/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/990409.MBX              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R=20

               Friday, April 9, 1999, Vol. 1, No. 46=20


AMERICAN FAMILY: "Disappearing Premium" Settles for $77 Million
CHS ELECTRONICS: Finkelstein & Krinsk File Complaint in Florida
CHS ELECTRONICS: Milberg Weiss Files Complaint in Florida
CHS ELECTRONICS: Yates Firm Files Complaint in Florida
COMPAQ COMPUTER: Lockridge Grindal Files Complaint in Texas

ENGINEERING ANIMATION: Milberg Weiss Files Complaint in Iowa
ETRADE GROUP: Online Traders Sue When Brokerage Systems Crash
FRITZ COMPANIES: Propriety of Dismissal Pending Before 9th Cir.
GAP, INC.: Moves for Transfer of Saipan Worker Case to NMI
HUNTSMAN POLYMERS: Looks For Dismissal of Tender Offer Complaint

MEDICAL RADIATION: Military Experiments Settle for $5 Million
MILESTONE PROPERTIES: $7 Million Settlement Adds to Net Loss
NATIONAL HEALTHCARE: Nursing Homes Face Patient Neglect Claims
PEDIATRIX MEDICAL: Berman DeValerio Expands Defrauded Class
PEDIATRIX MEDICAL: Milberg Weiss Files Complaint in Florida

PHOTO-RADAR SYSTEMS: Accused Speeder Refuses to Squeal on Driver
RAINFOREST CAF=90: Expecting Dismissal of Shareholder Litigation
SAFESKIN, INC.: Yates Firm Files Complaint in California
SMARTALK CORPORATION: Shareholder Group Seeks Trustee's Review
STAFFMARK INC.: Cauley Firm Files Complaint in Arkansas

SUBURBAN LODGES: District Court Dismisses Securities Litigation


AMERICAN FAMILY: "Disappearing Premium" Settles for $77 Million
The Milwaukee Sentinel & Journal reported that American Family=20
Life Insurance Co. would pay at least $77 million to settle two=20
class-action lawsuits alleging the company misled customers=20
about the nature and cost of some policies, according to=20
settlement documents filed Tuesday. Nationally, owners and=20
certain previous owners of about 534,000 "disappearing premium"=20
policies purchased between 1982 and 1996 will be eligible to=20
participate in the settlement. American Family Mutual Insurance=20
Co., of Madison, parent company of American Family Life, also is=20
participating in the settlement.

In the Milwaukee Sentinel & Journal story, the proposed=20
settlement was described as "fair and good," by attorney John F.=20
Maloney, who represented the plaintiffs in the companion cases=20
in federal court in Milwaukee and Waukesha County Circuit Court.=20
It still must be approved by judges in both jurisdictions. Mark=20
A. Peterson, another lawyer for the plaintiffs, was reported as=20
saying the settlement "is going to add value and give=20
policyholders what they thought they were getting in the first=20
place." The Waukesha County and federal suits, which contain=20
similar allegations, were filed in both places for strategic=20
reasons, Peterson said.

An American Family official was quoted as denying any=20
wrongdoing. "We settled this lawsuit because we want to avoid=20
expensive, protracted litigation, and we want to provide policy=20
owners a fair settlement of any claims," Executive Vice=20
President James F. Eldridge said in a prepared statement.

According to the Milwaukee Sentinel & Journal, the class-action=20
suits, filed in 1997, alleged American Family representatives=20
incorrectly told potential policy purchasers that after making a=20
stated number of premium payments, they would not have to make=20
any more. In many cases, according to the suits, agents=20
persuaded customers to use cash values or dividends from their=20
existing policies to purchase new, "disappearing premium" life=20
insurance polices that were purported to provide greater cash=20
values, surrender values and death benefits. Consumers were not=20
adequately informed that the warranties and representations made=20
were based upon then-existing high interest rates, which were=20
not guaranteed, and that the benefits promised would not=20
materialize if interest rates fell, the suit says.

Eldridge said his firm believes that sales illustrations and the=20
policies themselves "clearly disclosed" that changing economic=20
conditions could have an effect on dividends and future premium=20
payments. However, the report notes that he added, "We know that=20
some of our policy owners are disappointed in the performance of=20
their policies, and this settlement is a fair and reasonable way=20
for us to deal with their disappointments and complaints."=20

The Milwaukee Sentinel & Journal wrote that the proposed=20
settlements include funds to provide eligible policyholders with=20
additional insurance coverage at no cost; financial=20
contributions to policies or cash payments; and additional=20
benefits, attorneys and officials involved in the case said.=20
There also will be an arbitration process to resolve some cases,=20
according to the court documents. Individual policyholders will=20
be eligible for different aspects of the settlement agreement,=20
depending on their circumstances.

The Milwaukee Sentinel & Journal also noted that the American=20
Family lawsuits are similar to lawsuits filed against other=20
insurance companies around the country. Maloney and Peterson=20
filed a similar suit this month against Lutheran Brotherhood.

American Family policyholders who qualify for participation in=20
the settlement will be notified by mail, said Richard A.=20
Fetherston, vice president of public relations for the firm, in=20
the report. The story also noted that U.S. Magistrate Judge=20
William E. Callahan Jr. and Waukesha County Circuit Judge James=20
R. Kieffer are scheduled to hold hearings in October to=20
determine whether the proposed settlement is fair.

The Milwaukee Sentinel & Journal said that American Family=20
announced that most of the money for the proposed settlement was=20
reserved by the company at the end of last year and is reflected=20
in its 1998 annual report.

CHS ELECTRONICS: Finkelstein & Krinsk File Complaint in Florida
CHS Electronics (NYSE:CHS) a leading international distributor=20
of computer products was charged in a class action lawsuit with=20
deliberately avoiding European Value Added Taxes (VAT) in order=20
to fraudulently increase company profits and inflate the CHS=20
stock price. The complaint was filed by Finkelstein & Krinsk in=20
the United States District Court for the Southern District of=20
Florida and represents all who acquired the securities of CHS=20
Electronics between December 18, 1997 and March 22, 1999.

According to the complaint, executives of CHS Electronics=20
routinely shifted inventory from country to country within=20
Europe to avoid the 18 percent VAT. Certain CHS executives who=20
were implicated in masterminding the scheme chose to flee=20
government authorities under threat of indictment. The complaint=20
alleges that CHS Electronics and certain management violated the=20
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making false statements and=20
omitting material facts.=20

The complaint alleges that after a period of optimistic=20
predictions of higher earnings CHS issued fraudulent preliminary=20
earnings reports covering the third and fourth quarter of 1998.=20
In fact CHS auditors had uncovered discrepancies in the=20
company's financial statements and on March 22, 1999, CHS=20
acknowledged that it had overstated its vendor rebates for the=20
second, third and fourth quarters of 1998. As a result of these=20
announcements the CHS Electronics stock, which had traded as=20
high as $20, cratered to $3- 15/16 on that day.

CHS Electronics is a major supplier of computers, computer=20
peripherals, and other high tech products to the retail market=20
in Western Europe, Latin America and Eastern Europe.

CHS ELECTRONICS: Milberg Weiss Files Complaint in Florida
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach has filed a class action=20
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern=20
District of Florida, on behalf of all purchasers of the common=20
stock of CHS Electronics, Inc. (NYSE: HS) between June 19, 1998,=20
and March 22, 1999.

The complaint alleges that defendants issued a series of false=20
statements and failed to disclose material facts concerning the=20
Company's earnings and in particular that certain vendor rebates=20
had been overstated resulting in material downward adjustments=20
to previously reported earnings for fiscal 1998.

CHS ELECTRONICS: Yates Firm Files Complaint in Florida
The Law Office of Alfred G. Yates Jr filed a class action=20
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern=20
District of Florida on behalf of all purchasers of the common=20
stock of CHS Electronics (NYSE: HS) from February 27, 1997=20
through March 10, 1999.

The complaint charges CHS Electronics and certain of its=20
officers and directors with issuing a series of materially false=20
and misleading statements that artificially inflated the price=20
of the Company's common stock in violation of Sections 10(b) and=20
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as well as Rule=20

COMPAQ COMPUTER: Lockridge Grindal Files Complaint in Texas
Lockridge Grindal Nauen & Holstein P.L.L.P. filed a class action=20
complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern=20
District of Texas on behalf of all who acquired securities=20
issued by Compaq Computer Corporation (Nasdaq: CPQ) in the open=20
market during the period January 27, 1999, and February 25,=20

The complaint charges that defendants knowingly or recklessly=20
issued a series of false statements and failed to disclose=20
material facts concerning the Company's operating results and=20
its future prospects.

ENGINEERING ANIMATION: Milberg Weiss Files Complaint in Iowa
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP has filed a class=20
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the=20
District of Iowa on behalf of all persons who purchased the=20
common stock of Engineering Animation, Inc. (Nasdaq: EAII)=20
between February 19, 1998 and February 17, 1999.

The complaint alleges that defendants issued a series of false=20
and misleading statements concerning the Company's financial=20
operating results and financial condition. In particular, the=20
complaint alleges that Engineering Animation failed to disclose=20
that certain costs related to acquisitions completed by the=20
Company during 1997 and 1998 had not been accounted for in=20
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP)=20
and SEC financial reporting regulations.

ETRADE GROUP: Online Traders Sue When Brokerage Systems Crash
The Omaha World-Herald reported that thousands of consumers have=20
been hurt by recent system crashes and delays that have plagued=20
online brokerages, and lawsuits filed against ETrade Group Inc.=20
highlight the growing pains of the young Internet brokerage=20

Consider the case of Chris Miller, 31, a software developer in=20
San Francisco. His electronic trading saga turned ugly almost=20
immediately after opening an account with ETrade Group Inc. in=20
Palo Alto. According to the Omaha World-Herald, Miller logged on=20
Feb. 4 and bought $7,700 worth of shares in Intel, Microsoft and=20
Sun Microsystems. A few moments later, Miller clicked on=20
ETrade's Web site, looking for his orders - nothing. He checked=20
his portfolio - nothing. He looked for an e-mail from ETrade,=20
confirming the orders - nothing. He called ETrade, but gave up=20
after waiting on hold for 45 minutes. With no sign that his=20
trades had gone through, he replaced the orders four hours=20
later. The next day, according to the story, he checked his=20
account and discovered his orders had been processed twice - to=20
the tune of $15,400. "I was quite miffed, very mad," Miller=20
said. "It even showed my account had a negative balance."

According to the Omaha World-Herald story, Miller reached an=20
ETrade representative after waiting an hour on the telephone,=20
who agreed to cancel his second set of trading orders. But=20
Miller was angry enough to join one of two potential class-=20
action lawsuits filed against ETrade earlier this year in Santa=20
Clara County Superior Court. The lawsuits allege that ETrade's=20
trading system crashes, which have occurred several times since=20
1997, have cost its customers money. The suits also accuse=20
ETrade of misleading consumers in its $25 million marketing=20
campaign, which promised fast, 24-hour stock trading via the=20
Internet - even when ETrade knew its computer and telephone=20
systems could not handle heavy trading during peak hours.

The Omaha World-Herald quoted Seth Lesser, a lawyer at=20
Bernstein, Litowitz, Berger & Grossmann in New York who=20
represents Miller, as saying, "ETrade is a marketing machine=20
that hasn't lived up to its fiduciary duty to customers. I'm=20
convinced that tens of thousands of customers have lost money."=20
ETrade reportedly did not return calls for comment on the=20

Last year, online brokerage accounts grew to 7 million with $420=20
billion in assets, according to Piper Jaffray Inc., a=20
Minneapolis investment firm. The Omaha World-Herald noted that=20
Nearly one-third of all trades in stocks and mutual funds were=20
done online. As customers sign up in droves, technology problems=20
are to be expected, analysts say. No other online businesses are=20
handling the same rapid growth and volume of transactions as=20
ETrade, Schwab, Ameritrade and others. "They totally blow other=20
sites away," said Larry Tabb in the story, an electronic=20
commerce expert and group director at Tower Group in Needham,=20

The Omaha World-Herald reported that when online brokers=20
launched their sites three years ago, they woefully=20
underestimated the public's interest in Internet trading. The=20
original technology wasn't designed to handle millions of=20
transactions. "There really is no good traffic model now, and=20
they're running out of capacity more quickly than they thought,"=20
said Rob Enderle, an online analyst at Giga Information Group in=20
Santa Clara. "It's like building a dam and filling it to the=20
brim," Enderle said. "You can model and test the heck out of it,=20
but you won't know whether the dam will hold until the water=20
hits the top. ETrade and Schwab are not used to building dams of=20
this size."

The Omaha World-Herald explained that ETrade has found itself in=20
the spotlight because of its high- profile ad campaign=20
("Someday, we'll all invest this way") and a big series of=20
crashes earlier this year. For three days - Feb. 3, 4 and 5 -=20
ETrade's trading system conked out for nearly four hours=20
altogether. About 20,000 of ETrade's 676,000 customers were=20
affected. ETrade engineers blamed a routine hardware and=20
software upgrade ironically meant to speed up customers' orders.=20
At the time, ETrade spokeswoman Lisa Nash reportedly said the=20
breakdowns were glitches - not major problems. ETrade still can=20
handle up to 170,000 trades a day - four times its daily=20
average. The brokerage, which will spend $75 million this year=20
on new technology, also is opening a third technology center=20
near Atlanta that will triple its trading capacity.

With lawsuits pending and regulators studying the issue, though,=20
ETrade is playing it cautious. The Omaha World-Herald reported=20
that in a recent filing with the Securities and Exchange=20
Commission, ETrade told investors that its trading system could=20
slow or fail because of software problems, power failure, human=20
error or heavy stress on the system during peak trading hours.=20
"There can be no assurance that we will be able to prevent an=20
extended systems failure," ETrade wrote. "Any such systems=20
failure that interrupts our operations could have a material=20
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and=20
operating results."

The Omaha World-Herald story stated that it is unknown how many=20
customers have fled electronic brokerages because of the=20
breakdowns. The crashes have been costly to some firms, though.=20
During its fiscal first quarter, Ameritrade took a $3.1 million=20
pretax write-off to pay customers who lost profits from delayed=20
online trades. On the consumer and regulatory front, thousands=20
of small investors have flooded state and federal agencies with=20
complaints about the Internet brokers. In Washington, the SEC,=20
the National Association of Securities Dealers and the North=20
American Securities Administrators Association - the=20
professional group for state securities regulators - are looking=20
closely at the online brokerages. "We want to make sure the=20
online brokers are keeping faith with customers," said Mark=20
Beauchamp, a spokesman for the North American Securities=20
Administrators Association in the Omaha World-Herald article.=20
"They're growing very fast and advertising very aggressively,=20
and we want to make sure they're not promising more than they=20
can deliver."

FRITZ COMPANIES: Propriety of Dismissal Pending Before 9th Cir.
In 1996, a total of six  complaints  were filed (three in=20
federal court and three in state court of California) against=20
FRITZ COMPANIES, INC., and certain of its then  officers and =20
directors,  purporting to be brought on behalf of a class of=20
purchasers or holders of the  Company's  stock between  August=20
28, 1995 and July 23, 1996.  The complaints allege various=20
violations of Federal Securities law and California  Corporate =20
Securities law in connection with prior disclosures made by the=20
Company and seek unspecified damages.

The three class action  suits filed  against the Company in=20
state court were  dismissed  with prejudice by the Superior=20
Court of California for the County of San Francisco on grounds=20
the claims asserted under the California Corporate Securities=20
law and common law fraud were not legally tenable. One of the=20
dismissals has been reversed on appeal,  permitting the=20
plaintiff to file an amended complaint.  That amended complaint=20
was dismissed with leave to amend. A further amended complaint=20
was filed and has been dismissed.

The three class action suits filed against the Company in=20
federal court were consolidated into one suit which was=20
dismissed with prejudice, finding that plaintiffs had not=20
alleged any statement that was false and misleading in =20
violation  of the federal  securities  laws.  Plaintiffs  have=20
filed an appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.  That=20
appeal is pending.

GAP, INC.: Moves for Transfer of Saipan Worker Case to NMI
Gap, Inc., has been named as a defendant in two lawsuits=20
relating to sourcing of products from Saipan (Commonwealth of=20
the Northern Mariana Islands).

A complaint was filed on January 13, 1999 in California Superior=20
Court in San Francisco by the Union of Needletrades Industrial=20
and Textile Employees, AFL-CIO; Global Exchange; Sweatshop=20
Watch; and Asian Law Caucus against the Company and 17 other=20
parties. The plaintiffs allege violations of California's=20
unlawful, fraudulent and unfair business practices and untrue=20
and misleading advertising statutes in connection with labeling=20
of product and labor practices regarding workers of factories=20
that make product for the Company in Saipan. The plaintiffs seek=20
injunctive relief, restitution, disgorgement of profits and=20
other damages.

On March 29, 1999, the Company, along with other defendants,=20
filed a demurrer in California Superior Court in San Francisco,=20
seeking dismissal of the complaint.=20

A second complaint was filed on January 13, 1999 in Federal=20
District Court, Central District of California, by various=20
unidentified worker plaintiffs against the Company and 25 other=20
parties. Those unidentified worker plaintiffs seek class-action=20
status and allege, among other things, that the Company (and=20
other defendants) violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt=20
Organizations Act in connection with the labor practices and=20
treatment of workers of  factories in Saipan that make product=20
for the Company. The plaintiffs seek injunctive relief as well=20
as actual and punitive damages.=20

On March 29, 1999, the Company, along with several other=20
defendants, filed a motion in Federal District Court, Central=20
District of California, to transfer the venue of the case to the=20
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

HUNTSMAN POLYMERS: Looks For Dismissal of Tender Offer Complaint
On July 23, 1996, HUNTSMAN POLYMERS CORP. was served with a=20
purported stockholder class action lawsuit filed in the Chancery=20
Court of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County,=20
arising from the Company's rejection of the unsolicited offer=20
from Huntsman Corporation to purchase the outstanding shares of=20
Common Stock. The lawsuit names the Company and each of its=20
directors as defendants.=20

The complaint alleged that the defendant directors breached=20
their fiduciary duty to stockholders by refusing to attempt in=20
good faith to maximize stockholder value in the sale of the=20
Company and engaging in a plan to thwart and reject offers from=20
third parties, including Huntsman Corporation, in order to=20
entrench management. Plaintiff sought certification of the=20
lawsuit as a class action, an order requiring defendants to take=20
various actions including exposing the Company to the market=20
place in an effort to create an auction of the Company and an=20
unspecified amount of damages.=20

The Company is also aware of two other similar lawsuits that are=20
pending in the Chancery Court. Plaintiffs' counsel in these=20
cases has agreed to an indefinite extension of defendants'=20
answer date.  Under the agreement, defendants do not need to=20
respond to the complaints until notified to do so by plaintiffs'=20
counsel. Huntsman Corporation acquired the Common Stock at a=20
price $2.00 per share in excess of that referred to in the=20
complaint. Accordingly, the Company believes it likely that this=20
lawsuit will be dismissed.

MEDICAL RADIATION: Military Experiments Settle for $5 Million
The United Press International (UPI) reported that a federal=20
lawsuit involving military-sponsored radiation experiments in=20
Cincinnati is about to end in a five-million-dollar settlement.=20
The class-action lawsuit involves 73 families who say patients=20
were guinea pigs in tests of radiation's effect on the human=20
body. The experiments were conducted from 1960 to 1971 at=20
General Hospital (now University Hospital).

The UPI reported that 89 people died, and their families say the=20
doses of radiation hastened their deaths. The settlement will=20
amount to about 50-thousand dollars for each family. According=20
to the story, the lawsuit claimed terminally ill cancer=20
patients, most of them poor, black people, were part of a 651-=20
thousand-dollar Department of Defense study. Dr. Eugene Saenger,=20
who led the study, reportedly says the treatments were to cure=20
the patients or to rid them of pain.

MILESTONE PROPERTIES: $7 Million Settlement Adds to Net Loss
The Palm Beach Post reported that Milestone Properties Inc.=20
(OTC-BB: MPRP) announced a net loss of $8.4 million, or $1.99 a=20
share, for the year ended Dec. 31, compared with a net loss of=20
$3.4 million, or 82 cents a share, a year earlier. The company=20
Friday attributed the increased loss to fees of $7 million=20
incurred in connection with the settlement of a class action and=20
derivative lawsuit.

The Palm Beach Post identified Milestone as a Boca Raton-based=20
company that owns, manages and invests in commercial real estate=20
and real estate-related assets.

NATIONAL HEALTHCARE: Nursing Homes Face Patient Neglect Claims
The St. Petersburg Times reported on complaints involving=20
National Healthcare, one of the country's largest nursing home=20
companies and a major presence in Florida.

According to the story, a $10-million negligence settlement=20
against National Healthcare precedes lawsuits the company faces=20
in Tampa and Hernando County. When National Healthcare attorney=20
Rick Sebek left the West Pasco Judicial Center after his clients=20
recently lost a $10-million negligence lawsuit, he looked like a=20
man who didn't think things could get much worse. "It's been a=20
long day," Sebek was quoted as saying, declining to talk to a=20

The St. Petersburg Times wrote that Wilkes and McHugh, the same=20
law firm that won Wednesday's settlement - the largest ever in=20
the state's Sixth Judicial Circuit - will argue a similar case=20
in Hernando County in two weeks. Also pending in the same court=20
is a $100-million case that Wilkes and McHugh brought against=20
all of the nursing facilities operated jointly by NHC and York=20
Hannover. That case will hinge on whether the court grants=20
class-action status, meaning that Wilkes and McHugh will be able=20
to sue on behalf of all of the residents of homes operated by=20
NHC and York Hannover. The report also noted an action in=20
federal court in Tampa, where NHC is the target of a billing-
fraud lawsuit brought by a former employee and the federal=20

The St. Petersburg Times also spoke with Jim Wilkes, the=20
outspoken attorney whose firm also won a state- record $15.2-=20
million judgment against a Tampa nursing home last week, who=20
said it's no accident that NHC often finds itself in court. "We=20
have multiple cases of people rotting with bedsores" at NHC=20
facilities, Wilkes reportedly said. "We have 16 cases pending=20
against NHC." Wilkes said the nursing company has widespread=20
patient care problems that stem from NHC's financial condition.=20
The company's stock price has plunged 77 percent over the past=20
year, and NHC reported it lost money in 1998. "Their stock is in=20
the dump, and they're cutting back on staff and supplies,"=20
Wilkes was quoted as saying.

But Liz Massa, a spokeswoman for NHC, said in the St. Petersburg=20
Times story that the company's excellence in caring for=20
residents has been well-documented by state inspectors. The=20
state's most recent reports show that all but three of the=20
company's 42 Florida nursing homes received average or superior=20
ratings from the Agency for Health Care Administration. "If we=20
have a center that gets a conditional poor rating, we go=20
berserk. We do whatever we can to get that corrected."=20

Massa was quoted as saying that NHC officials don't agree with=20
Wednesday's jury verdict, which found the company liable for=20
failing to treat an ulcer on the leg of 89-year- old Marion=20
Heide. Heide eventually lost her leg after the sore cut down to=20
the bone and became infected. "We feel like it's a malfunction=20
of justice," Massa said in the St. Petersburg Times report. She=20
added that those most directly affected by the verdict are the=20
workers at Heather Hill Nursing Home - many of them low-paid=20
nursing assistants - where Heide was treated. "It's devastating=20
to them," Massa said. "They're really hurt that people would say=20
these kinds of things about them."

PEDIATRIX MEDICAL: Berman DeValerio Expands Defrauded Class
After Pediatrix Medical Group, Inc. (NYSE: PDX) announced that=20
it was being investigated by the states of Arizona and Colorado=20
with respect to its Medicare billing practices, Berman,=20
DeValerio & Pease LLP announced that it was expanding a class=20
action previously filed in the United States District Court for=20
the Southern District of Florida to include charges of improper=20
revenue recognition due to improper billing of Medicare and=20

The class action had charged Pediatrix with overstating its=20
earnings and violating the federal securities laws, and was=20
filed on behalf of all who purchased the common stock of PDX=20
from April 28, 1998 through February 12, 1999. The new action=20
will be expanded to include purchasers through April 2, 1999.

PEDIATRIX MEDICAL: Milberg Weiss Files Complaint in Florida
A class action lawsuit was filed by Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes=20
& Lerach LLP in the United States District Court for the=20
Southern District of Florida, West Palm Beach Division, on=20
behalf of all persons who purchased the common stock of=20
Pediatrix Medical Group Inc. (NYSE: PDX) between April 28, 1998=20
and February 12, 1999.=20

The complaint alleges that defendants issued false and=20
misleading financial statements and press releases concerning=20
Pediatrix's operating results. The financial statements of the=20
Company, all of which implicitly or expressly were prepared in=20
conformity with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP),=20
were materially false and misleading because the Company=20
materially overstated its revenues, income and earnings.

PHOTO-RADAR SYSTEMS: Accused Speeder Refuses to Squeal on Driver
The United Press International (UPI) reported that Denver's=20
photo-radar system is being challenged by a Denver lawyer who=20
says he doesn't want to tattle-tale on his family and friends.

UPI wrote that in a class action suit filed in Denver U.S.=20
District Court, Robert Schultz called the law "...abhorrent and=20
intrusive." Schultz received a speeding ticket in February but=20
he says he isn't the person driving the car in the picture. He=20
says it's unconstitutional that he must identify the driver to=20
avoid paying the ticket.

RAINFOREST CAF=90: Expecting Dismissal of Shareholder Litigation
Luis San Andres, derivatively on behalf of Rainforest Cafe, Inc.=20
vs. Kenneth W. Brimmer, et al was filed on February 10, 1998 in=20
the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota.=20
The Luis San Andres complaint purports to seek relief on behalf=20
of the Company against Kenneth W. Brimmer, Mark Bartholomay,=20
Gregory C. Carey, Mark S. Robinow, Ercu Ucan, Steven W.=20
Schussler and Lyle Berman and the Company as a nominal=20
defendant. The complaint alleges that the defendants breached=20
their respective fiduciary duties to the Company and were=20
unjustly enriched as a result of certain trading activity. The=20
action was dismissed with prejudice on December 21, 1998.

The Company and certain executive officers of the Company are=20
named as defendants in a purported class action complaint, In=20
Re: Rainforest Cafe, Inc. Securities Litigation, alleging=20
violations by the Company and such executive officers of certain=20
Federal securities laws. The complaint was filed on July 31,=20
1998 and is a consolidation of seven separate actions which were=20
all filed in the United States District Court for the District=20
of Minnesota. The complaint alleges that the defendants violated=20
Federal securities laws by making misrepresentations and=20
omissions regarding the Company's performance and future=20
prospects during the class period while individually selling the=20
Company's Common Stock. The complaint purports to seek relief on=20
behalf of a class of plaintiffs who purchased the Company's=20
Common Stock during the period between October 20, 1997 and=20
January 6, 1998. The action was dismissed without prejudice on=20
December 21, 1998. Plaintiffs filed an appeal of the judgment of=20
dismissal on January 29, 1999 and then filed a motion to=20
voluntarily dismiss the appeal on March 16, 1999. The Company=20
expects the appeal will be dismissed.=20

SAFESKIN, INC.: Yates Firm Files Complaint in California
The Law Office of Alfred G. Yates Jr filed a class action=20
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern=20
District of California at San Diego on behalf of all purchasers=20
of the common stock of Safeskin, Inc. (Nasdaq: SFSK) from=20
February 18, 1998 through March 11, 1999.

The complaint charges Safeskin, Inc. and certain officers and=20
directors with issuing a series of materially false and=20
misleading statements that artificially inflated the price of=20
the Company's common stock in violation of Sections 10(b) and=20
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as well as Rule=20

SMARTALK CORPORATION: Shareholder Group Seeks Trustee's Review
Class action litigation has been filed in US District Court for=20
the Southern District of Ohio Eastern Division against a group=20
of individual defendants from the Smarktalk Corporation and=20
PriceWaterhouseCoopers. A group of over 250 common shareholders=20
in the Smartalk Corporation have organized the SMTK Action Group=20
and are currently seeking to file a motion before bankruptcy=20
court in Wilmington, Del., to appoint a Trustee to represent all=20
the shareholders of the Smartalk Corporation in matters related=20
to this litigation.

The SMTK Action Group seeks court appointment of an impartial=20
Trustee to see that all shareholders are treated with fairness=20
in any future settlement of this matter. Since the bankruptcy=20
court will be finalizing the sale of assets to AT&T in early=20
April, there is little time to arrange the motion for=20
appointment on this Trustee issue.

Howard Ferguson, group communications coordinator states, "We=20
would like to make an example of this case to see that=20
shareholders' interests in these matters do not continue to be=20
railroaded and disregarded, as commonly occurs. We currently=20
have high level US Senatorial interest in our situation. We hope=20
all current shareholders will participate in our efforts on=20
their behalf."

STAFFMARK INC.: Cauley Firm Files Complaint in Arkansas
The Law Offices of Steven E. Cauley, P.A. filed a class action=20
in United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas,=20
on behalf of all purchasers of StaffMark Inc. (Nasdaq: STAF)=20
common stock from July 6, 1997 through March 2, 1999. The=20
complaint alleges that StaffMark and certain of its officers and=20
directors violated the federal securities laws by issuing false=20
statements about StaffMark's business which caused its stock=20
price to trade at artificially inflated prices.

For example, the complaint alleges that, on February 24, 1999,=20
all levels of senior management of StaffMark stated that they=20
were "confiden(t) about operations" and that, while December 98=20
and early January 99 business had been slow, StaffMark's=20
business was ramping up "as fast or faster than expected."=20
However, just five days later, StaffMark revealed that its=20
revenues from its key Intellimark division had shown 0% growth=20
in January and 4-5% growth in February, both well under budget,=20
and that as a result, StaffMark's earnings for the first quarter=20
of 1999 and Year 1999 would fall dramatically below=20

While these disclosures caused StaffMark common stock to=20
collapse in price, just one month prior to these revelations=20
StaffMark's largest shareholder sold 250,000 shares for $4=20
million. Additionally, just three months before StaffMark=20
collapsed in price, StaffMark used $140 million worth of its=20
artificially inflated stock as a currency to acquire Robert=20
Walters p1c, a European business. At the same time, StaffMark's=20
CEO Clete Brewer had stated that StaffMark was "undervalued."

SUBURBAN LODGES: District Court Dismisses Securities Litigation
Suburban Lodges of America, Inc. (Nasdaq: SLAM) announced the=20
dismissal by the United States District Court of the class=20
action lawsuit that had been filed on December 19, 1997 against=20
the Company and certain of its officers and directors.

Suburban Lodges of America, Inc., develops, manages and=20
franchises Suburban Lodge economy extended stay hotels. There=20
are currently 94 Suburban Lodge hotels open in nineteen states.=20
David E. Krischer, Chairman and CEO said, "We have always=20
believed that this lawsuit was without merit so we are pleased=20
that the court has granted the early dismissal that we sought."


S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N=20

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by=20
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Princeton, NJ, and Beard=20
Group, Inc., Washington, DC. Peter A. Chapman, Editor.=20

Copyright 1999. All rights reserved. ISSN XXXX-XXXX.=20

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or=20
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic=20
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without=20
prior written permission of the publishers. Information=20
contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be=20
reliable, but is not guaranteed.=20

The CAR subscription rate is $575 for six months delivered via=20
e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same=20
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof=20
are $25 each. For subscription information, contact Christopher=20
Beard at 301/951-6400.=20

                 * * *  End of Transmission  * * *=20