I Have This Great Doctor You Gotta See
By Katherine L. Gallo and Christopher E. Cobey
The Docket – San Mateo County Bar Association, August/September 2001

In most personal injury actions, the plaintiff is served with a "Notice for an Independent Medical Examination"("Notice of IME") pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure ("C.C.P.") section 2032, a.k.a. "the defense medical." This defense option has become so commonplace that no one really thinks twice about the procedure. However, if you haven't already, you may encounter some unanticipated twists and turns in the procedural road for what may seem to be a run-of-the-mill Notice of IME. Here are some "traps for the unwary" that may make you take a second look at that IME notice.

Scenario #1: Plaintiff was injured on a construction site when a crane hook hit him on the side of his face. Plaintiff brought a personal injury action against the third party. In his answer to Form Interrogatory 6.1, plaintiff stated that he suffered a fractured skull, fractured jaw, migraines, hearing loss, vision loss and two broken teeth due to the incident. Upon receipt of the interrogatory answers, defendant noticed independent medical examinations for the plaintiff with a neurologist, an ophthalmologist, an ear nose and throat doctor and an oral surgeon. Plaintiff objected.

• Read full article (pdf)

• "The 1986 Discovery Act—Is it Working?"
  
• "There's This Case That Says . . . Depositions"
  
• "The Codes—They are a Changin' "
  
• "Oops!!! Now what do I do?"
  
• "I Have This Great Doctor You Gotta See"
  
• "Do You Have All Your Ducks (Experts) in a Row?"
  
• "Why Aren't You Using Requests for Admissions?"
  
• "Let the Other Guy Do the Work… Which Parts of Litigation-Related Investigation Are Not Protected from Disclosure?"
  
• "Five of the Most Annoying Discovery Objections by Opposing Counsel and the Rulings That Are Sure to Follow"