CAR_Public/081110.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Monday, November 10, 2008, Vol. 10, No. 223

                            Headlines

AGL RESOURCES: Ga. Lawsuit Over Monthly Service Charges Pending
AGL RESOURCES: Overcharging Litigation in Ga. Junked Last Sept.
AMERICAN INT'L: Shareholder Sues Over U.S. Government Bailout
ENGINEERED SUPPORT: Faces Shareholders' Litigation in Missouri
LORAL SPACE: Dec. 18, 2008 Hearing Set for N.Y. Securities Suit

MCKESSON CORP: Connecticut's Lawsuit Stayed Since Sept. 2, 2008
MCKESSON CORP: Faces Civil Litigation by Panama City, Florida
MCKESSON CORP: Faces Kans. Lawsuit on RICO & Antitrust Breach
MCKESSON CORP: New England Carpenters Lawsuit Junked in August
MCKESSON CORP: Oklahoma State Files RICO, OCPA Violations Suit

MCKESSON CORP: RICO Breach Class Claims Set for Trial on Dec. 1
MCKESSON CORP: San Francisco Health Plan's Litigation Stayed
ROGERS CABLE: Ontario Judge Certifies CDN100-Million Litigation
SHELL OIL: Claiming Deadline Nears for $1.10B "Cox" Settlement
SIGNALIFE INC: Faces Lawsuit in Arizona Alleging TCPA Violations

SOUTHWESTERN RESOURCES: Court Approves Agreement in Ontario Suit
UNITED FIRE: Hurricane Katrina-Related Lawsuits Still Pending
WASTE MANAGEMENT: Mass. Court Favors Drivers in Wage Litigation


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

BRITANNIA BULK: Coughlin Stoia Announces Securities Suit Filing
BRITANNIA BULK: Izard Nobel Announces Securities Lawsuit Filing
CADENCE DESIGN: Levi & Korsinsky Announces Stock Lawsuit Filing
GENERAL GROWTH: Brower Piven Announces Securities Suit Filing
NOAH EDUCATION: Izard Nobel Announces Securities Suit Filing

PRIMARY FUND: Berger & Montague Files Securities Suit in N.Y.
SPECTRANETICS CORP: Cohen Milstein Files Colo. Securities Suit



                           *********


AGL RESOURCES: Ga. Lawsuit Over Monthly Service Charges Pending
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class-action suit regarding monthly service charges filed
against Georgia Natural Gas, which is owned by AGL Resources,
Inc., remains pending.

In March 2008, the class-action suit was filed against GNG in
the State Court of Fulton County in the State of Georgia.

This lawsuit alleges that GNG arbitrarily assigned customer
service charges rather than basing each customer service charge
on a specific credit score.

According to the company's Oct. 29, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended Sept. 30, 2008, GNG asserts that no violation of law or
Georgia Commission rules has occurred, that this lawsuit is
without merit and has filed motions to dismiss this class action
suit on various grounds.

Based in Atlanta, Ga., AGL Resources Inc., through its
subsidiaries, distributes and markets natural gas to retail and
wholesale customers, stores and transports gas, offers asset and
risk management services, and operates telecommunications
networks.


AGL RESOURCES: Overcharging Litigation in Ga. Junked Last Sept.
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class-action lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of Fulton
County in the State of Georgia against Georgia Natural Gas,
which is owned by AGL Resources, Inc., was dismissed in
September 2008.

In February 2008, the class-action lawsuit was filed against GNG
containing similar allegations to those asserted by the consumer
affairs staff of the Georgia Commission.

The Georgia Commission staff alleged that GNG charged its
customers on variable rate plans prices for natural gas that
were in excess of the published price, that it failed to give
proper notice regarding the availability of potentially lower
price plans and that it changed its methodology for computing
variable rates.

The action seeks damages on behalf of a class of GNG customers,
according to AGL's Oct. 29, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept.
30, 2008.

Based in Atlanta, Ga., AGL Resources Inc., through its
subsidiaries, distributes and markets natural gas to retail and
wholesale customers, stores and transports gas, offers asset and
risk management services, and operates telecommunications
networks.


AMERICAN INT'L: Shareholder Sues Over U.S. Government Bailout
-------------------------------------------------------------
A shareholder of American International Group Inc. has sued the
company saying that her rights were violated when the company
accepted the U.S. government's $85 billion bailout in September
in exchange for a majority stake in the insurer, FinancialWire
reports.

AIG shareholder Wilma Walker said in a complaint filed in
Delaware Chancery Court in Wilmington that the board of
directors of AIG broke Delaware corporate law.  The board
refused to allow shareholders to vote on a part of the bailout
proposal that gives a 79.9 percent stake to the government in
the deal, according to the complaint provided by Ms. Walker's
law firm.

FinancialWire reports that the lawsuit seeks class-action status
and described the September 16 transaction as one of
unprecedented size, structure and speed for AIG to transfer
control of the company from its public shareholders to the
government in order to obtain an $85 billion loan from the
Federal Reserve Bank of New York.


ENGINEERED SUPPORT: Faces Shareholders' Litigation in Missouri
--------------------------------------------------------------
Engineered Support Systems, Inc., former CEO Michael Shanahan,
and other top executives, are facing a purported class-action
lawsuit that was filed by shareholders of the company in the
St. Louis Circuit Court., according to Heather Ratcliffe of The
St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

The lawsuit claims that company leaders breached their fiduciary
duty by selling the business in 2006 at an under-valued price in
an attempt to distance themselves from the risk of prosecution
in the backdating.

Darren J. Robbins, Esq., of Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman and
Robbins LLP, which filed the case, told The St. Louis Post-
Dispatch that more than 600 investors, who would qualify for the
class, lost up to $250 million in the sale of Engineered Support
to DRS Technologies Inc., of New Jersey.

Mark S. Newman, CEO of DRS Technologies Inc., is accused in the
suit of knowing about the backdating scandal when he bought the
company and distributing false information to shareholders at
the time, according to The St. Louis Post-Dispatch.


LORAL SPACE: Dec. 18, 2008 Hearing Set for N.Y. Securities Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
will hold a fairness hearing on Dec. 18, 2008, at 3:00 p.m. for
the proposed settlement in the matter, "In Re: Loral Space &
Communications Shareholders' Securities Litigation, Case No.
1:03-cv-08262-JES."

The hearing will be held in Courtroom 14C of the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York, 500 Pearl Street,
New York, New York 10007.

The action alleges that defendants Bernard L. Schwartz and
Richard J. Townsend misrepresente Loral Space & Communications'
financial condition, business activities, and prospects in
violation of Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the U.S. Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.

Specifically, the lead plaintiff alleges that Defendants
violated the Exchange Act by:

       -- engaging in two types of accounting fraud improper
          revenue recognition and misreporting general and
          administrative (G&A) expenses to make it appear as
          though the Company was meeting its earnings guidance
          when it was not;

       -- misrepresenting the state of Company's satellite
          manufacturing business;

       -- separately misrepresenting the status of a
          particularly lucrative satellite contract with a
          Chinese company; and

       -- misrepresenting the Company's viability as a going
          concern.

The suit covers all persons and entities who purchased the
common stock of Loral Space & Communications Ltd. during the
period July 31, 2002 through and including June 29, 2003.
  
The matter was recently settled.  The settlement of this action
calls for the creation of a cash Settlement Fund in the amount
of $3,450,000.00 to be distributed, after fees and expenses, to
the members of a settlement class, and calls for the creation of
a Notice and Administration Fund in the amount of $37,500.00, in
exchange for a release of all claims against the defendants and
other released parties and dismissal of this action with
prejudice.

For more details, contact:

          Loral Space & Comms Shareholders' Securities
               Litigation,
          c/o The Garden City Group, Inc.
          PO Box 9324
          Dublin, OH 43017-4224
          Phone: (866) 394-2787

               - and -

          Frederick T. Isquith, Sr., Esq. (isquith@whafh.com)
          Wolf, Haldenstein, Adler, Freeman & Herz, L.L.P.
          270 Madison Avenue
          New York, NY 10016
          Phone: (212) 545-4600


MCKESSON CORP: Connecticut's Lawsuit Stayed Since Sept. 2, 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, on
Sept. 2, 2008, entered an order staying the class-action
lawsuit, captioned, "State of Connecticut v. McKesson
Corporation, Civil Action No. 1:08-CV-10900-PBS."

On May 28, 2008, an action was filed by the State of Connecticut
against the Company, again as the sole defendant, alleging
violations of the civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organizations Act ("RICO"), the Sherman Act and the Connecticut
Unfair Trade Practices Act.

The plaintiffs seek damages, treble damages, restitution,
interest and attorneys' fees, all in unspecified amounts.

According to the company's Oct. 29, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended Sept. 30, 2008, the action is based on factual allegations
substantially identical to those asserted in the civil action
styled New England Carpenters Health Benefits Fund et al., v.
First DataBank, Inc. and McKesson Corporation, (Civil Action No.
1:05-CV-11148-PBS).

McKesson Corp. -- http://www.mckesson.com/-- provides supply,
information and care management products and services across the
healthcare industry. The Company is headquartered in San
Francisco, Calif.


MCKESSON CORP: Faces Civil Litigation by Panama City, Florida
-------------------------------------------------------------
McKesson Corp. faces a class-action lawsuit filed by the City of
Panama City, Florida on behalf of itself and a class of Florida
state and local governmental entities.

On Aug. 18, 2008, the class action was filed alleging violations
of civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act
("RICO"), federal and state antitrust laws and the Florida
Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act.

The plaintiffs are seeking damages and treble damages, as well
as injunctive relief, interest, attorneys' fees and costs of
suit, all in unspecified amounts.

The action is entitled City of Panama City, Florida v. McKesson
Corporation, et al., (Civil Action No. 1:08-CV-11423-PBS).

According to the company's Oct. 29, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended Sept. 30, 2008, the action is based on factual allegations
substantially identical to those asserted in the civil action
styled New England Carpenters Health Benefits Fund et al., v.
First DataBank, Inc. and McKesson Corporation, (Civil Action No.
1:05-CV-11148-PBS).

McKesson Corp. -- http://www.mckesson.com/-- provides supply,
information and care management products and services across the
healthcare industry. The Company is headquartered in San
Francisco, Calif.


MCKESSON CORP: Faces Kans. Lawsuit on RICO & Antitrust Breach
-------------------------------------------------------------
McKesson Corp. faces an action filed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Douglas County, Kansas on behalf of itself and
a purported national class of state, local and territorial
governmental entities.

On Aug. 7, 2008, the action was filed in the U.S. District Court
for the District of Massachusetts against the company and First
DataBank, Inc.

The plaintiffs allege violations of civil Racketeer Influenced
and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO") and federal antitrust
laws.

The plaintiffs seek damages and treble damages, as well as
injunctive relief, interest, attorneys' fees and costs of suit,
all in unspecified amounts, according to the company's Oct. 29,
2008 Form 10-Q Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008.

The action is tagged, "Board of County Commissioners of Douglas
County, Kansas v. McKesson Corporation et al., (Civil Action No.
1:08-CV-11349-PBS).

According to the company's Oct. 29, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended Sept. 30, 2008, the action is based on factual allegations
substantially identical to those asserted in the civil action
styled, "New England Carpenters Health Benefits Fund et al., v.
First DataBank, Inc. and McKesson Corporation, Civil Action No.
1:05-CV-11148-PBS."

McKesson Corp. -- http://www.mckesson.com/-- provides supply,
information and care management products and services across the
healthcare industry. The Company is headquartered in San
Francisco, Calif.


MCKESSON CORP: New England Carpenters Lawsuit Junked in August
--------------------------------------------------------------
The civil class-action lawsuit tagged, "New England Carpenters
Health Benefits Fund et al., v. McKesson Corporation, Civil
Action No. 1:07-CV-12277-PBS," was dismissed in August 2008.

On Dec. 10, 2007, the plaintiffs named in the class-action suit
styled, "New England Carpenters Health Benefits Fund et al., v.
First DataBank, Inc. and McKesson Corporation," filed a civil
class-action complaint under federal and state antitrust laws
against the company in the U.S. District Court, District of
Massachusetts ("New England Carpenters II").

On Aug. 27, 2008, the trial court entered an order granting the
company's motion to dismiss New England Carpenters II without
leave to amend, according to its Oct. 29, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended Sept. 30, 2008.

McKesson Corp. -- http://www.mckesson.com/-- provides supply,
information and care management products and services across the
healthcare industry. The Company is headquartered in San
Francisco, Calif.


MCKESSON CORP: Oklahoma State Files RICO, OCPA Violations Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
An action was filed on Oct. 15, 2008, by the State of Oklahoma
on behalf of itself and a class of Oklahoma state and local
governmental entities, agencies and subdivisions against
McKesson Corp. and First DataBank, Inc.

The action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District
of Massachusetts, alleging violations of civil Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), the Oklahoma
Consumer Protection Act ("OCPA") and civil conspiracy to violate
the OCPA.

The plaintiffs seek damages, treble damages and civil penalties,
as well as injunctive relief, interest, attorneys' fees and
costs of suit, all in unspecified amounts.

The action is styled, "State of Oklahoma v. McKesson Corporation
et al., Civil Action No. 1:08-CV-11745-PBS."

According to the company's Oct. 29, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended Sept. 30, 2008, the action is based on factual allegations
substantially identical to those asserted in the civil action
styled New England Carpenters Health Benefits Fund et al., v.
First DataBank, Inc. and McKesson Corporation, (Civil Action No.
1:05-CV-11148-PBS).

McKesson Corp. -- http://www.mckesson.com/-- provides supply,
information and care management products and services across the
healthcare industry. The Company is headquartered in San
Francisco, Calif.


MCKESSON CORP: RICO Breach Class Claims Set for Trial on Dec. 1
---------------------------------------------------------------
The certified third party payor and percentage co-pay consumer
class claims in the New England Carpenters I civil action
against McKesson Corp. remain set for trial commencing Dec. 1,
2008.

The claims are based on alleged violations of the Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).

The civil action pending against the company in the U.S.
District Court, District of Massachusetts is styled, "New
England Carpenters Health Benefits Fund et al., v. First
DataBank, Inc. and McKesson Corporation, (Civil Action No. 1:05-
CV-11148-PBS)."

On Aug. 7, 2008, the court issued its order denying plaintiffs
motion to certify a class made up of uninsured consumers who
paid "usual and customary" prices for prescription drugs from
Aug. 1, 2001 through the present, although the court did so
"without prejudice" to the plaintiffs renewing their motion at a
future date based on new facts developed in ongoing discovery.

Expert discovery is ongoing, and in connection with those
proceedings plaintiffs have produced a report which claims total
damages through March 15, 2005, for the third party payor class
and the consumer percentage co-pay class of US$5.6 billion,
inclusive of prejudgment interest.

As a subset of this total, the plaintiffs' report claims damages
for the respective certified class periods scheduled for trial
of US$3.7 billion for the third party payor class, and US$150
million for the consumer percentage co-pay class, both amounts
inclusive of prejudgment interest.

According to the company's Oct. 29, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended Sept. 30, 2008, under RICO, any damages awarded at trial
would be trebled and prejudgment interest would be
discretionary.

McKesson Corp. -- http://www.mckesson.com/-- provides supply,
information and care management products and services across the
healthcare industry. The Company is headquartered in San
Francisco, Calif.


MCKESSON CORP: San Francisco Health Plan's Litigation Stayed
------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, on
Sept. 2, 2008, entered an order staying the class-action suit
tagged, "San Francisco Health Plan et al v. McKesson
Corporation, Civil Action No. 1:08-CA-10843-PBS."

On May 20, 2008, a class-action lawsuit was filed by the San
Francisco Health Plan, on behalf of itself and a purported class
of political subdivisions in the State of California and by the
San Francisco City Attorney on behalf of the "People of the
State of California" in the U.S. District Court for the District
of Massachusetts against the company as the sole defendant.

The action alleges violations of civil Racketeer Influenced and
Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), the California Cartwright
Act, California False Claims Act and California's Unfair
Competition Law.

The plaintiffs seek damages, treble damages, civil penalties,
restitution, interest and attorneys' fees, all in unspecified
amounts.

On July 3, 2008, an amended complaint was filed in the San
Francisco action adding a claim for tortious interference.

According to the company's Oct. 29, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended Sept. 30, 2008, the action is based on factual allegations
substantially identical to those asserted in the civil action
styled, "New England Carpenters Health Benefits Fund et al., v.
First DataBank, Inc. and McKesson Corporation, Civil Action No.
1:05-CV-11148-PBS."

McKesson Corp. -- http://www.mckesson.com/-- provides supply,
information and care management products and services across the
healthcare industry. The Company is headquartered in San
Francisco, Calif.


ROGERS CABLE: Ontario Judge Certifies CDN100-Million Litigation
---------------------------------------------------------------
     In a decision released Nov. 4, 2008, Justice Shaughnessy of
the Ontario Superior Court of Justice certified a $100 million
dollar class action lawsuit against Rogers Cable and its
subsidiaries.

     The claim, commenced by Glenn Wilkins of Whitby, alleges
that Rogers breached its contract with its customers when it
failed to consistently provide digital On Demand service between
May 1 and September 30, 2006. The claim also alleges negligence,
unjust enrichment and breach of the Consumer Protection Act.
These allegations have not yet been proven.

     Glenn Wilkins is represented by Todd J. McCarthy and Sean
A. Brown of Flaherty Dow Elliott & McCarthy, a firm with offices
in Toronto, Whitby and Ottawa, specializing in litigation.

     "This is an important decision for consumers generally, and
Rogers' customers in particular, says Todd J. McCarthy. "We will
work diligently toward a fair, just and expeditious resolution
of this matter, and trust that Rogers will do likewise in the
best interests of their customers."

     The lawsuit is commenced on behalf of all persons who were
subscribers to Rogers On Demand digital cable services on or
after May 1 to September 30, 2006.

A copy of Justice Shaughnessy's decision is available at :

   http://media3.marketwire.com/docs/rogersclassdecision1.pdf

For more details, contact:

         Todd J. McCarthy
         Flaherty Dow Elliott & McCarthy Barristers & Solicitors
         120 Adelaide Street West Suite 2501
         Toronto, ON M5H 1T1
         Phone: (416) 368-0231
         Fax: (416) 368-9229
         e-mail: todd.mccarthy@fdemlaw.com
         Web site: http://www.rogersclassaction.com


SHELL OIL: Claiming Deadline Nears for $1.10B "Cox" Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Florida Division of Consumer Services reminds consumers
whose homes contain a polybutylene pipe system that time is
running out to file a claim in the $1.103-billion settlement in
the matter, "Cox, et al. v. Shell Oil Company, et ano., Civil
Action No. 18,844," which was filed in the Chancery Court for
Obion County, at Union City, Tennessee against Shell Oil Co.

According to The Miami Herald, under the terms of the class-
action settlement with the manufacturer, Shell Oil, homeowners
who have experienced a PB pipe leak might qualify for a free
plumbing replacement if a leak is detected by Jan. 31, 2009, and
they file their claims by May 1, 2009.

PB plumbing was installed in an estimated 6 million homes
nationwide between Jan. 1, 1978, and July 31, 1995, the dates
covered by the settlement, The Miami Herald posting stated.

                         Case Background

Named plaintiff Tina M. Cox and others brought the lawsuit as a
class action, alleging that, among other things, Shell Oil Co.
and Hoechst Celanese Corp. supplied raw materials used by other
entities in the manufacture of polybutylene plumbing (Class
Action Reporter, Jan., 9, 2008).

The plaintiffs further alleged that polybutylene plumbing is
defective.  In the suit, they sought money damages for, among
other things, the cost of replacing plumbing systems and
repairing property damage associated with leaks.

                     Polybutylene Plumbing

Polybutylene plumbing inside a structure (PB In-House Plumbing)
is a potable water supply system containing polybutylene pipe
and either acetal (plastic) or metal insert fittings (such as
tees and elbows).  PB pipe is a non-rigid, sometimes curved,
usually gray (or possibly silver or black) plastic pipe.

When used in the underground service from the water company to a
structure (Yard Service Line), PB pipe is blue, gray, or black.
PB pipe is not used for drains, waste, or vent pipe.

"PB Plumbing" refers to both PB In-House Plumbing and Yard
Service Line.  It does not include yard sprinkler systems,
irrigation systems, fire sprinkler systems, sewer lines,
faucets, or fixtures.

Insert fittings are used to join pieces of PB pipe.  The insert
fitting is inserted into the pipe and clamped with a metal
(aluminum or copper) crimp ring over the outside of the pipe.
Metal insert fittings are either copper or brass.

Acetal insert fittings are hard gray or white plastic.  They are
not black.  Insert fittings are not grabber, flare, or
compression fittings which are often threaded and use a plastic
or metal nut to secure the seal.

                        Settlement Class

The Settlement Class is composed of those who:

       -- own real property or structures in the U.S. in which
          there was installed between Jan. 1, 1978, and July 31,
          1995, PB Plumbing with acetal insert or metal insert
          fittings or PB Yard Service Line;

       -- own or previously owned such real property or
          structures and have already incurred any cost or
          expense, by reason of leakage from, or from failure,
          repair, or removal of, all or any portion of such PB
          Plumbing which was installed between Jan. 1, 1978, and
          July 31, 1995; or

       -- will own such real property or structures during term
          of entitlement to relief under the Settlement.

For more details, contact:

          Consumer Plumbing Recovery Center
          P.O. Box 869006
          Plano, TX 75086-9006
          Phone: 800-392-7591
          Web site: http://www.pbpipe.com/


SIGNALIFE INC: Faces Lawsuit in Arizona Alleging TCPA Violations
----------------------------------------------------------------
     Signalife, Inc. faces a purported class-action lawsuit in
the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, entitled,
"Peter Strojnik, P.C., et al. v. ABC Defendants, et al., Case
No. 2:08-cv-01116-FJM," alleging violations of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act.

     On Oct. 7, 2008, Peter Strojnik, P.C. filed a first amended
complaint in its proposed class-action suit against Signalife,
Inc., alleging the medical supply company engaged in a mass-
broadcast of junk faxes to promote its stock.

     President and CEO of Peter Strojnik, P.C., Peter Strojnik,
opined that Signalife certainly has a motive to pump up the
price of their stock. The Complaint alleges "Signalife had a net
loss for the six months ending June 20, 2008 in the amount of
$8,826,795.00."  Mr. Strojnik added, "Signalife admitted in a
recent Form 10Q that they had no revenues from product sales
during the first half of 2008."  Indeed, the Complaint alleges
"Signalife has no sales revenues and admits ... that its
inability to generate revenues could cause it to go out of
business."

     Signalife has not gone out of business, but they have been
delisted from the American Stock Exchange. In fact, Signalife
recently affected a 4500 for 1 reverse stock split and started
trading on the OTCBB and Pink Sheets.

     Mr. Strojnik explained that the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act awards damages at a minimum of $500 for each
unsolicited fax.  The proposed class-action lawsuit against
Signalife and others alleges Defendants broadcasted between
approximately 12 million to 16 million unsolicited faxes.

     In what Mr. Strojnik opined was a defense tactic,
Signalife, Inc. filed a Complaint for Declaratory Relief against
Peter Strojnik, P.C. in Los Angeles.  Signalife sought a decree
that it did not violate the TCPA.  After several months of
argument and deliberations, Orange County Superior Court
dismissed the case.

     Peter Strojnik, P.C.'s proposed class-action lawsuit
alleges that "The purpose of the Unsolicited Fax was to
manipulate SGN stock or any publicly traded Signalife stock in
the securities market."  Mr. Strojnik opined, "Signalife cannot
be allowed to violate federal law without redress for the
regular people who receive these annoying faxes."  Paraphrasing
the allegations of the Complaint, Mr. Strojnik stated, "In my
opinion, Signalife or its insiders hired a third party fax
blaster to broadcast millions of faxes promoting its stock."
Indeed, Signalife admits in its most recent Form 10Q that they
are "in discussions with a number of large third party marketing
and distribution partners with the manpower and financial
resources to more quickly and aggressively promote [its]
products."

Other defendants in the class action lawsuit include
Digitalspeed Communications, Inc. and Adam Harris Pasternack.

For more details, contact:

          Peter Strojnik, Esq. (strojnik@aol.com)
          Peter Strojnik PC
          3030 N. Central Ave.
          Ste. 1401
          Phoenix, AZ 85012
          Phone: 602-524-6602
          Fax: 602-296-0135


SOUTHWESTERN RESOURCES: Court Approves Agreement in Ontario Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
     Southwestern Resources Corp. announces that, further to its
press release dated September 10, 2008, reporting that it
entered into an agreement to settle the class actions (the
"Class Actions") commenced against the Company and others in
British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec (the "Settlement"), the
Ontario Superior Court of Justice, among other things, certified
the Ontario Class Action and approved the Settlement on November
3, 2008.

     Additional approval hearings will be held with respect to
the Class Action in Quebec on November 14, 2008 and in British
Columbia on November 17, 2008.


     The Company also announces, further to its news release
dated September 16, 2008 respecting the Letter of Intent ("LOI")
with Hochschild Mining Holdings Limited, a subsidiary of
Hochschild Mining plc (collectively, "Hochschild"), that the
Toronto Stock Exchange (the "TSX") has granted an extension to
November 28, 2008 for the closing of the strategic investment
(the "Private Placement") in the Company by Hochschild.

     Southwestern continues to work towards completing the
transactions contemplated under the LOI. The Private Placement
is subject to customary conditions, including completion of
satisfactory due diligence by Hochschild, and final acceptance
by the TSX.


UNITED FIRE: Hurricane Katrina-Related Lawsuits Still Pending
-------------------------------------------------------------
United Fire & Casualty Co. continues to face various lawsuits
relating to disputes arising from damages that occurred as a
result of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, according to the company's
Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008.

As of Sept. 30, 2008, there were approximately 400 such cases
pending, 18 of which were styled as class actions.

These cases have been filed in both Louisiana state courts and
federal district courts.  These cases involve, among other
claims, disputes as to the amount of reimbursable claims in
particular cases, as well as the scope of insurance coverage
under homeowners and commercial property policies due to
flooding, civil authority actions, loss of use and business
interruption.

Certain of the cases also claim a breach of duty of good faith
or violations of Louisiana insurance claims-handling laws or
regulations and involve claims for punitive or exemplary
damages, while other cases claim that under Louisiana's so-
called "Valued Policy Law," the insurers must pay the total
insured value of a home that is totally destroyed if any portion
of such damage was caused by a covered peril, even if the
principal cause of the loss was an excluded peril.  Other cases
challenge the scope or enforceability of the water damage
exclusion in the policies.

Several actions pending against various insurers, including the
company, were consolidated for purposes of pretrial discovery
and motion practice under the caption, "In re Katrina Canal
Breaches Consolidated Litigation, Civil Action No. 05-4182," in
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.

In light of an April 8, 2008 Louisiana Supreme Court decision
finding that flood damage was clearly excluded from coverage,
state and federal courts have been reviewing the pending suits
seeking class certification and other pending suits in order to
expedite pre-trial discovery and to move the cases towards
trial.

However, little has actually occurred, as many courts were
waiting on a request that the Louisiana Supreme Court reconsider
its decision.  That request was denied on July 8, 2008.  The
company expects litigation activity to resume now that the
Louisiana Supreme Court has ruled on the flood issue. (Class
Action Reporter , Aug. 14, 2008)

In July 2008, Lafayette Insurance Company participated in a
hearing in St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana after which the court
entered a judgment certifying a class defined as all Lafayette
Insurance Company personal lines policyholders within an eight
parish area in and around New Orleans who sustained wind damage
as a result of Hurricane Katrina and whose claim was at least
partially denied or misadjusted. The company has filed an appeal
of this judgment as it feels it is not supported by the
evidence.

United Fire & Casualty Co. -- http://www.unitedfiregroup.com/--
is engaged in the business of writing property and casualty
insurance, and life insurance.  The company operates in two
segments: property and casualty insurance, and life insurance.


WASTE MANAGEMENT: Mass. Court Favors Drivers in Wage Litigation
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Supreme Judicial Court has ruled against Waste Management of
Massachusetts in a class-action lawsuit involving wages of
garbage truck drivers, The Associated Press reports.

Specifically, the court ruled that Waste Management broke the
law by not calculating overtime pay using the state-mandated
"prevailing wage."  It said Waste Management instead used a
"payroll scheme" that based time-and-a-half overtime pay on a
wage it calculated that was sometimes lower than that minimum
wage.

Attorney F. Henry Ellis, Esq., the lawyer representing lead
plaintiff Mike Mullally in the a class-action lawsuit, told AP
that ruling could force the company to pay at least $6 million
in compensation to about 500 drivers, not including penalties
that could double or triple the total.  The lawsuit was filed in
May 2006, AP reports.

AP reported that the prevailing wage is mandated by the state so
workers in public contracts are paid at roughly the same level
as those in private jobs.

Waste Management workers were paid at an hourly rate that was
sometimes less than the prevailing wage, and the company would
make up the difference with extra payments.

However, according to the AP report, the company used that lower
hourly rate to calculate overtime.  The workers argued they were
underpaid by thousands of dollars over several years.

Waste Management argued that as long as its workers were paid at
least the prevailing wage for all hours worked, including
overtime, it was following the law.

According to AP, the court disagreed, saying the law's intent
was to reduce the number of work hours, encourage companies to
hire more people, and compensate employees who work long hours.
It stated that Waste Management was avoiding overtime costs by
paying workers what was essentially the regular hourly rate,
even for overtime hours.

Furthermore the court wrote, "Waste Management's payroll formula
also does not compensate employees for longer work weeks, as
illustrated by the fact that an employee performing prevailing
wage work receives approximately the same hourly wage regardless
whether the employee works overtime."

With the decision, the litigation now returns to a lower court
to determine payment, according to the AP report.


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

BRITANNIA BULK: Coughlin Stoia Announces Securities Suit Filing
---------------------------------------------------------------
     The law firm of Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP
("Coughlin Stoia") announced that a class-action has been
commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York on behalf of all persons or entities who
acquired Britannia Bulk Holdings Inc. ("Britannia Bulk") common
stock pursuant or traceable to the Company's Registration
Statement and Prospectus (collectively, the "Registration
Statement") issued in connection with its June 17, 2008 initial
public offering ("IPO").

     The complaint charges Britannia Bulk, certain of its
officers and directors and its underwriters with violations of
the Securities Act of 1933.  Britannia Bulk is an international
provider of drybulk shipping and maritime logistics services
with a focus on transporting drybulk commodities in and out of
the Baltic region.

     On June 17, 2008, Britannia Bulk accomplished its IPO of
8.3 million shares at $15.00 per share for net proceeds of
$116.2 million, pursuant to the Registration Statement.  In its
first day of trading, Britannia Bulk stock closed at $13.85 per
share.  Then, on October 28, 2008, Britannia Bulk issued a press
release announcing that the Company expected a significant net
loss for the third quarter of 2008 compared to the net income
achieved during the second quarter of 2008.  The loss was due to
problems with hedges the Company had entered into earlier in the
year.  In addition, the Company announced it would not pay a
dividend on its common shares for the quarter ended September
30, 2008, or for the foreseeable future.

     Following this disclosure, the Company's stock collapsed to
$0.16 per share.  The following day, the Company disclosed that
it had been notified by its lenders that they were accelerating
all of its subsidiary's obligations under a $170 million lending
facility.  This would ultimately result in the subsidiary being
placed into administration under U.K. insolvency laws.

     According to the complaint, the Registration Statement
failed to disclose the problems in the Company's activities in
the forward freight agreements ("FFAs") market.

     Specifically, the Registration Statement concealed that the
Company failed to institute and enforce controls that would
prevent Company personnel from buying FFAs not purchased to
hedge identifiable ship or cargo positions.  FFAs were
represented to only be used as a hedge for work Britannia Bulk's
ships engaged in.  However, in fact, FFAs were used outside of
these guidelines, exposing the Company to significant risks.
Moreover, the Company had not entered into appropriate fixed
price contracts given the dramatic fluctuation in crude oil and
bunker fuels.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all persons or
entities who acquired Britannia Bulk common stock issued in
connection with its June 17, 2008 IPO (the "Class").

For more details, contact:

          Darren Robbins, Esq. (djr@csgrr.com)
          Coughlin Stoia
          Phone: 800-449-4900 or 619-231-1058
          Web site: http://www.csgrr.com/cases/britannia/


BRITANNIA BULK: Izard Nobel Announces Securities Lawsuit Filing
---------------------------------------------------------------
     The law firm of Izard Nobel LLP, which has significant
experience representing investors in prosecuting claims of
securities fraud, announces that a lawsuit seeking class action
status has been filed in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of New York on behalf of those who
purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of Britannia
Bulk Holdings, Inc. ("Britannia Bulk" or the "Company")
traceable to the Company's initial public offering on or about
June 17, 2008 (the "IPO" or the "Offering").

     The Complaint charges that Britannia Bulk and certain of
its officers, directors and underwriters violated federal
securities laws.

     Specifically, the Company's Registration Statement and
Prospectus (collectively, the "Registration Statement") issued
in connection with its IPO failed to disclose problems in the
Company's activities in the forward freight agreements ("FFAs")
market.

     The Registration Statement concealed that the Company
failed to institute and enforce controls that would prevent
Company personnel from buying FFAs not purchased to hedge
identifiable ship or cargo positions. FFAs were represented to
only be used as a hedge for work Britannia Bulk's ships engaged
in.

However, in fact, FFAs were used outside of these guidelines,
exposing the Company to significant risks.  Moreover, the
Company had not entered into appropriate fixed price contracts
given the dramatic fluctuation in crude oil and bunker fuels.

For more details, contact:

          Nancy A. Kulesa, Esq.
          Wayne T. Boulton, Esq.
          Izard Nobel LLP
          Phone: (800) 797-5499
          e-mail: firm@izardnobel.com
          Web site: http://www.izardnobel.com


CADENCE DESIGN: Levi & Korsinsky Announces Stock Lawsuit Filing
---------------------------------------------------------------
     The Levi & Korsinsky ("L&K") announces that a class action
lawsuit has been filed on behalf of all persons who purchased
the common stock of Cadence Design Systems, Inc. ("Cadence" or
the "Company") between April 23, 2008 and October 22, 2008 (the
"Class Period").

     The class action lawsuit was filed in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California.  The
Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, the defendants
misrepresented Cadence's financial performance and prospects,
overstated its revenues, and caused it to file false and
misleading financial statements with the SEC.

For more details, contact:

          Eduard Korsinsky, Esq.
          Juan E. Monteverde, Esq.
          Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
          39 Broadway, Suite 1601
          New York, NY 10006
          Phone: (212) 363-7500
          Fax: (212) 363-7171
          Web site: http://www.zlk.com/cdns.html


GENERAL GROWTH: Brower Piven Announces Securities Suit Filing
-------------------------------------------------------------
     Brower Piven, A Professional Corporation announces that a
class action lawsuit has been commenced in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on behalf
of purchasers of the common stock of General Growth Properties,
Inc. ("General Growth" or the "Company") (NYSE: GGP) during the
period between April 30, 2008 and October 26, 2008, inclusive
(the "Class Period").

     The Complaint charges General Growth and certain of its
officers and directors with violations under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.  No class has yet been certified in the
above action.

     The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period,
defendants misrepresented that General Growth had the ability to
refinance billions of dollars in debt that was coming due in the
fall of 2008 and spring of 2009 on acceptable terms when, in
fact, General Growth did not have access to such financing.

     The complaint further alleges that after suspending its
dividend on October 3, 2008, on October 27, 2008, the Company
announced it was marketing for sale its portfolio of retail
properties in Las Vegas. The complaint alleges that as a result
of these announcements, the value of General Growth's stock
declined significantly.

For more details, contact:

          Charles J. Piven, Esq.
          Brower Piven
          The World Trade Center-Baltimore
          401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525
          Baltimore, Maryland 21202
          Phone: 410/332-0030
          Web site: http://www.browerpiven.com


NOAH EDUCATION: Izard Nobel Announces Securities Suit Filing
------------------------------------------------------------
     The law firm of Izard Nobel LLP, which has significant
experience representing investors in prosecuting claims of
securities fraud, announces that a lawsuit seeking class action
status has been filed in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of New York on behalf of those who
purchased the publicly traded stock or American Depository
Shares ("ADSs") of Noah Education Holdings, Ltd. ("Noah
Education" or the "Company") (NYSE: NED) in or traceable to the
Company's initial public offering on or about October 19, 2007
(the "IPO" or the"Offering").

     The Complaint charges that Noah Education and underwriters
of its IPO violated federal securities laws.  Specifically, the
Complaint alleges that the Registration Statement and Prospectus
issued in connection with the IPO failed to disclose that the
Company was experiencing an increase in raw materials costs
which had negatively impacted its earnings.

     On November 19, 2007, Noah Education issued a press release
announcing its financial results for the quarter ended September
30, 2007.  Among other things, the Company reported that its
gross profit margins had dramatically declined from 59.4% in the
same period the prior year to 50.2% in the quarter.  The press
release attributed the declining margins to "an increase in the
purchasing cost of certain raw material components of DLDs such
as flash chips and memory boards, during July and August."  On
this news, the price of Noah ADSs dropped from $12.46 to $6.72.

For more details, contact:

          Nancy A. Kulesa, Esq.
          Wayne T. Boulton, Esq.
          Izard Nobel LLP
          Phone: (800) 797-5499
          e-mail: atfirm@izardnobel.com
          Web site: http://www.izardnobel.com


PRIMARY FUND: Berger & Montague Files Securities Suit in N.Y.
-------------------------------------------------------------
     The law firm of Berger & Montague, P.C. has filed a class
action in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York on behalf of all persons or entities who
purchased or held the shares of the Primary Fund ("Primary Fund"
or the "Fund") (Nasdaq: RFIXX) money market mutual funds offered
by The Reserve Fund during the period from September 28, 2007 to
September 16, 2008, inclusive (the "Class Period"), including
purchasers and holders in connection with its September 28, 2007
offering (the "Offering").

     The case is Wolgin v. The Reserve Fund, C.A. No. 08 CIV
9525 (S.D.N.Y.).  It charges The Reserve Fund, its parent and
affiliates and certain of its officers and trustees with
violations of the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940.

     The Reserve Fund is a cash management vehicle for
institutions, banks, brokerages, advisors and individual
investors and is an open-end, management investment company.

     On September 16, 2008, The Reserve Fund announced with
respect to the Primary Fund that the value of the debt
securities issued by Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. (face value
$785 million) and held by the Primary Fund had been valued at
zero and, as a result, the net asset value of the Primary Fund
was $0.97 per share.  This was shocking news because this was
only the second time in history that a money market fund had
"broken the buck" - that is, reported a share's value was less
than a dollar.

     According to the complaint, the true facts, which were
omitted from the Prospectus and other statements made by
defendants during the Class Period, were as follows:

       -- the Fund was no longer adhering to the stated
          objectives of preserving capital, but in an effort to
          achieve greater yields was pursuing riskier
          instruments;

       -- despite the fact that many observers believed Lehman
          would be the next Wall Street failure after Bear
          Stearns collapsed in March 2008, the Fund continued to
          hold large amounts of Lehman commercial paper; and

       -- the Fund's internal controls were inadequate to
          prevent defendants from taking on excessive risk.

     Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all
purchasers or holders of the Primary Fund during the Class
Period, including purchasers and holders in connection with the
Offering (the "Class").

For more details, contact:

          Barbara A. Podell, Esq.
          Glen L. Abramson, Esq.
          Kimberly A. Walker, Investor Relations Manager
          Berger & Montague, P.C.
          1622 Locust Street
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Phone: 888-891-2289 or 215-875-3000
          Fax: 215-875-4604
          Web site: http://www.bergermontague.com
          e-mail: InvestorProtect@bm.net


SPECTRANETICS CORP: Cohen Milstein Files Colo. Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
     The law firm Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. has
filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
District of Colorado on behalf of its client and on behalf of
other similarly situated purchasers of The Spectranetics
Corporation ("Spectranetics" or the "Company") (NASDAQ:SPNC)
common stock during the period between April 26, 2005 and
September 3, 2008, inclusive (the "Class Period").

     The complaint charges Spectranetics and certain of its
officers and directors (collectively "Defendants") with
violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange
Act").

     Spectranetics manufactures and sells the only excimer laser
approved in the United States, Europe and Japan for use in
minimally invasive cardiovascular procedures.

     The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period,
Defendants issued numerous materially false and misleading
statements which caused Spectranetics' securities to trade at
artificially inflated prices.

     More specifically, the complaint alleges that Defendants'
public statements were false and misleading or failed to
disclose or indicate that: the Company had engaged in illicit
activities related to the promotion, use, testing, marketing and
sales of catheter guidewires and balloon catheters manufactured
by third parties outside the United States; the Company had
improperly received shipments from an international source; the
Company had marketed and sold certain of its products for
unapproved use; a material and significant portion of the
Company's revenues were generated by the sales of such products
intended for unapproved use; the Company had made improper
payments to medical professionals who participated in certain
clinical studies for the Company; the Company had engaged in
questionable compensation practices for certain of its
employees, which would necessarily subject the Company to an
extensive investigation by federal authorities into its business
practices; the Company lacked adequate internal and financial
controls, including effective regulatory and compliance
controls; and as a result of the above, the Company's financial
statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant
times.

     According to the complaint, on September 4, 2008, the
Company shocked investors when it announced that a search
warrant was executed at its offices by the Food and Drug
Administration and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

In particular, the Company disclosed that "[t]he search warrant
requested information and correspondence relating to:

       -- the promotion, use, testing, marketing and sales . . .
          of the company's products for the treatment of in-
          stent restenosis, payments made to medical personnel
          and an identified institution for this application,

       -- the promotion, use, testing, experimentation,
          delivery, marketing and sales of catheter guidewires
          and balloon catheters manufactured by certain third
          parties outside of the United States,

       -- two post-market studies completed during the period
          from 2002 to 2005 and payments to medical personnel in
          connection with those studies and

       -- compensation packages for certain of the company's
          personnel."

On this news, Spectranetics' shares declined $4.27 per share, or
more than 47%, to close on September 4, 2008 at $4.73 per share,
on unusually heavy trading volume.

For more details, contact:

          Steven J. Toll, Esq. (stoll@cmht.com)
          Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C.
          1100 New York Avenue, N.W.
          West Tower, Suite 500
          Washington, D.C. 20005
          Phone: (888) 240-0775 or (202) 408-4600


                            *********

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 research,
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 S. Senorin, Stephanie T. Umacob, Gracele D.
Canilao, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2008.  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  * * *