The boy, identified only as "J.L.," was "adjudicated delinquent" and sentenced to 18 months probation. He must continue the counseling and therapy he is already undergoing, the Middlesex County Prosecutor's Office said Thursday night.

Prosecutors had sought to have the youth serve a three-year sentence at a juvenile facility, the maximum allowed under law.

The boy was originally charged with aggravated manslaughter in the Aug. 23 death of 11-month-old Tahir Francis of Carteret, who died from head injuries after being kicked at the Beverly Bryant Family Day Care facility in Woodbridge Township.

It is still not clear what provoked the attack.

Beverly Bryant, 64, who operated the licensed facility out of her home, was not in the room when the infant was kicked. Authorities have said Bryant was distracted by a phone call and other home chores.

The center was ordered closed and Bryant was charged with child endangerment. She has pleaded not guilty.

Recently, on the American version of the TV show “The Office,” two of the main characters — Jim and Pam — confess to their co-workers that they’ve become romantically involved. In the spirit of openness and responsibility, the couple goes to the head of human resources, Toby, to ask whether they need to sign something attesting to their relationship. Toby (Paul Lieberstein), who also has a thing for Pam, tells them that won’t be necessary.

With Valentines Day upon us, we found ourselves asking: What would’ve happened if Jim and Pam were lawyers? Would they have insisted on signing a love contract to establish their rights and remedies in the event of a break-up? If Jim and Pam were both hard-working associates, would their relationship be more susceptible to trouble?

To work through these relationship issues — and the law that governs them — we caught up with Ashley Brightwell, a partner at Alston & Bird in Atlanta. Brightwell, who focuses on employment litigation, filled us in on the rise of love contracts, the phenomenon of lawyers who date lawyers and best practices for conducting a firm romance.

Hi Ashley. Thanks for chatting. So you’re a specialist on office romances. Talk about that a bit.

I do a lot of sexual harassment cases, mostly defending the company. Of sex harassment cases, I’d say a third stem from something that arguably began as a consensual relationship – either formal dating, or an affair — and then morphs into a bad break-up or something that’s no longer consensual. Or, just something as simple as inter-office flirtation where one party thought it was mutual, and the other party either never thought it was, or things progressed into it becoming unwelcome.

What are “love contracts”?

It used to be that many companies had strict prohibitions on office romances. Then they recognized that wasn’t going to work, and that no matter what the policies were, employees were going to get involved. That’s when the idea of a love contract came along. It’s a tool that employers use to protect themselves when an office romance goes sour. It’s a document that confirms that a relationship is voluntary and informs the parties of the company’s sexual harassment policies. It sets out a procedure if, at any point, the relationship goes south.

Let’s focus on law firms. We’ve heard a lot about the concept of “firm boyfriends” and “firm girlfriends.” Not romances, but the kinds of close relationships that develop between lawyers who spend more time with each other than they do with their families. Do a lot of law firm affairs begin like that?

I don’t have hard stats to back this up, but the number of affairs in law firms and romances that end up in marriage seem to be greater than in the general population. In large part, it’s because you’ve got a lot of people who are close in age, doing the same work, working alongside each other and putting in long hours. It’s inevitable, in those circumstances, that you’re going to have a lot of office romances.

What are the major pitfalls for lawyers who date lawyers? Take a partner dating an associate, for example.

I think when you’ve got a partner and an associate you’ve got two big issues. First is the fact that a partner can control the associate. Whether the relationship is going great or whether it goes south, the partner can really affect the person’s employment – in terms of the work they get, their reviews, and possibly even their salaries. The other issue is this: the perception among other associates and partners. For instance, if a female associate is getting great benefits because of a relationship it can result in hostile work environment claims from those outside the relationship.

Let’s try a hypothetical. I’m a sleep-deprived second-year associate who can’t find much time to socialize outside of work. One day I come running into your office, jump up and down on your couch, and confess that — on a firm-sponsored booze cruise — I fell in love with a summer associate. Advise me.

First you look and see what your firm’s policies say. If relationships are permissible in your organization, then there shouldn’t be a problem as far as HR or management are concerned. But I’d still advise informing someone higher up that it’s going on. And if that summer decides to become a lawyer at your firm, I’d take whatever steps I could to make sure you’re not working with that person. I’d avoid day-to-day interaction.

But I don’t need to fight my feelings, right?

Well, firms and companies are recognizing that if you have a policy against office romances, it’s just going to be broken. So they’re dealing with them in different ways – whether you call it a love contract or something less cheesy. So often I see things go bad, and then one person comes in and says it was never consensual to begin with. Typically, that person can produce a big stack of emails which look quite bad. But you can prevent a lot with a love contract in which the parties agree it’s voluntary.

James Michael McHaney of Washington, D.C., faces up to 10 years in prison after his felony conviction. He was fired from his job as a scheduler for Cantwell after his arrest last year. Earlier, he had worked for the 2004 presidential campaigns of Democrats Dick Gephardt and John Kerry.

Prosecutors say McHaney, 28, tried to arrange a sexual encounter with a 13-year-old boy last November. Police later found child pornography in his car and home.

He was initially charged with attempting to sexually exploit a minor, but pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of possession of child pornography. Prosecutors said he had more than 1,000 images of child pornography, as well as videos and DVDs portraying children as young as three engaged in sexual conduct.

McHaney's lawyer, Thomas Abbenante, called the case "a very tragic situation" for McHaney and his family. McHaney's parents were in court Thursday as U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan approved the plea agreement.

The parents declined to comment, as did Assistant U.S. Attorney Jean Sexton, who prosecuted the case.

Polk County, Fla., sheriff's officials said they were asked to speak with "the father of the shooting suspect" — Robert Kazmierczak of Lakeland, Fla.

The gunman is the younger Kazmierczak, a university official told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the identity has not been released by police.

The motive of the killer, who graduated from NIU in 2006, was still not known as the investigation unfolded Friday, officials said. The gunman also wounded 15 people in Thursday's attack, which sent panicked students fleeing for the exits.

"There is no note or threat that I know of," NIU President John Peters said on Friday ABC's "Good Morning America." "By all accounts that we can tell right now (he) was a very good student that the professors thought well of."

DeKalb County Coroner Dennis J. Miller released the identities of the four victims who died in his county: Daniel Parmenter, 20, of Westchester; Catalina Garcia, 20, of Cicero; Ryanne Mace, 19, of Carpentersville; and Julianna Gehant, 32, of Meridan.

Two other victims died after being transferred to hospitals in other counties, Miller said. Winnebago County Coroner Sue Fiduccia said a female victim died in her jurisdiction but has not been identified pending notification of family.

Witnesses said the gunman, dressed in black and wearing a stocking cap, emerged from behind a screen on the stage of 200-seat Cole Hall and opened fire just as the class was about to end around 3 p.m. Officials said 162 students were registered for the class but it was unknown how many were there Thursday.

Allyse Jerome, 19, a sophomore from Schaumburg, said the gunman burst through a stage door and pulled out a gun.

"Honestly, at first everyone thought it was a joke," Jerome said. Everyone hit the floor, she said. Then she got up and ran, but tripped. She said she felt like "an open target."

"He could've decided to get me," Jerome said. "I thought for sure he was gonna get me."

The shooter had been a graduate student in sociology at Northern Illinois as recently as spring 2007, but was not currently enrolled at the 25,000-student campus, Peters said. He also said the suspect had no record of police contact or an arrest record while attending Northern Illinois, about 65 miles west of Chicago.

Stephanie L. Seidman, a life science attorney with a doctorate in molecular biology and biochemistry, heads the group office along with attorney David A. Fisher. Associate attorneys in the office are Frank J. Miskiel, Cheryl A. Allaire, Gregory F. Brucia and Alidad Vakili. The office can be contacted at 858-509-7400.

The overall impact of the payout – placing some $100 billion mostly in the hands of middle- and lower-income taxpayers – should modestly boost the nation's economy in the second half of the year, economists agree. But it may only soften the blow of any recession, making it "shallower" than it might be without this spending.

The president sought this quick relief as "a shot in the arm" for an economy which the White House maintains is going through a "rough patch." The White House, while acknowledging that the growth of the economy is slowing, does not concede that a recession is coming – though the Bush administration is projecting near-record federal budget deficits this year and next, with the tax rebates adding to that deficit.

"Money will be going directly to American workers, family and individuals," Bush said earlier this week. "It's going to help deal with the uncertainties in this economy."

Congress quickly responded to the president's call for an initial package of $145-billion in tax relief for individuals and families as well as tax relief for businesses. With swift bipartisan approval, Congress gave the president a $168-billion measure that includes tax breaks aimed at encouraging business expansion and increases in the mortgage limits that federal lending agencies can support in the midst of a home-mortgage crisis.

"Many Americans are worried about their mortgages," Bush said today. "My administration is working to solve this problem."

The lion's share of the relief will come as tax rebates for eligible taxpayers, people earning at least $3,000 a year. The minimum payment will be $300 for an individual and $600 for a couple filing a joint tax return. Based on the amount of taxes that people pay, the rebate will be as much as $600 for an individual and $1,200 for a couple. In addition, rebates will add $300 for each child in a family eligible for tax credits.

The sliding scale is designed to offer the most money in checks to lower- and middle-income taxpayers, with the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reporting that a couple with two children with an income of $35,000 a year will see a tax rebate of $1,800 – the maximum for a couple with money added for the children.

And because that money will be going to people most likely to spend it, rather than save or invest it, economists agree that it should have its intended effect of pumping billions of dollars into an ailing economy.

"This puts money in the hands of people who will spend it," said Chad Stone, chief economist for the Center. "The more people are up against their credit card limits, the more likely they are to spend the rebates."

Combined with cuts which the Federal Reserve has made in interest rates this year, Stone says, the tax rebates should offer some modest help for the economy at a time when many are predicting a recession.

"On balance, it will provide some useful stimulus, on top of the stimulus that will come from the big rate cuts that the Fed had made," he said. "A lot of people will say it's too little to make a difference. Maybe, if that were the only thing going on that might be true. But it's not the only thing going on."

The Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, which Bush signed this afternoon in an East Room ceremony at the White House, could boost the nation's Gross Domestic Product by one-half to one-percent in the second half of the year, other economists say.

"Clearly it will have impact on the second half of this year," said Sung Won Sohn, an economist who teaches at California State University and served as chief economist for Wells Fargo Bank. "We think it could boost GDP at an annual rate of 1 percent during the second half of 2008. That is fairly significant.

"The rebate is structured in such a way that it aims at essentially low and moderate income folks," Sohn said. "They are suffering because of the high price of gasoline and the high price of food.