No good cause having been shown, the motion of defendants to compel a psychological examination of the plaintiff Malgorzata Mousavi is DENIED without prejudice.
This plaintiff alleges loss of consortium. But there are no allegations in the Complaint, nor evidence in any discovery responses, that suggest she is seeking any damages for psychological harm to her.
The defendants seem to suggest that a psychological examination is appropriate whenever a party makes a claim for loss of consortium. The defendants do not cite any case that addresses that specific issue. Both Leonard v. John Crane, Inc. (2012) 206 Cal.App.4th 1274 and Lantis v. Condon (1979) 95 Cal.App.3d 152 simply hold that this cause of action is not derivative to the other spouse’s injury and damages.
The plaintiff shall give notice.
Hearing Date
February 21, 2019
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
No good cause having been shown, the motion of defendants to compel a psychological examination of the plaintiff Malgorzata Mousavi is DENIED without prejudice.
This plaintiff alleges loss of consortium. But there are no allegations in the Complaint, nor evidence in any discovery responses, that suggest she is seeking any damages for psychological harm to her.
The defendants seem to suggest that a psychological examination is appropriate whenever a party makes a claim for loss of consortium. The defendants do not cite any case that addresses that specific issue. Both Leonard v. John Crane, Inc. (2012) 206 Cal.App.4th 1274 and Lantis v. Condon (1979) 95 Cal.App.3d 152 simply hold that this cause of action is not derivative to the other spouse’s injury and damages.
The plaintiff shall give notice.