Independent Medical Exams: Defense Strategies for Resisting Conditions and Limitations
Course Details
- smart_display Format
On-Demand
- signal_cellular_alt Difficulty Level
- work Practice Area
Personal Injury and Med Mal
- event Date
Wednesday, January 4, 2023
- schedule Time
1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT
- timer Program Length
90 minutes
-
This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.
-
This CLE webinar will offer strategies for resisting unofficial and usually unwritten limits on how independent medical examinations (IMEs) are conducted and later used. The panel will discuss what state procedural rules apply and Federal Rule 35, the types of conditions being requested by plaintiffs' counsel and the reasons used to justify them, and how different jurisdictions are allowing, rejecting, or tailoring these now frequent requests.
Mr. Adams is Chair of the NYS Labor Law (Scaffold Law) & Construction Defect team. He has extensive experience defending clients in construction accidents/New York Labor Law, construction defect, environmental toxic exposure, product liability, transportation negligence and other complex and catastrophic injury litigation. Mr. Adams also has significant experience handling environmental litigation and toxic exposure lawsuits, having handled matters including the initial and current Love Canal litigation.
Mr. Littleton’s practice area consists of commercial and general litigation and health care law. He helps businesses and organizations address a wide-range of litigation matters and disputes.
Mr. McAuliffe’s practice areas focus on trucking and transportation and insurance defense. Prior to joining MBLB, he was an Assistant District Attorney in New Orleans, where he rose quickly through the ranks, eventually heading up the District Attorney’s Bond and Asset Forfeiture Division. Mr. McAuliffe represented his office at the Louisiana District Attorney’s Association, aided in overseeing civil litigation, and implemented new policies and procedures both in his office and throughout the New Orleans criminal justice system.
IMEs--or, "additional medical examinations," as they are termed in some states--are part and parcel of the typical personal injury case, whether pursuant to applicable state law or the federal counterpart, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 35. These rules authorize an IME when the mental or physical condition of a party is at issue, but most do not set forth allowable conditions, if any, for those examinations.
Courts are now routinely asked to determine whether to impose parameters on examining physicians or experts by restricting what doctors can ask and by imposing conditions, such as prohibiting questions regarding the incident from which the injury arose; requiring the attendance of third parties at the examination; limiting who can conduct the examination; and permitting or prohibiting video or audiotaping of the examination. Procedural requirements and assumptions about which party is obligated to object or request conditions can vary.
Listen as this experienced panel discusses best strategies for responding to requests to limit the scope of examination.
- Notice vs. order to conduct IME
- Privacy and recordings
- Reports and access to IME findings
- Discovery
- Trial
The panel will review these and other critical questions:
- Do physician associations, such as the AMA, have practice standards for IMEs?
- What can be included and excluded from an IME?
- Are there any privacy limitations on the examination?
- What are the strategies for witness examination and discovery?
- Can one object to an IME, and if so, on what grounds?
