In Re John A. Mitchell
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
BY THE COURT:
IT IS ORDERED that the petition for writ of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari or other appropriate writ and for other relief is GRANTED. The scope of Rule 35, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is not coextensive with that of Rule 26, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 35 requires that examinations be conducted by physicians. Therefore, although the instant petition evinces a discovery order compatible with Rule 26 the order is erroneous in light of Rule 35. See Lavergne v. Davis, 5th Cir., No. 77-2465 [unpublished order] (mandamus granted in similar context).
2Cases cited1 opinion
3Cited by10 opinions
- James J. Acosta, Sr. v. Tenneco Oil Company and Mobil Oil CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1990
- Robinson v. Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc.District Court, M.D. Florida · 1988
- In re Certain Asbestos CasesDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 1986
- Williams v. SmithSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1991
- Stanislawski v. Upper River Services, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1991
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.