Peter's Clothiers, Inc. v. National Guardian Security Services Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a majority of federal courts have held that third parties should be excluded from mental examinations absent special circumstances
• allowing the examining physician to perform the routine procedures and noting defense counsel’s assurance that the examining physician will not perform any invasive testing
• rejecting the argument that “videotaping the [examination] will avoid discrepancies that may arise over statements made by Plaintiff during the examination in response to the examining physician’s inquiries and reduce the prospective need for court intervention”
• declining to restrict examiner from conducting any “painful or invasive procedure”
• declining plaintiff’s invitation to limit the examination to 45 minutes because the court had “no reason to doubt the examining physician [would] conduct the examination in the time reasonably needed to assess Plaintiff’s physical condition in order to render an expert medical opinion”
• “Plaintiff has not proffered sufficient reason for limiting the examination to 45 minutes, and the Court declines to do so.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).