Posted on May 30, 2014
Recently, the trial court addressed an issue involving a defense request for a 4th defense medical exam in a personal injury case. In Gilroy v. Housing & Redevelopment Ins. Exch., No. 09 cv 9064 (C.P. Lackawanna April 23, 2014) (mem.) the trial court denies the request and finds that the defendant failed to show good cause for requiring the plaintiff to undergo a pain management IME when 3 other IMEs had been performed. No new injury was alleged nor did the plaintiff conceal any injury. The trial court notes that the plaintiff’s pain was always at issue and the defendant had the opportunity for pain management to be addressed during the prior IMEs. Importantly, Pa. Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 4010 does not specifically permit or prohibit more than 1 exam but the defendant has a heightened burden of showing good cause for supplemental medical examination.
For a copy of the opinion please contact Schmidt Kramer Pennsylvania Auto Accident Lawyer Scott Cooper at [email protected] Kramer.com.
If you were the victim of a car accident and are living with injuries as a result, a Pennsylvania car crash lawyer from Schmidt Kramer wants to help you get the compensation you are entitled to.
You simply cannot trust the insurance company to give you what you are owed. The insurance company’s job is to protect the person they insure, not the victim. They will do all they can to prevent you from getting the compensation you are entitled to.
Contact our offices today to schedule a consultation and find out how we may be able to assist you. We have helped many people just like you get the money they need to help cover the costs of medical treatments related to their accident. Don’t let the insurance company take advantage of you—connect with us today!