Among the 47 people named in the lawsuit filed with the Supreme Court are three members of the current Cabinet, according to Sitthichoke Sricharoen, a lawyer representing the Assets Examination Committee.

"It is now up to the Supreme Court to decide whether or not to accept the case," Sitthichoke said.

The targets of the suit are accused of malfeasance for allegedly mismanaging and illegally spending money gained from the lottery scheme initiated by Thaksin's government.

The complaint alleged that irregularities in the scheme caused the state $1.17 billion in financial losses. It asked the Supreme Court to order the 47 people to pay the damages.

Thaksin's government launched the lottery in 2003, saying it would lure people away from the popular illegal underground lottery and also would generate revenue for education.

In addition to officials of the government lottery office, the suit targets Thaksin — who was toppled in a 2006 military coup and returned from exile last month to face other cases against him — and 29 members of his former Cabinet.

Three of those named in the suit are in the current government of Thaksin ally Samak Sundaravej.

The committee had previously submitted the case to the Attorney General's office, which had declined to prosecute it. This time it decided to submit the complaint directly to the Supreme Court's criminal division for political office holders, said Sitthichoke.

Rakkiat Pattanaphong, the division's secretary, said a panel of nine judges will take 30 days to deliberate whether to accept the case and order a trial.

The AEC was established right after the September 2006 coup that toppled Thaksin. There are several other corruption-related suits under way against Thaksin and his family, but none have yet come to trial.

Brian Z. Liss has joined theWashington, D.C. office of Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP as specialcounsel in the firm's Labor and Employment practice group.  Liss most recently practiced with MorganLewis & Bockius in Washington, D.C. 

Liss focuseshis practice on wage and hour counseling and litigation, National LaborRelations Act and Railway Labor Act arbitration and litigation, labor law complianceadvice and defense of unfair labor practice charges, labor and employment lawdue diligence for mergers and acquisitions, and employment discriminationcomplex litigation.  Liss' practice alsoincludes advising clients regarding the labor and employment law ramificationsof business transactions, negotiation and administration of collectivebargaining agreements, and employment law counseling. 

Liss has extensive experiencearbitrating union grievances, litigating Fair Labor Standards Act collectiveactions, and litigating Title VII, ADA, FMLA, and multi-plaintiff"hybrid" breach of contract/duty of fair representation cases.  Liss also has experience conductingcomprehensive internal wage and hour audits, representing clientsin federal and state Department of Labor audits, developing employmentpolicy manuals and training materials, and conducting wageand hour training for human resources staff, supervisors, and managers. 

"We are thrilled that Brian has elected to join us," said EdSchiff, managing partner of the firm's Washington, D.C. office.  "He will be a great addition to our firmand to the Washington, D.C. office, as we continue to expand the Labor andEmployment group on the East Coast.  His depthof experience in labor relations is a perfect fit for the practice group andallows us to provide added resources for our client representation."

Commented Liss, "I am thrilled to rejoin former colleagues SheldonKline and Jonathan Rose, as well as begin practicing with the other top-notchemployment attorneys at Sheppard Mullin. I am greatly impressed by the firm and look forward to expanding theLabor and Employment practice in D.C."

Labor and Employment partnersSheldon Kline and Jonathan Rose joined Sheppard Mullin last year.  Sheppard Mullin has 40 attorneys based in itsWashington, D.C. office.  The firm'sLabor and Employment practice group includes more than 65 attorneys. 

About Sheppard MullinRichter & Hampton LLP

Sheppard Mullin is a fullservice AmLaw 100 firm with more than 520 attorneys in 10 offices locatedthroughout California and in New York, Washington, D.C. and Shanghai.  The firm's California offices are located inLos Angeles, San Francisco, Santa Barbara, Century City, Orange County, Del MarHeights and San Diego.  Founded in 1927 on the principle that the firm would succeedonly if its attorneys delivered prompt, high quality and cost-effective legalservices, Sheppard Mullin provides legal counsel to U.S. andinternational clients.  Companies turn to Sheppard Mullin to handle a full range ofcorporate and technology matters, high stakes litigation and complex financialtransactions.  In the U.S., the firm'sclients include more than half of the Fortune 100 companies.  For more information, please visit www.sheppardmullin.com.

A court ruling that California parents "do not have a constitutional right" to home-school their children has touched off anger and bewilderment throughout America's home-schooling community and prompted a denunciation from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

For a movement that has gained greater accommodation in recent years, a state appellate court decision last month is a setback that, if not overturned on appeal, could force some 166,000 home-schooled students in California to enroll in conventional schools. It may also prod California and other states with vague or nonexistent laws on home schooling to be more specific about what is allowed and what is required of home-schoolers.

California's education statutes, for instance, do not mention "home schooling," but officials have allowed the practice for decades. The appellate court, however, found that the state's laws have not been changed to allow home schooling since a case back in 1953 erected a major roadblock to the practice.

Governor Schwarzenegger said Friday he would go to the legislature if the ruling is not overturned.

"I could see this ruling being a real strong impetus for home-schoolers in California to get the legislature to change their laws.... Or I could see it being perhaps the beginning of other states wanting to look more closely both at their laws and current enforcement," says Kimberly Yuracko, a professor at Northwestern University's Law School in Chicago.

The number of students nationwide who are home-schooled is not known because 10 states are so hands-off they require no reporting at all, nor do parents always comply with reporting requirements. Estimates range from 1.1 million to 2.5 million home-schooled students, and the numbers are rising.

About half the states require more than simple notification from parents or guardians, such as testing, curriculum approval, or home visits. But such rules are dwindling – either explicitly or by lax enforcement, say experts. Home-school advocates worry the California case could bring more regulation or enforcement, or both.

Who is eligible?

More than 130 million taxpayers will receive a rebate. To qualify, you must have at least $3,000 in income to receive the minimum rebate of $300 for an individual or $600 for a couple filing jointly.

Income for this purpose includes wages, railroad retirement benefits and certain disability and survivor benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs. It also includes Social Security retirement, survivor and disability benefits but not Supplemental Security Income or investment income.

The maximum rebate is $600 for an individual and $1,200 for a married couple filing jointly.

Parents eligible for a rebate will receive $300 for each qualifying child. The child must be under age 17 as of the end of last year and live with you for more than half the year.

Rebates begin to be reduced once adjusted gross income tops $75,000 for an individual and $150,000 for a couple. Your rebate is reduced by 5 cents for every $1 you make over those thresholds.

Tax return

You must file a 2007 tax return. The IRS will use this to determine eligibility and calculate the size of the rebate.

If you have filed your return, don't worry. You don't have to file again to get the rebate, as some fear, Stiff said.

About 20 million people aren't required to file a return because they earn too little. They still must file to obtain the rebate.

The IRS is encouraging veterans and Social Security beneficiaries who usually don't file returns to file a 1040A form and write on the top "Stimulus Payment."

If you need help filing a return, the IRS, AARP and community groups will be offering free assistance.

Low- to moderate-income households can receive free help at one of the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance programs. To find the nearest location to you, call 800-906-9887. To find an AARP Tax-Aide site, call 888-227-7669.

Despite the outreach, many people might never learn about the rebate and not file a return, said William Massey, a senior tax analyst with Thomson Tax & Accounting.

Massey says he has called his aunts—ages 78 and 93—to let them know that he will prepare returns for them.

If you do discover too late that you should have filed a 2007 return to obtain the rebate, you can always do so next year and receive the money, Stiff said.

When does the money arrive?

A rebate won't be lumped together with your regular tax refund. You'll receive a separate payment.

Rebates likely will be disbursed based upon Social Security numbers or geographic area, Stiff said.

The earliest rebates will be received in the first week of May by those who used direct deposit when filing their 2007 returns. Even if you're not due a refund for 2007, you can make sure the rebate is directly deposited into your account by filling out the bank routing information on your return.

Those who don't use direct deposit will start receiving paper checks the second week of May.

The IRS plans to set up a system where you can check online to find out when you'll receive your rebate, similar to how you can now track your refund online.

If you moved since filing your 2007 tax return, make sure you send the IRS a change-of-address form so you receive your rebate, Massey said.

Who won't get a rebate?

You won't receive money if you can be claimed as a dependent on someone else's tax return.

Cheney departs Sunday for a trip to Oman, Saudi Arabia, Israel, the West Bank and Turkey. Oil is also on his agenda, as the White House — coping with high energy prices that have socked American consumers — continues to push for greater oil production in the Mideast.

The White House announced the trip Monday. "This is the president continuing to show the commitment that he has to the region," said White House press secretary Dana Perino.

The vice president's visit comes on the heels of a brief troubleshooting mission to the Mideast by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. She was able to pressure the moderate Palestinian leadership to resume peace talks with Israel, which broke off after a deadly Israeli military incursion into Gaza.

Fonza Luke had worked as a nurse for Baptist Health System's Princeton Medical Center in Birmingham, Alabama, for 26 years when the human resources department summoned her to a meeting about a new "dispute resolution program." Nurses, housekeepers, and lab techs crammed into a conference room where hospital administrators presented a form and told them to sign. Signing meant agreeing to submit any future employment-related complaints to an arbitrator hired by the hospital and waiving the right to sue in court. Refusing to sign meant they'd be fired.

Luke had known the arbitration agreement was coming, and she didn't like the idea one bit—"I just think it's unfair to be made to do something like that," she says. Sobefore going to the conference room, she slipped away to a pay phone and called her lawyer. He said, "Don't sign it. You'll be signing your rights away," she recalls. Luke turned in the form without a signature in quiet protest. A few weeks later, the hospital again ordered her to sign, and again she refused. Despite repeated threats, the hospital didn't fire her, at least not then.

Three years later, Luke traveled to Atlanta for a continuing-education class recommended by her coworkers. When she returned, the hospital fired her for "insubordination" because she had been cleared to take just one day off, not two. For 30 years, Luke had been an exemplary employee. Her personnel file was full of praise for her performance; a review three weeks before the firing called her a "role model." Many of the younger, white nurses Luke worked with had taken unapproved leave, she observed, and kept their jobs. So Luke filed a race and age discrimination complaint with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (eeoc), which conducted a lengthy investigation, upheld her complaint, and recommended that Luke file a civil rights suit in federal court, which she did in 2003.

That's when the surprise came: Baptist Health argued that Luke had given up her right to sue back in 1997 when the hospital presented the arbitration agreement—even though she'd refused to sign. Simply by continuing to show up for work, Baptist's lawyers said, she'd agreed to the terms. Acting contrary to established contract law, which requires both parties to consent to a contract before it becomes binding, a federal judge accepted the hospital's argument. Luke was forced to take her civil rights case before Baptist's hired arbitrator, who dismissed it in short order. She had no right to appeal. She'd lost not only her job but, because she hadn't yet reached retirement age, part of the pension she'd worked toward for most of her adult life. Now Luke works night shifts at two health care facilities to make up her lost salary.

Euless officials say the sacrifices would violate ordinances against animal cruelty, keeping livestock and disposal of animal waste.

The background

In May 2006, Merced and 10 other church members were at his house a day before a planned ceremony when a Euless police officer and an animal control officer knocked on his door.

A resident had tipped off police that Merced, president of Templo Yoruba Omo Orisha Texas, and his group would sacrifice goats, according to police reports and court documents.

The officer did not see any goats, and Merced said he would not sacrifice any animals.

A month later, Merced and a priest from Puerto Rico met with Euless officials, who told him that the city would not issue a permit for their ceremonies. Merced sued in December 2006.

In 2007, the city offered Merced a compromise to help settle the lawsuit -- he could kill chickens, which city law allows, but not goats. The city would still enforce its animal cruelty ordinance and its ban against killing livestock. Merced declined.