CAR_Public/081111.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

           Tuesday, November 11, 2008, Vol. 10, No. 224

                            Headlines

C.R. BARD: Eight Circuit Denies Petition in Antitrust Litigation
CARTER'S INC: To Defend Claim in Securities Fraud Litigation
CARTER'S INC: To Defend Litigation Alleging Contract Breach
GENERAL GROWTH: Bull & Lifshitz Initiates Investigation
LEHMAN BROTHERS: Faces N.Y. Lawsuit Over Sept. 9, 2008 Layoffs

MONSANTO CO: W.Va. Court Issues Gag Order in Contamination Suit
MONSTER WORLDWIDE: Discovery Pending in N.Y. ERISA Litigation
MONSTER WORLDWIDE: Nov. 21 Trial Set for Litigation Settlement
MONSTER WORLDWIDE: Oshaben's Class Action v. Tickle in Discovery
MPC Computers: Ex-Worker Files Idaho Suit Over Unpaid Severance

PILGRIM'S PRIDE: Faces Securities Fraud Litigation in Texas
SADIA S.A.: Faces Securities Fraud Litigation in New York
SOLUTIA INC: Summary Judgment Motions in Ill. ERISA Suit Pending
TYLER TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Tex. Lawsuit Alleging  FLSA Violations
WALGREEN CO: To Defend Plumbers and Steamfitters' Litigation


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

BRITANNIA BULK: Abraham Fruchter Announces Stock Lawsuit Filing
BRITANNIA BULK: Izard Nobel Announces Securities Suit Filing
BRITANNIA BULK: Levi & Korsinsky Announces Stock Lawsuit Filing
BRITANNIA BULK: Shalov Stone Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.Y.
CADENCE DESIGN: Milberg LLP Files Calif. Securities Fraud Suit

GENERAL GROWTH: Howard G. Smith Announces Securities Suit Filing
HARDINGE INC: Brualdi Law Firm Announces Securities Suit Filing
LEHMAN BROTHERS: Law Firms File Securities Fraud Suit in N.Y.



                           *********


C.R. BARD: Eight Circuit Denies Petition in Antitrust Litigation
----------------------------------------------------------------
     The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit denied C.R.
Bard's Inc.'s ("Bard") 23(f) Petition seeking to overturn class
certification in "Southeast Missouri Hospital, et. al v. C. R.
Bard Inc.," an antitrust action pending against the company.

     The plaintiffs in the case are a certified class of
hospitals who purchased catheters pursuant to Group Purchasing
Organizations (GPOs) contracts, the primary means through which
sales of urological catheters to hospitals occur, between
February 2003 and the present.  A trial is scheduled for April
2009 in Cape Girardeau, Missouri.

     The lawsuit charges that Bard overcharged the plaintiffs
for urological catheters through use of anticompetitive
practices in violation of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act,
Section 3 of the Clayton Act, and analogous claims under
Missouri law. The plaintiffs allege that Bard engaged in
anticompetitive practices through:

       -- entering into exclusionary contracts with GPOs that
          substantially limited the ability of GPO hospital
          members to purchase urological catheters from Bard's
          competitors;

       -- within these exclusionary GPO contracts, imposing
          market share purchase requirements that penalized GPO
          hospital members that did not purchase all (or nearly
          all) of their urological catheters from Bard;

       -- within these exclusionary GPO contracts, imposing
          additional penalties on hospitals that did not
          purchase Bard's urological catheters as part of a
          bundle of other (unrelated) products.

For more details, contact:

          Kenneth Walsh (kwalsh@kmllp.com)
          Laura Parcells (lparcells@kmllp.com)
          Kirby McInereny LLP
          Phone: (212) 371-6600
          Web site: http://www.kmllp.com


CARTER'S INC: To Defend Claim in Securities Fraud Litigation
------------------------------------------------------------
Carter's, Inc. intends to defend the claim in the class-action
lawsuit filed on Sept. 19, 2008, under Sections 10b and 20 of
the federal securities laws.

According to the Company's Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly
period ended Sept. 28, 2008, the case is at its earliest stage
as lead plaintiff and lead counsel have yet to be determined.

Following appointment of lead plaintiff and lead counsel, the
Company intends to file a motion to dismiss for failure to state
a claim under the federal securities laws.

No specific details were disclosed in the Company's Form 10-Q
filing dated Oct. 30, 2008.

Based in Atlanta, Ga., Carter's, Inc. markets apparel for babies
and young children in the United States. The Company owns two
brand names in the children's apparel industry, Carter's and
OshKosh.


CARTER'S INC: To Defend Litigation Alleging Contract Breach
-----------------------------------------------------------
Carter's, Inc. intends to defend the contract breach claim in a
class action lawsuit, according to the Company's Oct. 30, 2008
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarterly period ended Sept. 28, 2008.

The class action lawsuit was filed on Sept. 29, 2008, against
the Company claiming breach of contract arising from certain
advertising and pricing practices with respect to Carter's brand
products purchased by consumers at Carter's retail stores
nationally.

The complaint seeks damages and injunctive relief.

Based in Atlanta, Ga., Carter's, Inc. markets apparel for babies
and young children in the United States. The Company owns two
brand names in the children's apparel industry, Carter's and
OshKosh.


GENERAL GROWTH: Bull & Lifshitz Initiates Investigation
-------------------------------------------------------
     The law firm of Bull & Lifshitz, LLP is investigating
possible illegal conduct as alleged in proposed class action
lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois against General Growth Properties,
Inc. ("General Growth" or the "Company") and certain of General
Growth's officers and directors for violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. The lawsuit is brought on behalf of all
purchasers of common stock from April 30, 2008 through October
26, 2008 (the "Class Period").

     General Growth, a Delaware corporation, is a self-
administered and self-managed real estate investment trust.  The
Company was founded in 1986 and is based in Chicago, Illinois.
The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
made false and misleading statements about General Growth's
access to financing.

     Specifically, defendants represented that the company 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.  In fact, the company did not have access to such
financing.

     Further, defendants failed to disclose that the Company's
President/Chief Operating Officer and its Chief Financial
Officer had received loans from the Chief Executive Officer's
family trust in violation of the Company's own Code of Business
Conduct and Ethics.

     On September 22, 2008, the Company announced that it was
pursuing a comprehensive evaluation of its financial and
strategic alternatives.  On October 3, 2008, the Company
suspended its dividend and then, on October 27, 2008, announced
it was marketing for sale its portfolio of retail properties in
Las Vegas.

On this series of disclosures, General Growth's stock price
collapsed, falling from $21.42 on September 19, 2008 to less
than $2.00 per share on October 27, 2008, or nearly 95% from its
Class Period high of $43.83 per share.

For more details, contact:

          Joshua M. Lifshitz, Esq.
          Bull & Lifshitz, LLP
          18 East 41st Street, 11th Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Phone: (212) 213-6222
          Fax: (212) 213-9405
          e-mail: counsel@nyclasslaw.com


LEHMAN BROTHERS: Faces N.Y. Lawsuit Over Sept. 9, 2008 Layoffs
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lehman Brothers is facing a purported class-action lawsuit in a
New York bankruptcy court that was brought on behalf of 100
former employees who lost their jobs during layoffs on Sept. 9,
2008 at the company's data center in Jersey City, The
Accountancy Age reports.

The suit was filed by computer programmer, Miron Berenshteyn,
who worked as a senior java developer at Lehman Brothers'
facility.

It seeks 60 days pay and benefits as well as severance pay of
one week's wages for every year worked.  If the class-action
suit is certified, it could include about 1,000 ex-employees and
be worth more than $5 million, according to Finextra.com.

Attorneys from Outten & Golden LLP, which is representing Mr.
Berenshteyn, claim Lehman breached the Worker Adjustment and
Retraining Act, which requires 60 days advance notice in writing
of a layoff, when Lehman stopped paying the staff before the 60
days were up.  Lehman filed for bankruptcy on Sept. 15, 2008,
according to the Accountancy Age report.

For more details, contact:

          Outten & Golden LLP
          3 Park Avenue
          29th Floor
          New York, New York 10016
          Phone: (212) 245-1000
          Fax: (212) 977-4005
          Web site: http://www.outtengolden.com


MONSANTO CO: W.Va. Court Issues Gag Order in Contamination Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
A state court in Putnam County, West Virginia has issued a gag
order in a class-action lawsuit against Monsanto Co. that claims
the company polluted the Nitro area with unsafe levels of the
toxic chemical dioxin, Gil McClanahan of WOWK reports.

The order prevents lawyers from placing ads in the media about
the facts of the case and from initiating contact with the media
about the case, according to the WOWK report.

                        Case Background

The purported class-action lawsuit was filed by 15 plaintiffs
against Monsanto Co. and several other defendants over
dioxins/furans contamination (Class Action Reporter, Jan. 23,
2008).

The suit, "Virdie Allen, et al. v. Monsanto, et al.," also names
as defendants Pharmacia Corp. and seven others.  The company is
named as the successor in interest to the liabilities of
Pharmacia.

The alleged class consists of all current and former residents,
workers, and students who, between 1949 and the present, were
allegedly exposed to dioxins/furans contamination in counties
surrounding Nitro, West Virginia.

The complaint alleges that the source of the contamination is a
chemical plant in Nitro, formerly owned and operated by
Pharmacia and later by Flexsys, a joint venture between Solutia
and Akzo Nobel Chemicals, Inc.

Akzo Nobel and Flexsys are named defendants in the case, but
Solutia is not, due to its pending bankruptcy proceeding.

The suit seeks damages for property clean up costs, loss of real
estate value, funds to test property for contamination levels,
funds to test for human contamination and future medical
monitoring costs.

The complaint also seeks an injunction against further
contamination and punitive damages.

Akzo Nobel and the Flexsys group of defendants tendered their
cases to Monsanto for indemnification and defense.  Monsanto
agreed to indemnify and defend Akzo Nobel and the Flexsys
defendant group.

For more details, contact:

         W. Stuart Calwell, Esq.
         Alex McLaughlin, Esq.
         The Calwell Practice
         P.O. Box 113, Charleston, WV 25301
         Phone: 304-343-4323 and 304-291-5223
         Fax: 304-344-3864 and 304-291-2240;

              - and -

         James F. Humphreys, Esq.
         J. David Cecil, Esq.
         Thomas G. Wilson, Esq.
         James F. Humphreys & Associates
         United Center, Suite 800, 500 Virginia Street
         East Charleston, WV 25301
         Phone: 304-347-5050
         Fax: 304-347-5055


MONSTER WORLDWIDE: Discovery Pending in N.Y. ERISA Litigation
-------------------------------------------------------------
Discovery is pending in the class-action captioned, "Taylor v.
McKelvey et al., 06 CV 8322 (S.D.N.Y.)," according to Monster
Worldwide, Inc.'s Nov. 4, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
Sept. 30, 2008.

In October 2006, a putative class action litigation was filed in
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by
a former Company employee against the Company and a number of
its current and former officers and directors.

On Feb. 16, 2007, plaintiff served an amended class action
complaint. The amended complaint was purportedly brought on
behalf of all participants in the Company's 401(k) Plan.

On Dec. 14, 2007, the Court granted the defendants' motions to
dismiss.

On Feb. 15, 2008, plaintiff, joined by three new proposed class
representatives, filed a second amended complaint against the
Company, three of the individuals who had been defendants in the
amended complaint, and three new defendants who are former
employees of the Company.

The SAC alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary
obligations to Plan participants under Sections 404, 405, 409
and 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act by
allowing Plan participants to purchase and to hold and maintain
Company stock in their Plan accounts without disclosing to those
Plan participants the historical stock option practices.

The SAC seeks, among other relief, equitable restitution,
attorney's fees and an order enjoining defendants from
violations of ERISA.

On July 8, 2008, the Court denied defendants' motions to dismiss
the SAC.

New York-based Monster Worldwide, Inc., provides online services
to customers in a variety of industries throughout North
America, Europe and the Asia-Pacific region in three reportable
segments: Monster Careers North America; Monster Careers
International; and Internet Advertising & Fees.


MONSTER WORLDWIDE: Nov. 21 Trial Set for Litigation Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------------
A hearing has been scheduled for Nov. 21, 2008, with respect to
final approval of the settlement of the federal shareholder
class action designated as "In re Monster Worldwide Securities
Litigation, 07 Civ. 2237 (S.D.N.Y.) (JSR)."

On March 15, 2007, a putative securities shareholder class
action was filed by Middlesex County Retirement System against
the Company and certain former employees in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York.

The class action seeks an indeterminate amount of damages on
behalf of all persons or entities, other than defendants, who
purchased or acquired the securities of the Company from May 6,
2005 until Sept. 9, 2006.

On July 9, 2007, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in the
securities class action asserting claims against the Company,
Andrew McKelvey and Myron Olesnyckyj, the Company's former
General Counsel, based on an alleged violation of Section 10(b)
the Exchange Act and against the individual defendants based on
an alleged violation of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act.

On July 14, 2008, the Court certified a class consisting of all
of those who purchased or acquired securities of the Company
from May 5, 2005 to June 9, 2006 other than the defendants, the
officers and directors of the Company, members of the immediate
families of any excluded person, the legal representatives,
heirs, successors or assigns of an excluded person, any entity
in which defendants have or had a controlling interest and any
current of former Company employee who acquired the Company's
securities through the exercise of options.

On Sept. 28, 2008, the lead plaintiff, the Company and the
individual defendants entered into a Stipulation of Settlement
that memorializes the terms pursuant to which the parties have
agreed, subject to Court approval, to settle the securities
class action.

According to the company's Nov. 4, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended Sept. 30, 2008, the Stipulation of Settlement provides for
a payment to the class by the defendants of US$47.5 million in
full settlement of the claims asserted in the Securities Class
Action. The Company's cost is anticipated to be approximately
US$25 million (net of insurance and contribution from another
defendant).

On Oct. 3, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York granted preliminary approval of the
Stipulation of Settlement.

New York-based Monster Worldwide, Inc., provides online services
to customers in a variety of industries throughout North
America, Europe and the Asia-Pacific region in three reportable
segments: Monster Careers North America; Monster Careers
International; and Internet Advertising & Fees.


MONSTER WORLDWIDE: Oshaben's Class Action v. Tickle in Discovery
----------------------------------------------------------------
Discovery in a putative class-action lawsuit entitled, "Ed
Oshaben v. Tickle Inc., Emode.com, Inc. and Monster Worldwide,
Inc. (Case No. CGC-06-454538)" is underway, according to the
company's Nov. 4, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008.

In July 2006, the putative class action was filed against the
Company and its Tickle Inc. subsidiary in California State
Court.

An amended complaint was subsequently filed.

The amended complaint alleges that Tickle engaged in deceptive
consumer practices and purports to be a class action
representing all users who purchased a test report from Tickle
and received "unauthorized charges."

The amended complaint alleges various violations of the
California consumer and unfair business practice statutes and
seeks, among other things, unspecified restitution for the
class, disgorgement of revenues, compensatory damages, punitive
damages, attorneys' fees and equitable relief.

During the second quarter of 2008, the company decided to wind-
down the operations of Tickle and has classified the historical
results of Tickle as a component of discontinued operations.

New York-based Monster Worldwide, Inc., provides online services
to customers in a variety of industries throughout North
America, Europe and the Asia-Pacific region in three reportable
segments: Monster Careers North America; Monster Careers
International; and Internet Advertising & Fees.


MPC Computers: Ex-Worker Files Idaho Suit Over Unpaid Severance
---------------------------------------------------------------
A former employee of MPC Computers has filed a class-action suit
against the Nampa, Idaho-based computer company, KBCI reports.

The employee filed the suit over "failure to pay promised
severance payments to her and other employees."

Dan Williams, one of the attorneys for the employees, told KBCI,
"Anyway you look at it legally, MPC is bound by their agreement
to pay laid-off employees."  He pointed out, "The law requires
you to keep this kind of promise."

KBCI reports that MPC has laid off 290 employees in the past two
months and has also filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the first
week of November.

Mr. Williams also told KBCI that MPC began making payments to
employees, but then recently broke its promise and reneged on
further payments.


PILGRIM'S PRIDE: Faces Securities Fraud Litigation in Texas
-----------------------------------------------------------
Pilgrim's Pride Corp. is facing a purported class-action lawsuit
in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas,
alleging that the company and its officers and directors
violated federal security laws by misrepresenting the company's
financial condition, Lou Antonelli of the Mount Pleasant Daily
Tribune reports.

The complaint was filed by Ronald Alcaldo, who is represented by
the Kendall Law Group in Dallas, Texas.  It was brought on
behalf of anyone who bought Pilgrim's stock between May 5, 2008
and Sept. 24, 2008, according to the Mount Pleasant Daily
Tribune report.

In the Nov. 3, 2008 edition of the Class Action Reporter, it was
reported that the complaint charges Pilgrim's Pride and certain
of its officers and directors of violating federal securities
laws by misrepresenting the company's financial condition.
Specifically, defendants failed to disclose that:

     (i) the company's hedges to protect it from adverse changes
         in costs were not working and in fact were harming the
         company's results;

    (ii) the company's inability to continue to use illegal
         workers would adversely affect its margins;

   (iii) the company's financial results were continuing to
         deteriorate rather than improve, such that the
         company's capital structure was threatened;

    (iv) the company was in a much worse position than its
         competitors due to its inability to raise prices for
         customers sufficient to offset cost increases, whereas
         its competitors were able to raise prices to offset
         higher costs affecting the industry; and

     (v) the company had not made sufficient changes to its
         business model to succeed in the more difficult
         industry conditions.


SADIA S.A.: Faces Securities Fraud Litigation in New York
---------------------------------------------------------
Sadia S.A. is facing a purported securities fraud class-action
lawsuit in New York, alleging that it was misleading investors
about its financial "well-being and future business," David
Glovin and Carlos Caminada of Bloomberg reports.

The complaint seeks damages for violations of federal securities
laws on behalf of all investors who purchased Sadia S.A.
American Depository Receipts (ADRs) and/or common stock between
the class period starting May 1, 2008 through Sept. 26, 2008,
inclusive (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 7, 2008).

Sadia is a producer and marketer of food products and exports
their products throughout the world.  It is Brazil's second-
biggest food company.

During the class period, Sadia entered into undisclosed
currency derivative contracts to purportedly hedge against the
Company's U.S. dollar exposure.  The company characterized the
amounts of these contracts as "nominal."

However, these contracts violated company policy in that
they were far larger than necessary to hedge normal business
operations and resulted in a loss of $365 million.

As a result of defendants' admission of violating company
policy regarding currency hedging, the American Depository
Receipts of Sadia S.A. closed at $9.50 per share, down from the
previous day's close of $15.27, a decline of 38%.

The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York on Nov. 5, 2008, under the
caption, "Westchester Putnam Counties v. Sadia, 08-cv-9528."

Bloomberg reports that the named plaintiff in the matter is the
Westchester Putnam Counties Heavy & Highway Laborers Local 60
Benefit Funds.

According to Bloomberg, the suit seeks unspecified damages and
an order certifying the case as a class action, or group
lawsuit, on behalf of other investors.  It also names senior
company executives as defendants.


SOLUTIA INC: Summary Judgment Motions in Ill. ERISA Suit Pending
----------------------------------------------------------------
Summary judgment motions in a consolidated class-action suit
that claims Solutia Inc. Employees' Pension Plan discriminated
against employees on the basis of their age are pending.

According to the Class Action Reporter dated June 18, 2008,
since October 2005, current or former participants in the
Solutia Inc. Employees' Pension Plan have filed three class
action complaints alleging that the Pension Plan is
discriminatory based upon age and that the lump sum values of
individual account balances in the Pension Plan have been, and
continue to be, miscalculated.

Two of these cases are:

       1. "Davis, et al. v. Solutia, Inc. Employees' Pension
          Plan," and

       2. "Hammond, et al. v. Solutia, Inc. Employees' Pension
          Plan."

The two are still pending with the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Illinois.

Those two cases have been consolidated with similar cases
against Monsanto Co., and Monsanto Company Pension Plan, and
Pharmacia Cash Balance Pension Plan, Pharmacia Corp., Pharmacia
and Upjohn, Inc., and Pfizer Inc.

Those two cases that were consolidated with the Solutia suits
are:

       -- "Walker, et al. v. The Monsanto Pension Plan, et al."
          and

       -- "Donaldson v. Pharmacia Cash Balance Pension Plan, et
          al."

The plaintiffs seek to obtain injunctive and other equitable
relief (including money damages awarded by the creation of a
common fund) on behalf of themselves and the nationwide putative
class of similarly situated current and former participants in
the Pension Plan.

A consolidated class action complaint was filed by all of the
plaintiffs in the consolidated case on Sept. 4, 2006.

The complaint alleged three separate causes of action against
the Pension Plan:

       -- the Pension Plan violates the Employee Retirement
          Income Security Act by terminating interest credits on
          prior plan accounts at the age of 55;

       -- the Pension Plan is improperly backloaded in violation
          of ERISA; and

       -- the Pension Plan is discriminatory on the basis of
          age.

In September 2007, the second and third of these claims were
dismissed by the court.

By consent of the parties, the court certified a class in
September 2007 with respect to the Pension Plan on plaintiffs'
claim that the Pension Plan discriminated against employees on
the basis of their age by only providing interest credits on
prior plan accounts through age 55.

Summary judgment motions have been filed in the case, according
to Solutia's Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period
ended Sept. 30, 2008.

Solutia, Inc. -- http://www.solutia.com/-- together with its
subsidiaries is a global manufacturer and marketer of a variety
of high-performance, chemical-based materials, which are used in
a range of consumer and industrial applications. Solutia has two
segments. The Performance Products segment manufactures
performance films for laminated safety glass and after-market
applications and specialties, such as water treatment chemicals,
heat transfer fluids and aviation hydraulic fluid. The
Integrated Nylon segment consists of an integrated family of
nylon products, including high-performance polymers and fibers.
Solutia sells its products directly to end users in various
industries, principally by using its own sales force, and, to a
lesser extent, by using distributors.


TYLER TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Tex. Lawsuit Alleging  FLSA Violations
----------------------------------------------------------------
Tyler Technologies, Inc. and EDP Enterprises, Inc. are facing a
purported class-action lawsuit in Texas, alleging violations of
the Fair Labor Standards Act, Michelle Massey of the South Texas
Record reports.

The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Texas on Oct. 31, 2008, under the caption, "Beall et
al v. Tyler Technologies, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:08-cv-00422-
TJW."  The plaintiffs in the suit are Patty Beall, Matthew
Maxwell, Talina McElhany, and Kelly Hampton.

According to the South Texas Record, workers at the two software
companies have filed the class-action lawsuit against their
employers, alleging that the defendants violated federal law by
failing to pay them overtime.

EDP Enterprises and Tyler Technologies create, install and
provide customer training and support for specialized software
programs for use by public entities including schools, appraisal
districts, courts, pension plans and public safety entities, the
South Texas Record reports. .

The plaintiffs purport to represent a class of employees that
includes customer service representatives, customer liaisons,
engineers, trainers and education service specialists employed
as exempt salaried employees by the defendants in the last three
years.

Asserting they are not exempt under the computer professional
exemption, they claim that the the defendants violated the Fair
Labor Standards Act by not providing additional compensation for
any hours they worked over 40 hours per week.

The South Texas Record reports that Patty Beall, one of the
plaintiff, alleges that she told management on numerous
occasions that the company's failure to pay overtime was in
violation of the law.  She argues management responded by
stating her job position was exempt from overtime compensation.

The suit states the employees did not qualify for the exemption
due to their respective job duties and further those job duties
did not include any other non-exempt functions such as
managerial functions.

Thus, it seeks damages for liquidated damages equal to the sum
of unpaid overtime, attorneys' fees, court costs, and pre and
post-judgment interest, according to the South Texas Record
report.

The suit is "Beall et al v. Tyler Technologies, Inc. et al.,
Case No. 2:08-cv-00422-TJW," filed in the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas, Judge T. John Ward,
presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs is:

          Laureen Furey Bagley, Esq. (lbagley@textrialfirm.com)
          Sloan Bagley & Perry
          P.O. Box 2909
          101 E. Whaley
          Longview, TX 75601-2909
          Phone: 903-757-7000
          Fax: 903-757-7574


WALGREEN CO: To Defend Plumbers and Steamfitters' Litigation
------------------------------------------------------------
Walgreen Co. and its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Operating
Officer intend to defend against the Plumbers and Steamfitters
Local No. 7 Pension Fund's putative class action suit, according
to the company's Oct. 28, 2008 Form 10-K Filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for fiscal year ended Aug.
31, 2008.

On April 16, 2008, the Pension Fund filed a putative class
action suit against the company and two of its officers in the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

The suit was filed on behalf of purchasers of company common
stock during the period between June 25, 2007, and Nov. 29,
2007.

The complaint charges the company and its Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Operating Officer with violations of Section
10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, claiming that the
company misled investors by failing to disclose declining rates
of growth in generic drug sales and a contract dispute with a
pharmacy benefits manager that allegedly had a negative impact
on earnings.

Based in Deerfield, Ill., Walgreen Co. is principally a retail
drugstore chain that sells prescription and non-prescription
drugs and general merchandise.


                   New Securities Fraud Cases


BRITANNIA BULK: Abraham Fruchter Announces Stock Lawsuit Filing
---------------------------------------------------------------
     The law firm of Abraham, Fruchter & Twersky, LLP ("AF&T")
has been retained to file a class action law suit arising out of
the June 17, 2008 initial public offering ("IPO" or the
"Offering") of Britannia Bulk Holdings Inc. ("Britannia")
(PINKSHEETS: BBLKF) on behalf of purchasers of common stock
pursuant or traceable to the Company's Registration Statement
and Prospectus (collectively, the "Registration Statement")
issued in connection with the IPO.

     A complaint already filed charges Britannia, certain of its
officers and the IPO underwriters with including, or allowing
the inclusion of, materially false and misleading statements in
the Registration Statement in violation of the Securities Act of
1933.

     In particular, the complaint alleges that the statements
made in the Registration Statement were materially false and
misleading because of the failure to properly 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, 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 is represented by AF&T which has expertise in
prosecuting investor class actions.

For more details, contact:

          Jack G. Fruchter
          Abraham, Fruchter & Twersky, LLP
          One Penn Plaza, Suite 2805
          New York, N.Y. 10119
          Phone: (212) 279-5050


BRITANNIA BULK: 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 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


BRITANNIA BULK: Levi & Korsinsky Announces Stock Lawsuit Filing
---------------------------------------------------------------
     Levi & Korsinsky ("L&K") announces that a class action
lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons who
purchased Britannia Bulk Holdings, Inc. ("Britannia" or the
"Company") (Pink Sheets:BBLKF) common stock pursuant to, or
traceable to the Company's Registration Statement and Prospectus
issued in connection with the Company's June 17, 2008 initial
public offering ("IPO").

     The complaint charges the Company, certain officers and
directors and its underwriters with violations of the Securities
Act of 1933.

     Britannia is an international provider of drybulk shipping
and maritime logistics services.  On June 17, 2008, Britannia
completed an IPO of 8.3 million shares at $15.00 per share
raising $116.2 million.  Britannia stock closed at $13.85 per
share after its first day of trading.

     On October 28, 2008, Britannia issued a press release
announcing that the Company expected significant losses for the
third quarter of 2008 as a result of problems associated with
hedging activity in which the Company engaged.

     Following the announcement, the Company's share price fell
to $0.16 per share.  The Complaint alleges that the Prospectus
failed to disclose that the Company did not have controls in
place to ensure that its hedging activity in the forward freight
agreements ("FFAs") market was limited to minimizing economic
risks associated with identifiable ship or cargo positions.
Instead, FFAs were used for speculation thereby exposing the
Company to significant risks.

     Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all those
that acquired Britannia common stock issued in connection with
its June 17, 2008 IPO.

For more details, contact:

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


BRITANNIA BULK: Shalov Stone Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.Y.
----------------------------------------------------------------
     The law firm of Shalov Stone Bonner & Rocco LLP filed on
November 7, 2008 a securities class action lawsuit against
Britannia Bulk Holdings Inc. (NYSE: DWT) (PINKSHEETS: BBLKF) on
behalf of purchasers of the company's common stock issued in its
initial public offering.

     The complaint names as defendants the company and certain
of its executives, underwriters, and directors.  The lawsuit
alleges, among other things, that the company made material
misstatements or omissions in its prospectus and registration
statement for its initial public offering filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.  The alleged misstatements
and omissions relate to the company's use of "chartered-in
capacity," forward freight agreements, and naked bunker fuel
hedges.  The lawsuit is pending in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York.

For more details, contact:

          Ralph M. Stone, Esq. (rstone@lawssb.com)
          Thomas G. Ciarlone, Jr., Esq. (tciarlone@lawssb.com)
          Shalov Stone Bonner & Rocco LLP
          485 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1000
          New York, New York 10018
          Phone: (212) 239-4340
          Fax: (212) 239-4310


CADENCE DESIGN: Milberg LLP Files Calif. Securities Fraud Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
     The law firm of Milberg LLP has filed a class action in
United States District Court for the Northern District of
California on behalf of all purchasers of Cadence Design
Systems, Inc. ("Cadence" or the "Company") common stock during
the period between April 23, 2008 and October 22, 2008 (the
"Class Period").  The case is entitled "Hu v. Cadence Design
Systems, Inc., Michael J. Fister, William Porter and Kevin S.
Palatnik."

     The complaint charges Cadence and certain of its current
and former officers with violations of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934.  Cadence develops electronic design automation
software and hardware for electronics companies worldwide.

     The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period,
defendants misrepresented Cadence's financial performance and
prospects, overstated its revenues, and caused it to file false
and misleading financial statements with the SEC.

     More specifically, defendants allegedly caused Cadence to
improperly report approximately $24 million in revenue in the
first quarter of 2008 and in the six months ended June 28, 2008
that will not be earned until the later quarters and, therefore,
should be recognized properly over the duration of the customer
contracts.

     On October 15, 2008, the Company announced the departures
of its Chief Executive Officer and four other senior executives.
In response to this surprise announcement, the price of Cadence
common stock dropped approximately 15%.

     Merely a week later, on October 22, 2008, defendants
stunned investors by acknowledging that the Company was
reviewing the recognition of revenue related to customer
contracts signed in the first quarter of 2008 and that it
expected to restate its financial statements not only for that
quarter, but also the first half of 2008.

     As a result of these disclosures, Cadence's stock price
dropped another 25%, as the artificial inflation caused by
defendants' false and misleading statements came out of the
stock price.

For more details, contact

          Jeff Westerman
          Milberg LLP
          One California Plaza
          300 South Grand Avenue, Suite 3900
          Los Angeles, California 90071
          Phone: (800) 320-5081
          e-mail: contactus@milberg.com
          Web site: http://www.milberg.com/


GENERAL GROWTH: Howard G. Smith Announces Securities Suit Filing
----------------------------------------------------------------
     The Law Offices of Howard G. Smith announces that a
securities class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of all
purchasers of the common stock of General Growth Properties,
Inc. ("General Growth") between April 30, 2008 and October 26,
2008, inclusive (the "Class Period").  The class action lawsuit
was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois.

     The Complaint alleges that the defendants violated federal
securities laws by issuing material misrepresentations to the
market concerning General Growth's business and financial
condition, thereby artificially inflating the price of General
Growth stock.

     No class has yet been certified in the above action.

For more details, contact:

          Howard G. Smith, Esq.
          Law Offices of Howard G. Smith
          3070 Bristol Pike, Suite 112
          Bensalem, Pennsylvania 19020
          Phone: (215)638-4847 or (888)638-4847
          e-mail: howardsmith@howardsmithlaw.com
          Web site: http://www.howardsmithlaw.com


HARDINGE INC: Brualdi Law Firm Announces Securities Suit Filing
---------------------------------------------------------------
     The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C. announces that a lawsuit has
been commenced in the United States District Court for the
Western District of New York on behalf of purchasers of the
securities of Hardinge, Inc. ("Hardinge" or the "Company")
during the period between February 22, 2007 and February 21,
2008, inclusive (the "Class Period").


     The Complaint charges that defendants misled or failed to
inform the investing public with regard to the fact that orders
and sales were slowing, thus causing Hardinge's inventory of
outdated machinery to grow and causing an undisclosed impairment
in the value of inventory.

     The complaint further alleges that this undisclosed
information materially inflated the financial results of the
Company and demonstrated that the Company lacked adequate
internal controls.

     According to the complaint, after the Company announced on
February 21, 2008, that in the fourth quarter of the fiscal year
ending December 31, 2007, Hardinge experienced a combination of
prior period accounting adjustments and the negative impact of
operational initiatives to reduce inventory which contributed to
an unexpected loss in the fourth quarter of 2007 and that the
Company planned to lower inventory by $20 million and to
discount inventory of older product lines, the value of
Hardinge's shares declined significantly.

For more details, contact:

          Sue Lee, Esq. (slee@brualdilawfirm.com)
          The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C.
          29 Broadway, Suite 2400
          New York, New York 10006
          Phone: (877) 495-1187 or (212) 952-0602
          Web site: http://www.brualdilawfirm.com


LEHMAN BROTHERS: Law Firms File Securities Fraud Suit in N.Y.
-------------------------------------------------------------
     The law firms of Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP and the Law
Offices of James V. Bashian, P.C., filed a class action lawsuit
on October 31, 2008 in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York on behalf of a class (the "Class")
of purchasers of certain senior unsecured obligations of Lehman
Brothers known as the Return Optimization Securities with
Partial Protection Linked to the S&P 500(R) Index with a
maturity date of September 30, 2009 (the "Notes"), between March
28, 2008, the date of Pricing Supplement No. 1 to the Lehman
Brothers Registration Statement (the "Prospectus") which
described the Notes to potential investors, and Lehman's
bankruptcy filing on September 15, 2008 (the "Class Period").

     The defendants named in the complaint include top Lehman
officials who signed the Prospectus as well as UBS Financial
Services, Inc., an underwriter of the Notes offering.  (Because
of its bankruptcy, Lehman itself is not named as a defendant.)

     The complaint alleges that these defendants breached their
duties under the federal securities laws by failing to
adequately disclose Lehman's endangered financial position to
investors, and by making materially inaccurate statements
reassuring investors about Lehman's risk control measures.

     Less than three months after offering the Notes, Lehman
announced $2.8 billion of net losses for the second quarter of
fiscal year 2008, and three months after that the company sought
bankruptcy protection from its creditors, including the
investors who bought the Notes.

Approximately $29.5 million of the Notes were sold during the
Class Period.

For more details, contact:

          John Halebian, Esq. (jhalebian@lshllp.com)
          Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP
          Phone: (212) 981-6760
          Fax: (212) 208-6806,



                            *********

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  * * *