The British defense group since June has been the subject of a criminal investigation in the United States of possible anti-corruption law violations related to its activities in Saudi Arabia.

Britain's Serious Fraud Office announced in 2006 that it was halting an investigation into claims that BAE Systems set up a slush fund for some members of the Saudi royal family during the giant 1980s Al-Yamamah deal. Press reports said BAE paid two billion dollars in bribes to the prince with staggered payments, a furnished Airbus A340 and a honeymoon for his daughter.

BAE has not denied the payments and in September US shareholders saying they had been injured filed suit against BAE executives and Prince Bandar.

Plaintiffs, after learning Bandar might sell some of his US properties, asked authorities to ensure that profits from any such sales were not allowed to leave the country.

In a decision announced Tuesday Judge Rosemary Collyer, who is handling the case in a Washington federal court, granted their request. The prince can sell his properties as he likes but the product of any sale would remain in a US account in his name, she ordered.

First came the $211 billion in write-downs of subprime debt, now comes the legal bonanza. In the past four months, nearly 20 law firms have set up subprime practices comprising more than 500 attorneys, many of them in New York. Not since the savings and loan crisis two decades ago have so many law firms moved so fast to create a whole new discipline.

“It's a sea change,“ says Marvin Pickholz, the partner in charge of Duane Morris' month-old, 15-lawyer subprime practice group. “These problems are going to expand to such a dimension that it will consume vast amounts of lawyers' time.“

Among the first was powerhouse Greenberg Traurig, which has 1,750 lawyers. It began building what is now a 48-member group in August. Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo launched its 25-lawyer practice in December; Pepper Hamilton followed in February with its 70-member credit crisis response team. Many other firms, including Bryan Cave, are mulling plans for their own subprime groups.

At Bingham McCutchen, 65 partners make up a subprime practice that didn't exist two months ago. Such top firms often bill in the range of $600 to $800 an hour. Amy Kyle says she is already drawing additional lawyers from the 1,000-attorney firm and is open to hiring more legal talent.

“We'd be opportunistic,“ Ms. Kyle says.

At this point, firms seem to be running ahead of actual demand.

“A client told me that he got seven cold-calls last week from law firms offering their services in this area,“ says John Grossbart, partner at Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal and co-head of its 40-lawyer credit markets and subprime lending task force.

So far, much of the work has involved the investment houses that packaged and sold subprime debt. Law firms are being hired to sue or defend such companies as Citigroup, J.P. Morgan Chase, Merrill Lynch and Bear Stearns. The work will by necessity be spread to many firms, as the lawyers who advised banks in the creation of these instruments will face conflicts of interest and most likely be barred from participating.

Mr. Grossbart reports a rise in fraud actions as insurers and other institutional investors absorb huge losses from holdings in supposedly top-rated subprime debt. One of his clients, an insurance company, has been the target of six subprime-related lawsuits in as many months. “Frankly, that's a lot,“ Mr. Grossbart says.

A growing number of investigations launched by federal, state and local authorities have generated further demand. In recent weeks, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York has launched criminal probes of Bear Stearns and UBS; the Securities and Exchange Commission has begun formal inquiries into Merrill Lynch, UBS, Morgan Stanley and others; and the New York attorney general has subpoenaed Bear Stearns, Deutsche Bank, Morgan Stanley, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch.

Exxon Mobil has gone after the assets of state oil company Petroleos de Venezuela SA in U.S., British and Dutch courts as it challenges the nationalization of a multibillion dollar oil project by Chavez's government.

A British court has issued an injunction "freezing" as much as $12 billion in assets.

"If you end up freezing (Venezuelan assets) and it harms us, we're going to harm you," Chavez said during his weekly radio and television program, "Hello, President." "Do you know how? We aren't going to send oil to the United States. Take note, Mr. Bush, Mr. Danger."

Chavez has repeatedly threatened to cut off oil shipments to the United States, which is Venezuela's No. 1 client, if Washington tries to oust him. Chavez's warnings on Sunday appeared to extend that threat to attempts by oil companies to challenge his government's nationalization drive through lawsuits.

"I speak to the U.S. empire, because that's the master: continue and you will see that we won't sent one drop of oil to the empire of the United States," Chavez said Sunday.

"The outlaws of Exxon Mobil will never again rob us," Chavez said, accusing the Irving, Texas-based oil company of acting in concert with Washington.

A U.S. Embassy spokeswoman did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

Venezuelan Oil Minister Rafael Ramirez has argued that court orders won by Exxon Mobil have "no effect" on the state oil company PDVSA and are merely "transitory measures" while Venezuela presents its case in courts in New York and London.

Exxon Mobil is also taking its claims to international arbitration, disputing the terms it was granted under Chavez's nationalization last year of four heavy oil projects in the Orinoco River basin, one of the world's richest oil deposits.

Other major oil companies including U.S.-based Chevron Corp., France's Total, Britain's BP PLC, and Norway's StatoilHydro ASA have negotiated deals with Venezuela to continue on as minority partners in the Orinoco oil project.

The court overturned an April 2007 ruling by a lower court that forbade the 12 Muslims from returning to Christianity on the grounds that Islamic law would consider that apostasy.

There is no Egyptian law against converting from Islam to Christianity, but in this case tradition had taken precedent. Under a widespread interpretation of Islamic law, converting from Islam is apostasy and punishable by death — though the state has never ordered or carried out an execution on those grounds.

Judge Mohammed el-Husseini sidestepped the issue by saying the 12 should not be considered apostates since they were born Christian, said a judicial official on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.

The judge also ordered the Ministry of Interior to list converts' former and current religious status on identification cards, which the government body had previously refused to do.