Lehman Brothers Holdings filed suit [complaint, PDF] against JPMorgan Chase & Co. [corporate website] in May 2010 for allegedly "siphoning" off billions of dollars [JURIST report] in "critically-needed" assets days before the investment bank filed for a record-breaking bankruptcy. Former Lehman Brothers Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Richard Fuld, a defendant in the investors' lawsuit, called for a new regulatory scheme [JURIST report] for financial firms during testimony before the US House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform [committee website] in October 2008. Fuld answered questions regarding Lehman Brother's role in the financial crisis and the the high levels of executive compensation at the firm in the run-up to its Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing [bankruptcy petition, PDF; affidavit, PDF] and disputed lawmakers' suggestions that Lehman Brothers managers defrauded investors by making public statements at odds with Lehman's internal financial health.

Here, on the facts as pleaded, Canada did not owe a prima facie duty of care to consumers. The relationship between the two was limited to Canada's statements to the general public that low-tar cigarettes are less hazardous. There were no specific interactions between Canada and the class members. Consequently, a finding of proximity in this relationship must arise from the governing statutes. However, the relevant statutes establish only general duties to the public, and no private law duties to consumers. ... As for the tobacco companies, the facts pleaded allege a history of interactions between Canada and the tobacco companies capable of establishing a special relationship of proximity giving rise to a prima facie duty of care. ... Canada's alleged negligent misrepresentations do not give rise to tort liability, however, because of conflicting policy considerations. The alleged representations constitute protected expressions of government policy. Core government policy decisions protected from suit are decisions as to a course or principle of action that are based on public policy considerations, such as economic, social and political factors, provided they are neither irrational nor taken in bad faith. The representations in this case were part and parcel of a government policy, adopted at the highest level in the Canadian government and developed out of concern for the health of Canadians and the individual and institutional costs associated with tobacco-related disease, to encourage people who continued to smoke to switch to low-tar cigarettes.

In the same opinion on Friday, the Supreme Court ruled [materials] in Attorney General of Canada v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of British Columbia that individual provinces are able to sue tobacco companies for damages to offset the cost of treating tobacco-related illnesses. In 2001, British Columbia attempted to recover funds from 14 tobacco companies that the government had spent paying for medical care of those afflicted with tobacco-related illnesses. They based their claim on the Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act (CRA) [text], which makes tobacco manufacturers liable to the provinces for health care costs. As Canada has national healthcare, each province bears the cost of their citizens' medical bills. In this case as well, the appealing tobacco industries alleged that Canada is also a manufacturer and supplier of cigarettes and this preempts their liability. The Court refuted this understanding.

I conclude that Canada is not a manufacturer under the Act. Indeed, holding Canada accountable under the CRA would defeat the legislature's intention of transferring the health-care costs resulting from tobacco related wrongs from taxpayers to the tobacco industry. This conclusion makes it unnecessary to consider Canada's arguments that it would in any event be immune from liability under the provincial Act.

Suspects connected to the Mumbai terror attacks continue to face arrest and prosecution. In March, US citizen and Chicago resident David Headley pleaded guilty [press release; JURIST report] to 12 counts of federal terrorism stemming from the Mumbai terror attacks and a terror incident in Copenhagen. A federal jury acquitted Tahawwur Hussain Rana [JURIST report], a Chicago resident with Canadian citizenship, of participating in the Mumbai terror attacks in June, but convicted him on two counts of planning to attack a Copenhagen newspaper after Headley testified at his trial. In December, Spanish authorities arrested seven men [JURIST report], including six Pakistanis and one Nigerian, in Barcelona suspected of aiding in the Mumbai terror attacks by allegedly stealing passports and other identification documents belonging to male tourists between the ages of 20 and 30, then sending the documents to Thailand where they would be forged and then forwarded to terrorist groups. India's National Investigation Agency (NIA) announced [JURIST report] in October that it has secured INTERPOL [official website] red notices [official backgrounder] for five Pakistani citizens, including two military officials, for their suspected involvement in the attacks.

The North Carolina government is one of several state legislatures to have acted recently to limit abortion rights. Both Texas and Florida [JURIST reports] have recently passed bills requiring ultrasounds before abortions. Last month, the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) [advocacy website] filed a lawsuit challenging the Texas law [JURIST report]. In March, South Dakota passed a law requiring a three-day waiting period [JURIST report] before an abortion—the longest waiting period in the country. That law is also facing a court challenge [JURIST report]. Multiple states have acted to ban abortions after 20 weeks, when some studies suggest a fetus can begin feeling pain, including Missouri, Indiana, Alabama, Ohio, Oklahoma, Kansas and Idaho [JURIST reports].

California has encountered similar difficulties passing greenhouse gas emissions standards. In March, the San Francisco Superior Court [official website] delayed the implementation of a cap-and-trade program [JURIST report] by requiring California's Air Resources Board (ARB) [official website] to further analyze alternatives. While the court's decision did not officially preclude the ARB from adopting or implementing the program in the future, it delayed the process as the ARB will now have to conduct additional research on other available options and report back as to why the cap-and-trade program is superior as well as invite public comment on the issue. Earlier this year, Texas failed for the third time in two months [JURIST report] at its attempts to block new Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [official website] regulations governing greenhouse gas emissions. The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia [official website] denied the state's request to block the program, which allocates greenhouse gas emission permits under the Clean Air Act [materials].

Pleau was sentenced to 18 years in prison [The Call report] for violating his probation after being accused of killing a gas station attendant in the process of a robbery. No state charges were filed [The Call report], as Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Kilmartin [official website] decided that the US Attorney's Office had jurisdiction for the crime beyond the probation violation. However, should federal proceedings not occur, Pleau has agreed to plead guilty and accept a life sentence [Boston.com report] without the possibility of parole. Rhode Island was one of the first states to abolish the death penalty, abolishing it in 1852. After becoming a state, Rhode Island has only executed seven people, including John Gordon in 1845, who Chafee recently pardoned [press release], delivering a statement on his stance on the death penalty: "John Gordon’s wrongful execution was a major factor in Rhode Island’s abolition of and longstanding opposition to the death penalty. ... as we pardon John Gordon, we also recognize and uphold that commitment."