Kudos to Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan for their article on surreptitiously videotaping IMEs. (“Videotaping IMEs: a Corollary to Defense Surveillance,” Aug. 26) In terms of surreptitious videotaping in general, I would add that plaintiff’s attorneys should also be sensitive to the effect surveillance may have on their clients.
I represented a rape victim who suffered severe post traumatic stress disorder for which she enrolled in therapy. According to the therapy records, the plaintiff frequently felt that she was being watched and followed. These feelings exacerbated and prolonged her symptoms. On the eve of trial, defendants produced hundreds of hours of videotaped surveillance. Based on the proof that the surveillance had actually occurred and the therapist’s opinion that the extensive surveillance aggravated the plaintiff’s condition and suffering, I moved to amend the complaint to add this aggravation. The case settled before a decision was rendered.
Madeline Lee Bryer
The author is a solo practitioner in New York