Their lawyer, Mark Geragos, says he will refer the case to prosecutors for possible criminal charges against the insurer, Cigna HealthCare.

"All of the doctors there unanimously agreed that she needed and should have that liver transplant. And the only entity, if you will, who said no to that in the middle of that medical decision, was some piece of garbage who decided that making a couple of dollars, or saving them a couple of dollars, was worth more than the 65% chance over six months that she would survive," said Geragos.

"The only reason they approved it is because we had organized a protest in front of Cigna's corporate headquarters& and in the face of public pressure, they did it," he said.

By the time the approval came through Nataline had been on the liver transplant list for two weeks and her condition had deteriorated so badly that it was too late to have the procedure.

"I believe, the corporation knew, powers that be knew, that at that point approving the liver transplant was a 'gimme' because her condition deteriorated to the point where she couldn't receive the liver&she didn't have any chance of either, one, getting a liver or, number two, actually being able to receive it," he says.

Nataline, who was fighting leukemia, developed liver failure after complications from a bone marrow transplant she received from her brother last month.

Despite her already fragile health, Geragos says, "all of the doctors at the University of California Medical Center unanimously agreed that she needed and should have that liver transplant."

More than 6,000 liver transplants are performed in the United States every year, making it one of the most common organ transplants, according to the United Network for Organ Sharing.

The lawyers' payments, which when proposed had attracted criticism from some institutional investors as being too hefty, will be drawn from the settlement fund.

"In summary, I find that the settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate," U.S. District Judge Paul Barbadoro wrote in the ruling.

Tyco agreed in May to pay $2.975 billion to settle several long-running class-action lawsuits. Another defendant, former Tyco auditor PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, said in July it would pay $225 million to resolve the litigation.

Kozlowski and former Tyco finance chief Mark Swartz were found guilty in June 2005 of stealing millions from the conglomerate, a case that became infamous amid revelations that Kozlowski had used company funds to pay for a $15,000 umbrella stand and a $6,000 shower curtain.

Kozlowski and Swartz are now serving sentences of up to 25 years apiece in New York state prison.

Plaintiffs in the shareholder lawsuit contended that from December 1999 through June 2002, Tyco and others misrepresented the value of acquisitions and misled investors about Tyco's financial health. The settlements were reached before the case ever went to trial. 

Phillip Bennett, the former chief executive of Refco, and others have been indicted in connection with the Refco collapse.

"Acting hand-in-hand with Bennett, Collins made affirmative misrepresentations, material omissions, and told deceptive half-truths, all to assist Bennett's scheme to steal more than $2.4 billion from potential investors," the indictment said.

Lawyers are rarely charged criminally in connection with a client's alleged fraud. In the collapse of Enron Corp., no outside lawyers were charged. "There tends to be gray in legal transactions, but to show intent in a white collar prosecution, it needs to be black and white," says Andrew Weissmann, the former head of the Department of Justice's Enron Task Force and now a partner at Jenner & Block LLP. "It's difficult to develop that kind of evidence against lawyers."

The Securities and Exchange Commission also filed a civil complaint Tuesday against Mr. Collins, alleging that he aided and abetted securities fraud at Refco.

Mr. Collins, who has been the head of Mayer Brown's derivatives group, is now on leave from the firm while the charges are pending, the firm said Tuesday. "Mayer Brown has cooperated fully with authorities investigating activities related to the collapse of Refco," the firm said in a statement. "Our review of the evidence available to us shows that the firm acted in a professional, competent and ethical manner in its work on behalf of Refco."

Mr. Collins's lawyer, William Schwartz, said his client intended to fight the charges and called him "an innocent victim of the Refco fraud. This indictment should send a chill down the spine of every transactional lawyer who believes he or she is representing an honest client."

Michael Garcia, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, took a different view, saying it is "not a crime to have a client who commits a crime. No lawyer will be prosecuted unless that lawyer knows about the client's fraud and agrees to join in it understanding its unlawful nature."

The charges are a blow to a law firm that has weathered several of late. In July, buyout firm Thomas H. Lee Partners LP, which purchased a stake in Refco in 2004, sued Mayer Brown for allegedly failing to inform Lee about the bogus loan transactions. Also this year, an independent examiner filed a report in Refco's bankruptcy, concluding that there was significant evidence that the law firm "knew or should have known" the loans were fraudulent.

Beyond Refco, the law firm has struggled with recent defections by high-profile partners, and it suffered negative publicity this year when it fired or demoted 45 partners in an effort to boost its profitability.

U.S. District Court Judge Henry Kennedy, who in 2005 had ordered the government to preserve information on prisoner mistreatment at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, scheduled a court hearing on the tapes for Friday, overriding government objections.

Lawyers for a group of Guantanamo Bay inmates contesting their detention had requested the hearing to learn whether the government had complied with the preservation order. They cited reports that information obtained from the interrogations implicated five unnamed Guantanamo detainees.

"We hope to establish a procedure to review the government's handling of evidence in our case ... and generally to require an accounting from a government that has admitted that it destroyed evidence," said David Remes, an attorney for the group of inmates.

He declined to comment on whether he believed any of his clients were implicated during the interrogations.

The CIA on December 6 disclosed that it had destroyed hundreds of hours of interrogation tapes, prompting an outcry from congressional Democrats and human rights activists. The sessions recorded on the tapes were believed to have included a form of simulated drowning known as waterboarding, which has been condemned internationally as torture.

The CIA said it destroyed the tapes lawfully and did so out of concern for the safety of agents involved if the recordings were ever made public. The White House has repeatedly denied the United States tortures terrorism suspects.

The Justice Department declined to comment on the judge's hearing order but the department last week urged Kennedy not to investigate the videotapes.

Park Il Woo pleaded guilty in federal court on Friday to lying about his role as a South Korean agent, the U.S. attorney's office in Manhattan said. Park, who also goes by the name Steve Park, was never charged with espionage.

Prosecutors have said that Park made 50 trips to China and the Korean peninsula over the last several years and had appeared to be engaged in espionage type activities for at least five years.

Park is a South Korean citizen living in the United States. U.S. law requires anyone acting as an agent of a foreign government to register with the attorney general and disclose the nature of the activity.

An FBI agent said in court papers that Park had not registered, though he had admitted meeting with South Korean intelligence officers and agreeing to be paid to travel to North Korea to gather information for South Korea.

According to court papers, Park met with the FBI once in 2005 and twice this year, each time lying about his contacts with or knowledge of certain South Korean officials.

Park's lawyer has said her client is a law-abiding resident, and this case was an instance in which "what appears to be quite bad turns out to be much less."