Separately, an appeals court in New Jersey sharply reduced a verdict in another Vioxx case. The court ruled that the jury should not have been allowed to award punitive damages against Merck or to find that Merck had committed consumer fraud. Only compensatory damages of $4.5 million were permitted, the court said.

The rulings on Thursday leave lawyers for plaintiffs with just three victories, all with relatively small awards, in the nearly 20 Vioxx cases that have reached juries. Mark Lanier, a plaintiffs’ lawyer who was involved in both cases decided Thursday, criticized the decisions and promised appeals. But plaintiffs face an uphill battle.

Bruce Kuhlik, Merck’s general counsel, said the company was pleased with the rulings.

“Our faith in the judges and the fairness of the process has been well placed,” he said.

Thursday’s ruling may further discourage lawyers from pursuing lawsuits against drug makers. Already, plaintiffs’ lawyers are nervously awaiting a Supreme Court ruling in a case that will be heard this fall and could bar most lawsuits against companies for injuries said to be caused by prescription medicines approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

Earlier in the week the court convicted Vikas Yadav in the abduction and murder of Nitish Katara in 2002. His cousin, Vishal Yadav, was also convicted.

The prosecution said the defendants killed Katara because they did not approve of his relationship with Vikas Yadav's sister, Bharti. The court said Friday the case did not merit the death sentence under Indian law.

A lawyer representing the Katara family, Kamini Jaiswal, told the CNN-IBN news channel she was satisfied with the sentence, while Yadav's lawyer, K.N. Balgopal told reporters they would appeal the conviction.

Vikas Yadav's father, Dharam Pal Yadav, is a wealthy and powerful lawmaker from India's Uttar Pradesh state, notorious for strongmen who dominate state politics using money, power and harassment to further their interests.

The case was seen as a bellwether of the courts' ability and willingness to take on powerful figures who often use bribery and influence to escape punishment.

Katara, then 24, was last seen the night before he was killed, attending a wedding with Bharti. His badly charred body was found later.

In most parts of largely conservative India, romantic relationships without parental approval are frowned upon and even considered an affront to family honor.

"The definition of marriage predates recorded history," said New York State Catholic Conference Executive Director Richard E. Barnes. "No single politician or court or legislature should attempt to redefine the very building block of our society in a way that alters its entire meaning and purpose."

Paterson issued a memo earlier this month saying that gay New Yorkers who marry where it is legal will have the right to share family health care plans, receive tax breaks by filing jointly, enjoy stronger adoption rights and inherit property.

He cited a February ruling in a New York Appellate Division court in which the judges determined that there is no legal impediment in New York to the recognition of a same-sex marriage.

Earlier this month, the California Supreme Court ruled that same-sex marriage in the nation's most populous state is legal. The ruling overturned a voter-approved ban on gay marriage.

Instead, Roth, his two teenage children, his wife and mother spent three days in airports, went days without their luggage, were treated rudely by airline employees and were forced to spend $21,000 on unused hotel rooms in Argentina, replacement clothes, and other costs.

"Through its gross negligence, malfeasance and absolute incompetence, Mr. Roth holds Delta responsible for ruining his vacation," said the lawsuit, filed in New York state court.

Delta Air Lines Inc had no immediate comment. Roth said that he has been in touch with Delta about getting reimbursed, but was repeatedly rebuffed. He told Reuters on Wednesday filing the suit was a last resort.

After the initial flight from New York was delayed by more than two hours, the family was not allowed to board their connecting flight in Atlanta, Roth said.

A Delta employee "literally walked away chuckling that he had left them stranded," he said. After waiting in the airport for hours, Roth was told the next available flight would depart more than two weeks later.

And such unions might soon be recognized at the other end of the country in New York, where the governor has directed state agencies to do so.

California said it chose June 17 because the state Supreme Court has until the day before to decide whether to grant a stay of its May 15 ruling legalizing gay marriage.

Gay-rights advocates and some clerks initially thought couples would be able to wed as early as Saturday, June 14. The court's decisions typically take effect 30 days after they are made.

The guidelines from Janet McKee, chief of California's office of vital records, to the state's 58 county clerks also contained copies of new marriage forms that include lines for "Party A" and "Party B" instead of bride and groom. The gender-neutral nomenclature was developed in consultation with county clerks, according to the letter.

"Effective June 17, 2008, only the enclosed new forms may be issued for the issuance of marriage licenses in California," the directive reads.

A group opposed to gay marriage has asked the court to stay its decision until after the November election, when voters are likely to face a ballot initiative that would once again define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Passage of the initiative would overrule the Supreme Court.

Under the Supreme Court's regular rules of procedure, justices have until the end of the day June 16 to rule on the stay request, according to the memo sent by e-mail to county clerks. Lawyers involved in the marriage case have said previously the court could grant itself an extra 60 days to consider the stay.

It was the first time the state high court has taken such an action, and her colleagues could have suspended her or removed her from the bench.

Ziegler ruled in favor of West Bend Savings Bank in several cases she heard as a Washington County judge between 2001 and last year. The court said Ziegler's "serious and significant" offense diminished public confidence in the legal system.

The state's judicial code requires judges to withdraw from cases in which they have a significant financial interest that could raise questions about their impartiality.

Ziegler called her hearing of the cases an "inadvertent error."

"I appreciate that this matter is now concluded," she said in a statement. "I look forward to continuing to serve the people of Wisconsin."

Mike McCabe, director of the watchdog group Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, which filed the complaint, argued that suspension or removal from office would be more appropriate.

"The discipline will be seen by the public as nothing more than a slap on the wrist," McCabe said. "Clearly the court is operating under a cloud right now."

Ziegler, 44, began her 10-year term on the Supreme Court in August.