The Supreme Court will let two West Virginia residents revive a lawsuit against Bayer AG over its anti-cholesterol drug Baycol, which was withdrawn from the market in 2001 after reports of a severe and sometimes fatal muscle disorder.

The high court on Thursday unanimously agreed to let Kevin Smith and Shirley Sperlazza's class-action lawsuit against Bayer go forward.

The 8th U.S. Court of Appeals had thrown out their lawsuit out after a federal judge overseeing multistate litigation against Bayer refused to let other West Virginians file a similar class-action lawsuit against the corporation.

The high court said that decision was incorrect.

The second trial to result from a massive investigation into insider trading at hedge funds ended Monday with the conviction of a trio of Wall Street traders on charges they paid hefty bribes to coax confidential information out of shady lawyers.

A jury reached the verdict against stock trader Zvi Goffer and two others in federal court in Manhattan after deliberating five days since June 2. It came a month after the conviction of Raj Rajaratnam, the one-time billionaire who founded the Galleon Group of hedge funds and who was once Goffer's boss.

Goffer, his brother Emanuel and Michael Kimelman were convicted of conspiracy to break securities laws. The men were permitted to remain free on bail pending sentencing, set for the fall.

The defendants, who had insisted they based trades only on public information, remained calm during the verdict. Zvi Goffer's wife and mother left the courtroom in tears.

The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal from investment funds seeking repayment of their losses in a $3.7 billion Ponzi scheme operated by Minnesota businessman Thomas Petters.

The funds together lost $165 million and challenged a federal judge's order denying restitution to any of Petters' victims. Among other things, the court said the victims would have other ways of recouping some of their money.

The justices on Monday refused to disturb the ruling.

A federal law generally requires a court to order restitution as part of a defendant's sentence, but allows for some exceptions. The judge in this case said that restitution would be too complex, take too long and result in the payment of less than a penny for each dollar victims lost.

A Yemeni detainee ordered to be freed from Guantanamo Bay has to stay now that a U.S. appeals court has overturned his release.

The U.S Court of Appeals in Washington says circumstantial evidence of terrorist ties can be enough to keep a prisoner like Hussain Salem Mohammad Almerfedi at the U.S. naval prison in Cuba.

Almerfedi was captured in Iran after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and eventually transferred to U.S. authorities through Afghanistan. Government attorneys argue he was staying at an al-Qaida-affiliated guesthouse, based on the testimony of another Guantanamo detainee. Almerfedi denied it, and a lower court judge found the testimony against him unreliable and ordered him released.

But the appeals court said the judge erred in finding the testimony unreliable and found it was likely Almerfedi was part of al-Qaida.

The Michigan appeals court has overturned a Washtenaw County judge and said a young man who committed sexual misconduct at school must be on the state's sex-offender list.

Judge Darlene O'Brien said registration in the case was cruel punishment that violated the Michigan Constitution, but the appeals court disagreed.

A man identified in court papers as T.D. was 15 in 2006 when he was accused of putting a chokehold on a girl and exposing her breast while another boy tugged on her belt. T.D. was placed in a youth home and completed therapy.

AdvertisementHe was required to register when he turned 18. The appeals court says it's not punishment but a way to inform the public even if the risk of another offense is low.

A federal appeals court has affirmed a judge's decision to let stand Minnesota's law requiring the disclosure of corporate political donations, saying the state's rules are similar to laws upheld by the Supreme Court and the groups who want them blocked are unlikely to prevail.

In an opinion filed Monday, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed with claims that Minnesota's disclosure requirements effectively prohibit corporate independent expenditures and impose burdensome regulations that ban free speech.

"The burden on corporations appears light, and the reporting requirement greatly facilitates the government's informational interest in monitoring corporate independent expenditures," the appeals court found. The judges wrote that rather than banning contributions, the law provides a way to disclose certain information.

Minnesota law requires that in election years, businesses and independent groups must submit five reports and disclose large donations within 24 hours for the three weeks leading up to the primary and the last two weeks before the general election. In off years, one report is required. The registration requirement is triggered when businesses or independent funds spend more than $100. Penalties for violations can be up to $25,000.

One member of the three-judge panel disagreed with the majority in part, saying the state's reporting requirements chill political speech.