Slapping a teenager or taking money from her paycheck to pay family bills is hardly admirable, but doesn't constitute child neglect or abuse, the state Supreme Court ruled today.

In a 7-0 decision, the court found the state Division of Youth and Family Services lacked sufficient evidence to remove a teenager from her father and stepmother's home in 2008, and dropped the abuse and neglect judgment against her stepmother.

"The parental decisions made within this family unit may not have been exemplars of stellar parenting, but they did not rise to the level of Title Nine violations," wrote Justice Jaynee LaVecchia, referring to New Jersey's child abuse laws.

The girl was removed from the home after her grandfather reported the parents for taking her earnings from her part-time job and "slapping her around." A DYFS worker also found the home was without heat and authorized an emergency removal.

The father told a DYFS representative that his wife had slapped his daughter once two years earlier, and that part of his daughter's earnings went to the cable bill. The couple said their central heating was broken, and they were using space heaters. The family members were not named the decision.

The Illinois Supreme Court has refused to review a lower court decision in favor of Chicago's acquisition of a cemetery that's in the path of a planned runway in the $15 billion O'Hare International Airport Modernization Program.

Spokesman Joseph Tybor says the court's decision means the appellate court decision stands.

Earlier this month, Chicago Aviation Commissioner Rosemarie Andolino said the city planned to resume unearthing bodies at the cemetery as soon as the Supreme Court made a decision in its favor.

Plans call for the 900 buried at St. Johannes Cemetery in Bensenville to be relocated.

Attorney Joseph Karaganis, who represents cemetery owner St. John's United Church of Christ, says Wednesday's decision is technically "not the end of the line" for the issue, but is pretty close to it.

A 59-year-old New York man has pleaded guilty to slashing his wife's neck during an attack that ended with him being dragged underneath her car.

The Democrat and Chronicle of Rochester reports that John Gilbert pleaded guilty Wednesday in Ontario County Court to assault, aggravated criminal contempt and endangering the welfare of a child.

Gilbert was facing a February trial on attempted murder charges when a plea agreement was reached with prosecutors.

Authorities say Gilbert attacked Jennifer Gilbert when she went to his home in Geneva in 2009 to pick up her three children. She wasn't badly hurt.

Police said when she tried to escape, her estranged husband clung to the car, then fell underneath it and was dragged for 40 feet, suffering serious injuries.

Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange has told operators of closed electronic bingo casinos that he has no problem with going to court to determine if their machines are legal.

Operators of casinos closed by former Gov. Bob Riley's gambling task force have said they would like to go to court to prove that their machines are legal according to local constitutional amendments. But the courts have ruled they can't do it unless machines are seized.

The new attorney general said Wednesday he has told the casino operators he would be willing to confiscate some machines and file charges saying the machines were operated illegally. Strange said he could confiscate the machines in a way that they would stay in place at the casino, but could not be operated.

Strange said the machines could be confiscated quietly and would not involve pre-dawn raids by law enforcement officers similar to those attempted by Riley's task force.

He said the result would be a ruling from a judge on the legality of the machines that could be appealed by either side to the Alabama Supreme Court.

Chief Deputy Attorney General Richard Allen said the proposal has been made to casino operators and the AG's office is waiting to get an answer.

An attorney for the closed Country Crossing casino in Dothan said the facility's operators appreciate that Strange is willing to discuss finding a way to get the issue into court.

"We are open to any discussion that might bring this to a resolution short of the midnight Gestapo-type raids," said Doug Jones, an attorney for Country Crossing.

President Barack Obama's call to lower corporate tax rates is popular among business leaders and lawmakers from both parties. That support, however, won't be easy to maintain if the president ever gets specific about how to pay for the lower taxes.

Obama said in his State of the Union address that he wants to close corporate tax loopholes and use the additional revenue to lower corporate tax rates for the first time in 25 years — without adding to the budget deficit. The top corporate tax rate is 35 percent, among the highest in the industrialized world. However, federal tax laws are filled with so many credits, deductions and exemptions that few companies pay the top rate.

"Over the years, a parade of lobbyists has rigged the tax code to benefit particular companies and industries," Obama said in his speech Tuesday night. "Those with accountants or lawyers to work the system can end up paying no taxes at all. But all the rest are hit with one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. It makes no sense. It has to change."

Obama's goal is to create a simpler tax code that encourages sound business decisions rather than aggressive tax planning. As it stands now, businesses and individuals spend more than 6 billion hours a year working to comply with the tax code, according to the National Taxpayer Advocate, an independent watchdog within the Internal Revenue Service.

It will take a sustained effort by the administration, however, to forge a consensus with lawmakers on reshuffling corporate taxes in a way that is sure to create winners and losers. The "loopholes" Obama talked about in his speech are regarded as cherished, well-deserved tax breaks by many lawmakers in both parties.

With Chicago election officials printing mayoral ballots that include Rahm Emanuel's name, it's up to the Illinois Supreme Court to decide whether voters will actually see him among their choices during next month's election.

The state's highest court agreed Tuesday to decide whether Emanuel can run for mayor, and the justices ordered election officials not to print any ballots without his name until they can rule.

The action bought valuable time for the former White House chief of staff, who a day earlier was kicked off the ballot by an appeals court because he didn't live in the city for a year before the Feb. 22 election. The state Supreme Court said it would expedite the matter but gave no specific time frame.

With less than a week to go before the first early ballots are cast, a number of potential scenarios loomed, including the possibility that Emanuel would have to resort to a write-in campaign or wage a desperate bid to take the matter to federal court.

Emanuel, who had been the heavy favorite to lead the nation's third-largest city, pressed ahead with confidence and said he was doubling his campaign by adding more stops to his already busy schedule.