The state's highest court, reversing two lower court decisions, ruled that a nationwide class was not appropriate for the lawsuit. The suit had been brought by a union health plan on behalf of all insurance plans that paid for Vioxx prescriptions, or about 80 percent of all Vioxx sold.

A lawyer for the New Jersey union said that because the state's consumer fraud law allows for triple damages, the case could have cost Merck $15 billion to $18 billion. The company's annual revenue last year was $22.6 billion.

Had the class action been allowed to proceed, it also would have been a major setback to the company's strategy of fighting the Vioxx lawsuits individually. Of the cases that have reached verdicts, Merck has won nine and lost five. A new trial was ordered in one case, and two others ended in mistrials this year.

Shares of Merck, which is based in Whitehouse Station, N.J., rose more than 2 percent, to $50.47, Thursday.

"We were thrilled with the decision," said John Beisner, who argued the case for Merck.

Christopher A. Seeger, lead lawyer for the plaintiff, the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 68 in West Caldwell, N.J., said he would pursue separate claims on behalf of individual health plans. He said that the high court did not rule that the state's consumer fraud law could not be applied to health plans from other states, so those claims could still be pursued in New Jersey, with the possibility of triple damages.

"Merck temporarily dodged a bullet," he said. "Merck didn't totally dodge the bullet."

The ACLU sued on behalf of an anonymous internet service provider, which was served an NSL about one of the websites it hosted.  The ISP contested the order, which the FBI subsequently dropped, but the ISP remains unable to even acknowledge that it got a request, and the company's president said he's been forced to lie to his friends and girlfriend about it.

Judge Victor Marrero of the Southern District of New York ruled that the gag order and the strict rules about how to contest them amounted to prior restraint on speech and allowed the FBI to pick and choose which persons would be gagged, based on whether the feds believed the target might speak critically of the government.  Judge Marrero found, in a 106 page opinion, that the gag order provisions couldn't be struck down without affecting the rest of the statute so he found that the entire NSL provision was unconstitutional.  He also stuck down a provision that prescribed the standards courts should use in judging the FBI's arguments for keeping gag orders.  Marrero wrote that Congress had overstepped its bounds in setting out those standards.

But the ruling by the 9th U.S. District Court of Appeals on Thursday upheld a lower court's ruling that said the land transfer was a sham. The appeals court had ruled before the land transfer that the cross was unconstitutional.

Judge M. Margaret McKeown, writing for the unanimous three-judge panel, said that "carving out a tiny parcel of property in the midst of this vast preserve—like a donut hole with the cross atop it—will do nothing to minimize the impermissible governmental endorsement" of the religious symbol.

Peter Eliasberg, an attorney with the ACLU, said his organization sued to remove the cross from its remote resting place outside Barstow because it was clearly a religious item being supported by the federal government.

"I hope this stops the litigation and the waste of taxpayers money," Eliasberg said.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, who voted with the majority, said in a separate opinion supporting his decision that racial balance is a worthy goal for school districts and that districts can use other methods to achieve it.

That opinion has both the district and the parent group, Parents Involved in Community Schools, declaring victory. It's one reason the district, which spent about $434,000 on its portion of the seven-year battle, doesn't believe it should have to pay the plaintiffs' fees.

Technically, the parents group still has to get a U.S. district judge to declare them the "prevailing party," said Seattle Public Schools attorney Shannon McMinimee.

McMinimee says it's "disingenuous" for the law firm, Davis Wright Tremaine, to go after money when the firm took the case pro bono. But firm spokesman Mark Usellis said "pro bono" means their clients don't have to pay.

"The thing that's really important to us in a civil-rights case is that Congress specifically and explicitly wrote into the law that if the government is found to have violated citizens' civil rights, then the prevailing party should seek fee recovery," he said.

Most governments can argue, as Seattle Public Schools is, that they don't have much money. But going after the fees helps deter other government bodies from violating civil rights, Usellis said.

The parents who sued the district in 2000 did not seek damages but asked the court to force Seattle to stop using the race-based tiebreaker that prevented their children, who are white, from attending Ballard High School. The district did, in 2002, but continued to fight for the policy in court, eventually making it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court last year.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will decide whether to award the fees to the firm. If the firm wins, the fees likely wouldn't be covered by the district's insurance carrier, McMinimee said. So the money would have to come out of the district's $490 million general-fund budget.

Authorities have rounded up hundreds of supporters of two-time prime minister Nawaz Sharif and his politician brother, Shahbaz, apparently in the hope of thwarting big welcome rallies if and when the two end seven years of exile on Monday.

The return of the prime minister he ousted in 1999 is a serious challenge for Musharraf, whose popularity has been sliding as he prepares to try to get re-elected by the national and provincial assemblies between September 15 and October 15.

He aims to hold a general election around the year-end.

"There's complete panic in government ranks," said a spokesman for Sharif, Ahsan Iqbal.

With political tension rising, a senior U.S. official arrived to prepare for a scheduled "strategic dialogue" session next week. U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher is likely to meet Musharraf for talks.

The United States is keen to ensure nuclear-armed Pakistan sustain efforts in the global war on terrorism and has been encouraging army chief Musharraf to work with liberal-minded former prime minister Benazir Bhutto.

Musharraf has been negotiating with Bhutto on a package of proposals that would likely see Musharraf quitting his post as army chief to become a civilian president, and Bhutto being cleared of corruption charges and coming back for elections.

Kelly Hart & Hallman officially opened the doors of its Houston office this week. It's the first major expansion outside of its hometown for Fort Worth's largest law firm.

The firm hired as partners James Derrick, David Hedges, Max Hendrick and J. Clark Martin, all former Vinson & Elkins attorneys, to work in the office along with an associate.

More hires are planned, said Dee Kelly Sr., one of the firm's founders. The office has space for 21 attorneys.

After the hiring of former appeals court Judge David Keltner, Kelly Hart & Hallman announced that it planned to expand to a Houston office.

The firm has about 100 attorneys in Fort Worth and a client list that includes American Airlines, the Bass family interests and Pier 1 Imports.

Although the firm also has an Austin office, this is the first time Kelly Hart & Hallman has expanded in an effort to develop clients in a new area, Kelly said. Houston is home to several large energy-related companies along with other major corporations.

"I think it has a chance to succeed or I wouldn't have done it," Kelly said.

"This one is a complex case," said Kevin Madonna, "We do a lot of cases involving communities where industry has done harm to drinking water supplies. This case is a chance to protect the community before damage is incurred."

Madonna said the large landfill proposed for the rural community in Conecuh is "a classic case of an out-of-state corporate interest bringing garbage in from out of state and dumping it on the people there, taking the money and running. It is a fundamentally unfair situation for the people there."

Phillip Kinney, who works for the public relations firm Matrix in Montgomery, is a spokesman for Conecuh Woods whose principals are based in the Tampa Bay, Fla., area. He disagreed with Madonna's characterization of the project.

"Conecuh Woods is not an out-of-state corporation," Kinney said, "it is an Alabama LLC, which was incorporated by Jimmy Stone and David Kirby. No other corporation or individuals have any interest in Conecuh Woods."

Kinney said that Conecuh Woods will be a "state-of-the-art economic development project" generating construction jobs, permanent jobs and revenue for Conecuh County. The money could be used to pave roads and help provide emergency services and programs for children and seniors, he said.

Developers have said the project could bring more than $250 million over more than 60 years and would provide about 15 jobs.

Controversy began in Conecuh and surrounding counties even before the landfill developers made a proposal. Several municipal governments and the Monroe and Escambia county commissions passed resolutions urging the Conecuh commission to refuse the landfill.

Though the commission voted in January against the project, that vote was not binding.

Once the developers make formal application, the County Commission can vote yes or no after a public hearing. If the commission takes no action, the landfill is automatically approved after 90 days.

Commissioners said the outcome of the referendum would not be binding.

Johnny Andrews, president of the citizen's group, said he was satisfied that the majority of Conecuh people oppose the landfill.

"I was startled the commissioners would ask for this to be on the ballot," Andrews said. "Why waste taxpayers' money when it is clear to everyone most people are against it?"

Madonna said his firm was "evaluating our options with respect to the commission's decision to place the issue on the ballot."

Kinney said Conecuh Woods considered the request for a vote to be good news. "Conecuh Woods applauds the county commissioners' decision to let the voters have a voice in their future and we look forward to the opportunity to speak directly to the citizens of Conecuh County."