Divorces are as common as plastic surgery in Hollywood, but the divorce trial between Frank and Jamie McCourt that begins Monday has a chance to be the most titillating drama in this city since Lindsay Lohan's late-night capers.
This trial could determine the fate of the Los Angeles Dodgers and, ultimately, who will own the storied franchise.

It's possible that once the 11-day trial is over, with legal fees estimated to approach $20 million, neither will be able to afford the franchise, forcing a sale. Commissioner Bud Selig says he won't talk about the trial until it concludes, but Thomas Ostertag, general counsel of Major League Baseball, is expected to testify.

The trial does not hinge on child custody issues, divvying up their seven homes, extramarital affairs, or excessive use of their in-home makeup and hair stylists.

This trial is solely about whether the Dodgers franchise and its assets belong solely to Frank McCourt, or whether Jamie is entitled to half of the franchise, valued between $750 million and $1.5 billion.

Utah's Supreme Court has rejected a petition from members of a southern Utah-based polygamous sect seeking a reversal of changes made to its communal land trust.

In a ruling issued Friday, justices say members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints waited too long to challenge the state's intervention in the United Effort Plan Trust.

Valued at $110 million, the trust holds the property in Hildale, Utah and Colorado City, Ariz., the twin border towns where most church members live.

Utah seized the trust in 2005 after allegations of mismanagement by church leaders. A court-appointed accountant has since converted the trust into a secular entity.

FLDS members consider state control of the UEP a violation of their religious rights.

A federal judge says the Nebraska Supreme Court should answer a legal question about whether a Nebraska city's ban on hiring and renting to illegal immigrants is allowed by state law.

U.S. District Judge Laurie Smith Camp ruled late Wednesday on briefs from parties in lawsuits filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska and the Mexican American Legal Defense & Educational Fund, also known as MALDEF. Those lawsuits challenging Fremont's ban have since been combined.

Smith Camp had asked for the briefs last month, saying she wasn't sure whether the lawsuit should be heard in federal or state court.

Lawyers have until Sept. 1 to craft the language of the question that Smith Camp will present to the Nebraska Supreme Court.

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor predicted Thursday that the nation's high court will be asked again to weigh issues of national security versus free speech because of the recently leaked classified war documents posted on the WikiLeaks website.

Sotomayor told high school and college students at the University of Denver that she couldn't answer a student question about the security questions and free speech because "that question is very likely to come before me."

The release of the WikiLeaks documents, which included names of Afghans working with American forces, has been blasted by the Pentagon. It said the publication of those documents put lives at risk, while WikiLeaks employees insisted the website provides a public service for whistleblowers.

Sotomayor said Thursday that the "incident, and others, are going to provoke legislation that's already being discussed in Congress, and so some of it is going to come up before (the Supreme Court)."

She added that the balance between national security and free speech is "a constant struggle in this society, between our security needs and our First Amendment rights, and one that has existed throughout our history."

Sotomayor compared the current question to the debate over allowing publication of the Pentagon Papers, a secret Pentagon study about the Vietnam War. The New York Times published those in 1971 after the Supreme Court declined to block their publication over the objections of the Pentagon.

A group that filed a lawsuit over documents related to a June appearance by Sarah Palin at California State University, Stanislaus is claiming victory in a judge's ruling.

The open-government group Californians Aware says Stanislaus County Superior Court Judge Roger Beauchesne decided Wednesday that the university must release Palin's contract.

The group says the judge also ordered the release of any documents related to the use of university property or services during her visit.

CalAware filed a lawsuit in April after the school refused to disclose documents related to Palin's appearance.

The university has said negotiations with Palin were handled by its nonprofit foundation, which is not subject to the California Public Records Act.

The university did not immediately respond to requests for comment Wednesday evening.

Southern California's Metrolink system and Connex Railroad filed court papers Wednesday accepting the maximum $200 million in liability for a 2008 head-on collision between a commuter train and a freight that killed 25 people and injured more than 100.

The sum is the maximum for a train accident under federal law, said Keith Millhouse, board chairman of the Southern California Regional Rail Authority.

"The rationale is this is the maximum that could be recovered in any event and will expeditiously get the maximum compensation to the victims and their families," Millhouse said.

Investigators believe the commuter train's engineer was texting when he ran a red light and collided head on with a Union Pacific freight train in the Chatsworth area of the San Fernando Valley on Sept. 12, 2008.

Engineer Robert Sanchez, who was among those killed, was provided by Connex.

The court, which has to approve the settlement, would distribute the fund to victims.

The filing noted that 109 lawsuits, almost all involving passengers, are pending in Los Angeles County Superior Court and asked that all passenger claims be consolidated into the federal proceeding.