Kaplan, along with 10 other executives from the online gambling industry were indicted by U.S. District Court in St. Louis on charges that the company took billions in illegal bets from U.S. residents. The company BetOnSports stopped taking bets from US citizens as a result of a civil settlement last November, and agreed to return the money back to the American bettors, something that has not happened as of yet. The criminal charges, however, are still pending.

The 48-year-old Gary Kaplan was arrested in March in the Dominican Republic, after fleeing the country to avoid prosecution.

A former Joliet Catholic Academy student pleaded guilty Monday to selling crack cocaine to undercover police officers in an investigation that netted 14 teens, including 8 pupils at the school.

David M. Caiafa, 18, of the 500 block of Northfield Drive faces up to 60 years in prison or as few as six years, if Will County Judge Daniel Rozak accepts the prosecution's sentencing recommendation. Rozak is scheduled to sentence Caiafa on July 25.

The charges stemmed from Operation After-School Special, a Joliet police probe focusing on the sale of cocaine and Ecstasy that initially targeted students at the Catholic school.

Caiafa told Rozak he continued to pursue his high school diploma after he was expelled from Joliet Catholic.

Caiafa said he takes anti-depressants and some medications, but Rozak determined the prescription drugs would not affect Caiafa's ability to understand the charges against him.

Caiafa pleaded guilty to selling, or helping to sell, one to four grams of cocaine on four dates in early 2006. Two of the charges cited the sales' proximity to a school. But Assistant State's Atty. Chris Regis amended them to eliminate reference to the location.

Outside the courtroom, defense attorney Frank Andreano said the change in charges, which eased the sentencing guidelines, made the plea bargain possible.

Regis said Caiafa's chances of entering the county's drug court treatment program are "less than zero."

Caiafa is the third teen to plead guilty to drug charges in connection with the investigation.

Last month, Benjamin J. Dilday, 18, of Joliet pleaded guilty to unlawful delivery of a controlled substance. He is awaiting sentencing. In March, Alexander Bulanda, 19, of Shorewood pleaded guilty to two counts of delivery of a controlled substance and was sentenced to 4 years.

Fowler was arrested after detectives used Department of Motor Vehicle records to trace broken headlight lenses found at the accident scene to his vehicle, said Nassau County police officer Thomas Blanchard.

Police said Nina Sharma, 49, was struck by the vehicle as she stood at the foot of the family driveway, waiting for her husband, Raj, to bring trash cans to the curb, before they took a late-night walk.

Homicide detectives said the impact threw or dragged her about 65 feet. She was pronounced dead at Nassau University Medical Center.

The couple, who have three children, own a clothing business in Hicksville.

The Supreme Court Monday turned down an appeal from an Iowa telecommunications company that claimed Qwest Communications International Inc. owed it money for wireless phone calls that Qwest connected to its network.

At issue in the case, which was brought by Iowa Network Services Inc., is whether federal regulators have the final say on telecom rates or whether local call rates can be set by state officials.

Lower federal courts ruled in Qwest's favor and gave Iowa's state utilities board a role in resolving the dispute. By declining to take the case, without comment, the Court let stand the lower court rulings in Qwest's favor, which will save Qwest tens of millions of dollars in charges and interest that INS had sought.

James Troup, Iowa Networks' attorney, said the rulings undermined the ability of the Federal Communications Commission to enforce uniform rates across the country and could also affect other federally regulated industries, such as electric and gas utilities and railroads.

The quarrel began in the late 1990s, when INS sought to bill Qwest for wireless telephone calls that Qwest transmitted to INS's networks, which INS then sent to local phone companies. The calls were originated by third-party wireless carriers, not Qwest.

INS argued that Qwest did not provide them with enough information to determine which wireless companies originated the call, making it impossible to bill firms for the use of their network. At that point, INS sought payment from Qwest, based on rates that had been approved by the FCC.

Qwest, though, had sought a ruling in 2000 from the Iowa Utilities Board, which said that since the calls in question are local, rather than long-distance, they would not be subject to the FCC-approved rates.

Iowa Network Services said in its petition to the Supreme Court that the board's ruling overrides federally approved rates that require telecom carriers to charge the same rates to all customers, INS said.

A federal district court and the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, however, agreed with much of the utility board's analysis. The 8th Circuit said that rather than nullifying the rates, the utilities board's ruling meant they didn't apply to local traffic.

The case is Iowa Network Services Inc. v. Qwest Corp., 06-1217.

Iowa Network Services owns a stake in Newton, Iowa-based Iowa Telecommunications Services Inc., whose shares dropped a penny to $21.88 in early trading. Qwest shares rose 9 cents to $9.86.

Also, in a rare move, three executives of Purdue Pharma — President Michael Friedman, top lawyer Howard Udell and former medical director Dr. Paul Goldenheim — pleaded guilty Thursday to misbranding charges, a criminal violation.

They agreed to pay a total of $34.5 million in fines.

The fines will be distributed to state and federal law enforcement agencies, the federal government, federal and state Medicaid programs, a Virginia prescription monitoring program and individuals who had sued the company.

The plea agreement settled a national case and came two days after the company agreed to pay $19.5 million to 26 states and the District of Columbia to settle complaints that it encouraged physicians to overprescribe OxyContin.

"With its OxyContin, Purdue unleashed a highly abusable, addictive, and potentially dangerous drug on an unsuspecting and unknowing public," U.S. Attorney John Brownlee said.

"For these misrepresentations and crimes, Purdue and its executives have been brought to justice."

Purdue spokesman James Heins objected to any suggestion of ties between the plea agreement and the abuse of OxyContin. "We promoted the medicine only to health care professionals, not to consumers," he said in a statement.

Purdue Pharma said it accepted responsibility for its employees' actions and has taken steps to ensure "similar events" do not occur again.

OxyContin is a powerful, long-acting narcotic that provides relief of serious pain for up to 12 hours. Initially, Purdue Pharma contended that OxyContin, because of its time-release formulation, posed a lower threat of abuse and addiction to patients than traditional, shorter acting painkillers like Percocet or Vicodin.

That claim became the lynchpin of the most aggressive marketing campaign ever undertaken by a pharmaceutical company for such a drug. Just a few years after its debut in 1996, annual sales hit $1 billion.

Purdue Pharma heavily promoted OxyContin to doctors who had little training in the treatment of serious pain or in recognizing signs of drug abuse in patients.

But both experienced drug abusers and novices, including teenagers, soon discovered that chewing an OxyContin tablet or crushing one and then snorting the powder or injecting it with a needle produced a high as powerful as heroin.

By 2000, several parts of the U.S. began to see skyrocketing rates of addiction and crime related to the drug's use.

In a proceeding Thursday morning in U.S. District Court, both Purdue Pharma and those executives acknowledged that the company fraudulently marketed OxyContin for six years as a drug that was less prone to abuse as well as one that also had fewer narcotic side effects.

Federal officials said that internal Purdue Pharma documents show that company officials recognized even before the drug was marketed that they would face stiff resistance from doctors concerned about OxyContin's potential to be abused.

As a result, company officials developed a fraudulent marketing campaign to promote OxyContin as a time-released drug less prone to such problems.

A Portsmouth law firm and a Portsmouth contracting firm are tangled in Supreme Court litigation after serving as each other's unhappy customers two years ago.

The high court heard oral arguments Wednesday in a Consumer Protection Act claim by the Becksted Associates construction firm against the Nadeau law firm for using alleged deceptive and coercive business practices against them.

That's just one of several lawsuits between the two companies in the past year.

Attorney J.P. Nadeau and his son, Justin Nadeau, an attorney and former Democratic Congressional candidate, won a directed verdict for the firm in Rockingham County Superior Court in 2006 dismissing the consumer protection charge. The Becksteds appealed to the Supreme Court.

Both sides agree William Becksted Sr. and his son, William Becksted Jr., were renovating the second floor of the Nadeau law firm into an apartment for Justin Nadeau. The Nadeau court brief says the Becksteds were still billing Justin for more than $39,000 after he had paid $166,000 for a project he had understood would cost no more than $100,000, and later would cost no more than $154,000.

Nadeau refused to pay the balance because he was disappointed with the cost overruns and the work he was getting. According to both sides, he sent the contractors a letter March 4, 2005, on law firm letterhead threatening litigation unless they stopped dunning him. The Becksteds hired a different lawyer and sued the Nadeau firm on March 28.

Amid these mounting tensions, J.P. Nadeau was still representing the Becksteds in two unrelated legal cases on behalf of the construction firm. The elder Nadeau had sent his client no bills between the summer of 2004 and that December. In January 2005 he finally gave them an invoice for $12,001.50. It had obvious arithmetic errors, which Becksted Sr. picked up on. The total should been around $5,000, based on the hours and hourly rate.

Becksted asked the New Hampshire Bar Association for help resolving the billing issue. The elder Nadeau found out about it, rechecked his time log, changed the billable hours slightly, and sent a corrected bill for $5,335. He soon sent a bill for another $3,234 in legal fees for the second case he was working on. Eventually the combined legal bill reached $15,000.

Attorney Philip Pettis argued the Consumer Protection case for the Becksteds. He told the high court it was improper for the Nadeau firm to keep representing them as lawyers. Pettis also noted the legal bills arrived only after the contracting dispute had flared up.

Justice Richard Galway asked why this case is any different from the average contract dispute. Pettis said the lawyers were using their position of relative power as unfair leverage. It's hard to change lawyers in the middle of litigation. He also called the incorrect billing "inflated and deceptive."

Chief Justice John Broderick said a billing error is a foolish way to intimidate someone.

"Why would you do that if you weren't innocent?" he asked.

Pettis agreed that might not have been the best tactic.

Broderick grilled attorney Anna Barbara Hantz, the lawyer for the Nadeaus, the same way.

"You're working on my house," Broderick said. "I'm representing you in a legal case. I'm trying to use the bills you owe me to get you to drop claims against me over my house. We now have a personal dispute that's not going away. Does that bother you?"

Hantz said it certainly would.

"But the Consumer Protection Act doesn't have a different standard for lawyers," she added.