Washington (CNN) -- The U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced Wednesday that laboratory tests on popular smoking devices known as electronic cigarettes have found they contain carcinogens and other toxic chemicals dangerous to humans. E-cigarettes are battery-operated and contain cartridges filled with nicotine and other chemicals. Known as "e-cigarettes," the devices are battery-operated and contain cartridges filled with nicotine and other chemicals, spiced with flavors such as chocolate, cola or bubble gum. While manufacturers tout e-cigarettes as a "healthy way" to smoke, federal health officials say the devices turn nicotine, which is highly addictive, and other chemicals into a vapor that is inhaled by the user. "The FDA is concerned about the safety of these products and how they are marketed to the public," said Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg, commissioner of the FDA. CNN contacted Florida-based Smoking Everywhere, one of the largest manufacturers of e-cigarettes, after the FDA announcement, and a spokeswoman said the company had no comment. Because e-cigarettes have not been submitted to the FDA for evaluation or approval, the agency had no way of knowing the levels of nicotine or the amounts or kinds of other chemicals that the various brands of these products deliver to the user. That is why the FDA began to test them. The FDA's Division of Pharmaceutical Analysis analyzed the ingredients in a small sample of cartridges from two leading brands of e-cigarettes. In releasing its information, the FDA did not identify the two companies, but said in one sample, diethylene glycol -- a chemical used in antifreeze that is toxic to humans -- was detected. Other samples detected carcinogens that are dangerous to those who smoke them, the FDA said. The FDA has been examining and seizing shipments of non-U.S.-made e-cigarettes at the U.S. border since summer 2008. To date, 50 shipments have been stopped. The products examined thus far meet the definition of a combination drug-device product under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. "We know very little about these devices, said Dr. Jonathan Samet, director of the Institute for Global Health at the University of Southern California, "but to say they are healthy -- that's highly doubtful."

What are two chemicals that have been detected by the FDA that are of a concern?

Legal assistance for battered women is hard to come by. But it just got a little easier to find in Tarrant County. This month, the federal Violence Against Women Office awarded a two-year, $350,000 grant to the Women's Haven of Tarrant County. The money will allow the shelter to add a second full-time attorney to its staff and contract with the law school clinic at Texas Wesleyan University for pro bono and student services. Most important, the funds will help fill a frustrating gap. The Women's Haven, which provides shelter and outreach to domestic-violence victims, already has a full-time attorney. But that person is prohibited (by funding parameters) from representing women in matters of divorce or child custody. That's not a problem for most of the shelter's indigent residents, who can access free legal aid locally from West Texas Legal Services. But many of the clients served by the Women's Haven outreach programs are the working poor, who don't qualify for free legal services. Divorces and custody battles are simply out of their financial reach. "They can't begin to save up enough money for a divorce, so they're stuck," says Sonyia Hartwell, the Women's Haven's associate director. "They're completely shut out of the civil-law system." In Texas, unlike in some other states, women who aren't divorced can't gain full control over their portion of assets. And they can't obtain child support. The grant will also provide law students with valuable experience working these types of cases. "They can't go to court, but they can interview clients and do all the initial intake work that needs to be done" as well as investigative work, says Hartwell. And there's no shortage of abuse victims who need this kind of help. "Within 60 days of hanging out her or his shingle," says Hartwell of the yet unhired new attorney, "we'll have an active caseload of 20 or more."

Thanks to a grant, which shelter will now be able to add a second full-time attorney to its staff and contract with Texas Wesleyan University for pro bono and student services?

With a budget of $329 million, LSC provides civil legal assistance to low-income people in every county in America, Kleiman said. NLAP was created in 1968. A decade later, the agency used a $50,000 LSC grant to buy a building at 438 King St. in Charleston and $33,000 to buy a building at 201 King St. in Georgetown, according to Erlenborn's letter to Kaynard. In 1980, NLAP used $63,000 in LSC funds to buy property at 607 Main St. in Conway, the letter said. On Nov. 14, 2001, NLAP transferred title of the King Street building in Charleston to the Charleston County Bar Association, according to county property records. The local bar paid $5 for the building, which sits between a redeveloped office building and an antique shop. The local bar said it would maintain the building for "legal services to indigent residents of Charleston County and coastal South Carolina," the records said. The King Street building appears to be vacant. Notices at the entrance direct visitors to the equal justice center on West Montague Avenue in North Charleston. E. Douglas Pratt-Thomas, president of the local bar, was not available for comment. Charleston County has not appraised the King Street property because it is tax-exempt. But Randall Goldman, managing partner of Patrick Properties, which owns buildings from 440 to 456 King St., said he estimates 438 King St. would sell for between $700,000 and $900,000. "That building, which was purchased solely with federal legal aid dollars, should be used to provide legal services for poor people in South Carolina," Kleiman said. LSC wants the title to go to the equal justice center in Charleston or "we want 100 percent of the proceeds from the sale of the building to stay in Charleston. We are not contemplating taking that money out of South Carolina," he said. Kleiman said if the neighborhood legal program in Charleston "had honored their obligation, this would not be an issue."
A local bar in Charleston County paid how much for the Charelston building?