All CLE Packages On Sale Now — Ends 8/14 (No Code Needed)
Rule 35 Mental Exams
Presented by Robert Fitzpatrick
Watch This Course for Free!
New LexVid members can watch their 1st course for free. No credit card needed, just create an account and you'll receive your certificate immediately after watching your free course.
Already a member? Sign in
Video Player is loading.
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Course Description
Length: 1h 58min Published: 12/16/2020 
Civil Rule 35 mental exams have become a common occurrence in litigation where one party seeks emotional distress damages. This area of law is complex and, in many respects, still in conflict. In this program, Robert Fitzpatrick will unpack all of the issues involved in a Rule 35 exams. Counsel for both plaintiffs and defendants will receive a number of invaluable tips on how to successfully litigate a case with a Rule 35 exam.
Learning Objectives
* Explore the dos and don'ts with respect to litigating a case with a Rule 35 mental exam
* Understand when a Rule 35 exam can be used to benefit your client
* Learn how to defend against a Rule 35 exam that is being used against your client
Speaker Q&A
Question
How does the distinction between "garden variety" emotional distress and a specific psychiatric diagnosis (like PTSD) fundamentally alter the trajectory of discovery and the applicability of a Rule 35 mental exam?
- JoseT
Answer
In general, I would think pleading PTSD may open up discovery substantially. I would insist on paper discovery of treater as well as deposition of treater. And, a more expansive discovery of plaintiff,including a mental exam. I would put the discovery of plaintiff before the depo of the treater read the Diagnostic Manual re PTSD. Then, based on that I may be able to get PTSD out of the case.
Keep in mind that I am retired from law practice and this is not advice and there is no attorney/client relationship between the requester and me.
- Robert Fitzpatrick
Question
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, how do the reporting requirements drastically change for a treating physician if the plaintiff decides they want that doctor to offer an expert opinion on the causation of their emotional distress at trial?
- JoseT
Answer
I would think that once the other side designates someone as an expert, the requirements of Rule 26 apply.
Keep in mind that I have retired from law practice. Thus, this does not constitute advice and there is not an attorney/client relationship between the requester and me
- Robert Fitzpatrick
Presented By:
Robert Fitzpatrick
202-558-8084
fitzpatrick.law@verizon.net
Featured Reviews
"Extremely knowledgeable instructor! Very interesting topic."
Christina D
"Very knowledge with excellent teaching skills."
Patrick B
"Best CLE course I have ever taken, by a mile."
Alexander C
"This presentation is filled with practical information based on experience. Very insightful practice tips!"
MaryAnne R
