The opinion of the court was delivered by: CLIFFORD PROUD, Magistrate Judge
Before the Court is the defendants' motion for a physical and
mental examination of the minor Lamar D. Hill (the putative
plaintiff) and for extension of the deadline for defendants to
disclose their expert(s). (Doc. 21). Also before the Court is
the defendants' amended motion for a physical and mental
examination of the minor Lamar D. Hill (the putative plaintiff)
and for extension of the entire pretrial schedule. (Doc. 26).
Also before the Court are the plaintiff's responses (Docs. 23
and 27), and the defendants' replies (Docs. 24 and 28).
As a preliminary matter, the Court must note that the delay in
attending to this discovery dispute is due to defendants' failure
to submit proposed orders to the Court, as required by Local
Rule 7.1(a). Now that the Court utilizes an electronic filing
system, a proposed order serves to alert the Court of a pending
motion, and facilitates a prompt ruling. The absence of a
proposed order has only compounded the discovery delays in this
case delays plaintiff attributes fully to the defendants.
Although the Court in no way intends to reward defendants for
their procedural miscue, the Court strongly prefers to have cases
decided on their merits, as opposed to procedural one-upmanship.
After consultation with Chief Judge Murphy, it is agreed that the pretrial scheduling order controlling this case should be
modified, moving the presumptive trial month from October, 2005,
to January, 2006, which will allow for discovery to be completed.
The pretrial schedule will be altered by separate order.
Furthermore, defendants have shown good cause for authorizing
an independent mental examination and limited physical
examination of Lamar D. Hill, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Rule 35(a) grants the Court discretion to order the physical or
mental examination of a party when that person's physical or
mental condition is in controversy, provided good cause is shown.
And, the examiner must be shown to be suitably licensed or
certified. Defendants propose a mental and physical examination
by Dr. Wayne Andrew Stillings, M.D., who is a psychiatrist with
apparent expertise in intertwined physical and psychiatric
The fact that plaintiff's treating psychiatrist has not
performed any diagnostic testing, combined with plaintiff's
counsel's refusal to consent to have Hill examined because of
other discovery disagreements between counsel, constitute good
cause for permitting Dr. Stillings to examine Hill.
Plaintiff does not take issue with Dr. Stillings'
qualifications, per se. However, the Court is hesitant to
authorize a blanket physical exam when Dr. Stillings' curriculum
vitae makes clear that, although he has a medical degree, his
practice and teaching is clearly geared to psychiatry. Therefore,
Dr. Stillings' physical examination of plaintiff must not go
beyond any intertwined physical and psychiatric injuries claimed
in the complaint, by Hill in his deposition, and by his mother,
Markeyta Y. Jones, in her deposition. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the defendants' motion for a
physical and mental examination of the minor Lamar D. Hill (the
putative plaintiff) and for extension of the deadline for
defendants to disclose their expert(s) (Doc. 21) is DENIED AS
MOOT, having been superseded by the defendants' amended motion.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendants' amended motion for
a physical and mental examination of the minor Lamar D. Hill (the
putative plaintiff) and for extension of the entire pretrial
schedule (Doc. 26) is GRANTED, in that the pretrial
scheduling order controlling this case is being amended by
separate order, and Lamar Hill shall submit to a physical and
mental examination by Dr. Wayne Andrew Stillings, M.D., as
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that named-plaintiff, Markeyta Jones,
shall produce her minor child, Lamar Hill, for physical and
mental examination to be conducted by Dr. Wayne A. Stillings,
M.D., a licensed and certified psychiatrist, on June 7, 2005 at
9:00 a.m. at Kare & Therapy, Inc., 1034 South Brentwood
Boulevard, Suite 516, St. Louis, Missouri 63117, with the scope
of the examination being such as in the opinion of Dr. Stillings
is necessary to determine the past and present physical and
mental condition of Lamar Hill, with particular reference to the
injuries claimed to have been suffered by Lamar Hill as a result
of the matters alleged in the complaint, Jones' deposition and
Hill's deposition, including the making of all routine and proper
tests according to good medical practice and in order to
determine fully and completely the physical and mental condition
of Lamar Hill.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in accordance with Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 35(b), Dr. Stillings shall forward a detailed
written report setting out his findings, including results of all
tests made, diagnoses and conclusions, to counsel at the
following addresses: William F. Kopis
Law Offices of William F. Kopis
215 West Washington Street
P.O. Box 505 Belleville, IL 62222
Robert Becker and Garrett Hoerner
Becker, Paulson et al.
5111 West Main Street
Belleville, IL 62226
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel for plaintiff shall ensure
that in advance of the June 7, 2005, examination Lamar Hill
and/or Markeyta Jones execute all necessary releases required by
Dr. Stillings, including but not limited to releases necessitated
the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)
and the Federal Regulations enacted pursuant to said Act.
© 1992-2005 VersusLaw ...