A 17-year-old boy charged in a school shooting rampage that left three students dead was told by a judge on Tuesday that the case could be sent to adult court for trial.

Authorities will decide later whether T.J. Lane will be tried as an adult and face a possible life sentence if convicted.

Lane, who is charged with three counts of aggravated murder, two counts of attempted aggravated murder and one count of felonious assault, did not enter a plea Tuesday when he appeared before Juvenile Judge Tim Grendell.

The judge postponed a hearing on the adult-court matter from March 19 until April 3 because two new attorneys have joined the defense team.

Lane watched the judge without visible emotion, blinking occasionally. He was taken into court under heavy security, a deputy's hand on his arm. He was dressed in an outfit similar to what he wore last week in court — a tan, open-collared dress shirt and dark slacks.

Relatives of the victims faced Lane from the jury box. Some wore memorial ribbons of red and black, the colors of Chardon High School.

Lane spoke in response to routine questions from the judge about his understanding of the case and his rights.

Missouri's highest court says convenience stores cannot claim a tax break on the electricity used to prepare food.

The Supreme Court's decision Tuesday hinged on whether the act of warming or cooking food qualified as "processing" a product. If so, then the electricity used for food preparation could qualify for a state sales tax exemption.

In a 5-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that food preparation was not "processing" and the tax break could not be claimed.

Casey's General Stores had sought the tax break for one month of electricity used at stores in Grain Valley and Greenwood.

The Missouri Department of Revenue said it did not have a specific figure for what might have been owed to Casey's, or to other companies that might have made similar claims.

Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of purchasers of CNOOC Limited American Depositary Shares between January 27, 2011 and September 16, 2011, inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. CNOOC, through its subsidiaries, engages in the exploration, development, production and sale of crude oil, natural gas and other petroleum products. The Company owns oil and natural gas properties in Asia, Oceania, Africa, the Americas and offshore China – including the Penglai 19-3 (“PL19-3”) oilfield situated in northern China’s Bohai Bay.

The Complaint alleges that defendants misrepresented or failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business and financial results, including that: (i) the Company was not in compliance with environmental laws and regulations; (ii) the Company concealed the extent and severity of oil spills that occurred at the PL19-3 oilfield in June 2011; (iii) as news of the oil spills emerged, the Company downplayed its responsibility to effect the cleanup of the oil spills, portrayed itself as being the “non-operator” of the oilfield and, moreover, hindered the cleanup by requiring the operator of the oilfield to use a CNOOC-affiliated company for the cleanup; (iv) the Company improperly accounted for its contingent liabilities in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”); and (v), based on the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company’s operations and its expected oil production.

No class has yet been certified in the above action. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. If you purchased the ADSs of CNOOC between January 27, 2011 and September 16, 2011, you have certain rights, and have until April 29, 2012 to move for lead plaintiff status. To be a member of the class you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent class member.

www.glancylaw.com

The International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant Thursday for Sudan's defense minister, the third senior regime official sought by the court for alleged involvement in atrocities in Darfur.

The court announced it wants Abdelrahim Mohamed Hussein arrested on a warrant containing seven counts of crimes against humanity and six war crimes including murder, persecution, rape and torture. The charges cover 41 different incidents, the court said.

Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo asked judges for the warrant in December, saying Hussein is among those who "bear greatest criminal responsibility" for atrocities in Sudan's Darfur region from August 2003 to March 2004.

Sudan does not recognize the court and refuses to hand over suspects including President Omar al-Bashir, who is accused of genocide in Darfur. His government denounced Moreno-Ocampo's request for an arrest warrant for Hussein in December.

At the time covered by the charges, Hussein was interior minister and the Sudan government's special representative in Darfur.

Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP today announced that a class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of CNOOC Limited American Depositary Shares (“ADSs”) during the period between January 27, 2011 and September 16, 2011.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from today. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiff’s counsel, Darren Robbins of Robbins Geller at 800/449-4900 or 619/231-1058, or via e-mail at djr@rgrdlaw.com. If you are a member of this class, you can view a copy of the complaint as filed or join this class action online at http://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases/cnooc/. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.

The complaint charges CNOOC and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. CNOOC is China’s biggest offshore state oil company. CNOOC co-owns the Penglai 19-3 (“PL 19-3”) oilfield in northern Bohai Bay with ConocoPhillips China Inc. (“ConocoPhillips”) as its operator.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business and financial results. As a result of defendants’ false statements, CNOOC’s ADSs traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, reaching a high of US$270.64 per ADS on April 4, 2011.

On June 4, 2011, an oil spill occurred at the PL 19-3 oilfield. A second spill occurred at the PL 19-3 oilfield on June 17, 2011. The complaint alleges that CNOOC and ConocoPhillips failed to disclose the spills when they occurred. However, despite CNOOC’s attempts to conceal the news, news of the spills began to leak into the market. On July 5, 2011, the State Oceanic Administration (“SOA”), China’s coastal regulator, officially acknowledged the spills had occurred. Thereafter, CNOOC downplayed the extent of the damage done by the oil spills and the impact it would have on CNOOC’s operations. On September 2, 2011, the SOA announced that it had ordered CNOOC and ConocoPhillips to immediately suspend all oil production at the PL 19-3 oilfield. On September 6, 2011, it was announced that CNOOC and ConocoPhillips would establish a Bohai Bay fund to address the environmental impact of the oil spills. On this news, CNOOC’s ADSs declined US$9.39 per ADS on September 6, 2011. Then, on September 18, 2011, it was announced that CNOOC and ConocoPhillips would establish a second Bohai Bay fund. On this news, CNOOC’s ADSs declined another US$6.85 per ADS on September 19, 2011.

According to the complaint, the true facts, which were known by the defendants but concealed from the investing public during the Class Period, were as follows: (a) the Company was not in compliance with environmental laws and regulations; (b) as news of the oil spills emerged, the Company concealed the extent and severity of the oil spills; (c) as news of the oil spills emerged, the Company downplayed its responsibility to effect the cleanup of the oil spills as it portrayed itself as being the “non-operator” of the oilfield; (d) the Company improperly accounted for its contingent liabilities in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles; and (e) based on the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company’s operations and its expected oil production.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of CNOOC ADSs during the Class Period (the “Class”). The plaintiff is represented by Robbins Geller, which has expertise in prosecuting investor class actions and extensive experience in actions involving financial fraud.

www.rgrdlaw.com