The amended diversity jurisdiction statute and removal before service
The dark side of alternative fee agreements

Professional reading - some notable blog posts

Here are some notable blog posts from my professional reading:

From the K&L Gates Electronic Discovery blog, there is a discussion of a D.C. Court of Appeals Committee on the Unauthorized Practice of Law Opinion addressing "Discovery Services Companies."

Surprisingly, it is not "anything goes" in the District.

A Houston partner in Vorys, Sater gives major love to a 1st Circuit Daubert opinion in The Sentry That Guards Against the Tyranny of Experts

Be glad when you are in federal court and can rely on Daubert.

The Advocate's Studio has a post on How to Subpoena Social Media.

But that applies mainly to criminal investigators.  Let me guess how it is for civil litigants:  Facebook, which does business not only in every State and every County, but does business in everyone's darn house, has decreed that it can only be subpoenaed with a California subpoena, and even then, only when a totally unreasonable fee is paid.  Plus they'll drag their feet for a couple months.  That about it?  Looks like it.

Negligence per se based on traffic regulations: A D.C. refresher.

Apart from the legal issue, what I found interesting is that in one of the cases discussed, Mahnke v. WMATA, a pedestrian was hit by a bus in a crosswalk when the pedestrian had a "Walk" signal, and WMATA still defended on liability based on contributory negligence.  This was possible in part because by chance, there was an available videotape of the accident, which in WMATA's view, showed that the plaintiff did not look for oncoming traffic before stepping off the curb.  This illustrates how CCTV video is affecting litigation.  I don't know about anyone else, but I frequently see people march off the curb into a crosswalk without looking when they get a  "Walk" sign.  And frequently, they do so talking on a cell phone.

In fact, physicians at the University of Maryland have recently published a study concerning Headphone Use and Pedestrian Injury in the United States:  2004-2011.  Hat tip to Aaron Kase's blog post, Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise, which was published on the blog (link no longer available).  I am seeing that every day now: pedestrians riding escalators while reading their smart phones or kindles, pedestrians crossing busy intersections while talking on their cell phones, and so on.  It's a standard question in pedestrian injury depositions to ask the claimant what he or she was carrying at the time; now, there should also be specific questions about any electronic devices they were using at the time.