Former International Monetary Fund chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn has shed little public light on his account of what happened between him and a hotel housekeeper who accused him of sexually attacking her. But in a potentially revealing hint, one of his lawyers has said he doesn't expect the evidence will show a forcible encounter.

If Strauss-Kahn's lawyers are planning to argue there was a consensual liaison, they would be using a common sex-crime defense argument — but one that has both succeeded and failed in other high-profile cases. It sets up a "he-said, she-said" confrontation that can pose challenges for defense lawyers and prosecutors alike, legal experts say.

"They're really difficult cases because, by their very nature, nobody else is there," said Brenda Smith, an American University Washington College of Law professor who has studied sexual violence. Even DNA or other forensic evidence might establish sexual contact but still not prove an attack, "so it really is the credibility of the complainant and the defendant, and also the facts and information that each side can marshal to support their version of what occurred."

For now, Strauss-Kahn is under house arrest in a Manhattan apartment on a total of $6 million in bond and cash bail, facing attempted rape and other charges. At the time of his May 14 arrest, the 62-year-old economist and diplomat led the powerful, loan-making IMF and was considered a leading contender to challenge French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

Prosecutors say he chased down the cleaner in a penthouse suite, groped her, tried to pull down her pantyhose and forced her to perform oral sex.

An appeals court has overturned the dismissal of a class-action lawsuit brought by investors against mortgage giant Countrywide Financial Corp.

The move by a panel of the California 2nd District Court of Appeal reverses the decision by a Superior Court judge in Los Angeles last year. That court threw out the complaint on grounds that a state court had no jurisdiction to hear the case, citing the U.S. Securities Act.

In the ruling issued Wednesday, the appeals court disagreed, concluding such a complaint could be heard in state court.

The decision allows the case to proceed.

The investors claim Countrywide had false or misleading statements in documentation for the mortgage-backed securities that they bought from the lender between 2005 and 2007.

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to revive a lawsuit challenging a controversial post-Sept. 11 CIA program that flew terrorism suspects to secret prisons.

The appeal asked the court to examine two controversial aspects of the U.S. response to the 9/11 attacks, "the extraordinary rendition" program that sent the suspects to secret prisons and the "state secrets privilege."

The high court has refused several other appeals based on the government's invocation of state secrets to derail lawsuits.

The case involved five terrorism suspects who were arrested shortly after 9/11 and said they were flown by a Boeing Co. subsidiary to prisons around the world where they were tortured. A divided 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco cited national security risks in dismissing the men's case last year.

The terror suspects sued Boeing subsidiary Jeppesen Dataplan in 2007, alleging that the extraordinary rendition program amounted to illegal "forced disappearances." They alleged that the San Jose-based subsidiary conspired with the CIA to operate the program.

A trial court judge quickly dismissed the lawsuit after the Bush administration took over defense of the case from Chicago-based Boeing and invoked the state secrets privilege, demanding a halt to the litigation over concern that top secret intelligence would be divulged.

Two medical marijuana providers have accused the U.S. government of civil rights violations in what may be the first lawsuit of its kind in response to a federal crackdown on pot operations across the nation.

The owners of Montana Caregivers Association and MCM Caregivers claim federal raids on pot businesses across Montana in March were unconstitutional, exceeded the government's authority and pre-empted the state's medical marijuana law.

Since then, federal agents have raided two Washington state dispensaries, and federal prosecutors have sent letters of warning to leaders in most of the 15 states with medical marijuana laws.

The lawsuit was filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Missoula against the government, Department of Justice, Attorney General Eric Holder and U.S. Attorney for Montana Michael Cotter.

The plaintiffs claim the intent of the raids was to shut down the medical pot industry.

"The federal government has made clear its intent to threaten and eventually eliminate any business or enterprise related to the medical use of marijuana," Christopher Williams of the Montana Caregivers Association and Randy Leibenguth of MCM Caregivers claimed in the lawsuit.

The Department of Justice did not comment when contacted Wednesday. Cotter spokeswoman Jessica Fehr also declined comment, saying the U.S. attorney's office had not been served with the lawsuit.