“In the Fight Over Piracy, a Rare Stand for Privacy”: Monday’s edition of The New York Times will contain this installment of Adam Liptak’s “Sidebar” column.

“In sum, the number of issues raised in a Rule 1925(b) statement does not, without more, provide a basis upon which to deny appellate review where an appeal otherwise complies with the mandates of appellate practice.” So states the opinion announcing the judgment of the court that the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania issued Friday in Eiser v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.

The question presented in the case asked: “Did Appellant waive her right to appellate review by raising a quantity of issues sufficient to impair meaningful appellate review?”

The decision, which the court posted online today, also consists of an opinion concurring in the judgment and two dissenting opinions (here and here). In addition, the court’s Chief Justice concurred in the result without issuing an opinion.

In just a matter of days, three of the seven justices currently serving on Pennsylvania’s highest court will be departing from that court. As a result, the court has been issuing an unusually high volume of decisions in argued cases over the past few days and weeks.

“Chipping at tough crack sentencing; Laws were ineffective and the drug’s ravages overblown, experts say”: Richard B. Schmitt and David G. Savage have this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

“Aussie Taliban Goes Free”: This article appears online at Time magazine’s web site.

“In-state tuition fight may head to high court; Controversial state law allows lower rate for some illegal immigrants”: The Topeka Capital-Journal today contains an article that begins, “The fight over in-state tuition in Kansas for the children of some illegal immigrants may be headed to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

“Malls: free speech zones; A California Supreme Court decision says malls, like parks, can’t pick who protests inside.” This editorial appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

“U.S. Supreme Court expected to make decision on Teck Cominco case soon”: The Canadian Press provides this report.

“Kenneth Starr: Open to the public; These days, the former special prosecutor pursues service and conscience in the law.” Jim Newton has this interview online today at the web site of The Los Angeles Times.

“High court’s ruling to have lasting impact in Ohio; Law limiting money damages in pain-and-suffering lawsuits will make Ohio business-friendly, supporters say”: The Dayton Daily News today contains an article that begins, “The Ohio Supreme Court’s decision to uphold a law limiting the money damages that can be awarded in pain-and-suffering lawsuits could discourage people from pursuing those lawsuits and eliminate a deterrent for companies to fix defective products, trial lawyers said.”

“Voter ID Law Heads to Supreme Court”: Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has a report that begins, “The dispute over Indiana’s voter identification law that is headed to the Supreme Court next week is as much a partisan political drama as a legal tussle.”