Four of the five candidates for West Virginia's Supreme Court believe it faces several serious threats to its integrity and reputation.

A declining number of opinions, allegedly unfair treatment of businesses and civility among the justices were among the issues cited at a Wednesday forum hosted by the state's bar association.

Two court seats are up this year. All five hopefuls attended, including Chief Justice Elliott "Spike'' Maynard.

The sole incumbent running, Maynard defended the level of discourse among the court's five justices and the quality and quantity of their opinions.

"I don't know any judge who misbehaved in the conference room,'' Maynard said. "I think the written product is as good as any court's in the land.''

Maynard has made national headlines following the release of photos showing him in Monaco with the chief executive of a coal company with cases pending before the court. He has since disqualified himself from at least three cases involving Massey Energy Co.

Fellow Democrat Menis Ketchum was asked about the court's method for handling recusal requests. A Huntington lawyer, Ketchum advocated an independent panel to resolve such issues.

While court rules require judicial officers to recuse themselves from "a proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned,'' it also gives that judge the final say.

In Texas, that all depends on a legal battle between medical doctors and podiatrists, who both claim the ankle as their turf. The debate has raged to the point that the two sides disagree in court on whether the ankle actually exists.

A state appeals court recently sided with medical doctors when it determined that the state board that licenses podiatrists exceeded its authority in defining the ankle as part of the foot.

"You don't have an ankle," said Mark Hanna, a lawyer for the Texas Podiatric Medical Association. "The foot actually includes the ankle. If you took the foot off the leg, there is nothing lying there that's the ankle."

Not so, said Dr. David Teuscher, an orthopedic surgeon in Beaumont who said treating the ankle is complicated enough to require medical school training.

"If they say the ankle doesn't exist, why do they want to operate on it?" asked Teuscher, immediate past president of the Texas Orthopaedic Association. "Everyone knows what an ankle is."

The Texas State Board of Podiatric Medical Examiners bypassed the Legislature to create its ankle-is-part-of-the-foot definition in 2001. Podiatrists say they've been treating ankles for decades and accuse medical doctors of trying to limit competition. The Texas Medical Association argues podiatrists should stick to corns, calluses and diabetic foot care.

The physicians group interprets last Friday's ruling as saying the ankle and foot are separate. The podiatrists group says the ruling doesn't go that far and plans to appeal. About 900 podiatrists await the outcome.

Dozens of protesters mingled with tourists and waved signs saying "Ban the Washington elitists, not our guns" or "The NRA helps criminals and terrorist buy guns."

Members of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence chanted "guns kill" as followers of the Second Amendment Sisters and Maryland Shall Issue.Org shouted "more guns, less crime."

A line to get into the court for the historic arguments began forming two days earlier and extended more than a block by early Tuesday.

The high court's first extensive examination of the Second Amendment since 1939 grew out of challenge to the District of Columbia's ban on ownership of handguns.

Anise Jenkins, president of a coalition called Stand Up for Democracy in D.C., defended the district's 32-year-old ban on handgun ownership.

A three-judge panel of the 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Minnesota has a compelling interest in the psychological health of children.

But the judges wrote that the state didn't have enough proof that violent video games cause psychological harm and agreed with a lower-court judge that Minnesota went too far when it passed the law two years ago.

Under the law, kids under 17 would have faced a $25 fine if they rented or bought a video game rated "M" for mature or "AO" for adults only. The law also would have required stores to put up signs warning of the fines.

Heather Mills has failed to stop publication of a divorce judgment highly critical of her as a witness and her financial claims against Sir Paul McCartney.

Mr Justice Bennett said her evidence was "not just inconsistent and inaccurate but also less than candid".

And he ended his ruling with a word of advice for anyone who puts forward "an excessive, indeed exorbitant, claim". They have only themselves to blame if the court awards much less than what they expected, he said.

Former model Miss Mills sought an award of almost £125 million but the judge decided she should leave her marriage to the former Beatle with a total of £24.3 million.

Mr Justice Bennett had released the financial details of his ruling on Monday but gave Miss Mills a chance to appeal his decision to release the full judgment.

Two appeal judges refused her request for permission to appeal and the judgment on her private divorce battle with Sir Paul became public.

The husband's evidence, said the judge, was balanced. "He expressed himself moderately though at times with justifiable irritation, if not anger. He was consistent, accurate and honest."

The judge continued: "But I regret to have to say I cannot say the same about the wife's evidence.

"Having watched and listened to her give evidence... I am driven to the conclusion that much of her evidence, both written and oral, was not just inconsistent and inaccurate but also less than candid. Overall she was a less than impressive witness."

Mr Justice Bennett said Miss Mills, who lost part of her leg in a road accident, was a "strong-willed and determined personality" who had shown great fortitude in overcoming her disability. He added that she was a "kindly person" who is devoted to her charitable causes.