Legal Opinion

Gensbauer v. May Department Stores Co.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided April 5, 1999No. CIV. A. 98-CV-5323PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

ANITA B. BRODY, District Judge.

In this personal injury action, the parties agreed to defendant’s scheduling an independent medical examination (I.M.E.) of plaintiff on April 7, 1999. By letter dated March 23, 1999, defendant informed plaintiff that the I.M.E. would be canceled if plaintiffs attorney insisted on being present for the examination. Plaintiff then filed a motion for a protective order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), to allow the attendance of plaintiffs counsel at the defendant’s I.M.E. of plaintiff.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 35(a),…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Shirsat v. Mutual Pharmaceutical Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1996
  2. Brandenberg v. El Al Israel AirlinesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1978
  3. Neumerski v. CalifanoDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1981

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance Co. v. OverstreetKentucky Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Tarte v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2008
  3. McKitis v. DefazioDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1999
  4. BELL v. LITTLEDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2024
  5. BROWN v. BROOKSDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2024

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API