In personal-injury cases trial courts do not grant motions for a party to undergo a mental or physical examination as a matter of right. Instead, Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 204 gives a trial court the discretion to order an exam only if the movant shows good cause and demonstrates that the other party’s mental or physical condition is in controversy.
“Good cause” and “in controversy” are separate but related concepts. In Coates v. Whittington (1988), the Texas Supreme Court held that a party could establish good cause under the predecessor version of Rule 204 by showing three things: The exam is relevant to the issues generally in controversy in the case, there is a reasonable nexus between the condition in controversy and the exam sought, and it is not possible to obtain the desired information through means less intrusive than a compelled exam.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]