Gaines v. Smith

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that to the extent an ongoing injury is claimed, the relevance aspect of \good cause\ can be read as merging with Rule 35(a)'s \in controversy\ requirement
• assessing whether the examination would preserve the \equal footing\ of the parties
• negligence plaintiff claiming ongoing psychiatric harm put psychiatric state into suit and must submit to interview by defendant’s expert
• \[O]ne purpose in granting a request for a[n] . . . examination pursuant to Rule 35 is to `preserve the equal footing of the parties to evaluate the plaintiff's [condition]. . . .'\
• “By claiming ongoing psychiatric harm caused by the negligence of the defendant, therefore, the plaintiff has placed his mental state in controversy, which in turn constitutes good cause for ordering a psychiatric examination under Schlagenhauf.”
• funding from defendant to defendant’s expert affected credibility, not qualifications

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).