United States District Court, D. Kansas
MEMORANDUM & ORDER ON MOTIONS
KENNETH G. GALE U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
before the Court is Defendants' Motion for Medical
Examination Pursuant to Rule 35 and for Extension of Time.
(Doc. 21.) Having reviewed the submissions of the parties,
Defendants' motion (Doc. 21) is GRANTED.
present diversity of citizenship action, Plaintiff alleges
she was injured in a motor vehicle accident, which she
contends was caused by the negligence of Defendant Jacob
Riddle (“Defendant Riddle”) while he was acting
the course of his employment with Defendant Board of County
Commissioners of Sedgwick County, Kansas (“Defendant
County”). Defendants admit liability, but dispute the
nature and extent of Plaintiff's damages. Plaintiff seeks
damages for her alleged personal injuries including medical
expenses, past and future economic loss, and pain, suffering,
and mental anguish. (Doc. 1.) Plaintiff seeks over $500, 000
for future medical expenses. (Doc. 22-1.)
deposition occurred on December 14, 2018, following a
postponement she requested. (Doc. 22, at 1.) Defendants
requested to have an independent medical examination,
pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 35, performed on Plaintiff after her
deposition. (Id.) Defendants also requested
corresponding extensions of the IME deadline as well as
Defendants' expert deadline. The deadline in the
Scheduling Order for Rule 35 medical examinations was
December 31, 2018 (four days before Defendants filed the
present motion) with Defendants' expert designation
deadline set for February 1, 2019. (Doc. 13, at 4, 5.)
Plaintiff's counsel apparently did not object to the time
extensions “as long as the trial date is unaffected
… .” (Doc. 22, at 2; Doc. 23, at 2.)
counsel provided the dates of February 12, 14, 19, and 20,
2019, for an IME with Dr. Michael Johnson to occur at his
office in Salina, Kansas. (Doc. 22, at 2.) Plaintiff, who
filed the present case in the District of Kansas and lives in
Carthage, Missouri, objects that Defendants have not shown
“good cause” for the examination, which Plaintiff
describes as unnecessarily burdensome and duplicative. (Doc.
23, at 1.) The Court notes, however, that the Scheduling
Order entered in this case specifically states that
“[t]he parties agree that physical or mental
examinations pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 35 are appropriate in
13, at 5.) Plaintiff also objects that is unduly burdensome
for her to be required to travel to Dr. Johnson's Salina
office because she lives approximately 190 miles from Wichita
and approximately 280 miles from Salina. (Doc. 23, at 1.)
Standards for Rule 35 Medical Examinations.
and mental examinations are governed by Fed.R.Civ.P. 35,
which provides in relevant part:
Order for an Examination.
(1) In General. The court where the action is pending may
order a party whose mental or physical condition … is
in controversy to submit to a physical or mental examination
by a suitably licensed or certified examiner.
(2) Motion and Notice; Contents of the Order. ...