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.

The Stamford, Connecticut-based company and three executives admitted that they falsely claimed OxyContin was less addictive, less subject to abuse, and less likely to cause withdrawal symptoms than rival pain medications.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration had not approved those claims.

"Purdue (Frederick) put its desire to sell OxyContin above the interests of the public," Assistant Attorney General Peter Keisler said in a statement. "Purdue abused the drug approval process which relies on drug manufacturers to be forthright in reporting clinical data and, instead, misled physicians about the addiction and withdrawal issues involved with OxyContin."

OxyContin, prescribed for patients with moderate to severe pain, is now regulated as a controlled substance with the same addictive potential as morphine.

Of the $634.5 million settlement, $276 million will be forfeited to the United States, $160 million allocated to federal and state government agencies to resolve false claims for government healthcare programs and $130 million will go to resolving private civil claims.

Additional amounts will be paid to the Virginia Attorney General's Medicaid Fraud Control Unit and the Virginia Prescription Monitoring program.

The guilty pleas follow a $19.5 million settlement the related manufacturer of OxyContin, Purdue Pharma LP, made with 26 states and the District of Columbia this week over allegations it failed to adequately disclose abuse risks posed by the powerful narcotic.

Purdue Pharma had also settled a civil case brought by its insurer in June for $200 million.

Randi Collotta, who worked for Morgan Stanley's compliance division in New York, admitted to giving information about upcoming mergers and acquisitions to her husband, who is in private practice.

Christopher Collotta told the court he shared some of the insider information with Florida broker Marc Jurman, who agreed to share part of his profits with the Collottas and also passed the information along to others.

The couple sat at opposite ends of a long table at the hearing, flanked by their lawyers and occasionally glancing at each other. Randi Collotta wept softly as she read a statement admitting her guilt.

"Randi Collotta accepted responsibility for what she did, and today she took a significant step in putting this behind her," her lawyer Kenneth Breen said after the hearing.

The Bayport, New York couple were among 13 people charged criminally in March with participating in the scheme. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed separate, civil charges against 11 people, including the Collottas.

Six of the 13 defendants, including Jurman, have pleaded guilty.

Christopher Collotta's lawyers released a statement after the hearing saying, "Mr. Collotta recognizes that these are serious offenses, deeply regrets his actions in participating in these offenses, and realizes that he will have to live with the consequences of his actions for the rest of his life."

Both defendants agreed to forfeit $9,000 in profits they made through the scheme. Randi Collotta agreed not to appeal a sentence of 18 months or less in prison, while her husband agreed not to appeal a sentence of 16 months or less, Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew Fish said. Both face a maximum 25 year prison term.

The couple were released until sentencing, scheduled for Sept. 7. They have been free on $250,000 bond each.

Katona, 56, was charged in January with siphoning money from an investment pool belonging to the rural Lake Huron county where he was treasurer - an elected post - from 1993 until his dismissal last year.

State police said he authorized wire transfers totaling $186,500 last summer to overseas accounts linked to the well-known Nigerian scam. They suspect he lost more than $1.2 million in county funds altogether - plus $72,500 of his own money, despite a warning from his bank that he might be getting swindled.

"I'm sure if you were to ask Mr. Katona how did this happen, he'd just shake his head and say, 'I don't know how I let it happen, but I did,"' White said in a telephone interview.

Variations of the scheme have been around for years. They begin with unsolicited letters - or, increasingly, e-mails - seeking help in transferring millions of dollars from Africa to overseas accounts.

The recipients are typically offered a generous share of the money if they pay what they are told are upfront costs such as taxes, fees and bribes. Those who play along can lose large sums before realizing they've been fleeced.

Katona entered his pleas during a routine hearing ahead of a trial that was to begin later this month.

The Michigan attorney general's office, which is prosecuting the case, offered no plea bargain. White said Katona pleaded guilty to all charges to avoid wasting the court's time and money "proving what is very apparent."

Matt Frendewey, spokesman for Attorney General Mike Cox, said Katona's decision was "a testament of the strength of the case the state had against him."

Sentencing was scheduled for June 12. A count of forgery is punishable by up to 14 years in prison, while the maximum is 10 years for embezzlement and five years for attempted embezzlement.

"If he gets a long enough sentence, I think the county can start healing," said Kevin Boyat, chairman of the Alcona board of commissioners. "There's still going to be people mad for a long time."

Katona pleaded guilty to two felonies in 1998 after falsifying documents for private accounting clients. Under his plea bargain, the charges were dismissed after he stayed out of trouble for a year.

Voters re-elected him in 2000 and 2004.

Boyat said he hoped Katona would provide a detailed accounting of where the money went. The attorney general's office will seek restitution, Frendewey said.

It won't be clear how the thefts will affect Alcona finances until the state treasurer's office finishes auditing the county's books, Boyat said.

"It doesn't look real good," he said, adding that spending cuts might be needed.