The Indiana Supreme Court will decide whether southern Indiana officials should be held liable for a dog that bit a 6-year-old Evansville boy.

The court heard oral arguments in the case Wednesday.

Misty Davis sued the city of Evansville on behalf of her son, Shawn. Her suit argues that animal control officials knew that the Rottweiler that attacked him was dangerous but failed to sanction its owner under the city's dangerous animal ordinance, making the attack possible

A trial judge agreed with officials' argument that they were immune, but the state Court of Appeals in August voted 2-1 to reverse that ruling.

A former Florida attorney general and congressman said Monday that Missouri should limit the fees a private law firm can collect when it handles some cases for the state attorney general.

Republican Bill McCollum came to Jefferson City to testify before a Missouri Senate panel about legislation restricting the attorney general's ability to use outside lawyers on a contingency basis. The measure would also limit outside lawyers' fees in such cases and make their expense reports a public record.

Lawyers who are hired on a contingency basis receive a portion of a judgment made in favor of their client instead of - or sometimes in addition to - their hourly rate.

McCollum supported similar legislation in Florida because of the large fees that private attorneys there collected for their work in a $205 billion settlement the tobacco industry reached with 46 states in 1998. McCollum said Florida attorneys had collected about $3.4 billion in fees from the settlement - a sum he termed "outrageous."

"The governor and the people of Florida felt that this was a big, huge rip-off," he said. "There needs to be some protections and transparencies for when an attorney general uses this outside counsel."

Private attorneys who negotiated Missouri's tobacco settlement were paid $111 million. An attempt to reduce that figure failed in the state Supreme Court in 2003.

McCollum said Missouri could have won a large award through the tobacco settlement even without agreeing to give the private attorneys a large contingency fee.

Sen. Jolie Justus, D-Kansas City, said the attorney general's office had told her staff that the state had not hired outside lawyers on a contingency basis since the tobacco settlement. The state does routinely hire outside counsel for specialized cases, such as those involving Medicaid, but it pays them an hourly rate because the state is the defendant in those cases.

The Supreme Court has overturned a $14 million judgment given to a former death row inmate who accused New Orleans prosecutors of withholding evidence in order to help convict him of murder.

John Thompson had successfully sued the district attorney's office, arguing that former District Attorney Harry Connick showed deliberate indifference by not providing adequate training for assistant district attorneys.

Prosecutors did not turn over a crime lab report that indicated Thompson's blood type did not match the perpetrator in an attempted robbery in 1985. Prosecutors used that conviction to get the death penalty in another case Thompson was involved in.

Prosecutors normally have immunity for their actions while working, but Thompson had convinced a jury there had not been enough training on evidence handling. The court overturned that decision.

The Supreme Court is questioning a massive sex discrimination lawsuit on behalf of at least 500,000 women claiming that Wal-Mart favors men over women in pay and promotions.

The justices suggested that they are troubled by lower court decisions allowing the class-action lawsuit to proceed against the world's largest retailer.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, often a key vote on the high court, said he is unsure "what the unlawful policy is" that Wal-Mart engaged in to deprive women of pay increases and promotions comparable to men.

Billions of dollars are at stake in the case. Class actions create pressure on businesses to settle claims and create the potential for large judgments.

Wal-Mart denies it discriminates against its female employees.

A western Colorado family has filed a lawsuit saying that negligence by oil and gas drilling companies contaminated their drinking water and air and forced them from their home.

Beth and Bill Strudley and their sons, ages 11 and 13, moved in 2005 outside Silt but said they started living in Glenwood Springs this year to escape the effects of work by Antero Resources Corp. and subcontractors Frontier Drilling and Calfrac Well Services. The Strudleys still own the home outside Silt. Their lawsuit in Denver District Court accuses all three firms of negligence.

Denver-based Antero said it doesn't comment on pending litigation. Calfrac had no immediate comment, and a phone message for Frontier Drilling wasn't returned.

The Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, which regulates oil and gas development, has said it has found no scientific data that the water quality in the family's well was contaminated by drilling, but the Strudleys said they have conducted their own tests. They and their lawyers declined to disclose the results Thursday, saying only that they were "abnormal."

The family said they started getting sick after drilling started within a mile of their home in August. They wouldn't discuss details at a news conference Thursday, but Beth Strudley, 46, told The Post Independent of Glenwood Springs in January that they have suffered rashes and nosebleeds.

Wisconsin Republicans insist that the anti-union law that sparked weeks of protests at the state Capitol and that is being challenged in court takes effect Saturday because a state office decided to post it online. The head of the office that posted it and a court order temporarily blocking the law's implementation suggest otherwise.

The saga surrounding Gov. Scott Walker's push to strip most public employees of nearly all of their collective bargaining rights took another unexpected, and confusing, turn Friday when the Legislative Reference Bureau posted the law online, despite a court order blocking its publication while challenges to the law are considered.

That order specifically bars Secretary of State Doug La Follette from publishing the law, which is the last step before a law takes effect. This is typically done by the Reference Bureau within 10 working days after it's signed by the governor, on a date set by the secretary of state. Walker signed the collective bargaining measure March 11 and La Follette initially designated Friday as the date of publication. But after the restraining order was issued, La Follette notified the Reference Bureau that he was rescinding that publication date.

La Follette said Friday that he didn't know what the law's online publication meant, and that he's not taking any action because of the court order.

Ultimately, the state Supreme Court will likely decide the law's fate. A state appeals court earlier in the week asked the Supreme Court to take up one of several lawsuits challenging its approval.