Khodorkovsky — the former head of Yukos oil company, and once Russia's richest man — was sentenced to prison for eight years in 2005 on charges of tax evasion and fraud in what Kremlin critics slammed as a flawed trial.

"Prisoner Khodorkovsky does not deserve conditional early release," Judge Igor Faliliyev said at the Ingodinsky regional court in the Siberian city of Chita, citing as reasons his refusal to take part in professional training in sewing while in prison, and an alleged misdemeanor dating back to October.

Khodorkovsky showed little surprise at the decision, appearing calm as the judge finished speaking. As he was hustled out of the courtroom by guards, he said Russia's "legal system will not be reformed anytime soon."

Detained since 2003, Khodorkovsky has served more than half of his sentence and has been eligible for parole for the past 10 months.

Most of that sentence has been served in the remote Chita region, nearly 4,000 miles east of Moscow. In December 2006, he was moved from a prison camp to a pretrial detention center in the city after new charges were brought against him and his business associate Platon Lebedev.

Similar to a retail shop that increases its product lines to meet customer demand, the law firm of Jonathan D'Agostino & Associates, has ventured into additional areas of jurisprudence.

The expansion wasn't part of the original game plan for the 18-year-old firm, which began specializing in personal injury.

"I never wanted to be that law firm that claims they do everything, because I do not believe you can do everything well," said founder Jonathan D'Agostino.

But when his clients indicated a need for other legal services, D'Agostino didn't want to let them down. He brought legal experts, in a variety of specialties, on board.

"We would settle large cases, and clients would ask us to help with estate planning," D'Agostino said.

At other times, he said, personal-injury cases would involve clients who were so injured they didn't have the mental capacity to make decisions or handle their settlements, so the firm would be prompted to draft special-needs trusts.

Today, in addition to personal injury, the Eltingville-based firm offers a range of legal services, including medical malpractice, estate planning, elder law, criminal defense and Social Security disability.

"Rather than refer those types of matters to other firms, we brought in trained and seasoned attorneys to handle things. This also assured our clients the same exceptional service they were used to," D'Agostino said.

The firm's Social Security department grew out of the need to service clients who, due to their injuries, could not return to work.

Attorney Edward Pavia helps clients like these with Social Security paperwork, hearings and appeals.

Judge Ernest Murphy and the state Commission on Judicial Conduct have agreed Murphy is "permanently disabled" from performing his judicial duties, according to the order from the state Supreme Judicial Court.

Murphy has said the libel case took a severe physical and emotional toll and he suffers from post-traumatic stress.

The commission initiated a complaint in October, alleging that Murphy suffered from disabilities that affected his performance. The court sealed the complaint and most related documents because they contain personal medical information.

Murphy's attorney, Michael Mone, said he was prohibited from commenting on the agreement.

Howard Neff, a staff attorney for the commission, would not comment on details of the complaint, but said the court accepted the agreement and "ordered that Judge Murphy shall not sit again as a judge in Massachusetts."

The Supreme Judicial Court hasn't decided yet whether to impose on Murphy the commission's recommendation for a 30-day suspension without pay, $25,000 fine and public censure for using court letterhead to write a threatening letter to the Herald's publisher, Patrick Purcell.

The agreement allows Murphy to continue to receive his judicial pay for up to four months. During that period, he must use any accrued vacation and sick time.

In a 2-1 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit threw out a two-year-old rule that may have allowed some refineries, power plants and factories to exceed pollution limits because the Environmental Protection Agency "failed to fix inadequate monitoring requirements ... and prohibited states and local authorities from doing so."

Since 1990, the Clean Air Act has required permits granted to facilities releasing more than 100 tons of any pollutant a year to include enough monitoring to ensure the company is meeting its emissions targets. Approximately 15,000 to 16,000 permits have been issued under the program, mostly by state and local pollution agencies.

"We can't have strong enforcement of our clean air laws unless we know what polluters are putting into the air," said Keri Powell, a staff attorney with Earthjustice, who sued the EPA on behalf of four environmental groups.

The EPA said Tuesday that it was reviewing the court's decision. But an agency spokesman said the monitoring deficiencies should be remedied on the national level rather than on a case-by-case basis.

Appeals court judge Brett Kavanaugh, a former attorney in the Bush White House, wrote the sole dissenting opinion.

He said that while EPA and state and local governments may disagree about whether monitoring requirements will adequately measure compliance, he found "nothing in the statute that prohibits EPA's approach."

The High Court made the ruling in the case of Binyam Mohamed, who is accused of conspiring with al-Qaida leaders to attack civilians. Captured in April 2002 in Pakistan, he claims he spent 18 months in Morocco and was tortured there before being flown to an alleged CIA-run site in Afghanistan and later transferred to Guantanamo.

The accusation is important in a legal context because evidence obtained by torture will not be admissible during military tribunals being conducted at the detention center at the U.S. Naval base in Guantanamo.

"Compelling the British government to release information that can prove Mr. Mohamed's innocence is one obvious step towards making up for the years of torture that he has suffered," Clive Stafford Smith, director of the human rights charity Reprieve, said in a statement.

In a statement, the Foreign Office said it is considering the implications of the judgment.

The government has cited national security concerns in refusing to hand over documents.

Mohamed, an Ethiopian refugee who moved to Britain when he was 15, is the 20th detainee selected for trial at Guantanamo. He has not yet entered a plea.

The High Court heard the case over five days in August. Only some sessions were open to the public because of the sensitivity of the information.

Merrill Lynch & Co. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. face increased pressure by New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo to settle claims they misled investors on auction-rate debt as Wachovia Corp. agreed to buy back $9 billion of the bonds.

Merrill's prior offer to repurchase $10 billion of the securities was inadequate and the firm may face ``imminent'' legal action, Cuomo said yesterday.

New York has subpoenaed about 25 firms involved in sales of auction-rate securities, including five that then settled. Goldman is among the firms being probed, he said.

Wachovia joined Citigroup Inc., Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase & Co. and UBS AG in settlements stemming from a nationwide investigation into why auction-rate securities were marketed as safe as cash until the $330 billion market collapsed. Regulators have sought auction-rate buybacks for customers, reimbursement for consumers forced to sell securities at prices below face value and relief for institutional investors.