At the behest of the plaintiffs’ bar, a bill introduced in the Assembly this week would substantially limit a defendant’s attorney from determining whether a plaintiff’s injuries were the actual result of the accident caused by the defendant.

Below is a synopsis of AB 815. WCJC will provide timely updates of this bill.

Medical Examinations

The bill makes a number of changes to current law involving physical, mental, or vocational examinations when a plaintiff files a lawsuit against a defendant.

First, if a plaintiff raises an issue involving his/her mental or physical condition, the court may order the plaintiff to undergo only one physical, mental, or vocational examination, unless the defending party shows good cause for the plaintiff to undergo more than one examination.

Second, under this bill, the court order for an examination must do the following:

• Specify the time, place, manner, conditions, and scope of the examination, and identify who will conduct the examination.
• Prohibit the person conducting the examination from inquiring into the any issue relating to liability in the underlying action.
• Allow the plaintiff to record the examination electronically and have one or more witnesses present at the examination.
• Require the examination to be conducted within 100 miles of where the plaintiff lives, is employed, or transacts business.
• Require the defending party to pay the plaintiff’s expenses related to the examination, including traveling expenses, child care expenses, and a minimum $30 per hour.

Patient Records

The plaintiffs’ bar is also attempting to limit access by a defendant and his/her attorneys to a plaintiff’s medical records. The bill does the following:

• If a plaintiff seeks damages for personal injuries, a court may order the plaintiff to give the defending party, and any physician named in the order, permission to inspect any X-rays or hospital or medical records or reports that were taken in the course of diagnosing or treating the injuries for which the plaintiff seeks damages.
• If the defending party seeks additional discovery, the bill requires the defending party to prove, by clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence to a reasonable certainty, that the additional discovery is essential to the defense relating to the cause of the plaintiff’s injuries and that the discovery relates to a pre-existing condition that is at least substantially similar to the injuries for which the plaintiff seeks damages.
• Also requires the defending party to give a copy of any report that is made pursuant to an examination or inspection within 15 days after the examination or inspection takes place to the plaintiff.
• The bill also provides that a plaintiff may introduce evidence obtained from the examination or inspection, regardless of whether the defending party seeks to introduce the evidence.