U.S. District Judge George Wu postponed the sentencing of Charles Lynch until June 11. In front of a courtroom packed with reporters, attorneys and Lynch supporters, Wu listened for more than two hours before asking lawyers on each side to file further arguments stating their position.

Lynch, 47, is one of the first in the nation who was convicted on five marijuana-related offenses to seek leniency from a judge after U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced last month that federal agents will now target marijuana distributors only when they violate both federal and state laws.

However, Holder didn’t say how the new approach would affect pending cases.

Wu recently asked prosecutors for written clarification about whether Holder’s statements would affect Lynch, who was not charged with any state crimes.

In response, H. Marshall Jarrett, director of the Department of Justice’s executive office of U.S. attorneys, wrote in a letter that Lynch’s prosecution and conviction were “entirely consistent with department policies as well as public statements made by the attorney general.”

Wu might disregard the mandatory minimum five-year sentence for Lynch if defense attorneys can prove their client is eligible under a “safety valve” provision for one of the counts he was convicted of—conspiracy to manufacture and distribute marijuana. The provision allows a judge to reduce federal sentencing guidelines and ignore mandatory minimum sentences in determining punishment for defendants. One of the provision’s criteria cited by Wu is determining whether Lynch was an organizer, leader or manager of others in the crime and he continued to break federal law.

Even if he found in favor of Lynch, Wu said he’s required by law to sentence him to at least one year in prison for also being convicted of distributing marijuana to someone under the age of 21—considered a minor under federal law.

“If I could find a way out, I would,” said Wu, who added he didn’t believe Lynch’s case should have a mandatory minimum sentence.

Lynch, who ran a marijuana dispensary in the Central Coast town of Morro Bay, was convicted in August by a jury in Los Angeles for selling more than 100 kilograms of marijuana. His case has become a rallying point for pot advocates who believe pending cases in California and a dozen other states that allow medical marijuana use should be dismissed after Holder’s remarks.

Other defendants have followed Lynch’s lead. In Northern California, one-time fugitive Kenneth Hayes has agreed to either plead guilty or no contest to two counts after he was indicted seven years ago for running a medical marijuana dispensary in San Francisco, his attorney William Panzer said Thursday.

Hayes went to Canada shortly before charges were filed against him because he felt there were more liberal marijuana policies there, Panzer said. After being denied political asylum in Canada, Hayes moved around until he was arrested in Romania last year and brought back to the United States.

Panzer said his client hopes the judge in his case will show leniency.

“He felt that once the Bush administration was out, things would be better,” Panzer said of his client’s expected plea. “This is a case that shouldn’t be taking up time in federal court.”

In Lynch’s case, Wu noted that the dispensary owner wasn’t being sneaky about what he did. He met with city officials, obtained a business license and allowed frequent inspections. Lynch’s attorney, federal public defender Reuven Cohen, said his client believed he was complying with state law.

Assistant U.S. Attorney David Kowal responded by saying Lynch knew that his actions were illegal under federal law.

Janice Peters, the mayor of Morro Bay, said Lynch was a good business owner and was welcomed by the community.

“This is a victimless crime,” Peters said in court. “The only victim here is Charles Lynch, who is caught between two laws.”

Article attributed to By GREG RISLING Associated Press Writer

California and North Carolina in March posted their highest jobless rates in at least three decades, as unemployment increased in all but a handful of states during the month, the Labor Department said Friday.

California’s unemployment rate jumped to 11.2% in March, while North Carolina rose to 10.8%, the highest for both since the U.S. government began a comprehensive tally of state joblessness in 1976.

The state-by-state employment figures showed only a few states avoiding the deterioration seen nationwide. Unemployment rose in 46 states during the month, and 12 states plus the District of Columbia posted unemployment rates in March that were significantly higher than the 8.5% nationwide figure the government released earlier this month.

The Nation’s Unemployed

March unemployment rates, state-by-state.

The chief economist for California’s finance department, Howard Roth, said the state’s unemployment rate hasn’t been this high since reaching 11.7% in January 1941. The highest level on record in California is 14.7% in October 1940, he said.

California lost 62,100 jobs in March, with Florida next at 51,900 jobs lost, Texas at 47,100 and North Carolina at 41,300, according to the federal figures.

California, the nation’s most-populous state, has been hit particularly hard by the housing-market crash. That led to major job losses in the construction and financial industries. “We did it bigger in terms of the housing bubble,” Mr. Roth said. “You pay for that by falling farther.”

Still, the latest figures offered a “glimmer of hope,” he said. March losses were about half the 114,000 jobs shed in February, a sign that the pace of decline in California’s job market may be slowing.

Most economists expect job losses across all U.S. nonfarm employers to continue in April at or near the rapid pace seen in March, when 663,000 jobs disappeared.

California exemplifies the troubles across America. Teresa Nelson, a 54-year-old public-interest lawyer, has sought work at government or nonprofit agencies since last summer. She has applied for 20 jobs and landed five interviews. “I have a lot of qualifications, lots of experience, but people assume I need a higher salary,” said Ms. Nelson, who lives in the San Francisco Bay area. “It’s been frustrating.”

The federal report showed 48 states and the District of Columbia posted payroll declines in March. Only Mississippi and North Dakota had slight gains of about 300 jobs.

Among states, North Carolina experienced the largest month-over-month percentage drop in payroll employment, about 1%. It was followed closely by Idaho, Minnesota and Washington state, each losing about 0.9%.

Eight states have already seen double-digit unemployment rates, which are calculated on a different survey than payroll numbers. As the economy deteriorates, and job hunters face difficulty finding new work, economists expect joblessness to top 10% nationwide by late 2009 or early 2010.

Michigan, battered by turmoil in the auto industry, reported the highest unemployment at 12.6%. Oregon followed at 12.1%, then South Carolina at 11.4%.

Only North Dakota and the District of Columbia saw unemployment rates decline for the month. Rates remained flat in Georgia, New York and Rhode Island.

Write to Stu Woo at Stu.Woo@wsj.com and Sudeep Reddy at sudeep.reddy@wsj.com

Sacramento Business Journal – by Chris Rauber San Francisco Business Times

Five medical malpractice cases involving Kaiser Permanente’s now-defunct Northern California kidney transplant program in San Francisco have been settled for a total of $1 million, according to their Irvine-based attorney, who blamed flaws in California’s malpractice laws for the relatively small size of the settlements.

Three of the five cases were wrongful death cases, which alleged that Kaiser failed to provide transplant kidneys on a timely basis. In another case, the patient’s transplant allegedly was delayed by a year and a half due to the improper refusal of a donor kidney. In the fifth case, allegedly inappropriate post-transplant care contributed to the rejection of the transplanted organ.

Lawrence Eisenberg, a trial attorney at Lawrence S. Eisenberg & Associates, said the settlements involved transplant patients “who were improperly treated at the Kaiser Renal Transplant Center in San Francisco which was closed in 2006.”Kaiser allegedly failed to provide proper oversight, transfer patients into the program properly, or provide access to medical specialists, Eisenberg said in an April 15 statement.

The state Department of Managed Health Care fined Oakland-based Kaiser $5 million due to problems with the transplant program, which was closed in the spring of 2005, after about a year and a half of operation. Transplant patients were transferred to UC San Francisco Medical Center and UC Davis Medical Center.

“We can confirm these cases have been settled,” Tony Rau, a spokesman for Kaiser’s Northern California region, told the San Francisco Business Times. “As we said at the time, we deeply regret the problems, difficulties and concern that some of our members experienced with transfers involving the San Francisco kidney transplant program. “

California’s medical malpractice law limits malpractice recovery awards to $250,000 per case, which Eisenberg described as an “arbitrary” ceiling, adding “These cases are a perfect illustration as to why the law in California needs to be changed.”

Federal and state regulators forced Kaiser to close its troubled kidney transplant center, which had about 1,900 patients on its waiting list, in May 2006. The center performed just 56 transplants in 2005, compared with approximately 168 each in 2004 and 2003, due to what regulators and critics called bungling and lack of proper oversight. Prior to September 2004, UCSF and UC Davis performed transplant surgeries for virtually all Kaiser kidney patients in the region.

Investigations by regulators found that many Kaiser patients spent added months or years on waiting lists for a new kidney without being credited for their long waits. Others died or had their conditions worsen during the period between late 2004 and May 2005, when the DMHC and the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services required Kaiser to close the unit and transfer patients to other institutions. Additionally, investigators concluded, Kaiser lost track of records and in some cases kidney transplants were not performed, largely due to bureaucratic barriers and lack of oversight within the giant organization.

The state managed care agency later imposed a $2 million fine on Kaiser and required it to contribute $3 million to a nonprofit that encourages Californians to donate needed organs and tissues.

A Manhattan jury on Wednesday awarded $27.5 million to a woman who lost her left leg after a New York City Transit bus ran over her while it was turning a corner two blocks from her apartment in 2005.

The woman, Gloria Aguilar, 45, who had to have her leg amputated and has worn a prosthetic leg ever since, cried when the verdict was announced. She then thanked some members of the jury who had heard the nearly seven-week trial in Manhattan Supreme Court, her lawyer, Ben Rubinowitz, said on Thursday.

“I think she feels vindicated,” Mr. Rubinowitz said in a telephone interview. “The transit authority went after her, calling her a liar. The problem that she has, it’s a lifelong injury, and whenever she looks down, she’ll have a constant reminder.”

The lawyer for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, John Woodruff, made a motion to the judge, Paul G. Feinman, immediately after the verdict, arguing that the award to Ms. Aguilar was excessive. But Justice Feinman let the verdict stand, Mr. Rubinowitz said.

The transit agency plans to appeal the verdict, according to Wallace Gossett, a lawyer for the agency who did not try the case. “This is just a jury verdict,” Mr. Gossett said in a brief interview. “The appellate courts won’t sustain a verdict of this magnitude.”

Mr. Gossett pointed out that the jury found Ms. Aguilar negligent for not looking when she crossed the street. But the jury also found, according to Mr. Rubinowitz , that both New York City Transit and the bus driver, Andrew Monaco, had been negligent, and that their negligence was 100 percent responsible for Ms. Aguilar’s injury.

Charles Seaton, a spokesman for the transit agency, said only that the case was being appealed.

In recent months, juries have awarded three other plaintiffs in personal injury cases against New York City Transit a total of about $11 million, but the agency is appealing all of them, Mr. Seaton wrote in an e-mail message.

In the case involving Ms. Aguilar, one of the main issues was whether she had been in or outside the crosswalk when she was hit, at 50th Street and 10th Avenue on Nov. 4, 2005. The transit agency contended that she had walked into the path of the bus.

Mr. Rubinowitz said he had shown how the wheel, with its 40,000 pounds of weight, crushed a portion of Ms. Aguilar’s lower left leg, from just above the ankle to below the knee, although the foot was not damaged. Ms. Aguilar’s leg was amputated at Bellevue Hospital Center.

Two weeks later, Mr. Rubinowitz said, doctors had to perform another operation to amputate her leg to the groin, because of infection. She has been unable to work since then, he said.

In February, Dustin Dibble was awarded $2.3 million after a subway train ran over him in Manhattan in 2006 and he had to have his right leg amputated. He was intoxicated, but a jury found that he was only 35 percent culpable because the subway operator did not stop, court records show.

In March, a jury awarded James Sanders $7 million after a subway train struck him when he stumbled onto the tracks in 2002. The jury found him to be 30 percent culpable. His right leg had to be amputated, and he also lost an eye, said his lawyer, Gary Pillersdorf.

And last month, Claude Williams was awarded $1.8 million, according to court records, because he was hit by a New York City Transit bus in 2003.

More Articles in New York Region » A version of this article appeared in print on April 17, 2009, on page A22 of the New York edition.