A Pennsylvania court recently addressed whether a deponent could be compelled to remove a face mask during his deposition after the deponent refused, citing health concerns. After rescheduling the deposition once, plaintiff’s counsel asked the Court to order the deponent to testify maskless given that he would be doing so alone in a room with
Parties, Start Your Engines: Snap Removals and Defeating Incomplete Diversity
In what is known as a “snap” removal, a non-resident defendant may be able to remove a state court case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction, despite resident defendant(s) being named in the suit. To effect a snap removal, the non-resident defendant must file removal papers before the plaintiff can effect service on any
Amendment to Florida Rules Increases Likelihood of Summary Judgment in State Court
The Florida Supreme Court recently amended Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510 (Summary Judgment), adopting the less restrictive federal summary judgment standard as articulated by the United States Supreme Court in Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986), Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986), and Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v.
Texas Amended Rule 106 on Substitute Service: Have You Been Served?
Attempting to align the Texas legal system with current realities, effective December 31, 2020, Rule 106 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure is amended to allow substitute service by “social media, email, or other technology ….” Indeed, any plaintiff faced with the previous options for substitute service (essentially, publication in a physical newspaper or