Revius Ortique Jr., the first black justice on the Louisiana Supreme Court, has died of complications from a stroke. He was 84.

Current Supreme Court Justice Kitty Kimball says Ortique died Sunday.

Ortique was elected to the court in 1992, but had to step down two years later when he reached the state's mandatory retirement age for judges at 70.

As a civil rights lawyer in the 1950s and '60s, he helped integrate state labor unions and sued to get equal pay for black workers.

He held several presidential appointments, including a stint as an alternate delegate to the United Nations under President Clinton.

The Supreme Court will review a ruling that allows the brother of an Iranian terrorism victim to collect $2.8 million.

The justices said Monday they will consider overturning a decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco in the case of Dariush Elahi, who is seeking the money as compensation for the killing of his brother, Cyrus, in Paris in 1990.

French authorities blamed the Iranian government for the killing.

In 2000, Dariush Elahi sued Iran in federal court in Washington. The Iranian government failed to respond to the lawsuit and, after a trial, a judge awarded Elahi $11.7 million in compensatory and $300 million in punitive damages.

When Dariush Elahi accepted $2.3 million from the U.S. government under a law that allows terrorism victims to collect damages from the U.S. Treasury, lawyers for the Bush administration and the Iranian government said he relinquished his claim to the rest of the original judgment.

But the appeals court said that he is entitled to collect another $2.8 million from a California company that owes Iran for a canceled weapons shipment.

International commercial real estate services firm Studley announced today that Bailey Law Group, a full-service law firm with a national network, has signed a 10-year 23,146-square-foot lease expansion that will more than triple the size of its DC headquarters at 1615 L Street, NW in Washington, DC.

The law firm decided to lease additional space this year, bringing its total square footage to 32,424, after growing significantly since its move to 1615 L Street, NW in 2005. Bailey Law Group’s office is in the heart of Washington’s Central Business District and is just two blocks from the Farragut North Metro station.

“Our decision to expand reflects our commitment to meeting the needs of our clients as our practice continues to grow within the DC area and nationally,” said Bailey Law Group Principal Kathy Bailey. “Studley helped to secure and negotiate space adjacent to our existing office location, which we found to be a perfect fit for us.”

The expansion space is conveniently located on the south side of the top floor of the building, the same floor on which the firm is currently located. With the expansion space, Bailey Law Group now occupies more than 85 percent of the 13th floor, which boasts tremendous views of the Washington, DC skyline.

Demetri Koutrouvelis, Laurent Myers, Adam Singer and Ryan Nunes of Studley represented Bailey Law Group in the lease transaction. Richard Tonner and Kimball Wood of Cassidy and Pinkard represented the building’s landlord Broadway Partners.

Founded by Kathy Bailey in 1998, Bailey Law Group is a law firm with practice specialties in environmental law, litigation, business and nonprofit law, real estate law, government and regulatory affairs and alcoholic beverage licensing. In addition to its Washington, DC location, Bailey Law Group has offices in Orange County, California and Boulder County, Colorado.

The law firm is in the process of building out its expansion space in Washington, DC and expects to occupy it by May 2009.

The Supreme Court announced Monday it will step into a dispute over the Navy's use of sonar off the Southern California coast and its potential harm to dolphins and whales.

Acting at the Bush administration's urging, the court will review a federal appeals court ruling that limits the use of sonar in training seminars. The administration says the decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco jeopardizes the Navy's ability to train sailors and Marines for service in wartime.

The government also contends that national security interests can trump those of marine mammals, and that its use of mid-frequency sonar in training exercises hasn't caused any documented harm to dolphins or beaked whales in the waters where they're conducted. Arguments will take place in the next court term, beginning in October.

A man scheduled to be executed on Friday was issued a stay just minutes before he was to be electrocuted, triggering a flurry of legal moves as the state sought to carry out the sentence before a midnight deadline.

James Earl Reed had been scheduled to die at 6 p.m. Friday. A federal judge in Columbia issued the stay at 5:40 p.m. after a defense attorney's last-minute request for the execution to be halted. Five hours later, the appeals court vacated the stay and defense lawyers asked the U.S. Supreme Court to halt the execution. The state was fighting that possibility.

Under the state's execution order, the death sentence had to be carried out by midnight or it would have to be rescheduled. By 11 p.m., as the high court considered the defense's request, witnesses for the execution were being brought to the death chamber.

Reed, 49, has been on death row since 1996, when he was convicted of murdering Joseph and Barbara Lafayette in their Charleston County home two years earlier. Prosecutors said he was looking for an ex-girlfriend.

During his trial, Reed fired his attorney and represented himself, denying the killings despite a confession and arguing that no physical evidence placed him at the scene. Jurors found him guilty and decided he should die.

In the request for the stay, the defense attorney cited a U.S. Supreme Court decision the day before regarding defendants' rights to represent themselves, according to the order by U.S. District Judge Henry Floyd. The high court on Thursday said a defendant can be judged competent to stand trial, yet incapable of acting as his own lawyer.

Reed would be the first person executed by electric chair in the U.S. in nearly a year and South Carolina's first since 2004.

In South Carolina, anyone sentenced to death may choose the electric chair or lethal injection. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, eight other states electrocute inmates.

The Supreme Court said Thursday that courts should consider an insurance company's potential conflict of interest when reviewing the denial of an employee's health or disability benefits claim.

The court ruled 6-3 in the case of an Ohio woman who sued MetLife Inc. over a disability claim. She contended insurance companies have a financial incentive to deny claims and that conflict of interest should weigh heavily in employees' favor when they challenge benefit claims in court.

A federal appeals court ordered Wanda Glenn's benefits reinstated. The Supreme Court upheld that ruling.

Writing for the majority, Justice Stephen Breyer said federal law imposes a special standard of care on insurers requiring full and fair review of claim denials. Breyer noted that MetLife had emphasized a medical report that favored denial, de-emphasized other reports suggesting benefits should be granted and failed to provide MetLife's vocational and medical experts with all relevant evidence.

Dissenting, Justice Antonin Scalia said the court is using the wrong standard in dealing with potential conflicts of interest. Scalia said there must be evidence that a conflict improperly motivated a denial of benefits. In the MetLife case, there was no such evidence, Scalia said. Justices Clarence Thomas and Anthony Kennedy also dissented.

MetLife administered a disability plan for Sears, where Glenn worked for 14 years. The insurance company paid benefits for two years but in 2002 said her condition had improved and refused to continue the benefit payments. MetLife saved $180,000 by denying Glenn disability benefits until retirement, her lawyers said in court filings.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered Glenn's benefits reinstated in September 2006, ruling that MetLife acted under a conflict of interest and made a decision that was not the product of a principled and deliberative reasoning process. MetLife argued that the standard used by the 6th Circuit would encourage participants with dubious claims to file suit, which in turn would raise the costs of benefit plans to both companies and employers.