Browne

Browne v. Superior Court

Good Law
159 Cal. Rptr. 669·1979 Cal. App. LEXIS 2304·98 Cal. App. 3d 610
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 15, 1979Civ. No. 46792California1,738 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Racanelli, J.

We issued our alternative writ of mandate to examine the single question whether a personal injury litigant may be compelled to submit to a physical examination by a vocational rehabilitation expert who is not a licensed physician. We conclude that neither statutory nor other authority sanctions the examination ordered by the trial court; accordingly, the petition must be granted.

Facts

The facts are undisputed: Petitioner filed a civil damage action against real parties for injuries allegedly sustained as a result of an automobile-motorcycle accident. Petitioner’s future wage loss is one of the disputed issues in the pending litigation. Although petitioner voluntarily submitted to a medical examination conducted by a licensed physician selected by real parties, he refused the latter’s request “to be examined and tested by Dr. Hal Ulery, a rehabilitation expert” on the grounds that a physical examination by a nonphysician was unauthorized by law. 1 Thereafter real parties filed a written motion for an order pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2032, subdivison (a) 2 com- *613 polling petitioner “to submit to an interview and physical examination and/or testing by…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.