A federal appeals court says parents cannot sue school districts to force them to comply with the No Child Left Behind Act.

The ruling Thursday comes in a case filed against the low-performing Newark Public Schools in New Jersey.

Parents say the district failed to notify them of the right to transfer out of failing schools and of other provisions required under the law.

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals says enforcement of the act is up to state educational agencies.

ACLU attorney Scott Michelman says the decision is not in the best interests of parents or children. A school district lawyer did not return calls.

An Arizona appeals court panel ruled Friday that the Havasupai Indian tribe can proceed with a lawsuit that claims university researchers misused blood samples taken from tribal members.

Overturning a judge's 2007 dismissal of the case, a split Arizona Court of Appeals panel said the Havasupai and other plaintiffs had provided enough information to go to trial or at least enough to go forward in trial court pending further proceedings.

The northern Arizona tribe, whose isolated village lies deep in a gorge off the Grand Canyon, claims Arizona State University and University of Arizona researchers misused blood samples taken from more than 200 tribal members for diabetes research in the 1990s by also using it for research into schizophrenia, inbreeding and ancient population migration.

The tribe claims the additional research was conducted without its permission and constituted an invasion of privacy. As a result, the tribe says, some members now fear seeking medical attention.

Attorneys for the university system and individual researchers have argued that tribal members supplied the blood samples voluntarily and that there is legitimate public interest in data that can advance disease research.

• Havasupai Tribe: http://www.havasupaitribe.com/
• Arizona Court of Appeals Division One: http://www.cofad1.state.az.us

 With its easily accessible main office in New Haven and convenient satellites in Stamford and Bridgeport, Stratton Faxon Law Firm represents plaintiffs who have suffered personal injury and loss in the most catastrophic ways.

Founded by dedicated trial lawyers Michael A. Stratton and Joel T. Faxon, the team of strong litigators and client champions at Stratton Faxon represent plaintiffs who have been truly wronged, those who have suffered personal injury and loss in the most catastrophic manner. Experienced in the courtroom and recognized by their peers, Stratton Faxon has demonstrated a sincere commitment to taking on the most serious and difficult cases, and bringing them before juries. In 2006, Stratton Faxon won the highest personal injury verdict in Connecticut Federal Court history.

The firm currently represents over 250 families have suffered injury due to the pharmacological agents Vioxx, Bextra, and Celebrex – defective Cox-2 inhibitor drugs used to treat arthritis pain. This class of drugs has been shown to have dangerous side effects and can be linked to serious health problems such as excessive clotting, heart attack and stroke.

Stratton Faxon is currently accepting claims involving the late Dr. George Reardon, a rogue endocrinologist affiliated for more than three decades with Saint Francis Hospital, New England’s largest Catholic hospital, and suspected of victimizing dozens, and perhaps hundreds, of Connecticut children during the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, prior to his death in 1998. Many unsuspecting children, primarily young boys, were lured into bogus human growth studies that in some cases may have devolved into full-blown illicit sexual liaisons.

In addition to catastrophic personal injury, medical malpractice, and product liability, Stratton Faxon handles a limited number of cases in the following practice areas: serious auto & truck collisions; birth injury/trauma; wrongful death; spinal cord and brain injury; nursing home abuse/neglect; pharmaceutical liability; aviation disasters; legal malpractice; vaccine injury; industrial or construction site accidents; and stock market losses. Asserts co-founder Michael A. Stratton, “The average person needs to know that without hard-working, authentic trial lawyers, it would simply be a world of might makes right.”

A jury on Wednesday was unable to reach a verdict on the main conspiracy charge and instead convicted a Missouri woman of three minor offenses for her role in an Internet hoax that apparently drove a 13-year-old girl to suicide.

The Los Angeles federal court jury rejected felony charges of accessing a computer without authorization to inflict emotional distress on young Megan Meier.

However, the jury found defendant Lori Drew guilty of three counts of the lesser offense of accessing a computer without authorization. Each count is punishable by up to one year in prison and a $100,000 fine.

The jurors could not reach a verdict on a conspiracy count, and U.S. District Court Judge George Wu declared a mistrial on the charge. It was not known if she would be retried.

She could have been sentenced to a total of 20 years in prison if convicted of the four original counts.

Prosecutors said Drew violated the MySpace terms of service by conspiring with her young daughter and a business assistant to create a fictitious profile of a teen boy on the MySpace social networking site to harass Megan.

Megan, who had been treated for depression, hanged herself with a belt in her bedroom closet in 2006 after receiving a message saying the world would be better without her.

Mr. Ahlstrom represents clients in complex litigation in both federal and state courts. Prior to joining Hodgson Russ, Mr. Ahlstrom was an associate at a large law firm in Washington, D.C. His experiences include working for national and regional firms in the areas of securities fraud and accounting malpractice, as well as a variety of employment matters involving discrimination, retaliation, and whistleblowers. Mr. Ahlstrom also served as a law clerk to the Hon. Frederick J. Scullin, Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York.

Hodgson Russ attorneys facilitate the U.S. legal aspects of transactions around the world. We practice in virtually every substantive area of law and generally use multidisciplinary work teams to serve the specific, often complex, needs of our clients, which include public and privately held businesses, governmental entities, nonprofit institutions, and individuals. Hodgson Russ has offices in New York City, Albany, Buffalo, and Johnstown, New York; Boca Raton and Palm Beach, Florida; and Toronto, Ontario.

Singapore's High Court ruled the Wall Street Journal Asia in contempt of court for publishing two editorials and a letter to the editor that the government says damaged the reputation of the country's judicial system.

The court also fined the newspaper 25,000 Singapore dollars ($16,400).

Justice Tay Yong Kwang ruled Tuesday against the newspaper and two of its editors, three weeks after Attorney General Walter Woon argued the editorials published in June and July questioned the judiciary's independence from Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and the ruling People's Action Party. Not meting out punishment in this case would undermine the country's rule of law, the court said.

The letter to the editor was written by Chee Soon Juan, head of the opposition Singapore Democratic Party.

The editorials and the letter "contained insinuations of bias, lack of impartiality and lack of independence and implied that the judiciary is subservient to Mr. Lee and/or the PAP and is a tool for silencing political dissent," Tay wrote in the ruling.

"There can be no doubt that allegations of the nature mentioned above would immediately cast doubts on the judiciary in Singapore and undermine public confidence."

The newspaper's lawyer, Philip Jeyaretnam, was not immediately available for comment. The Wall Street Journal is published by Dow Jones & Co., a part of News Corp.

Singapore's leaders have sued journalists and political opponents several times in past years for alleged defamation. They have won lawsuits and damages against Bloomberg, the Economist and the International Herald Tribune.

Human Rights Watch called on Singapore last month to stop using defamation lawsuits to stifle criticism and bankrupt opposition politicians, citing the High Court's decision in October to order Chee and his party to pay $416,000 to Lee and his father, Lee Kuan Yew, in damages stemming from a 2006 defamation case.

Government leaders justify suing political opponents, saying it is necessary to defend their personal and professional reputations since it bears on their ability to govern properly and command respect from Singaporeans.