There is no place in the U.S. more expensive to smoke than New York City, where the taxes alone will set you back $5.85 per pack. Yet, addicts who visit Island Smokes, a "roll-your-own" cigarette shop in Chinatown, can walk out with an entire 10-pack carton for under $40, thanks to a yawning tax loophole that officials in several states are now trying to close.

The store is one of a growing number around the country that have come under fire over their use of high-speed cigarette rolling machines that function as miniature factories, and can package loose tobacco and rolling papers into neatly formed cigarettes, sometimes in just a few minutes.

The secret to Island's low prices is simple: Even though patrons leave carrying cartons that look very much like the Marlboros or Newports, the store charges taxes at the rate set for loose tobacco, which is just a fraction of what is charged for a commercially made pack.

Customers select a blend of tobacco leaves, intended to mirror the flavor of their regular brand. Then they feed the tobacco and some paper tubes into the machines, and return to the counter with the finished product to ring up the purchase.

The savings come at every level. Many stores sell customers loose pipe tobacco, which is taxed by the federal government at $2.80 per pound, compared with $25 per pound for tobacco made for cigarettes. The shops don't pay into the cigarette manufacturer trust fund, intended to reimburse government health programs for the cost of treating smoking-related illness. And the packs produced by "roll-your-own" shops are generally also being sold without local tax stamps, which in New York include a $1.50 city tax and a $4.35 state tax.

New York City's legal department filed a lawsuit against Island Smokes on Nov. 14, arguing that the company's Manhattan store and another on Staten Island are engaging in blatant tax evasion.

The Supreme Court is not immediately saying whether it will make an election-year determination on the constitutionality of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.

Justices met in private conference Thursday to consider new cases to hear next year. Appeals surrounding the health care overhaul were on the list to be discussed, but there was no announcement as to whether the hot-button issue had even been discussed.

The next opportunity justices have to reveal when or if they will hear a health care overhaul appeal is on Monday.

Lower courts have ruled in conflicting ways on the new law and its requirement that individuals buy health insurance starting in 2014 or pay a penalty.

If the court decides to take the case, oral arguments could come as early as March.

Pomerantz Haudek Grossman & Gross LLP has filed a class action lawsuit against Diamond Foods, Inc. and certain of its officers. The class action (CV 11 5399 RS) filed in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, is on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of Diamond during the period from December 9, 2010 through and including November 4, 2011 (the "Class Period"), seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"). This class action is brought under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. Sections 78j(b) and 78t(a); and SEC Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by the SEC, 17 C.F.R. Section 240.10b-5.

If you are a shareholder who purchased DMND securities during the Class Period, you have until January 6, 2012 to ask the Court to appoint you as lead plaintiff for the class. A copy of the complaint can be obtained at www.pomerantzlaw.com. To discuss this action, contact Rachelle R. Boyle at rrboyle@pomlaw.com or 888.476.6529 (or 888.4-POMLAW), toll free, x350. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address and telephone number.

The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose that: (1) the Company overstated its earnings by improperly accounting for certain crop payments to walnut growers; (2) the Company's acquisition of Pringles snack business would be delayed; (3) that the Company lacked adequate internal and financial controls; and (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company's financial results were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York, Chicago and Washington, D.C., is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 70 years later, the Pomerantz Firm continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of class members. See www.pomerantzlaw.com.

The Supreme Court won't hear an appeal from some television networks being sued by a paranormal investigator who claims his idea was stolen and turned into the television show "Ghost Hunters."

Without comment, the court turned away an appeal from NBC Universal, Inc., Universal Television Networks and Pilgrim Films & Television, Inc.

Parapsychologist Larry Montz and producer Daena Smoller unsuccessfully shopped around an idea for a show about paranormal investigators in 1981. "Ghost Hunters" appeared on the Sci Fi Channel — now known as SyFy — in 2004.

Montz and Smoller sued in federal court. The courts threw out their copyright claims, but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that they could sue for breach of an implied contract and breach of confidence claims.

The Supreme Court says the Florida courts should reconsider whether arbitration is required for claims against an auditing firm that worked on a fund that invested with Bernie Madoff.

The high court on Monday reversed a decision by a Florida appeals court. KPMG was sued by investors in the Rye Funds, which lost millions of dollars to Madoff's Ponzi scheme. KPMG was the auditor for the Rye Funds, and the investors said the company did not use proper auditing standards.

KPMG says its contract requires arbitration but the state courts would not allow it.

The Supreme Court ruled that the Florida courts only looked at part of the claims being brought against KPMG. The high court ordered the lower courts to investigate all of the claims before making a decision.

The Supreme Court seemed unlikely on Tuesday to allow employees at a privately run federal prison to be sued by an inmate in federal court, despite his complaint that their neglect left him with two permanently damaged arms.

Justices heard appeals from lawyers representing employees of the GEO Group, formerly known as Wackenhut Corrections Corp, who work at the privately run Taft Correctional Institution in Taft, Calif. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled inmate Richard Lee Pollard could sue GEO officials for his treatment after he fell and fractured both of his elbows.

Pollard said GEO officials put him in a metal restraint that caused him pain, and refused to provide him with a splint, making his injuries worse and causing permanent impairment. He sued in federal court for money, claiming GEO officials had violated the Eighth Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

The federal appeals court allowed his lawsuit against the GEO officials to move forward. Courts normally don't allow government employees to be sued in those types of lawsuits, but the high court has authorized some if constitutionally protected rights have been violated by the federal employee and there is no state court remedy.