---

            C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
     
             Tuesday, February 9, 1999, Vol. 1, No. 3

                           Headlines

AFRICAN-AMERICANS: Reparations Sought for Ancestors' Enslavement
ADAC LABORATORIES: Milberg Weiss Files Complaint in California
AGRIBIOTECH, INC.: Abbey Gardy Files Complaint in Nevada
BABY NEAL: Case Finally Settles
CANADIAN HEMOPHILIACS: Sues Arkansas Prison System for $660MM

DURA PHARMACEUTICALS: Wolf Haldenstein Files Suit in California
E*TRADE GROUP: New York State's Attorney General Begins Probe
GUN MANUFACTURERS: City of Cleveland Joins Plaintiff Consortium
INSO CORP.: Shapiro Haber Files Complaint in Massachusetts
LERNOUT & HAUSPIE: Berger & Montague Files Suit in Massachusetts

LERNOUT & HAUSPIE: Berman DeValerio File Suit in Massachusetts
LIVING CONCEPTS: Lowey Dannenberg Files Complaint in Oregon
PEOPLESOFT, INC.: Wolf Haldenstein Files Complaint in California
SERVICE CORPORATION: Whittington Von Sternberg File Complaint
SERVICE CORPORATION: Spector & Roseman Files Complaint in Texas

SPYGLASS, INC.: Cohen Milstein Files Complaint in Illinois
TURBODYNE TECHNOLOGIES: Glancy Firm Files Complaint in California
VISION TWENTY-ONE: Berger & Montague File Complaint in Florida
WORLD ACCESS: Chitwood & Harley File Complaint in Georgia
Y2K LITIGATION: US Chamber of Commerce Pres. Urges Legislation

                           *********

AFRICAN-AMERICANS: Reparations Sought for Ancestors' Enslavement
----------------------------------------------------------------
"When a government deliberately prevents a people from
participating in its social and economic life because of their
ancestry, it has violated the United Nations Human Rights Charter
-- an act that warrants immediate correction," says the National
Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America, which thinks that
black people in the United States should be paid reparations for
the enslavement of their ancestors.  Accordingly, the
organization is preparing a class-action lawsuit to be filed this
year against the U.S. government.  "Our team is convinced that a
solidly crafted lawsuit will help us achieve reparations," said
Adjoa Aiyetoro, part of the team of lawyers who will file the
lawsuit, according to a report appearing in The Times-Picayune.

In 1988, Congress passed legislation authorizing the payment of
$1.25 billion to Japanese-Americans who were forced into
concentration camps during World War II.  Since that time, groups
such as the National Coalition have called on the government to
acknowledge, apologize for and pay for the wrongs inflicted
against Africans living in America, The Times-Picayune said.


ADAC LABORATORIES: Milberg Weiss Files Complaint in California
--------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP filed a class action  
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern
District  of California against ADAC Laboratories (Nasdaq:
ADACE) and its officers and directors for violations of Sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Purchsers of ADAC securities between January 10, 1996 and   
December 28, 1998, may, not later than 60 days from December 29,
1998, move the court to serve as lead plaintiff of a class action
seeking to recover damages on behalf of all similarly situated
purchasers of ADAC securities.


AGRIBIOTECH, INC.: Abbey Gardy Files Complaint in Nevada
--------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Abbey, Gardy & Squitieri, LLP announced on
February 5, 1998, that a Class Action has been filed in the
United States District Court for the District of Nevada on behalf
of purchasers of AgriBioTech, Inc. (NDQ: ABTX) securities  
during the period October 8, 1998 through January 22, 1999.

The Complaint charges AgriBioTech and Johnny Thomas, its Chairman
and Chief Executive Officer, with violating the federal
securities laws.  The plaintiff claims that defendants
misrepresented and concealed material facts concerning the
Company's efforts and plans to sell the Company.

Class members may, not later than March 26, 1999, move the court
to serve as lead plaintiff of the Class.


BABY NEAL: Case Finally Settles
-------------------------------
A federal judge last week approved settlement of a class-action
lawsuit known as the Baby Neal case, according to a report
published in this week's edition of Pennsylvania Law Weekly.  

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the suit in 1990 against
the state Department of Public Welfare, Philadelphia's Department
of Human Services and the Philadelphia Common Pleas Court,
alleging they violated the civil rights of dependent, abused or
neglected children.  The ACLU settled separately with all three
defendants last year.  

Under the agreement approved by U.S. District Court Judge Robert
Kelly, state officials must write new regulations governing
inspections of the city's child welfare programs; the Family
Court Division must create a "model courtroom" to handle cases of
abused, neglected children; and DHS must establish a program for
exchanging information and monitoring the dependency court system
to ensure it meets "generally accepted" standards of social work.  
The ACLU will monitor the defendants for two years to ensure
compliance with the agreement, said ACLU legal director Stefan
Presser. The major portion of the lawsuit involved DHS and
allegations that children in foster care, group homes and
institutions were not receiving the protection and care to which
they were entitled. The suit also said the agency failed to make
adequate efforts to keep troubled families together.  

The ACLU sued in 1990 on behalf of children like Baby Neal, an
infant born in 1990 at Hahnemann University Hospital. The child
began life infected with syphilis and with cocaine in his system.  
His mother already had four children in foster care, and when DHS
could not find a home for him he was classified a "boarder baby"
ready for discharge but without a home.  Two months later, when
the ACLU filed suit, the infant was still at Hahnemann.  Baby
Neal was adopted in 1994.


CANADIAN HEMOPHILIACS: Sues Arkansas Prison System for $660MM
-------------------------------------------------------------
On Thursday, a group of about 1000 Canadian hemophiliacs filed a
$660 million class-action suit in Toronto alleging they had
received tainted blood sold to Canada by the Arkansas prison
system while Clinton was governor.  Now the group says it plans
to ask for a full investigation by the U.S. Justice Department.

Michael McCarthy, 39, a nurse who is a hemophiliac and a leader
of the group, alleged that members contracted AIDS and/or
hepatitis C from 1980 to 1985 from plasma containing a clotting
factor that was traced to blood taken from prisoners in Arkansas.
"We feel that there are people who should be held accountable in
our tragedy," McCarthy said.  "The American parties must be
brought to justice."

McCarthy appealed to Clinton, who was governor of Arkansas in the
early 1980s and oversaw the state prisons when the blood program
was in operation. If the president knows anything about the blood
program, McCarthy said, he should "come forward and find justice
for people who have lost their lives and are sick."  McCarthy
maintained there is evidence that Arkansas prison blood products
found their way to Europe and Japan, and in at least one instance
were sent back to the U.S.

According to one source, plaintiffs are drawing up new U.S. suits
that will seek to name Clinton, members of his administration
while he was governor, and officials at the Department of
Corrections in both Arkansas and Louisiana, as well as various
companies.  The group reportedly plans to hold a press conference
in Washington this month, and is seeking access to papers dealing
with the program when Clinton was governor, which are alleged to
have been taken from the governor's mansion in Little Rock.

Under the Arkansas program, the state contracted with a now
defunct company called Health Management Associates to provide
medical care for prisoners.  As part of its operation, the
company was permitted to collect blood at $7 a unit from  
convicts. This was among the blood, some of it allegedly HIV-
tainted, that entered the Canadian supply.  The president of
Health Management was Leonard Dunn, a close friend of Clinton's,
chair of his gubernatorial reelection finance committee, and a
Clinton appointee to the Arkansas Industrial Development
Commission.

According to the Ottawa Citizen, which broke the blood story late
last year, internal Arkansas State Police documents detail
investigations into charges that Health Management provided
inadequate treatment to prisoners along with rumors that Clinton
appointees to the prison board demanded a kickback in return for
renewing HMA's $3 million health-care contract in 1985.


DURA PHARMACEUTICALS: Wolf Haldenstein Files Suit in California
---------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP announced that it has
filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California on behalf of all persons
who purchased common stock issued by Dura Pharmaceuticals Inc.
(NASDAQ: DURA) at artificially inflated prices during the period
April 15,1997 through February 24, 1998 and who were damaged
thereby.

The complaint charges Dura and certain of its officers, directors
and its investment bankers with violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.  The Complaint alleges that defendants made
false and misleading statements about Dura's supposedly well-
trained and highly effective sales force, strong sales of Dura's
Ceclor CD, Keftab, Nasarel/Nasalide, Rondec and Dura-Vent
products, and the successful development of its new Spiros drug
delivery system while forecasting its commercial release in late
1998/early 1999 and $150 million in sales by 2000, strong growth
in Ceclor CD sales in 1998 to $50-55 million, 1998 earnings per
share ("EPS") of $1.15-$1.45, 1999 EPS of $1.90-$2.05 and 30%-50%
EPS growth for Dura during 1998-2000. These representations
artificially inflated Dura's stock to a Class Period high of $53
in October 1997.  Capitalizing on this, Dura and its related
Spiros Development Corp. II entity raised $375 million in badly
needed capital from public investors, Dura used its stock to
repurchase the shares of the Spiros Development Corp. entity and  
to attempt to acquire Scandipharm Inc. for $93-$139 million of
Dura stock, while the Dura insiders named as defendants sold
390,374 shares of their Dura stock at as high as $49.31 for $16.8
million in proceeds, selling 82% of the Dura stock they actually
owned.

On Feb. 24, 1998, Dura revealed that, due to weak sales of Ceclor
CD, Keftab, Nasarel/Nasalide, Rondec and Dura-Vent, its 1stQ 1998
and 1998 results would be much worse than earlier forecast.
Dura's stock dropped by $18-3/8, almost 46% in one day, to $20-
3/4. As Dura revealed further sales and EPS shortfalls during
1998 and a 4thQ 1998 loss, excessive inventories of Ceclor and
that its Spiros drug delivery system could not be approved by the
FDA its stock fell to as low as $8.

Members of the Class may, not later than sixty days from January
27, 1999, move the court to serve as lead plaintiff.


E*TRADE GROUP: New York State's Attorney General Begins Probe
-------------------------------------------------------------
New York State's attorney general began an investigation of the
online trading industry after "dozens of complaints" in the past
month from consumers about delays in processing stock trades and
Web- site crashes.  The action came as software troubles plagued
online brokerage E*Trade for a second straight day Thursday,
enraging investors who were unable to buy or sell stocks and who
have already sued.  

"There are always risks involved in investing in the stock
market," Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said in a statement. "But
part of the risk should not include questions about whether
trades will be executed promptly or whether online brokerage
firms can deliver the services that they've promised."


GUN MANUFACTURERS: City of Cleveland Joins Plaintiff Consortium
---------------------------------------------------------------
Cleveland is joining other big cities in a class-action lawsuit  
against the gun industry, according to United Press
International.  Cleveland joins Chicago, New York and New Orleans
in trying to force gun manufacturers to place trigger locks on
handguns.  Cleveland Mayor Michael White says gun violence makes
police protection, emergency services and medical treatment
necessary . . . and taxpayers are paying.  The cities, UPI
relates, plan to file suit within 30 days.



INSO CORP.: Shapiro Haber Files Complaint in Massachusetts
----------------------------------------------------------
On February 1, 1999, a class action suit alleging securities
fraud was filed in the United States District Court for the  
District of Massachusetts against Inso Corp. (Nasdaq: INSO) and
certain of its officers and/or directors, by the law firm Shapiro
Haber & Urmy LLP.  The case was filed on behalf of all persons
who purchased Inso common stock during the period April 23, 1998
through January 29, 1999, inclusive.  

The complaint alleges that Inso Corp. and certain of its officers
and/or directors, disseminated materially false and misleading
statements concerning the company's financial results for the
first three quarters of fiscal 1998, thereby causing the price of
the company's common stock to be artificially inflated throughout
the class period.  After Inso announced that its financial
results had been overstated by approximately $7 million for the
first three quarters of 1998, the price of its common stock  
declined by 64%.

Members of the class may move the court to serve as a lead
plaintiff on or before April 2, 1999.


LERNOUT & HAUSPIE: Berger & Montague Files Suit in Massachusetts
----------------------------------------------------------------
Berger & Montague, P.C. announced that it has filed a Complaint
alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the  
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The action, seeking class
action status, was filed in the United States District Court for
the District of Massachusetts on behalf of purchasers of Lernout
& Hauspie Speech Products (Nasdaq: LHSPF) securities during the
period from February 3, 1998 through December 1, 1998, inclusive.

Purchasers of LHSPF securities during the Class Period may, not
later than March 20, 1999, move the court to serve as a
representative plaintiff for the Class.  

The Complaint alleges that Lernout & Hauspie Speech Products had
improperly accounted for "in-process" research and development of
other voice recognition and translation software companies it had
acquired since at least 1996.  In accounting for those
acquisitions, Lernout wrote-off up to 60% of the in-process
research and development of the acquired companies.

The SEC had commented that these write-offs were excessive.  
Lernout was forced to assign the excess R&D write-offs to
goodwill recorded for its various acquisitions.  As a result, the
Company was forced to amortize more goodwill, thereby incurring
material, added expenses during the Class Period.  This, in  
turn, materially reduced the income the Company reported and will
report in the future.  

Further, during the Class Period, the individual defendants and
other Lernout insiders sold 528,176 shares of their personal
Lernout holdings for proceeds in excess of $23 million.


LERNOUT & HAUSPIE: Berman DeValerio File Suit in Massachusetts
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action filed by Boston's largest and  most experienced
securities class action firm charges Lernout & Hauspie Speech  
Products (Nasdaq:LHSPF) with violating the federal securities
laws by  overstating its income.  The case was filed as a class
action in the United  States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts on behalf of all  investors who purchased the
common stock of Lernout & Hauspie during the period February 3,
1998 through and including December 1, 1998 and who suffered
losses on their investments.

The action charges that L&H issued materially false and
misleading financial statements during the Class Period in
violation of the federal securities laws.  On February 1, 1999,
the Company announced that, due to accounting irregularities, it
would restate its 1998 financial results for its first, second
and third fiscal quarters.  In response, L&H stock which had
traded as high as $66 per share during the Class Period, plunged
to $33 per share by December 4 when the market absorbed the news.  
During the Class Period, while its income was materially
overstated, certain of L&H's officers sold more than one half
million of their L&H common stock and collected proceeds in
excess of $23 million.

Class members may, but not later than March 20, 1999, move the
court to serve as a representative plaintiff for the Class.


LIVING CONCEPTS: Lowey Dannenberg Files Complaint in Oregon
-----------------------------------------------------------
Lowey Dannenberg Bemporad & Selinger, P.C. announced that a
securities fraud class action was commenced on February 5, 1999,
in the United States District Court for the  District of Oregon
on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Assisted
Living Concepts, Inc. (AMEX:ALF) from July 28, 1997 through
February 1, 1999, inclusive.

The complaint names Assisted Living Concepts, Inc. and certain of
its officers and directors and charges each with violations of
the federal securities laws.  The plaintiff in the suit alleges
that the defendants artificially inflated the price of ALC common
stock during the Class Period by disseminating materially false
and misleading statements regarding the company's financial
results.
Class members may, not later than April 4, 1999, move the court
to serve as lead plaintiff of the Class.


PEOPLESOFT, INC.: Wolf Haldenstein Files Complaint in California
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP announced that it is
filing a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California on behalf of all persons
who purchased common stock of PeopleSoft, Inc. (NASDAQ:PSFT) at
artificially inflated prices during the period February 5, 1997
and January 28, 1999, inclusive and who were damaged thereby.

The complaint charges PeopleSoft and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
represented to the investment community that PeopleSoft was still
enjoying strong growth in orders and was on track to continue
45%-65% revenue growth through 1999.  As a result, PeopleSoft's
stock price was artificially inflated to as high as $55-15/16  
during the Class Period from the $24 range at the beginning of
the Class Period.  When PeopleSoft ultimately admitted that its
revenue growth had slowed and that it might restate its 1996-1998
financial statements, its stock declined to as low as $18-1/8 on
volume of 20.5 million shares.  While investors, who paid as high
as $55-15/16 for PeopleSoft stock, have lost millions, the top
officers and directors of PeopleSoft sold 8.2 million shares  
for proceeds of $232 million before the bad news was disclosed.

Members of the class may, not later than sixty days from January
29, 1999, move the court to serve as lead plaintiff of the class.


SERVICE CORPORATION: Whittington Von Sternberg File Complaint
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Office of Whittington, Von Sternberg, Emerson & Wilsher,
based in Houston, Texas, filed suit against Service Corporation
International (NYSE: SRV) on behalf of those who purchased,
between February 2, 1998 and January 26, 1999, shares in Service
Corporation International, or exchanged the common stock of
Equity Corporation International (NYSE: EQU) for their SRV shares
in the January 19, 1999 merger between the two companies.

This lawsuit alleges that, during the Class Period, certain
officers and directors of Service Corporation issued false
statements which caused the price of Service Corporation common
stock to trade at artificially inflated prices.  Thereafter,
Service Corporation issued $830 million of stock to acquire
Equity Corporation International and certain officers and
directors of Service Corporation sold, in the aggregate, over
2,470,000 shares of Service Corporation common stock between $39-
$42 per share, and reaped $96 million before it collapsed in
price to $15.75 on January 26, 1999.

A class member wishing to serve as lead plaintiff in this lawsuit
filed under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, must file the
appropriate motion with the Court no later than 60 days from
January 26, 1999.  


SERVICE CORPORATION: Spector & Roseman Files Complaint in Texas
---------------------------------------------------------------
Spector & Roseman, P.C., filed a class action lawsuit on February
5, 1998, in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Texas on behalf of all purchasers of Service
Corporation International (NYSE:SRV) common stock during the
period of  July 23, 1998 through Jan. 26, 1999.  

The Complaint alleges that Service Corp. and certain officers and
directors of the Company during the Class Period violated
Sections 10 (b) and 20 (a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. The Complaint charges that the defendants issued a series
of materially false and misleading statements concerning the  
Company's business, operations, and its prospects for future
profitability.  Because of the issuance of these false and
misleading statements, the price of Service Corp. common stock
was artificially inflated during the Class Period.  Prior to the
disclosure of the adverse facts on Jan. 26, 1999, Service Corp.  
sold $600 million worth of notes and completed a merger with
Equity Corporation International using $576 million worth of
Service Corp.'s artificially inflated common stock.

Members of the Class may, no later than sixty days from Jan. 26,
1999, move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff of the Class.


SPYGLASS, INC.: Cohen Milstein Files Complaint in Illinois
----------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. and
Bruce G. Murphy, Esq., on behalf of their client, on Feb. 5,
1999, filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois, on behalf of persons who purchased
Spyglass Inc. (Nasdaq:SPYG) common stock during the period
between Oct. 20, 1998, and Jan. 4, 1999, inclusive.

The Complaint charges that Spyglass and certain officers and
directors of that Company during the relevant time period
violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 by misrepresenting or failing to disclose material
information about Spyglass' operations and financial condition.
The market price of Spyglass common stock was artificially
inflated during the Class Period, thereby enabling certain
defendants to take advantage of their inside knowledge to sell
more than 500,000 shares of their own Spyglass stock for proceeds
exceeding $9.1 million.  Defendants' statements during the Class  
Period were false and misleading because, contrary to their
public statements, the Company was not returning to profitability
due to the fact that defendants had not secured deals in the
manner originally portrayed to the public.  In fact, defendants
had failed to sign contracts with several key clients and  
forecasts of first quarter profitability were based, in large
part, on revenue to be derived from such contracts, which would
never materialize or yield profits.  The Complaint alleges that
members of the Class purchased their Spyglass securities at
artificially inflated prices.

Purchasers of Spyglass common stock during the period between
Oct. 20, 1998, and Jan. 4, 1999, inclusive, may move the Court no
later than sixty days from Jan. 29, 1999, to serve as lead
plaintiff for the Class.


TURBODYNE TECHNOLOGIES: Glancy Firm Files Complaint in California
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Lionel Z. Glancy filed a class action lawsuit
in the United  States District Court for the Central District of
California on behalf of all persons who purchased the common
stock of Turbodyne Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq: TRBD) between
March 1, 1997 through January 22, 1999, inclusive.  Named as
defendants are Turbodyne and its President, Chief Executive
Officer and Director, Edward Halimi.

Turbodyne and its subsidiaries design, develop, manufacture and
market proprietary products that enhance performance and reduce
emissions of internal combustion engines and manufacture aluminum
cast automotive products, including engine components and
aftermarket specialty wheels.

Turbodyne was, until July 19, 1997, listed on the Vancouver Stock
Exchange.  The Company commenced listing on the Nasdaq Small
Capital Exchange on March 24, 1997.  Throughout the time
Turbodyne traded on both the Vancouver exchange and  Nasdaq,
defendants issued a series of public statements portraying
Turbodyne as a booming company which was experiencing and would
continue to experience rapidly rising sales and profits on its
core products and new product offerings.  These public statements
represented, among other things, that Turbodyne's "breakthrough"
technology was protected by more than 30 granted and pending
patents in the United States and internationally, that the United  
States Environmental Protection Agency had certified certain of
Turbodyne's products for special urban bus retrofitting projects,
that the United Nations endorsed the Company's products and that
a United Nations representative accompanied defendant Halimi to
London and Moscow to assist in product sales negotiations.

The false and misleading nature of defendants' public statements
remained undisclosed throughout the Class Period, until Nasdaq
announced on January 22, 1999, the last day of the Class Period,
that Nasdaq was joining Easdaq in halting trading in Turbodyne
stock, while the Easdaq Market Authority initiates disciplinary
proceedings against Turbodyne for allegedly issuing false or  
misleading price sensitive information to the investing public.  
The Easdaq hearing is scheduled to take place on March 1, 1999
and the NASD hearing is set for February 25, 1999.

As a result of the foregoing, Turbodyne's common stock traded
during the Class Period at artificially inflated prices as high
as approximately $16 per share.

Class members may move the Court, not later than 60 days from
January 22, 1999, to serve as lead plaintiff.


VISION TWENTY-ONE: Berger & Montague File Complaint in Florida
--------------------------------------------------------------
Berger & Montague, P.C., filed a Complaint on January 27, 1999
pursuant to Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 seeking class action status in the United States
District court for the Middle District of Florida (99-171-CIV-T-
26A) on behalf of purchasers of Vision Twenty-One, Inc.,
securities during the period from December 5, 1997 through
November 5, 1998, both dates inclusive.  

Named as defendants are Vision 21, Theodore N. Gillette and
Richard T. Welch.  The Complaint alleges that Vision 21
misrepresented its ability to integrate the acquisitions that the
Company had made during the Class Period and misstated its
revenues, net income, and expenses reported in the Company's  
financial statements for the first and second quarters of fiscal
1998.

On November 6, 1998, Vision 21 shocked the market when it
reported a $0.03 per share loss for the third quarter of 1998,
and admitted, among other things, that: (1) revenues for the
first and second quarters were overstated and expenses were
under-reported; and (2) it was forced to make adjustments to the  
third quarter financials resulting in a charge of $700,000, or
just under $0.05 per share, for the accounting irregularities in
the first and second quarters;

During the Class Period, Vision 21 common stock traded as high as
$11.75 per share. In the days following the November 6, 1998
announcement, the price of Vision 21 common stock plunged to
$4.00 per share, losing over 60% of its value from its high
during the Class Period.

Purchasers of Vision 21 securities (Nasdaq: EYES) during the
period December 5, 1997 through November 5, 1998, may, not  
later than March 23, 1999, move the court to serve as a
representative plaintiff for the Class.


WORLD ACCESS: Chitwood & Harley File Complaint in Georgia
---------------------------------------------------------
Chitwood & Harley filed a securities class action suit in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
on February 5, 1999, on behalf of anyone other than defendants
who purchased or  otherwise acquired common stock of World
Access, Inc. (Nasdaq:WAXS) between October 7, 1998 and January 5,
1999, including those who received World Access stock pursuant to
the NACT or Telco merger.

The complaint alleges that World Access and certain of its
officers and directors violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 after they realized that demand
for World Access products had declined in the third quarter of
1998. The complaint alleges that inventories became bloated, but
that the Company deceived investors into believing that the
inventory build-up was deliberate and designed to meet an
anticipated demand.  

The complaint alleges that this course of conduct maintained the
price of World Access common stock at an artificially high level,
which enabled defendants to acquire certain target companies in
exchange for a lesser quantity of World Access stock than
otherwise would have been required to consummate these  
acquisitions.  In addition to these acquisitions, certain
defendants took advantage of the artificially inflated share
prices by engaging in insider sales of their own shares of World
Access, the complaint alleges.  One individual defendant sold
18,075 shares for $419,780.25 in proceeds, while another sold
64,000 shares sold for $1,494,640 in proceeds.

Class members wishing to move the Court to serve as lead
plaintiff of the Class must do so no later than March 8, 1999.


Y2K LITIGATION: US Chamber of Commerce Pres. Urges Legislation
--------------------------------------------------------------
Priority legislative goals were announced by Thomas J. Donohue,
U.S. Chamber of Commerce president and chief executive officer.
Mr. Donohue listed Y2K legislation and legal reform -- passing
legislation providing liability protections to businesses that
make good-faith efforts to work on the 2000 computer bug, while
"continuing to push for wider curbs on wasteful and expensive
litigation including class-action reforms" -- among the
highlights and focus points for 1999



                           *********



                           *********

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., Princeton, NJ, and Beard
Group, Inc., Washington, DC.  Peter A. Chapman, Editor.

Copyright 1999.  All rights reserved.  ISSN XXXX-XXXX.

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 301/951-6400.  
       
                  * * *  End of Transmission  * * *