Bradley's lawyer quit before the trial, and a Sonoma County judge appointed a replacement in a hearing from which Bradley and her chosen lawyer were excluded. When Bradley sought to dismiss the new lawyer because of conflicts, Superior Court Judge Knoel Owen refused, saying the trial had already been delayed by almost two years and it wasn't clear Bradley could pay for her own lawyer.

In Wednesday's 9-2 ruling granting Bradley a new trial, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said nearly all the pretrial delays were the results of judges' decisions, not Bradley's.

Noting that Bradley's trial lawyer disagreed with her on a possible plea agreement and on whether she should testify, the court said the trial judge's decision had created an adversary relationship between lawyer and client.

Defense lawyer Dennis Riordan praised the ruling and said a new trial could result in a lesser conviction, for second-degree murder or manslaughter. Deputy Attorney General Gregory Ott, who represented the prosecution, said the court disregarded a federal law that requires federal judges to defer to state court rulings unless they are clearly wrong.

The lawyers' payments, which when proposed had attracted criticism from some institutional investors as being too hefty, will be drawn from the settlement fund.

"In summary, I find that the settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate," U.S. District Judge Paul Barbadoro wrote in the ruling.

Tyco agreed in May to pay $2.975 billion to settle several long-running class-action lawsuits. Another defendant, former Tyco auditor PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, said in July it would pay $225 million to resolve the litigation.

Kozlowski and former Tyco finance chief Mark Swartz were found guilty in June 2005 of stealing millions from the conglomerate, a case that became infamous amid revelations that Kozlowski had used company funds to pay for a $15,000 umbrella stand and a $6,000 shower curtain.

Kozlowski and Swartz are now serving sentences of up to 25 years apiece in New York state prison.

Plaintiffs in the shareholder lawsuit contended that from December 1999 through June 2002, Tyco and others misrepresented the value of acquisitions and misled investors about Tyco's financial health. The settlements were reached before the case ever went to trial. 

Rothstein suffered severe internal injuries when he skied into the wall at Snowbird in February 2003. Rothstein sued, claiming negligence, but a state District Court ruled in favor of Snowbird, citing the releases Rothstein signed.

The Supreme Court's 3-2 decision Tuesday restores Rothstein's lawsuit and clarifies state law.

"What it will do is to encourage ski resorts to be more careful in their operations," said Jesse Trentadue, a lawyer representing Rothstein.

Snowbird attorneys Gordon Strachan and Kevin Simon did not immediately return a message seeking comment. Peter Rietz, a Colorado lawyer who is special counsel to the National Ski Areas Association, said the ruling applies only to Utah resorts.

Snowbird maintained Rothstein skied off a connecting trail to an area that was marked off by rope. But the rope had a gap, which Rothstein mistook for an entrance to an open trail. The wall Rothstein hit had a light covering of snow and couldn't be seen. Rothstein survived broken ribs, a kidney injury, liver damage and a collapsed lung.

Snowbird won the earlier ruling on two releases Rothstein had signed, assuming all risks and specifically mentioning cases "including the negligence of Snowbird, its employees and agents."

But the Supreme Court decided that the releases go against a state law, which was written to protect resorts by keeping liability insurance rates affordable.

Resorts are covered by the state's Inherent Risks of Skiing Act, saying skiers assume some risks every time they swoosh down a steep mountainside or trail lined with trees.

The law is designed to keep insurance rates affordable for the resorts, not shield them from liability all together. Resorts are responsible to insure themselves non-inherent risks, the high court said.

The releases Rothstein signed for Snowbird "are contrary to the public policy of this state and are, therefore, unenforceable," the ruling said.

Associate Chief Justice Michael Wilkins, who cast one of the two dissenting votes, noted that nothing in the state law says ski resorts can't shield themselves from lawsuits for non-inherent risks.

"In fact, the text is silent about whether an individual may or may not sue a ski area operator on some other basis," Wilkins wrote.

Speaking from Dillon, Colo., Rietz said there are trade-offs when a skier gets a season pass.

"Part of the consideration when you get a discounted pass is you have to sign a waiver that provides some additional protection for the resort," he said. "If you don't want to release liability you can buy a day ticket."

Italian judges forbade a couple from naming their son Friday, saying it would bring the child shame and ridicule to be named after the character in "Robinson Crusoe."

"They thought that it recalled the figure of a savage, thus creating a sense of inferiority and failing to guarantee the boy the necessary decorum," the couple's lawyer, Paola Rossi, said Wednesday.

Mara and Roberto Germano, whose son was born on Sept. 3, 2006, had the boy named and baptized Venerdi, Italian for Friday.

Even though the boy was not born on a Friday — it was Sunday — his parents liked the name, said Rossi.

"They wanted an unusual name, something original, and it did not seem like a shameful name," Rossi said in a telephone interview. "We think it calls to mind the day of the week rather than the novel's character."

Since City Hall officials are obliged by law to report odd names, the matter ended up before judges in Genoa, the northern Italian city where the couple live.

Last month, an appeals court stated that Friday falls into the category of the "ridiculous or shameful" names that are barred by law, because it recalled the native servant in Daniel Defoe's novel.

The judges wrote that naming somebody Friday would bar him from "serene interpersonal relationships" and would turn the boy into the "laughing stock of his group," according to a report in La Repubblica this week.

According to the daily, the judges also said that, as a day of the week, Friday raises a sentiment of sadness and penitence, when not being associated with bad luck outright.

Rossi said the court, which upheld a previous ruling in June, also ordered the boy to be named Gregorio after the saint on whose day he was born.

The couple are considering appealing the decision to Italy's highest court, she said.