The U.S. Forest Service is not required to disclose the identities of employees who responded to a 2003 wildfire near Idaho's Salmon River that killed two Forest Service workers, a 9th Circuit panel ruled.

The court dismissed a complaint filed by the Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, a public watchdog group that sought a copy of the Forest Service's investigation of the deaths of firefighters Shane Heath and Jeff Allen, who died while fighting the Cramer Fire in the Salmon-Challis National Forest.

Three other federal agencies, including the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, conducted similar investigations and criticized the Forest Service's response to the fire. The OSHA issued several citations against the agency for creating dangerous working conditions. By the Forest Service's own account, management failings had contributed to the deaths.

The Forest Service said it disciplined six employees involved in the fire, but withheld their names and identifying information due to privacy concerns.

The appellate court upheld the agency's decision, saying disclosure could cause "embarrassment, shame, stigma and harassment" for anyone associated with the tragedy.

The court also appeared skeptical that the plaintiff needed the information to launch its own investigation. The only new information that the group could exhume after four full investigations was the identities of the Forest Service employees, whom the group said it plans to contact. This stated purpose does not justify disclosure, the court ruled.

It concluded that releasing the information would not "appreciably further the public's interest in monitoring the agency's performance during that tragic event." 

A business that two employees sued for $35,000 in back wages has countersued the workers and the California Labor Commissioner in a federal class action, claiming undocumented workers should not be able to file such claims, and the Labor Commissioner lacks authority to award them back pay, as such awards violate the Immigration Reform and Control Act.

Kaji Enterprise dba Sushi Sharin and Masayoshi Kaji sued California Labor Commissioner Angela Bradstreet, and Tranquilino Cruz Garcia - who claims he is owed $5,797 in pay, plus penalties of $84 a day - and Rutilino Cruz Garcia - who claims he is owed $29,978 plus daily penalties.

The Cruzes sued Kaji on Feb. 5, alleging wages owed and Labor Code violations. The case is scheduled for trial before the Labor Commission on May 22.

Kaji claims he cannot get a fair trial because the Labor Commissioner "is biased in favor of illegal immigrants," and that the Commissions policies are "calculated to undermine the enforcement of Federal Immigration Law."

Kaji is represented by Ernest Franceschi Jr.

David Duncan, author of "The River Why," had sued a husband and wife, and their film companies, and Sierra Club Books, claiming Sierra resold movie rights to his book, without his permission and without paying him, after an initial option expired.

Duncan, author of the critically acclaimed "River Why" and "The Brothers K," sued Thomas Cohen dba Hammermark Productions, and Cohen's wife, Kristi Denton Cohen dba Peloton Productions, in Federal Court.

Duncan says Denton Cohen, who makes corporate training films, claims to have acquired rights to his book from her husband, a Marin County attorney. "This right, however, was not Cohen's to give," Duncan says.

Duncan claims the Cohens and Sierra Club Books perpetrated "a fraudulent scheme," in which Sierra, purporting to act as his agent, sold Hammermark film rights to the book. But Hammermark never exercised the option, Duncan says.

The complaint continues: "SCB, in violation of its fiduciary duty owed to Duncan, revived Hammermark's expired option without any consideration after Hammermark purportedly assigned the rights to Cohen and Cohen offered SCB an opportunity to invest on its own account in the film production. Even in the absence of this fraudulent conduct, Duncan terminated Hammermark's right to prepare a film derivative work in 1993 because Hammermark failed to fulfill its obligations within a reasonable time. ... Duncan has gone to great lengths in an effort to resolve the impasse created by Denton Cohen's insistence that she owns the film rights to the book and SCB's faithless conduct. Denton Cohen is not qualified to produce the film, and Duncan never would have agreed to grant her the rights. All else seemingly has failed, and Duncan now seeks herein by way of a lawsuit to finally put a stop to Denton Cohen's infringement of the right to prepare derivative works of his book 'The River Why.'"