arrow left
arrow right
  • MARIE UNDERHILL VS ESTATE OF TESTA Premises Liablty (e.g. slip & fall (General Jurisdiction) document preview
  • MARIE UNDERHILL VS ESTATE OF TESTA Premises Liablty (e.g. slip & fall (General Jurisdiction) document preview
						
                                

Preview

@ @ Brown, Brown & Brown David S. Brown; Bar No. 89438 LED Suse's. « Gourt of 7" Joan Benjamin Brown; State Bar No. 93572 6 founty of fos Anneias ma Aaron M. Brown; State Bar No. 277981 23326 Hawthorne Boulevard, Suite 380 N6V 18 z017 Torrance, CA 90505-3725 Sherri ment Keune Caner, Executive Uticer/Cie:, 310-378-3733; fax 310-378-0703 By. mrtorts@aol.com Deputy Raut Sanchez Attorneys for Plaintiff SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 10 Marie Underhill, Plaintiff, BC638507, Dept. 93, trial 4-26-18 v 11 Estate of Testa (Deceased) and Does OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 1 to 100, Defendants. SECOND MEDICAL EXAMINATION 12 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF 13 JOAN BENJAMIN BROWN 14 Date: November 28, 2017 15 Time: 1:30 16 Dept: 93 17 18 19 Plaintiff opposes defendant's motion to require plaintiff to submit to a second 20 medical examination, by a neurologist. The motion does not satisfy the requirements 21 of Code of Civil Procedure sections 2023.310 and 2032.320. In order to grant a 22 motion for a second defense medical examination, the Court must specify the 23 “diagnostic tests and procedures, conditions, scope, and nature of the examination 24 Because defendant has not told the Court or plaintiff this, the Court does not have the 25 necessary information to make that order. The order must also specify that the 26 examination will be within 75 miles of plaintiff's residence. Defendant chose a 27 physician whose office is more than 75 miles form plaintiff's residence ne 128 he 2 me ~ OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SECOND MEDICAL EXAMINATION 1