Nearly 150 years after Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant fought in northern Virginia, a conflict over the battlefield is taking shape in a courtroom.

The dispute involves whether a Walmart should be built near the Civil War site, and the case pits preservationists and some residents of a rural northern Virginia town against the world's largest retailer and local officials who approved the Walmart Supercenter.

Both sides are scheduled to make arguments before a judge Tuesday.

The proposed Walmart is located near the site of the Battle of the Wilderness, which is viewed by historians as a critical turning point in the war. An estimated 185,000 Union and Confederate troops fought over three days in 1864, and 30,000 were killed, injured or went missing. The war ended 11 months later.

The 143,000-square-foot space planned by the Bentonville, Ark., retailer would be outside the limits of the protected national park where the core battlefield is located. The company has stressed the store would be within an area already dotted with retail locations, and in an area zoned for commercial use.

The Orange County Board of Supervisors in August 2009 approved the special use permit Wal-Mart needed to build, but the National Trust for Historic Preservation and residents who live within three miles of the site challenged the board's decision.

A prominent lawyer for Boston-area clergy sex abuse victims on Wednesday released a new list of accused abusers, saying it was time to "end the secrecy."

The list includes previously undisclosed names of 19 Catholic priests, brothers and one deacon who attorney Mitchell Garabedian said were among those accused in the scores of cases his firm settled with the church for "tens of millions" of dollars.

None of the newly disclosed people on the list have been tried or convicted of a crime, and at least 16 of the 19 are dead, including all who were priests of the Boston Archdiocese.

Garabedian said he released the names to protect the public, help victims heal and end what he says is a culture of secrecy in the church that enabled abusers to get away with their crimes for years.

Garabedian said he grew tired of waiting for Boston Cardinal Sean O'Malley to release a similar list.

"We've been waiting for O'Malley to come forward," he said. "I thought it was his obligation to come forward, and we gave him time to come forward. ... It's time to end the secrecy."

The list included 117 names of those accused in cases settled by Garabedian's firm in roughly the last 15 years.

Verizon says it has filed a court challenge to new federal regulations that prohibit broadband providers from interfering with Internet traffic flowing over their networks.

A divided Federal Communications Commission adopted the "network neutrality" rules last month. Verizon Communications Inc. filed the challenge Thursday in federal appeals court in the District of Columbia, it says.

The new rules prohibit phone and cable companies from favoring or discriminating against Internet content and services that travel over their networks — including online calling services such as Skype, Internet video services such as Netflix and other applications that compete with their core businesses.

In its court filing, Verizon argues that the FCC overstepped its authority in adopting the regulations.

The new rules are also expected to be challenged by Republicans in Congress.

A federal lawsuit accuses a Pennsylvania school district of imposing excessive and illegal fines on truant children or their families, including one parent ordered to pay $27,000 and a 17-year-old student fined more than $12,000.

The suit against the Lebanon School District, filed Thursday in Harrisburg by the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia on behalf of four parents and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, targets the court-imposed fines it says were above the state's limit of $300 per violation.

The suit seeks a class-action declaration and the return of any illegal money that the south-central Pennsylvania district collected. It also asks the court to stop the district from trying to collect any fines that violate state law and remain unpaid.

Superintendent Marianne Bartley has denied any wrongdoing by the district and referred calls Thursday to a lawyer. The lawyer, Rebecca Young, said that some of the law center's information in its public statements is inaccurate, but that she had not seen a copy of the lawsuit and could not comment on it.

A federal judge has rejected a challenge to Iowa's judicial nominating and retention system.

U.S. District Court Judge Robert Pratt on Wednesday granted Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller's request to dismiss the lawsuit filed by four conservative activists who claimed the system gives too much power to attorneys who elect members of the state's Judicial Nominating Commission. That panel recommends judicial appointments to the governor.

The lawsuit was filed after voters ousted three state Supreme Court justices for their role in a decision that legalized same-sex marriage in Iowa.

Iowa voters approved the nominating and retention system in 1962 but an attorney for the activists who filed the lawsuit claims it gives too much power to seven commission members who are elected by licensed attorneys.

In his decision, Pratt says the argument is "fatally flawed" and does not demonstrate a constitutional violation.

A day after the state Supreme Court required an election for governor this year, lawmakers appeared divided Wednesday over whether candidates should be nominated by party conventions or a special primary.

Tuesday's decision mandating a 2011 vote cited a state law that calls for nominating conventions. But the opinion also noted that the Legislature could change that as long as a general election winner can take office by Nov. 15.

The deadline is set one year after Senate President Earl Ray Tomblin began serving as acting governor when fellow Democrat Joe Manchin resigned to join the U.S. Senate. Although the state constitution provides for that succession route, the unanimous ruling concluded that it also requires an "elected successor within one year of the date when the vacancy occurred."

That and other legal findings in the opinion have revived questions over Tomblin's decision to focus on the role of chief executive while setting aside his legislative duties. The agenda Tomblin hopes to pursue during the 60-day session could suffer as a result, some key lawmakers said.

While expressing support for Tomblin, Senate Judiciary Chairman Corey Palumbo said, "He knows that he's only guaranteed one session, where previously he thought he might be (acting as governor) for two sessions. He's automatically a lame duck, so to speak, so I think it may give him a little bit less juice."

The ruling has also stoked the debate over the new Senate office of acting president - created for when the actual president is acting as governor - and the election of Marshall County Democrat Jeff Kessler to that post.