Adamian v. Strandwall

Plaintiffs’ motion for an order vacating defendant’s notice naming the examining physician of plaintiffs on the ground that the physician named is objectionable to plaintiffs is granted.

The language of rule 1 of Part Four of the Rules of the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, does not appear to require plaintiffs to set forth their reasons for objecting to the physician selected by defendant to examine. This is as it should be for the court cannot, be expected to decide upon papers the professional qualifications of any particular physician. Once the party to be examined…