Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 22STCV32546, Date: 2024-06-26 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV32546    Hearing Date: June 26, 2024    Dept: 54

Hearing Date: June 26, 2024

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

Motion to Compel Medical Examinations of Plaintiff

Moving Party: Defendants Alpha Construction Co., McCadden Plaza Tay Housing LP, and Los Angeles LGBT Center

Responding Party: Plaintiff Aryand Arshadi

T/R:      DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IS GRANTED.

DEFENDANT TO NOTICE.

If the parties wish to submit on the tentative, please email the courtroom at SMCdept54@lacourt.org with notice to opposing counsel (or self-represented party) before 8:00 am on the day of the hearing. 

The Court considers the moving papers, opposition, and reply.

“(a) If any party desires to obtain discovery by a physical examination other than that described in Article 2 (commencing with Section 2032.210), or by a mental examination, the party shall obtain leave of court.  (b) A motion for an examination under subdivision (a) shall specify the time, place, manner, conditions, scope, and nature of the examination, as well as the identity and the specialty, if any, of the person or persons who will perform the examination. The motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040.”  (CCP § 2032.310.)  “The court shall grant a motion for a physical or mental examination under Section 2032.310 only for good cause shown.”  (CCP § 2032.320(a).) 

Defendants move to compel Plaintiff to sit for independent neurological and orthopedic medical exams. This action arises from a vehicle accident resulting in personal injury; Plaintiff concedes Defendants’ entitlement to these exams.

Plaintiff, however, requests that the Court order the examiners to produce the raw data and audio recordings from the exams to Plaintiff’s counsel. Defendants assert this compromises the examiner’s opinion, and argue that the data should only be given to Plaintiff’s opposing expert to interpret. The Court of Appeal in Randy's Trucking, Inc., et al. v. The Superior Court of Kern County (2023) 91 Cal.App.5th 818 held that the Court may order disclosure of this information to Plaintiff’s counsel. The raw data and audio recordings are relevant and discoverable.

Defendants’ motion is GRANTED.