Torts Made Perfect
Loews Hotel, Miami, Florida
Contact: 1-800-320-2227; 850-916-1678

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

May 1-30, 2006
HBA PRESENTS: AUTOMOBILE LITIGATION: DISPUTES AMONG
CONSUMERS, DEALERS, FINANCE COMPANIES AND FLOORPLANNERS
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

May 01-30, 2006
CONSTRUCTION DISPUTES: TEXAS RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION DEFECT
LIABILITY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

May 01-30, 2006
HBA PRESENTS: ETHICS IN PERSONAL INJURY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

May 01-30, 2006
IN-HOUSE COUNSEL AND WRONGFUL DISCHARGE CLAIMS:
CONFLICT WITH CONFIDENTIALITY?
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

May 01-30, 2006
BAYLOR LAW SCHOOL PRESENTS: 2004 GENERAL PRACTICE INSTITUTE --
FAMILY LAW, DISCIPLINARY SYSTEM, CIVIL LITIGATION, INSURANCE
& CONSUMER LAW UPDATES
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

May 01-30, 2006
HBA PRESENTS: "HOW TO CONSTRUE A CONTRACT IN BOTH CONTRACT AND
TORT CASES IN TEXAS"
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

May 01-30, 2006
CONSTRUCTION DISPUTES: TEXAS RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION DEFECT
LIABILITY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

May 4, 2006
TOUGH CASES IN TOUGH PLACES TELECONFERENCE: STRATEGIES IN
PLAINTIFF FRIENDLY JURISDICTIONS
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 16, 2006
WORKING WITH EXPERTS IN A TOXIC TORT CASE TELECONFERENCE
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 18, 2006
ETHICS TELECONFERENCE: THE CLASSIFICATION OF CLIENT EXPENSES IN
MASS TORTS--CASE SPECIFIC VS. COMMON BENEFIT EXPENSES
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 23, 2006
EMERGING TRENDS IN BAD FAITH LITIGATION TELECONFERENCE
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com


May 24, 2006
REVISITING KATRINA AND INSURANCE COVERAGE ON THE EVE OF THE NEXT
HURRICANE SEASON
Practising Law Institute
Contact: 1-800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu

May 25, 2006
NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 5, 2006
PREPARING FOR CATASTROPHES: LEGAL AND INSURANCE ISSUES TO
CONSIDER
Practising Law Institute
Contact: 1-800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu

June 6, 2006
PREEMPTION TELECONFERENCE
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 13, 2006
ETHICS IN CLASS ACTIONS
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 15, 2006
ARE YOU COVERED - WHAT EVERY IN-HOUSE LAWYER NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT
INSURANCE
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 20, 2006
FINITE REINSURANCE TELECONFERENCE
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

July 13, 2006
TEFLON LITIGATION TELECONFERENCE
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

CACI: CALIFORNIA'S NEW CIVIL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

CIVIL LITIGATION PRACTICE: 22ND ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
(2004)
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

CIVIL LITIGATION PRACTICE: 23RD ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
(2005)
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

EFFECTIVE DIRECT AND CROSS EXAMINATION
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

PUNITIVE DAMAGES: MAXIMIZING YOUR CLIENT'S SUCCESS OR MINIMIZING
YOUR CLIENT'S EXPOSURE
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

STRATEGIC TIPS FOR SUCCESSFULLY PROPOUNDING & OPPOSING WRITTEN
DISCOVERY
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND OTHER DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

TORTS PRACTICE: 19TH ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS (2004)
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

TORTS PRACTICE: 20TH ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS (2005)
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RECOVERIES
Big Class Action
Contact: seminars@bigclassaction.com

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

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

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

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

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

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


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


                   New Securities Fraud Cases


ASTEA INT'L: Kahn Gauthier Files Securities Fraud Suit in Pa.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kahn Gauthier Swick, LLC (KGS) commenced a securities class
action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania, on behalf of shareholders who purchased, exchanged
or otherwise acquired the common stock of Astea International,
Inc. (ATEA) between May 11, 2005 and March 31, 2006.  No class
has yet been certified in this action.

The complaint alleges that Astea materially overstated its
earnings throughout the Class Period by failing to correctly
account for software development costs under Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles (GAAP).

In order to adjust for its improper accounting, on March 31,
2006, Astea announced that it would restate its financial
results for the three quarters ended September 30, 2005. As a
result of the restatement, Astea stock lost nearly 30% in one
day, falling from $16.50 to $11.73 per share.

For more details, contact Lewis Kahn of KGS, Phone: 1-866-467-
1400, ext. 100 or 504-301-7900, E-mail: lewis.kahn@kglg.com.


ASTEA INT'L: Schiffrin & Barroway Files Securities Suit in Pa.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, initiated a class
action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
New York on behalf of all those who purchased certain mutual
funds (hereinafter Shelf-Space Funds) from the AIG Advisor Group
(Parent Company is defendant American International Group, Inc.
(NYSE: AIG), from June 30, 2000 through June 8, 2005, inclusive.

During the Class Period, the AIG Advisor Group consisted of
these broker-dealers:

     -- Royal Alliance, Inc.,
     -- SunAmerica Securities, Inc.,
     -- FSC Securities Corp.,
     -- Sentra Securities Corporation,
     -- Spelman & Co., Inc., and
     -- Advantage Capital Corp.

The Shelf-Space Funds included these mutual fund families: AIG
SunAmerica, AIM, AllianceBernstein, American Funds, American
Skandia, Columbia, Fidelity, Franklin Templeton, Hartford, John
Hancock, MFS, NationsFunds, Pacific Life, Pioneer, Putnam,
Oppenheimer, Scudder, Van Kampen, and WM Funds Distributor, Inc.

On June 8, 2005, the NASD announced that it had fined AIG in
connection with the receipt of directed brokerage in exchange
for preferential treatment for certain mutual fund companies.

For more details, contact Darren J. Check, Esq. or Richard A.
Maniskas, Esq. of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, Phone: 1-888-299-
7706 or 1-610-667-7706, E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com, Web site:
http://www.sbclasslaw.com.


CHINA ENERGY: Labaton Sucharow Files Securities Lawsuit in N.Y.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Labaton Sucharow & Rudoff, LLP, filed a class action on May 1,
2006 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New
York, on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired
publicly traded securities of China Energy Savings Technology,
Inc. (CESV) between April 21, 2005 and February 15, 2006,
inclusive.  The lawsuit was filed against China Energy, Kwun-
Luen Siu, Lawrence Lok, Yuen-Ming and Sun Li.

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.  Specifically, the complaint alleges
that defendants failed to disclose:

      -- that the Company's private placement offering in
         January 2006 was fraught with self dealing; and,

      -- certain information involving the facts and
         circumstances about certain underlying transactions
         related to the rescission of certain Rule 144a legal
         opinions by the Company's prior securities counsel who
         resigned in February 2006.

On January 17, 2006, the Company announced an underwriting
agreement to raise $50 million through a private placement of
Company stock.

The very same day, China Energy announced that Mr. Sun Li
resigned as Chairman and CEO of the Company.  Upon his
resignation, the Company immediately appointed Kwun Luen Siu
Chairman of the Board and CEO.

On January 20, 2006, China Energy filed two registration
statements indicating that the Company could offer up to ten
million shares of its common stock and in addition the Company
also indicated that selling stockholders could sell up to 6.05
million shares.

Shortly thereafter, on February 9, 2006, China Energy announced
that it was delaying the filing of its SEC Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended December 31, 2005, due to the recent change in
management.

On February 14, 2006, the Company filed its delayed Form 10-Q,
which revealed that the Company and its independent auditors
were the subject of an informal SEC inquiry.  On February 15,
2006, NASDAQ announced that trading was halted in China Energy.
The shares of the Company have been halted by NASDAQ ever since.

For more details, contact Labaton Sucharow & Rudoff, LLP,
Christopher Keller, Esq., Phone: 800-321-0476, Web site:
http://www.labaton.com/get/?case=ChinaEnergy.


CHINA ENERGY: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.Y.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schatz & Nobel, P.C., initiated a lawsuit
seeking class action status in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons who
purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly traded securities
of China Energy Savings Technology, Inc. (CESV) between April
21, 2005 and February 15, 2006, inclusive.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated federal
securities laws by issuing a series of materially false
statements. Specifically, the Defendants failed to disclose:

      -- that the Company's private placement offering in
         January 2006 was fraught with self dealing; and,

      -- certain information involving the circumstances of
         underlying transactions related to the rescission of
         certain Rule 144a legal opinions.

On January 17, 2006, China Energy announced an underwriting
agreement to raise $50 million through a private placement of
Company stock.

On the same day, the resignation of its Chairman and CEO was
announced.  The Company immediately appointed Kwun Luen Siu
Chairman and CEO.

On January 20, 2006, China Energy filed two registration
statements indicating that the Company could offer up to ten
million shares of its common stock.

On February 9, 2006, China Energy announced that it was delaying
the filing of its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31,
2005, due to the recent change in management.

On February 14, 2006, the Company filed its delayed Form 10-Q,
which revealed that the Company and its independent auditors
were the subject of an informal SEC inquiry.  On February 15,
2006, NASDAQ halted trading of China Energy.

Interested parties have no later than June 30, 2006 to request
the Court appoint themselves as lead plaintiff of the class.

For more details, contact Schatz & Nobel, Phone: (800) 797-5499,
E-mail: sn06106@aol.com, Web site: http://www.snlaw.net.


DISCOVERY LABORATORIES: Squitieri & Fearon Files Securities Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Squitieri & Fearon, LLP, initiated a class action in the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against
Discovery Laboratories, Inc. and Robert J. Capetola by the firm.

The lawsuit 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
about its lead product, Surfaxin(c).

The suit is on behalf of persons who purchased shares of
Discovery Laboratories, Inc. common stock (DSCO) during the
period from January 26, 2006 through April 25, 2006.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of himself and all
purchasers of DSCO common stock during the Class Period.
Excluded from the Class are the defendants and members of their
immediate families, any entity in which a defendant has a
controlling interest and the heirs of any such excluded party.

Interested parties have no later than July 1, 2006, move the
Court to serve as lead plaintiff of the Class.

For more details, contact Lee Squitieri of Squitieri & Fearon,
LLP, Phone: (212) 421-6492, E-mail: lee@sfclasslaw.com.


ESTEE LAUDER: Pomerantz Haudek Files Securities Lawsuit in N.Y.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross, LLP, filed a class
action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
New York against The Estee Lauder Companies Inc. (EL) and
certain of its officers, on behalf of purchasers of the common
stock of the Company on April 28, 2005 to October 25, 2005,
inclusive.  The complaint alleges violations of Section 10(b)
and Section 20(a) of The Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5.

The Estee Lauder Companies, Inc. engages in the manufacture,
marketing, and sale of skin care, makeup, fragrance, and hair
care products worldwide.  The Complaint alleges that by the
commencement of the Class Period, the Company was losing ground
to products that, increasingly, were being distributed outside
of the department store channels upon which Estee Lauder
primarily relied for distribution of its products.

Consequently, the Company's actual net sales and net earnings
were trending downward.  Defendants did not disclose the steady
erosion of the Company's market share, or rectify the conditions
leading to this result, but they did launch a largely successful
campaign that employed channel stuffing and the dissemination of
materially false and misleading statements to prop up the
Company's share price long enough for Estee Lauder insiders to
sell over 3 million shares of their common stock at artificially
inflated prices.

The truth began to emerge on September 19, 2005 when defendants
disclosed that the Company would not meet its guidance for the
first half of fiscal 2006.

On this disclosure, the Company's stock fell 9%, from $40.51 to
$36.05 per share.  The stock, however, continued to trade at
artificially inflated levels until October 26, 2005 when
defendants were forced to disclose that, for the first quarter
of fiscal 2006, the Company would earn only $61.8 million, or
$0.28 per share, down 38% from the previous year's earnings of
$95.7 million, or $0.41 per share.

These results were well below analysts' revised consensus
earnings estimate of $0.32 cents a share on revenue of $1.54
billion.  Following the disclosure of the Company's results and
lowered guidance, the Company's share price fell to $30.71.  By
this time, Estee Lauder insiders had sold the aforementioned
shares.

For more details, contact Teresa L. Webb or Carolyn S. Moskowitz
of Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross, LLP, Phone: 888-476-
6529, E-mail: tlwebb@pomlaw.com and csmoskowitz@pomlaw.com, Web
site: http://www.pomlaw.com.


FAIRFAX FINANCIAL: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Suit in N.Y.
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schatz & Nobel, P.C., initiated a lawsuit
seeking class action status in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons who
purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly traded securities
of Fairfax Financial Holdings, Ltd. between March 24, 2004 and
March 22, 2006, inclusive.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated federal
securities laws by issuing a series of materially false
statements in press releases and SEC filings. Specifically,
defendants failed to disclose the following facts:

      -- defendants allowed Fairfax to enter into bogus
         reinsurance contracts with its captive subsidiaries,
         Odyssey Reinsurance Holdings Ltd. and Northbridge
         Financial;

      -- defendants did not maintain adequate systems of
         internal operational or financial controls within
         Fairfax, such that the officers and directors of the
         Company could assure that its reported financial
         statements were true, accurate or reliable;

      -- Fairfax's statements and reports were not prepared in
         accordance with GAAP and SEC rules; and

      -- defendants lacked any reasonable basis to claim that
         Fairfax was operating according to guidance endorsed by
         defendants, or that the Company could achieve such
         guidance.

At the end of the Class Period, defendants revealed that V. Prem
Watsa and others related to the Company had received subpoenas
from U.S. market regulators concerning Fairfax's finite risk
insurance business, and that market regulators are investigating
these finite risk insurance transactions to determine if they
were improperly used to artificially inflate the Company's
earnings and profits.  Shares of Fairfax declined almost 30% in
the days following these disclosures.

For more details, contact Wayne T. Boulton or Nancy A. Kulesa of
Schatz & Nobel, P.C., Phone: (800) 797-5499, E-mail:
sn06106@aol.com, Web site: http://www.snlaw.net.


GLOBETEL COMMUNICATIONS: Sarraf Gentile Files Stock Suit in Fla.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Sarraf Gentile, LLP, commenced a securities
fraud class action on behalf of those investors who acquired the
securities of GlobeTel Communications Corp. (GTE) between
December 30, 2005 to April 11, 2006.  The lawsuit is pending in
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida and
names as defendants GlobeTel and certain of its top ranking
executives.

According to the complaint, the Defendants issued several
statements during the Class Period, which touted the
consummation of a $600 million deal with a Moscow-based Company
named LLC Internafta to install wireless networks in Russia's 30
largest cities.  The complaint alleges, however, that the
Russian deal, like so many of GTE's other business ventures, was
in reality a sham.

For more details, contact Joseph Gentile at Sarraf Gentile, LLP,
485 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1005, New York, New York 10018, Phone:
212-868-3610, Fax: 212-918-7967, E-mail:
joseph@sarrafgentile.com, Web site:
http://www.sarrafgentile.com.


NEWPARK RESOURCES: Kaplan Fox Files Securities Fraud Suit in La.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer, LLP, filed a class action in the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana against
Newpark Resources, Inc. and certain of its officers and
directors, on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased
the publicly traded securities Newpark between February 28, 2005
and April 14, 2006.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 by publicly issuing a series of false and misleading
statements regarding the Company's business and financial
prospects, thus causing Newpark's shares to trade at
artificially inflated prices.

In particular, the complaint alleges that on April 17, 2006,
before the opening of trading, Newpark issued a press release
titled "Newpark Commissions Internal Investigation" that stated,
in part, that "based on information that has come to its
attention, the Audit Committee has commissioned an internal
investigation regarding potential irregularities involving the
processing and payment of invoices by Soloco Texas, LP, one of
the Company's smaller subsidiaries, and other possible
violations."

Also as alleged, on April 17, 2006, the Company disclosed that,
"Effective immediately, and pending completion of the
investigation, the CEO of the Company has placed on
administrative leave the chairman and CEO of Newpark
Environmental Water Services, LLC, one of the Company's
operating divisions, as well as the Company's chief financial
officer, and an officer of Soloco Texas, LP."

The complaint alleges that the true facts, which were known by
the defendants but concealed from the investing public during
the Class Period, were that:

      -- Defendants had engaged in irregularities involving the
         processing and payment of invoices by Soloco Texas, LP,
         one of the Company's smaller subsidiaries, and other
         possible wrongful conduct;

      -- That the Company lacked adequate internal controls and
         was therefore unable to ascertain its true financial
         condition; and

      -- That the Company's financial statements were not
         prepared in accordance with GAAP.

For more details, contact Frederic S. Fox, Joel B. Strauss,
Donald R. Hall, Jeffrey P. Campisi and Laurence D. King of
Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer, LLP, Phone: (800) 290-1952, (212) 687-
1980 and (415) 772-4700, Fax: (212) 687-7714 and 415-772-4707,
E-mail: mail@kaplanfox.com, Web site: http://www.kaplanfox.com.


SEA CONTAINERS: Christopher J. Gray Files Stock Fraud in N.Y.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Office of Christopher J. Gray, P.C. initiated a class
action on behalf of all persons who purchased the securities of
defendant Sea Containers, Ltd. (NYSE:SCR-A) from March 15, 2004
through March 24, 2006.

The lawsuit asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated by
the SEC thereunder and seeks to recover damages. Interested
parties who wish to serve, as lead plaintiff must move the Court
no later than May 30, 2006.

The Sea Containers class action is pending in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York (500 Pearl Street,
New York, NY 10007), Docket No. 06-CV-2565.

According to the complaint, defendants made misstatements of
material facts and omitted to state material facts in violation
of the federal securities laws.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that during the Class
Period, defendants caused the share price of Sea Containers
stock to be artificially inflated by misrepresenting to the
public that Sea Containers' reported financial results presented
fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the
Company, and that Sea Containers had a system of internal
controls that was adequate to ensure that the Company's reported
financial results were accurate.

The complaint alleges that, unbeknownst to plaintiff and the
class, the true facts were as follows:

      -- Sea Containers' reported financial results were
         inaccurate and cannot be relied upon;

      -- Sea Containers' internal controls were inadequate to
         ensure the reliability of its publicly reported
         financial results;

      -- Sea Containers had materially overstated the value of
         (and failed to write down the value of) its investment
         in the common stock of Orient-Express Hotels Ltd.; and

      -- The value of the Sea Containers' ferry and container
         assets was materially impaired.

The complaint alleges that when Sea Containers shocked Wall
Street by revealing that it would have to take a mammoth
writedown of its assets in a sum that it estimated as $500
million, that it would miss the deadline for filing its 2005
annual report, and that its publicly reported financial results
for the first three quarters of 2005 should not be relied upon
and will have to be restated, the Company's stock plummeted from
a close of $12.06 per share on March 23 to as low as $7.34 on
March 24, before closing at $7.45 -- a drop of 38% in a single
day!

The class action seeks to recover investors' losses resulting
from defendants' alleged misrepresentations concerning Sea
Containers' assets, internal controls and financial results.

For more details, contact The Law Office of Christopher J. Gray,
P.C., 460 Park Avenue, 21st Floor, New York, New York 10022,
Phone: (212) 838-3221, Fax: (212) 937-3139, E-mail:
newcases@cjgraylaw.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 Senorin, Maria Cristina Canson, Francisco
Eltanal, Jr., Janice Mendoza and Lyndsey Resnick, Editors.

Copyright 2006.  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  * * *