Rule 35 permits examination where a party's mental condition is in controversy and good cause is shown. The order specifies the time, place, manner, conditions, scope, and examiner.
The in controversy requirement is higher than for physical examination.
Alternative Names:
Psychological Examination, Rule 35 Mental Examination
Why it Matters?
Placing mental condition in controversy requires more than garden-variety emotional distress in most jurisdictions, so a plaintiff seeking ordinary distress damages may avoid examination while one alleging a diagnosed psychiatric condition cannot. That distinction shapes how emotional distress claims are pleaded. Scope disputes are common, particularly over whether the examiner may inquire into childhood history and unrelated prior treatment.
Frequently Confused with
Frequently asked questions
When is mental condition in controversy?
What scope disputes arise?
